hello, everyone. welcome to amanpour and company. here is what's coming up. president trump takes to the u.n. to blast iran, calling it a corrupt regime. i speak with the iranian president. plus, can europeans save the nuclear deal the trump administration wants to destroy? they are trying as hard as they can. also ahead, new zealand's prime minister made history by bringing her newborn into the u.n. chamber. one of a coalition of new, young global leaders. we talk motherhood, her progressive agenda and climate

change. tracy ulman tells us why she's having the time of her life impersonating all kinds of characters on her variety show. uniworld is a proud sponsor. when bea founded hotels, she had bigger dreams on the water. a river. multiple rivers. that would be home to uniriver cruises and their floating boutique hotels. today, that dream sets sail in europe, asia, india, egypt for more information, visit uniworld.com. >> additional support has been provided by -- >> rosalyn p. walter, the cheryl

and phillip millsteen family. thank you. welcome to the program. world leaders are in the midst of their annual get together at the united nations. president trump's speech was awaited, although his opening lines didn't go down quite as he expected. >> in less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country. america -- so true. didn't expect that reaction, but that's okay. >> with that, trump embarked on a hard line address which was long on sovereignty and protectionism, offering foreign

aid to friends, saying he rejects globalism. last year, it was north korea. this year, iran is drawing his greatest fire. after pulling the u.s. out of the iran nuclear deal, president trump is now saying that he is confident their leaders will want to talk to him just like kim jong-un did. when i sat down with the iranian president, he painted a different picture. he tells me that iran does not want to meet with the united states at this point. mr. president, welcome to the program. >> translator: thank you very much. >> can i start by asking you, the president of the united states has tweeted this morning saying that despite repeated requests -- i think he means your requests -- he has no plans to meet you, maybe some time in the future. he thinks maybe you are a lovely man. that's what he says in the tweet. what do you make of that? have you requested a meeting with president trump?

>> translator: not this year nor last year. we have never made such a request for a meeting with the president of the united states. of course, last year, from american officials we received eight requests for a meeting. and i did not see that as being an appropriate meeting, as i do not see it as being appropriate now. and a meeting must take place at a time when that meeting can serve a purpose and be beneficial and serve the benefits of both countries. but under the current conditions, when it comes to a meeting and dialogue, i do not see it as beneficial nor appropriate. but you should ask him who made such request. >> we will try to ask. before i go on to the substance of the policy and the iran

negotiations for the nuclear deal, president trump likes to reach out to other leaders. he did it last year with leader kim jong-un. he called him rocket man, and he threatened to destroy north korea if there was nuclear activity from north korea. and then now, he is calling him a good man and shaking his hand and meeting him. in this tweet, he said maybe, i'm sure, you are a very lovely man. how do you respond to that? do you think he is a lovely man? how do you respond to those kinds of person to person reach outs? >> translator: in any way, for me what is of importance is the leaders of the two countries are seeking mutual interests. and have a dialogue and take subsequent steps which ultimately can lead to the

undoing of the knots that have existed and the difficulties that have existed in the relationship between the two countries during the last four decades. everything else is just playing with words and will not get us to any solutions or any destinations. >> what will bring you back to negotiating with the united states? i'm saying that because the u.s. says we need to renegotiate, we need to open the iran nuclear deal, known as the jpcoa. mr. trump, mr. pompeo, others have said, we do want to negotiate with the iranians. iran has to change its behavior. what do you say to that? >> translator: well, you see, after many years of negotiations and dialogue, a consensus was reached, an agreement was reached between the seven countries. and it was agreed upon by the

leadership of those seven countries involved. subsequent to which in the united nations security council it was approvedapproved. no one has the right to unilaterally exit such an agreement without just cause and cannot violate a united nations security council resolution. therefore, the united states government deviated on a path during the past few months, and it must return from that deviated path to the previous point, to the point of departure. and there will be the point where we can talk about as to whether this agreement is being implemented well. this is not the time to talk about anything else, to hold dialogue about anything else

