this is gps, the global public square. welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria coming to you from new york. we'll start today with the world that donald trump will soon face. is he pushing back prudently against china or risking an unnecessary conflict? what will he do about the iran deal? >> one of the worst deals ever negotiated. and even before he takes office, is the war against isis won? i'll ask former cia director james woolsey, in bremer and robin wright. also, math, science, reading, the global rankings on those subjects are just out and the u.s.'s report card is not impressive. what are singapore, canada, hong kong and finland doing right?

lessons on education. and italy's sent tryst reformer prime minister renzi resigned on wednesday, another win for the populace in europe. i talk to another centrist reformer, france's presidential candidate emmanuel about populism in the west. finally on gps today, first saddam, and now this. what is going on in this video? i will explain. but first, here's my take. a joke among journalists is that we are taught to count this way, one, two, trend. but at this point, i think it's fair to say we are witnessing a populist trend around the world. the question is, what is fueling its extraordinary rise? supporter of donald trump and other populist movements often point to economics as the key to their success, the slow recovery, wage stagnation, the erosion of manufacturing jobs and rising inequality.

these are powerful factors but it's strike wiig see right wing populism in sweden which is doing well economically. in germany, where manufacturing remains robust, in france where workers have many protections. here in america, exit polls showed that the majority of voters who identified the economy as the most important issue facing the country cast their ballots for hillary clinton. the one common factor present everywhere there is populism is immigration. in fact, one statistical analysis of european countries found more immigrants invariably means more populist. if you extrapolate from current trends as the percentage of immigrants approaches 22%, the percentage of right wing populists exceeds 50%. who is at this time to immigration has been a core theme of every one of these parties. another way to test this theory is to note that countries

without large scale immigration like japan have not seen the same rise of right wing populism. another interesting case is spain, a country that has take in many immigrants but mostly spanish speaking latinos who are easier to assimilate. while you see traditional left wing economic populism in spain, don't see right wing nationalist movements. the backlash against immigration must be admitted is rooted in fact. as i pointed out in a foreign affairs essay written in september before trump's victory, we're living in an age of mass migration. in the last three or four decades, western societies have seen large influxes of people from different lands and cultures. in 1970, foreign-born people made up under 5% of america's population. today they're about 14%. the rice is sharper in most european countries now home to 76 million international migrants coming mostly from africa and more recently the

middle east. austria, for example, took in almost 100,000 immigrants last year adding 1% to its population in 2015 alone. this much change can be unsettling. for most of human history, people lived, worked and died within a few miles of the place they were born. but in recent decades, hundreds of millions of people from poorer countries have moved to wealthier ones. this reflects an economic reality. rich countries have declining birth rates and need labor. poor countries have million who's seek better lives. but it does produce anxiety, uneasy and a cultural backlash. we're witnessing it across the western world. what does it mean for the future? western societies will have to better manage immigration. they should also place much greater emphasis on assimilation. canada could be a role model. it has devised smart pols on both fronts and is a model where high levels of skilled

immigration plus strong assimilation lead to no major backlash. eventually, western societies will be able to be adjust to this new feature of globalization. look at young people in europe and america, the vast majority of them deeply value the benefits of diversity and they seek to live in an open connected world. that's the future. we just have to ensure we don't wreck the world before we get there. for more, go to cnn.com/fareed and read my "washington post" column in week and let's get started. much to talk about today from rex tillerson to taiwan, russia to isis. joining me to discuss the former cia director jim woolsey, now a senior advicer to trump on national security, also robin wright, a contributing writer

for the new yorker which recently publish add important piece by her on isis. here in new york it, richard haass is the president of the council on foreign relations and the author of a forth coming book "a world in disarray, american foreign policy and the crisis of the old order." and ian bremer is the president a "time" magazine columnist. robin, let me start with you. if rex tillerson is to be the secretary of state, we now have a complete team in place with mike flynn,ings with mattis. what do you make of the team that is now advising donald trump? >> well, it's striking because you have so many people hope have never been involved in policy making before. the military officials have been involved in indicating policy and rex tillerson as head of exxon has been someone who has been actually acting sometimes as a challenger to american principles whether it's on human rights or transparency.