prior to the proper and precise implementation of the previous agreement that was reached. >> do you believe that the united states is after regime change to overthrow the government, the system in iran? i ask you because just as you arrived here in the u.s., two of president trump's closest advisers said two different things. giuliani said that whether it's in two days, two months, two years, the regime in iran will be overthrown. and then nikki haley, the u.n. ambassador said we are not in the business of regime change. do you think the sanctions and president trump's policy is aimed at regime change in your country? >> translator: perhaps many in the united states during the past had such wishes. to be dealing with the regime in

iran that would be completely beholden to the united states as was the case prior to the revolution. but such an objective was never reached. and it will never be reached until such time that the iranian government rises from the will of the people in result of the ballot box and the vote of the people through which process their leadership and the representatives are chosen, that means that the people are governing and are in charge and no power and no government can stand in front of and face down a nation, and the iranian government is not separate from the people. so overthrowing that government means overthrowing the will of the people of iran. and this shows a great mistake in their calculus, just as this mistake unfortunately has been repeated over and over again in

the past by the united states government. >> could i ask you this then? because you were brought before parliament in iran when the president pulled out of the iran nuclear deal, when president trump did and when sanctions started to be reimposed. ththth called you. it's the second time in history they called a president, to question about you about it. you said, beware sabotage wears to destruction. painting a bleak picture of people's lives will lead to further darkness. you said more important than that is many people lost faith in the future of the islamic republic and are in doubt about its power. you were talking about the iranian people. i'm interested in that because earlier this year there were demonstrations across iran, bigger than the so-called green revolution, wider, more people, longer. the people are saying they're not happy. you accept that, they're not

happy with the government, they're not happy with the way it's being run? >> translator: i will start from the last statement that you made, which wasn't quite precise. you said that demonstrations longer than we witnessed in the past. you do know that last year the entire length of those demonstrations were five days. whereas the previous ones that you touched upon lasted about seven months. so five days to seven months is not exactly equal, the number of people who were participating in these protests, it's very clear how many of them there were. and you do know that after five days of these protests, there were followed by three days of constant marches. pro government and in support of the government. so in many cities across iran.

so this event that you touched upon shows the strength of the system of the islamic republic of iran. if in the united states of america in five or ten cities a few thousand people demonstration, this shows the will of the people of the united states of america. the truth is that one year and some months ago, 41 million people went to the ballot boxes to cast their votes during the election. this is very clear. and it shows whether people do have faith in the system or not and they do certainly feel that they have a right to choose their leadership. >> what is the pressure on you and on the people of iran with these sanctions, with the fact that oil revenue and exports are now plummeting because of sanctions, because certain european companies have had to

pull out?occcurrency has droppe. the supreme leader said he regrets sending yourself and the foreign minister to negotiate with the united states. how much pressure is there on you? will you remain within the nuclear deal from your perspective? >> translator: the issue of the jcpoa, the nuclear agreement, until such time that our interests are secured, delivered within the framework of this agreement, we will remain within that framework. but if we do see that the five remaining countries in the agreement are not living up to their commitments, then we will have new conditions and new frameworks. iran does not believe that it should unilaterally stay in a

multilateral agreement. all of the sides who were signatories to this agroemeeeme have responsibilities upon which they must deliver. the only party that has committed egregious mistakes by exiting this agreement unilaterally and without cause is the united states of america. but certainly, the sanctions will bring pressure upon the people. sanctions mean breaking the normal cycle of economic trade between firms and countries. and the united states of america, with all of its power, is seeking to disrupt the cycles of trade and economic activity. so in the long-term, the united states will not be able to continue these pressures. these pressures will not in the long-term bring america closer to her objective. one thing is clear, that pressure is upon the shoulders

of the people, the people who seek to make ends meet, won't be in a position to have to pay more for the same. so the sanctions of the united states of america have only one affect, and that is pressure upon the daily lives of the normal people in our nation. and this represents animosity and enmity from the united states of america targeting the people of iran. and this is -- we say, therefore, that this is not a regime of sanctions that is targeting the iranian government or system. it's targeting the people of iran. and this is something that the americans unfortunately only believe in. they say not only we will target the people with sanctions and bring hardship to their daily lives, but we're also supporters of these same people. so this shows a disconnect

between what they are saying and what they believe the people of iran do not believe these to be realities. they see the realities in their daily lives. the realities clearly show that a country that wishes to deal with us or a firm that wishesin project, build roads, railroads, port facilities, the americans come in and they bring pressure upon that firm or that entity in order to stop that project. so they are against progress in iran. they are against advancement for iran. so this does not benefit the united states of america. it does not benefit iran nor the region. history will judge that the united states of america at this juncture made a big mistake. >> do you have faith? do you believe the european government and all the other signatories to this deal are trying very hard to save it and

trying all sorts of mechanisms to save the deal? do you have faith that they can do that and that you can stay in the deal? >> translator: thus far, the european countries as well as china and russia, when it comes to only expressing their political will and aims, they have been quite resolute in making those announcements which consisted of them saying that we wish to safeguard the jcpoa. but in reality, in a tangible fashion, our expectations have not been met. what the europeans announce, what they say today, if they can put it into practice, of course, the jcpoa will remain as such and we will be able to, without the presence of the united states of america, continue with this agreement. >> thank you very much for joining me.

>> translator: i thank you very much. >> for the moment, iran will stick with the nuclear deal. but for how long? u.s. pressure is forcing companies to leave iran as we talked about. the country is bracing for a harsh new round of u.s. oil sanctions starting in november. the european negotiator is trying to keep it all together and just before the presidents of iran and america spoke at the u.n. today, i asked her whether she thought the nuclear deal would survive. welcome back to the program. >> thank you. >> you have a very public role of trying to save the jcpoa, otherwise known as the irian nuclear deal. this time last year you told me that the entire international community and as europeans, we will make sure this deal stays and it sticks. how are you feeling about that today? >> well, so far i cannot say so

good. so far, it is holding. iran is still complying with nuclear-related commitments. the iea just came out with another report, the 12th report saying iran is complying with its commitment. we are putting in place measures that are making sure that iran can continue to benefit from the economic relations it has -- legitimate economic relations it has with the rest of the world. >> that's the point. isn't it? president trump not only pulled the united states out but put secondary sanctions on europeans and others who do business with iran. the president of iran has said we only give the europeans and the signatories a certain amount of time to make sure that this deal still benefits us. otherwise, we pull out. their oil is plummeting. they're going to have sanctions come early november. boeing has pulled out. german firms have pulled out.

all the major benefits as you say that were due to go to iran seem to be fraying very, very seriously at the edges. what can you actually do? >> we are putting in place mechanisms together with the europeans, but also with russians, chinese, with others in the world, from all over the world, to create the tunnel to keep trade with iran that would guarantee that trade can continue regardless of the secondary sanctions that the united states put. >> that means avoid paying the iran central bank or whatever, the government, and figure out all sorts of nemechanisms aroun >> we are working the technical details. we're putting in place mechanisms to guarantee that trade can continue. >> you have a huge amount of faith in your power to somehow convince european business and others that they won't be hurt by u.s. secondary sanctions. that's the bottom line. people actually think that their

business lies with the united states if there's a competition between the unlited states and iran. >> i'm not saying it's easy. the confidence i have has a limit. it is a difficult environment in which they are operating. i'm convinced of the value of what was done. i'm convinced because i see the results. what i'm saying is that the united states cannot think of imposing its own policy decisions on sovereign countries and organizations. the europeans have the legitimate right to decide with whom to do business and trade. this is what we are doing. not only the europeans but also the rest of the world. >> i keep having to come back to this. so far, they are choosing the u.s. boeing pulled out. a lot of german companies with major -- the major business with iran right now are pulling out. >> yes. some trends that we are seeing. we are working on trying to