has engaged in arrangements partnerships with corrupt governments with horrendous human rights records whether it's russia, angola, eke quaorial guinea. this is a time where you see the idea of profit often overcoming principle. it reminds me of donald trump in 1989 during when president bush, the first president bush was trying to make an arms deal with the soviet union. donald trump then the best selling author of the "art of the deal" wanted to be the man to negotiate with the soviet union. this is uncharted territory for a lot of the these people who have enormous responsibility in tackling some of the greatest challenges this nation has faced since world war ii. >> jim woelscy, what do you make of the russia connection? ing it does seem as though this is now a fairly consistent theme for donald trump. you know, he's been all over the map on lots of things but

remarkably consistent in being pro-russia, pro-putin and tillerson would seem to be part of that pattern, tillerson of course, being one of the very, very few foreigner to have been waerded russia's highest civil order. do you think this is, this speaks to some kind of coherent world view about russia? >> not really. i think this is largely a diplomatic niceties between senior people in government like putin was in russia even before he became prime minister and american business leaders. these sorts of have a dinner for me and give me an award things take place with some frequency. i think the problem with russia is not likely to be in something

like this. but in what they call disinformation which they go to great lengths to produce and have a lot of people involved in it. and it's, i think will help distort some of our views and ability to work with russia at least for a time. but i think there's a reasonable chance that people like the ceo of exxon and the former head of the marine corps and so forth can do a good job of dealing with russia. they're used to dealing with tough adversaries. >> ian bremer, what do you make of this? it's the fact that trump is now publicly disputing and making fun of the cia for having come come to the conclusion that russia hacked the dnc and tried to influence the elections. >> he's not been taking the intelligence briefings. pence has.

idea he would say the cia is wrong, i understand why he would do it for partisan purposes because he won the election and doesn't want to suggest he might not have. the idea you would go after the cia when they've made this public, it's sitting uncomfortably with a lot of republicans in congress right now. the russia or rentation has been the most consistent tact away from the obama's foreign policy. rex tillerson is more than just a competent ceo. he's said.many times he knows putin a lot better than all these presidents do of the united states. he felt that obama's policy was extremely naive. he probably knows putin individually better than any american i can think of. and you know, given the fact that this is not going to be about human rights, this is going to be about a transactional tact of the united states toward russia on yimia, on syria, on hacking, all of these things, tillerson is certainly a very capable person

to implement that policy. >> richard, what do you make -- it does strike me as bizarre, because there's no particular political advantage to trump being so pro-russia. it's not like there's a big pro putin contingency in the united states. why are there so many ways in which he seems to be signaling a much more sin sylviatarily policy towards russia. >> i don't know. i don't know what strategic motives might be. p. it might be a good moment for the united states and russia to find common ground in syria. i could see the understand and russia finding some way to have an exit of civilians and fighters out of aleppo and even down the road. there's a possibility to put distance between the russian government and the government of bashar al assad. there's some possibilities there. europe is more complicated and whether we can get the russians to not just stop doing what they're doing in eastern ukraine but not to expand and do any

challenging of the nato countries and how we basically combine getting tougher in europe in some ways reintroduce military forces into nato europe. at the same time, we've got to marry that with a diplomatic initiative to russia. when mr. obama called russia a regional power. there's no reason to insult them or belittle them. we've got to be diplomatically open at the same time, we've got to be 20/20 about what our real interests are and our real differences are in europe in the middle east and obviously in terms of what it is they've been doing here in terms of getting into our cyber domain. >> when we come back, we'll talk about a really interesting question. is isis already on the brink of collapse even before donald trump takes office and has promised, of course, to bomb the hell out of them when we come back.