guarantee that those that want to continue to invest in legitimate trade and investments in iran and with iran can do it. >> this time last year, president trump shocked world leaders by his rhetoric regarding north korea. little rocket man, fire and fury, we will destroy north korea. and then you saw the meeting and almost lovy dovy. they are exchanging letters. they say nice things about each other. do you think that's going to happen here? are you worried or are you anticipating president trump launching a broadside against iran from the podium of the security council or the general assembly? >> i cannot predict what president trump will say in the context of the general assembly or elsewhere. for us europeans what counts as actions, policies. >> president trump and his administration insist iran's global behavior has to change. that wherever they go on this

nuclear deal has to be tied with ballistic missiles and operations in syria and in the persian gulf area and all of that. is there any movement from iran on those issues to your satisfaction? >> believe me, the toughest discussions i have are about syria, yemen or the regional dynamics. that's clear. >> with the iranian foreign minister? >> the iranian foreign minister. we spent 12 years negotiating issues. that prevented us from the rest. the focus was prevent iran from developing a nuclear weapon. preserving that agreement allows us to build on it and address the other issues with an open channel of dialogue. we need to use more together. together with the united states hopefully. not having the nuclear deal in place would not put us in a better position to discuss with iran the rest that we need to address. indeed, we have started to discuss with iran the last couple of months the situation

in yemen, the situation in syria. i believe we are better positioned with the agreement to discuss and address and achieve results on the issues than without. >> you have spoken over and again about security, about making sure you maintain the global security so far as you can. some said that maybe you shouldn't be using just that as your paradigm. for instance, eli lake of bloomberg, if she didn't exist, the oug autocrats would be trying to create her. dictators should not aim to transition these countries to open societies but rather to prevent conflict at all cost. >> the question is? >> the question is, do they have a point? is there, for instance, a stronger way you could either then or now be engaging iran on

human rights as well as for instance non-proliferation? >> we are the only one in the world engaging with iran on human rights. you know we are the only ones having human rights dialogue at every time we meet with iran. engaging is not being soft. you can be very strong and talk. but you have better alternative than talking in times of conflict. is there a better way than diplomacy and dialogue? is it war the alternative? is that the military option the alternative that works? isn't it more dangerous? haven't we done that way enough? see the consequences of that. i will always refuse to hear that dialogue and diplomacy is being soft. you can be talking and very clear, very strong, very tough. what's the alternative? >> all around you, whether it's your own home country of italy, whether it's hungary, whatever

it,france, britain, everywhere, there's a rise of populism and nationalism. into this mix comes president trump's person for winning.popu. into this mix comes president trump's person for winning. you have everybody on board into the movement, which he is trying to gum up the works in the upcoming parliamentary election for the eu parliament. they believe they can get anywhere from 17% to 20% to 30% block in the parliament. how much of a threat is that to the workings of the european union in terms of the kind of policies that you are trying to make work? >> i wouldn't call it a populist movement. i think we have to call things with their name. it's a far right extreme right political movement. traditional party that have very little of unconventional and very traditional extreme right

position. not only europe but elsewhere in the world as well. they have a different political agenda. on foreign policy, we still continue to act as one with one voice and with a coordinated action. >> are you concerned -- because democracy is a great part of foreign policy. are you concerned with the rise of illiberal democracy as they call it in europe? >> in europe, elsewhere in the world, it is something that personally worries me. in particular, the fact that -- again, i stress not so much in europe but elsewhere in the world. the idea that values are not so relevant. that you can build solutions against others. and i think this is a very fragile way of building solutions. you might find the exit strategy for a couple of weeks, but then you go back to the situation of conflict or tension. this idea that the world is in

the hands of strong men sitting around the table and deciding by themselves over the heads of the people, i simply think that doesn't work. this belongs to a different kind of era. that is the past. i don't think this is fit for this country. i don't think this is what the people of the world think. the idea that human rights, women's rights, society is nothing relevant and that only the ones that have the power count, i don't think this is the right way to solve the problems of the world. >> thank you for joining us. >> thank you. >> talking about an old kind of leadership style. there is one prime minister here at the u.n. turning more heads than most. that is new zealand's. she's passionate about climate, refugees and progressive policies. she's only the second leader in modern times to have a baby while also being head of government. when she showed up for her first

general assembly with her three-month-old daughter, it went viral. when i sat down with her today, she told me why she hopes moves like these will help normalize the workplace. welcome to the program. >> thank you very much. >> did you ever imagine that the perfectly normal act of a woman giving birth would be so incredibly viral all over and everybody just wants to talk to you about that? >> no. no. obviously, this is the norm for a women to enter into motherhood. i had to experience it when it comes to world leaders, it was real. while i hope there will be a day when it isn't worthy of comment, currently, it is. i expect that that there will be a time. >> you are the second. you have done something quite unprecedented that has gone viral. you took your baby into the general assembly.

>> well, actually, i was speaking. i came down from the podium to find she was there on the general assembly floor. there's an image that captures the moment when i see her there. >> you pick her up and you are hugging her. >> it was delightful to see her there. i expected she might be in another space. i think probably what it speaks to is the fact that i am still breastfeeding. i have her near me most of the time. it's not always obvious that she's in close proximity most of the time. >> you talk about openly why? because you want to inspire working mothers? because you want to make it -- >> i want to normalize it. i do think that if we want to make our workplaces more open, then we need to acknowledge that there are logistical challenges that come with it. i hope that despite being a bit more open, which i expect brings

vulnerability, it might create a path for other women. >> it's extraordinary that your partner has agreed to be the house husband, so to speak, to take care of your daughter. that must be really important as you do all your state duties, your head of government duties. >> what i consistently acknowledge is that i'm not doing anything special. i have a lot of help. the fact that clark has the ability to be able to juggle his career and also be our primary caregiver makes all of this possible. what has struck me the most from the moment we announced the way we would make things work, the number of men and women who have done the same thing. there isn't a lot of discussion about something that has been happening. we need to normalize it. >> i don't know whether you are as alarmed as i have been amazed by some of the incredible sexism that you have received from your own media at home.

can a mother be prime minister? can a pregnant woman do the job in cjob? can a new mother talk about climate and refugees and all the things you are talking about? >> and yet i have to say i don't feel that it's the environment where you are able to openly challenge that. at least seems to be in any way claiming the criticism isn't justified or that you show any weakness. we should be open to criticism. we should be open to be challenged. the same way all of our counterparts are. i accept that and encourage it. it means we have a robust democracy. it becomes very tricky if you try and partition off what might be seen as sexist criticism. i just don't engage. the best way i can rebel against those notions is being confident and being good at my job.

>> it is actually extraordinary that these thoughts and these kinds of views occur in new zealand, which is distinguished by being the first country in the world that gave women the right to vote. >> i would absolutely classify as being incredibly progressive. the fact that i am the third female prime minister. i never grew up as a young woman believing that my gender would stand in the way of me being able to do anything that i wanted. i credit new zealand for that, the environment, the women who went before me. to credit new zealanders for the fact that they did welcome the fact that i had a child in office. the positivity far outweighed any negativity. i'm deeply proud of where we are as a nation. >> what is the leadership rule book for you? people think that to be a prime minister, you have to be this way, this way, this way. are you trying to sort of open

up the leadership rule book? >> i think it's time for us to reconsider whether or not with meeting the expectations of the public and their expectations, particularly of the new generation of voters. they are wanting us to be constructive. probably the old playbook when it comes to politics is you succeed if you are seen as pretty ruthless. there's a lot of ego in politics. they are mostly aligned with economic markers. i am determined to do things differently. i think you can be both strong and compassionate. i think success is not just about economic but about your social indicators. on those missieasures, we are looking to be world leaders. we are using indicators across cultural, social, economic and environmental.

if we succeed, we will be amongst the first in the world. that to me is the kind of governance we need. >> here at the u.n. you are taking part in climate talk and discussion and trying to move that ball forward. i spoke to jerry brown a week or so ago who also is doing his carbon neutral program, which i think you are signed up to. he said that unless we really get our act together, there's going to be the kind of climate danie damage, migration and refugees that makes what happened in europe look like a tea party. it's going to be so bad. he said a lot of countries are not stepping up to the plate, despite the paris climate accord. >> we all have an obligation. there's no ability to opt out. this is not a hypothetical. this is reality. we have just come from the pacific islands forum.