family road trip! fun! check engine. not fun! but, you've got hum. that's like driving with this guy. all you do is press this, and in plain english, "coolant", you'll know what's wrong. if you do need a mechanic, just press this. "thank you for calling hum." and if you really need help, help can find you, automatically, 24/7. because you put this, in here. hum by verizon. the technology designed to make your car smarter, safer and more connected.

put some smarts in your car.

back now with richard haass and ian bremer here with me in new york and in washington, jim woolsey and robin wright join us. jim, i want to ask you about robin's excellent essay in the "new yorker." the argument she lays out is that isis is crumbling, that they are down to a very, a small number of fighters in mosul. they're likely to be squeezed out of raqqa. and there's dangers of chaos but that the whole battle against isis is largely winning. what i want to ask you is this. if this is in fact happening and if the united states is confronting a new situation in syria and in iraq, what should its attitude be towards iran? i know you've always been very tough on iran and what i'm you can have by is the president-elect trump says we

should just leave this all to president assad in syria, let him consolidate power. let hip retake large parts of syria but of course, assad is a very close ally of issue and in effect, you would be strengthening iran by giving it its main regional ally, a huge boost. so is that a good idea? >> no, i think robin is right about what's happening in the home of the caliphate in sishia and iraq and that part of the world. but isis operates in some 30, 40 countries in one way or another. and one has to deal with them on lots of home turfs .not just on one big home turf. i think it is important to fracture iran's support for any of its proxies in the middle east. i think iran is our main problem in that part of the world.

and i think that it's going to be for some time because it's a theecratic toe talnarian set of revolutionaries and i'd say imperialists. they want to build an empire. >> they've been the ones fighting isis allied with assad and against isis. the president-elect seems to like that just fine. >> these are tactical decisions. we had a tikhonoval decision in '41 whether to sign on with stalin against hitler and we did. it was good we did. sometimes you have to ally temporarily with a bad guy in order to defeat another bad guy. it's happened throughout american arn world history. that's a tactic. the key thing over the long run, the strategy i think has to be to weaken iran. it's got a lot worses in store for us i think than it has shown so far. it's the world's leading terrorist state. >> robin, what do you make of

the kind of the anti-iran you know, if you look at james mattis, he's pretty anti-iran. if you look at mike flynn, is there, you know, it feels like there is a very strong orientation ta believes these forces in the middle east are very dangerous, out to get us. you know, do you see a common theme there? does it worry you? >> yes, i think there's are all iran haters basically. the important part of the iran nuclear deal is it not just prevents iran for the next 20, 25 years from getting a nuclear weapon but it sets a precedent, the most important nonproliferation ingredient if the world anywhere in the world in the last quarter century and sets us on a difference course. in the same way we came to terms a kind of day at that time with the soviet union, with china with, vietnam, this was trying at the end of 40 years of tensions to try to figure out a way that we could instead of

confronting each other figure out common cause, try to defuse tensions whether it's iran, saudi arabia. so the iran initiative was important for a lot of things beyond iran. the idea we can engage in regime change in iran is an illusion. the regime has proven it can survive whether whee like it or not. the most important things in many ways to look at in the region is the re-emergence of al qaeda. this is whether it's iran or isis, that the al qaeda has emerged in syria. its strongest presence since 2001. it is becoming in many ways with a fall of aleppo, the failure of warren-backed rebels, al qaeda's attempt to reexert its prime ministry in the region will haunt the trump administration than we need to to be very careful about what our priorities are and that the kind of long-standing hatred or suspicion of iran is not going to be productive in dealing with

the greatest challenges we face in that region. >> and we've got do a lightning round. i want to get back to another big issue. so much generate this had week. richard haass, it the taiwan phone call. now seems ancient history but it's pretty significant. what does it mean and why has it so rattled the chinese? >> u.s./chinese relationship is arguably the defining relationship of the 21st century as that relationship goes, so will a lot of this century. that relationship is based upon an arrangement. one-china policy we recognize only the mainland as china. there's another entity called taiwan. the united states maintains its diplomatic reegss with the people's republic but we're able to trade, we're able to sell arms, we have defacto diplomatic interaction with taiwan. this has served everybody's interests. the problem with the phone call, the tweets and so forth it jeopardized this finessing and