in discussing regional security, in that forum, pacific island nations identified climate change as being the biggest threat we face. the biggest threat that we face. the message that came through strongly as well was that we cannot give up. we cannot be the sentiment it's about now adaptation, that we still have a responsibility to try and ensure that wherever in the world an individual is living, that they have the option of being able to preserve their language, their place, their land and simply conceding that sea levels are rising and they will be inundated is not the position they want us to fight for. they want us to fight to try to reserve what we are seeing. >> you are definitely counter current if you like. europe is clamping down. the united states is clamping down. they have a low bar for allowing refugees, the lowest in u.s. history right now under the trump administration. i wonder -- you are a

progressive leader. you are among the new band of young leaders, including president macron, justin trudeau and others who see the world as it is today. president trump has pulled the u.s. out of the paris climate account, is putting a low bar on refugees allowed into the united states. also, he just gave a talk on drugs and the drug war, which you have said that you are not going to sign up to. what are the issues that you have with the current administration's policies? >> i think actually when you pull back, there is a common theme, actually, that underlies the political responses we're seeing, be it the -- we see growing insecurity. globalization is fundamentally changed the experiences of workers across the world. we have to challenge ourselves and say, did we respond adequately to that? did we give financial security

that voters were asking for? did we respond to those needs? probably answer no. i think we have seen the consequences of that. my response is to say in new zeala zealand, we can respond by feeding some of the fear, exacerbating that fear, saying we can do things differently and the response doesn't have to be isolation i isolationism. it can be open. it can be as a trading nation continuing to take a multilateral approach. that's the approach that we take. >> a lot of americans have suddenly become sensitized to where new zealand is, not just because of you and your profile. >> we're not on every map that's out there. it's a real problem. we have had a campaign around it. there are maps where we are missing. >> no. >> it's true. >> i'm sure peter thiel can put new zealand on the map and billionaires who look at it as a doomsday refuge for themselves.

is that something you welcome? do you want all these rich, internationals to buy up land? >> i have heard of this. for whatever reason they are interested in new zealand, we are a country that welcomes overseas investment into our productive economy. we want it to be of genuine benefit to new zealand. we want to grow jobs off the back of that investment. we have taken a particular view whether it comes to purchasing residential housing. that's because we have a housing crisis. >> what is the view? what have you done? >> offshore residential purchases where someone has no long-term interest in residing in new zealand and making a home. >> i guess just finally, you had a forum with your predecessors, the prime minister. you were talking about the three stages of feminism. there was suffrage and the vote and empowerment and running for office. the next one she says, the

current one is protecting against abuse. the abuse of women, which we see all over the place, the united states is in the middle of a me too movement. you have all these allegations of the supreme court nominee. how does one right those skcale? how does one protect women? >> i think this has been something that within the new zealand context that we have been very wise to for some time. we have horrific rates of domestic violence. our reporting rate has been as low as 9% for abuse. we know that domestically, we have a significant path to travel to improve. for me, that next wave is actually about basic security for women. underpinned by a notion of

respect. respect in the workplace, in the home. every woman has the right to feel safe in their day to day lives. what can be more basic than that? underpinning that as well for me, financial security. the ability for women to have the opportunity to support her family, have that independent. if she's in an abusive situational relationship, the ability to move, to leave, based on that financial security. working on the fact that we have low paid work, we have a gender pay gap. these are all interdwitwined. >> it's a big job. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> a big job. i wonder whether the prime minister will be a subject for our next government. tracy ulman, she's the first and only british woman to have her own tv sketch shows in both the uk and the united states. in her latest series, she looks

at the women shaping our world today from merkel to may to trump. she looks for empathy in her characters, taking an interest in their actions behind the scenes as well. we sat down with her to talk about her show. >> you have season three coming. if someone has not watched season one or two, what do they need to know. >> my first -- the shows oe s originated in england. i was asked would i like to do a television show in england. my goodness, i didn't think i was on the radar for bbc anymore. bbc was run by a woman who is doing an incredible job. the executive -- when i was there 30 years ago, it was white men in bow ties talking about the war. that was itv.

running around in bikinis. it was pretty bad. i started the show three years ago. i thought, england is this buzzing global hub, multinational melting pot, the food is great now. i want to take on this country again. then we go to brexit. everything changed. the psychology changed. that became interesting. this is my third year. the first two are slower. i would do one character that became a breakout in portraying angela merkel. i couldn't really do sketches about her and shoot them into september and put them out in january. too much has happened. this season, we filmed some things earlier and hoped they would remain pertinent. two days before transmission or a day before, we would run in and have a standing set for 10 downing street.

i could be theresa may panicking about brexit. it was lovely. it was my little "saturday night life". >> let's take a look at a clip. >> we will train you. i will take you through some everyday situations and all you must do is not close the eyes. begin. the phone rings. you pick it up. you hear a teenage boy whose voice is breaking. you realize it's theresa may. try harder. you are a chancellor. >> first of all, can we say, amazing work on the makeup. that is uncanny how good these folks are able to make you look. how long does that take? >> not long. for a television schedule, and if makeup takes more than an hour and a half, i can't do it.

i have a genius makeup artist. a dutch sculptor. it's brilliant. it's made with gelatin now. years ago i wore latex. it was like talking through a kitchen sponge. two men put them on in the morning. it must not take more than an hour and a half. i am angela merkel maybe through lunchtime. they have to be quick. that keeps the spontaneous -- >> you stay in character. >> i imagine -- all my characters are politicians are off duty. i don't want to see them making speeches. it's how they are behind the scenes that interests me. >> how do you model the manner itch mannerisms? if i wanted to figure out how to

imitate someone, is this their walk? >> her walk is -- particularly her shoulders. she moves her arms but only from here. only move from here. i think george w. hugged her from behind years ago and she went -- it was like a physical reaction. i thought, she's the only girl in the room. you got all the guys. i thought the hook for her is she's very, very sexy. she's a sex bomb giving off the sex and she's powerful because of that. i admire her enormously. i hope she knows i exist. >> what is it about politics that you find intriguing enough to put the time and effort into these characters? >> i try to cover the broad spectrum of society in the shows i'm doing. i really have found that women politicians like angela merkel, like theresa may, i'm similar

age to them, i look for the empathy and sadness in people, too. theresa may is having a horrible time. she's got to handle brexit. as a fair weather prime minister, she would have had a nice run. now, i have to fix what the boys have messed up. that's how i see it. >> there's a clip from brexit and people jumping ship. let's take a look. >> are you scared about life after brexit? worried you will be forced to cue for hours while the rest walk by laughing at you? you should be. you big british idiot. don't worry. the deadline for brexit is approaching. join the 160,000 who have applied for an irish passport, presumably one that says i'm still european so don't [ bleep ] hate me. our team will crawl through your

ancestry and find some irish relative who qualifies you. everyone is a bit irish. it helps me remember that my own mother is from dublin. the next time you see me -- >> that's one of my favorite characters. what about the relationship you portray between theresa may and donald trump? >> she gets on the line and has a talk with him. they are standing by with a large scotch. i think they were puzzled by trump at first. now they're getting used to it and figuring out how to play it. habitual.

i come here and it's like people are under siege and obsessed. i get to break it up by doing something varied. if i did trump or just talked about trump, i would go out of my mind. >> what's the secret to staying in the business this long? it's remarkable there's not that many champiomedians that have he run that your career has had. >> pretty great. i think i was married for 30 years to a producer. that would be my husband who passed away five years ago. he tout aught me controlling th right, owning the show, distribution. he really did all the business stuff. let me do the krocreative stuff. we worked together. i have big gaps between working. i've taken time off for

children. i'm not obsessed with working all the time. i get to do what i want to do. when i do it, it seems like -- i still do this multi-character thing. the credits on my show are me on my mother's window sill when i was 6 . i'm still doing it. thank god i made money out of it and made a living out of it. longevity in the business. >> you said before that that window show for your mom started after your father had passed away. this was a way for you and her to deal with the grief. tell me about that. >> well, we loved to laugh in my family. we have a very down to earth sort of london working class sense of humor. i remember i made her laugh. not just funny, making fun of things. sad things. i used to impersonate the spinster that lived opposite us.