the question is, is the united states now questioning or challenging what has worked pore several dagds. my analysis is if it ain't broke, don't fix it. this has worked. we've chosen what might be the most existential issue for china. there's no one in china who has any flexibility on it. this could get in the way of their ability to cooperate with us on our agenda. be as if the russians came to us and said we want a good relationship with america. but first give us russia back. we're not going to do it. we have to lay off this, continue the status quo. it's worked for everybody and focus on working with china with again what i'm worried about which is a north korea that can in a couple years take nuclear weapons, put them on missiles and reach the united states. >> very quickly and last word. you are just back from china and japan. is everybody in asia thinking about a post american world that is stepping back, seems less active, and what did you hear.

>> japan is not. they're paniced because they see the defense relationship with the u.s. as key. that's why they're not worried about change in u.s. president. threw got on a plane and said we've got work with you. but the chinese see opportunity. one of the biggest problems with the taiwan call, american allies in asia, what's the consistency? china sees a big opportunity to become a bigger leader in the region while american allies are saying you can't count on the americans. that's a very big problem for us. >> fascinating. thank you all. next on gp "s," why are america's ninth graders ranked 39th in the world in math? we'll explain.

please take out your number 2 pencils, put them on your desk. we are preparing to talk about just released results of a global standardized test called pisa which stands for program for international student assessment. the report card for the united states was less than stellar. out of 72 countries and

territories in the study, 38 ranked above the united states in math, 24 outranked america in science, and 22 in reading. why? and what can we learn from the top ranked nations? here to discuss are wendy cop, she now runs a global version of teach for all. and andria slicker is the director of education and skills at the organization that puts out these pisa rankings. ton just understand you know, the united states is really extraordinarily does extraordinarily poorly here. particularly how rich it is and that it spends an enormous amount on education. i want you to talk a little bit about what i thought was one of the most surprising countries which is vietnam. poor country developing country. and yet, massively outperforms the united states. why? >> you know, the world is no

longer divided between rich and well educated nations and poor and badly educated ones. if you look at vietnam, parts of china, singapore and many parts of asia, they have made education a priority. they make sure that they attract the most talented teachers into the classrooms. they get every student to benefit from excellent teaching. they have made huge investments in education and today, the 10% of the most disadvantaged children in vietnam and they grow up in very, very poor households. those children do better than the average american child at age 15 and better than the 10% wealthiest children in some of the other countries. >> 10% poorest vietnamese do better than the american average and to explain, these are probably people who are at a per capita gdp of maybe a few thousand dollars and the united states is at a per capita gdp of $50,000. >> money doesn't buy a good education. it's a lot to do with how to

invest resources. whenever these countries have to make a choice between better teacher and a smaller class, they invest in the capacity, they invest in teaching. > what do you think, wendy, does make for good education? >> honestly, there's no magic to it. you're not going to find one thing that makes it all seem easy. these are countries that aim at very high rigorous standards for kids. they do a tremendous amount to attract their top talent into teaching and into the kind of education workforce more broadly. and then they go about the hard work of continuously improving as they assess like what more do we need to do in order to move towards these standards. >> you talk about high standards, national standards seenls to be a core part of all these high ranking countries. and yet, in the u.s. the common core is already which is barely one year or a few years old is already under attack. >> well, i guess come back to what the pisa results represent

as a learning opportunity. you know, having listened to the people who have led the charge on improving the school systems in say finland or shanghai, some of the who have moved their systems from mediocre to the best in the world, the first thing they will say is, we sent our educators abroad to learn to open their minds about what is possible. and i actually think one of our biggest challenges in the united states is that we're not doing that. we're not actually going out and seeinging what are these countries that are doing so well doing differently. >> one final thought. the highest performing country consistently is a very rich country. singapore. if you had could wave a magic wand and have the united states adopt one singapore strategy, what would it be? >> coherence in policy. strong link. it's basically a system that is very carefully crafted and designed that has a close link between policy and practice.

teachers are designers of instructional processes. they're really part of the professional system. they're not the last whale in a big bureaucracy. i think there's a lot we can learn from the success of singapore. remember, in 1965 singapore became independent. 2% of the an adult population could read and write. this is a fairly recent success story. singapore has become rich because it invested in education. >> fascinating report. fascinating conversation. thank you both very much. next on "gps," david cameron was toppled by the brextity referendum. renzi was to tommed. will the wave of populism continue to roll out of europe? il talk to france's presidential candidate emmanuel macron.

whether it's data, whether it's eg laer to environment in bringing these together and having the right tools to address the issue to get to an on demand production environment. at kpmg, we have ways to go about it. >> it was a topsy-turvy week in european politics far right wing victory that many anticipated in austria did not materialize but the centrist

prime minister matio renzi lost his job after a failure of a referendum he staked his career on. in 2017 is, both france and germany go to the polls to elect their leaders. in both nations, pop uism is on the upswing. partially emboldened perhaps by the one-two punch of brexit and trump. he had the opportunity this week to sit down with emmanuel macron, is he a candidate for the presidency in france's upcoming elections. the economist recently called france europe's biggest populist danger. listen in. >> emmanuel macron, pleasure to have you on. we are looking at what is happening in europe. you are living it. what do you think is going on when you look at the italian vote, you know, in austria it went the other way. in france, you've him do very well. is this a wave of right wing

populism that is continuing? >> no, first of all, ied not compare the different countries and the different trends you mentioned. mr. phi yoen is a classical rightist. he's not an extremist and he's a very respectful man and nothing comparable with what could have happened in austria or with now the big vote in the italy after the referendum. but for sure in europe today, you have a lot of tensions, a lot of tension because of first the economic slowdown plus crisis because europe under delivered in comparison with the u.s. after the 2008-2010 crisis. >> in terms of growth and jobs. >> in jobs because for europe you still have something between 20 to 30% unemployment rate. for young people, it could reach

50%. that's our main challenge. second, you have a lot of the tensions in europe due to migration crisis and terrorist attacks. so all societies are under tension today. and that's the main cannon for europe which is how to address these new issues, how to deal with growth and investment in a new world with climate change and digital information and how to deal with security issues and preserve our open societies. >> why do you think trump won? you're here in part to try to understand what you need to understand about the trump phenomenon. >> yes, i'm here to understand this phenomenon and the consequences of this election on our relationship and the relationship between france and europe and the u.s. i think it's a mixture of a lot of things. i think mr. trump was extremely smart to play with emotion, of

your people and that's the first point. second, it was disruptive vis-a-vis the rest of the system and people love that because now they are fed up with the political system and third, he understood the frustration of american middle classes and workers about this globalization and the increasing inequalities of this globalization. i'm very doubtful about the ability for mr. trump to deliver his program because i think there are a lot of inconsistencies. but we will see. i do respect the american vote but now. >> what does it mean for you in europe? >> that's a big question mark. for me the big consequences of his election are number one, climate change. obviously, we need to a strong cohesion between europe and the u.s. to deliver. the paris agreement was the first step forward but we need to now to deliver, we need to

implement this agreement and we have to progress. if the u.s. decides to stop this effort and completely change its mind, it will be a big issue for all of us. that's the main risk for our planet following this election second, security. mr. obama started to disengage the u.s. from the middle east. but now what will mr. trump do for this region where classically and historically the u.s. was involved and what will be the relationship with mr. putin. for me, the main consequence is that europe has to strengthen its policy and to preserve its own interests in this new environment. >> your main point and foreign policy is europe may be on its own and have to come up with its own foreign and defense policy particularly with regard to the middle east and russia? >> def, i think we have to take into consideration the fact that now it's so critical for us

because in terms of terrorism, in terms of migration, we in europe have direct consequences of that i do think that the united nations, we have now to be much more organized and coordinated to take our responsibilities in this region. >> emmanuel macron, pleasure to have you on. >> thanks very much. up next, the fantastic writer michael lewis has a brand-new book out. it's a fascinating tale of a friendship and collaboration that has changed the way we think really about everything. you won't want to miss this.