never got married because her fiancee oiance had been killed war. to be her, i could be her for my mom. break their heart and impersonate everyone in the village. it's a way to deal with the sadness and grief. i'm doing it again. my husband died five years ago. i came back to bbc and i'm doing it as an adult woman. >> who did you look up to? who gave you some confidence to say, you keep doing this funny stuff? >> there are always wonderful characters, but they were trained. they did shakespeare. i wasn't that girl. neither here nor there. i had seen gilda radner. bits of carol burnett. and lucille ball. we were behind them in england, but then we caught up now.

i had this great admiration for the way women could thrive on american television. >> should there be anything that is off limits for comedy? i think we're in a national conversation right now on what's too far, political critique or about political correctness. >> it only goes too far when it's not based in good energy and it's observation, it becomes angry and partisan and cruel. then it's not funny to me. >> are you intentional? or is it just to entertain when it comes to thinking about what it is that you are writing? are you -- if somebody looks at a sketch, this is her way of pushing back? >> no, i don't think people see me that way. i've been very fair. i do a bbc show that goes out prime time with all generations, all sorts of age people watching it. i think we try and keep the show very fair.

i said, i'm sick of the tribalism. >> can you really avoid it? not that you have to be a member of it. >> no. >> when you lock at instagram, twitter, maybe people around you shield you from it. it is pretty -- >> i did a sketch about that on one of the shows with my daughter. i was -- i don't partake in twitter. my daughter does. she shared things that had been said on twitter. some of them are fantastic. i've always loved her. she's so much fun. she's crazy. one man was consistently writing things severe as i hope she gets cancer tomorrow, i hate her, why doesn't she die of aids, i would have had sex with her in the '80s and now she's -- you go, whoa. it's massively out of proportion. i wrote a sketch about that. this -- you saw the sketch. we did a sketch about going to find him. imagine if you say, what's the matter with you. my daughter went, it's a massive

overreaction. we had fun doing that. that was my take on that viciousness. there was some kid that would sit in the bleachers. now they have a voice. we have always done it. it's a different form of doing it. >> you optimistic? >> very optimistic, hopeful. >> why? >> i love people. i really do. i have faith in so many great people. my daughter is having a baby in a few months. >> congratulations. >> that's exciting to be a grandmother. always optimistic and hopeful and always looking to laugh and finding humor and having so much fun. enjoying my children and my life and this opportunity i've been given. i lived near a sewer work and a fish and chip shop. who thought i would do this and say what i want to say and s sitting here. i'm so lucky.

>> congratulations on your success. thanks for joining us. >> and yours. >> she has great energy. season three premieres on hbo september 28. just a note before we go. at the u.n., president trump berated opec for raising oil prices. tomorrow, i will speak with the sound did saudi foreign minister. that is it for our program tonight. thanks for watching amanpour and company on pbs and join us tomorrow. uniworld is a proud sponsor of ahmamanpour and company.

bea had bigger dreams and those dreams were on the water. a river specifically. multiple rivers that would be home to uniworld river cruises and their floating boutique hotels. today, that dream sets sail in europe, asia, india, egypt and more. bookings available through your travel agent. for more information, visit uniworld.com. >> additional support has been provided by, bernard and irene schwartz, the cheryl and phillip millsteen family and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> you are watching pbs.

he. >> announcer: this is nightly business report. with sue herera and bill griffeth. our economy is strong. growth is running at a healthy clip. the federal reserve hiked rates the eighth time since 2015. what this means for the economy, the market and your wallet. new rules, most corporations don't want the government involved in their business. but on capitol hill today big tech companies are pushing for more oversight. one of a kind, how the first and only female ceo of a publicly traded home builder is trying to close the depender gap. those stories and moren