my name is jamir dixon and i'm a locate and mark fieldman for pg&e. most people in the community recognize the blue trucks as pg&e. my truck is something new... it's an 811 truck. when you call 811, i come out to your house and i mark out our gas lines and our electric lines to make sure that you don't hit them when you're digging. 811 is a free service. i'm passionate about it because every time i go on the street i think about my own kids. they're the reason that i want to protect our community and our environment, and if me driving a that truck means that somebody gets to go home safer, then i'll drive it every day of the week.

together, we're building a better california. michael lewis is one of the most successful book authors ever since his debut "liar's poker," he's written money ball, the blind side and "the big short," all later turned into movies. money ball was about the oakland a's baseball team and its real

life quest to pick the best prospective players. the team figured out how to game the system by using better analysis of data to find market efficiency. there was a review of money ball who pointed out much of what the a's were doing was stripping human bias out of the equation of mr.ing a team. that kind of analysis had been pioneered by a pair of israeli social scientists who did ground breaking work on behavioral economics as lewis says, a field that focuses on biases and irrational behaviors of human beings. lewis had never heard of them so he dug into the topic and ended up writing a book about the duo. "the undoing project, a friendship that changed our minds." welcome back, mike. >> good to see you. >> so one of the things we always talk about nowadays is the way in which people act sort

of irrationally. it sounds bad but not in a way that can be predicted easily. even in this election, people point out that you know, people who think they're acting in their economic interests don't act in their economic interests. so there are all these irrational or hidden bias sees we have. to put it simply, what is it that they have made us understand about this field? >> generally, what their work was about was showing that the mind is the roughly well equipped to kind of get us through life and the judgments we have to make, it's not wired to make probistic judgments. so when it's faced with probabilistic situations it doesn't do statistics. it tells stories. sometimes in those stories are skewed and predictable ways. by memory, by the way we think in stereotypes, by -- there are a whole range of things that are querrying it but in ways that are predictable.

and systemic. so if people can be systematically irrational, then markets can be systematically irrational but is how they infiltrate economics. >> one of the classic cases that they point out is what's called regression to the mean. so anytime somebody has a streak, a lucky streak in gambling in, sports had, hollywood executives are often promoted because the last six movies they made were fantastic. and then people are always surprised that the next six movies aren't that good. >> right. >> or and what their point is, this should have been predictable because it's like coin tosses. if you get seven heads in a row, chances are at some point you'll start getting tails. >> but they would say that that's true what you just said is true. what's going on there people seeing patterns, meaningful patterns where the patterns are not meaningful. every wall street con man knows

this. there's a famous con where you're if you're giving stock market advice to individual investors you tell half the people that ibm stock is going down and half that it's going up and if it goes up, you go back to that half and tell them hp is going up. half it's going down. after two or three types, they go wow, this guy is on a hot streak and knows what he's talking about. and yes, they were sensitive to the way people's kind of blindness to statistical truths led them astray. >> you said that there are also stereotypes that we make decisions on stereotypes rather than data. what are examples of that? >> money ball was a great example. the oakland a's looking for bargains in the market for baseball players. why should they be that? that you have all this data attached to baseball players when they're on the job. the experts supposedly know what they're doing in picking the baseball players and the a's quickly figured out if you could

find players who -- if you focused on players who didn't look like baseball players, if they're fat, really fat, or if they were short or they had something physically off about them, you were likely to find, you were more likely to find a bargain because even the experts will a stereotype of what a baseball player looked like. i think we do this with all jobs. you know, like 60% of the ceos of fortune 500 companies are white men 61 machine or taller. what's the likelihood that that's the, who should be the ceos of fortune 500 companies? we have this idea in our head what they look liking. > donald trump says mitt romney looks like a secretary of state. >> he's really trapped in this. so they just one of the things pointed out was the power of stereotypes to deceive people in judgments. >> but what's depressing about this in some ways is you point out that this is really how the human mind, would.

they find that this is absolutely predictable that we will be irrational and even irrational in predictable ways. what does that mean for those of house believe in rationalism who believe that you should study data and that you should make decisions on basis of the best available information? >> their work and their ideas have infiltrated lots of spheres of human activity. medical judgments are made differently because of them and financial judgments in many cases are made differently because of them and the sporting world changing. there are signs of progress. it's not a depressing story. but they would have themselves said that correcting for these yourself it's virtually impossible. we're talking about it kind of cognitive illusions and the analogy is with an optial illusion. if you are experiencing an optical illusion even when someone points out that's not water on the highway in the desert, you still see the mirage. they would say even when your

error is pointed out, you're still kind of a victim of it. so the way i mean i think the general response that's hopeful is to understand that we've got build decision making environments to account for these errors in human judgment. >> one final thought. does the friendship here strike you as remarkable, unusual? it seems like these two guys thinking as one. >> as the a love story. they're as passionate about each other as if they were lovers and they weren't lovers but they might as well have been. i talked to other academics about their collaboration. they say in this just doesn't happen. yeah, people come together and collaborate but don't fall in love, they don't break you. . they don't have this arc that looks like a tragic love story. it's very unusual. the emotions that they're intellectual sparks generated as i mean, it's what attracted me to the story in the first place. >> kind of irrational in its own

way. michael lewis, pleasure to have you on. as close as two friends trying to annihilate each other can be. ahh, interception! that's because with fingerhut.com we can shop over 700,000 items from brand names like samsung, keurig and sony. go to fingerhut.com to get low monthly payments and the credit you deserve. and get great stuff like this awesome flat screen tv. [doorbell rings] fingerhut man's here! oooh! maybe he brought you some defense. 'cause that's a touchdown, buttercup! ♪ ♪ oww! ♪ if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, isn't it time to let the real you shine through? introducing otezla (apremilast). otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently.

with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea, nausea, upper respiratory tract infection, and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you.

lepe's foods is a locally owned here in santa rosa. as a small business, we're always looking to save money, and pg&e was able to help us. i help the small businesses save money and energy. it feels great. we looked at their lighting, their refrigeration system, and with just those two small measures, they were able to save a good amount of money.

i was shocked. i couldn't believe that i could save $1,500 a month. with the savings that we get from pg&e, we're able to pass it on to our customers. it's pretty awesome. learn how your business can save at pge.com/businessenergycheckup. together, we're building a better california. last week, president-elect

donald trump accepted a phone call from taiwanese president raising questions about his plans for the future of u.s. relations with china. and it brings me to my question of the week. who was the only sitting american president to actually visit taiwan? fdr, harry true man, dwight eisenhower, or richard nixon? stay tuned and we'll tell you it the correct answer. this week's book of the week is "shoe dog," by phil knight. bill gates recommended it on his blog and it was well worth it. the founder of nike has written an extraordinary memoir, one of the best stories of entrepreneurship i've teacher read. well written but most strike ily, it's a deeply honest account of all the doubts, setbacks and tradeoffs on the way to business super success. the correct answer to our challenge question was c. president eisenhower traveled to taipei in june, 1960, where he met with the then president of taiwan officially the republic

of china chang kai-shek. at the time of course, the united states did not have diplomatic relations with mainland china. the taiwanese haven't forgotten this presidential visit to the i land and last year pledged a $1 million donation towards an eisenhower memorial in washington, d.c. thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. i will see you next week. . i'm brian stelter. it's time for "reliable sources" our weekly look at the stories behind the stories, lou the media, would and how the news gets made. welcome to viewers here in the u.s. we have a packed show ahead for you this hour. with donald trump showing no signs of toning down his twitter attacks, so what do his tweets he will us about our next commander in chief. >> i'll ask an all-star panel. hillary clinton speaking out warning against the real life dangers from fake news stories. former executive editor of "the new york times" jill aim ram son is