01/28/20 01/28/20 [captioning made possible by democracy now!] amy: from the sundance film festival in park city, utah, this is democracy now! >> it is our position as president's counsel that the actingnt was at all-time under his constitutional authority, under his legal authority, international interests, and pursuant to hisis oathth of office. amy: in the historic impeachment trial, president trump's lawyers

defend his actions as calls mount for the senate to allow witnesses, including john bolton, to testify. we will get the latest. then to mexico, where the assassination of a beloved feminist artist has refocused the spotlight on the painful legacy of femicides and violence against women in thehe border cy of juarez. >> she wouldld go out on the streets to protest femicide in the trafficking of women. she was murdered with a g gun ad right now we are demanding justice as she wanted for other women when she was alive. amy: and we will speak to the world-renowned chihinese artist and activist ai weiwei here at sundance. his new film "vivos" looks at the story of the 43 mexican students who disappeared in 2014 after they were brutally attacked and abducted in iguala, mexico. cases theyot been seen since. y

look different but have similar conditions because the truth never comes out. and what i am concerned is not just what happened, but what really happened as someone n ner comes back home. amy: we will also speak to ai weiwei about the protests in hong kong and china's crackdown on the muslim population in xinjiang. all that and more, coming up. welcome to democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amamy goodman. president trump's legal team is concluding its defense in trump's senate impeachment trial today as the explosive revelations from former national security adviser john bolton's

leaked manuscript continue to rock capitol hill. on monday, trump lawyer alan dershowitz argued bolton's claim that trump conditioned military aid to ukraine on investigations into democrats, including trump's political rival joe biden, does not constitute an impeachable offense. republican utah senator mitt romney told reporters it was pleasingly likely that he and at least three other republicans would side with democrats to vote in favor of calling witnesses to testify. john bolton has said that he would answer questions before the senate if subpoenaed. another member of trump's legal team, kenneth starr, whose investigation led to the impeachment of bill clinton, warned that impeaching trump would be too divisive. >> like war, impeachment is hell --or at least presidential

impeachment is hell. those of us who live through the clinton impeachment, including members of this body, full well understand presidential impeachment is tantamount to domestic war. amy: we will h have morere on te impeachment of president trump after headlines with university of pennsylvania professor claire finkelstein. president trump is unveiling his so-called middle east peace plan today amid his senate impeachment trial. he is expected to introduce it alongside is really prime minister benjamin netanyahu, trump's son-in-law and senior advisor jared kushner, who develop the plan, which will reportedly offer conditional sovereignty to palestinians and remap the borders of the occupied west bank to give more control to israel, among other proposals. prime minister benjamin netanyahu and his political challenger benny gantz met with trump monday to hear details of the plan. palestinians have rejected trump's plan.

this is palestinian prime minister mohammamad shtayyeh. >> this plplan does not provivie the occupied l land to its peop, and that does not recognize the borders of 1967, does not recognize that jejerusalem is an occupied land, and provides to israel as a capital. the plan's creaeators what a financial wawar against us. it drives the financial resources of the palestininian authority. it is nothing but a plan to liquidate the palestinian issue and we reject it. amy: meanwhile, netanyahu said today he is withdrawing his request for immunity from prosecution over corruption charges he faces back in israel. he is charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. he is expectcted to be standing with president trump when trump releases the so-called middle east peace plan. the supreme court voted 5-4 monday to allow trump's so called public charge rule to take effect. the vote lifts a prior injunction blocking the measure

while it's being challenged in the courts. the hardline immigration rule penalizes documented, low-income immigrantsts who may seek benefs including medicaid, food stamps and housing vouchers, by allowing officials to deny green cards and visa applications to those individuals. javier valdes of make the road new york said -- "this decision will hurt immigrant communities. the trump administration's public charge rules attack our loved ones and neighbors by imposing a racist wealth test on the immigration system. we will continue our fight in the courts to stop this reckless policy in its tracks." in more immigration news, house democrats say they will soon consider the "no ban act," which seeks to overturn trump's muslim travel ban. trump said lasast week he planso expand the travel ban and will announce additional countries soon. an appppeals couourt in virgini,

meanwhilile, is set to h hr argumentnts in three cases challenging the travel ban . the state depapartment has remov a veteran n npr reporter from secretary of state mike pompeo's upcocong trip afafter clashing with another npr reporter last week. michele kelemen was part of the press pool accompanying pompeo to several central asian and european countries, including ukraine. on friday, pompeo was interviewed on the program "all things considered" by mary louise kelly, who pressed him over the treatment of recalled u.s. ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch. >> i have defended every state department official. we have built a great team. >> respectfully, where have you defended marie yovanovitch? >> i have defended everything a person on this team. >> can you point me toward your remarks where you have defended marie yovanovitch? >> i have set i'm going to say today. amy: after the tense interview, kelly said pompeo shouted at her for asking him about ukraine,

asked her, "do you think americans care about ukraine?" -- using the f-word in that, and other sentences -- and asked her to identify ukraine on a map. in a statement, pompeo said kelly lied to him about the questions she would ask in the interview, as well as about their post-interview exchange being off the record. kelly denies both of these claims. ben wizner of the aclu said of the incident -- "the state department cannot retaliate against a news outlet because one of its reporters asked tough questions. it is the job of reporters to ask the tough questions, not be polite company." in more media news, "the washington post" is under fire after it suspended a reporter for tweeting about a rape allegation against basketball superstar kobe bryant, who died sunday in a helicopter crash that also killed his 13-year-old daughter gigi and seven others.

felicia sonmez posted a link to a daily beast article about the 2003 sexual assault allegation against bryant, which was met with immediate backlash by other users. in a now-deleted post, sonmez wrote in response to the criticism -- "any public figure is worth remembering in their totality even if that public figure is beloved and that totality unsettling. that folks are responding with rage and threats toward me -- someone who did not write the piece but found it well reported -- speaks volumes about the pressure people come under to stay silent in these cases." "the washington post" own media reporter and "the washington post" guild both condemned the move to put sosonmez on leave. in afghanistan, an american military plane crashed in the eastern province of ghazni, in an area largely controlled by the taliban.

u.s. officials say the crash was not caused by enemy fire. the number of people who had been on board the plane has not been confirmed. elsewhere in afghanistan, government air raids in northern balkh province killed at least seven civilians sunday, according to local reports. and on monday, at least 11 officers were killed after taliban fifighters stormed a police base in baghlan province. in brazil, record-breaking rains and widespread floods have killed at least 46 people and displaced tens of thousands in the southeastern state of minas gerais and surrounding area. this come exactly one year after the collapse of a mining dam in the region that killed over 250 people and devastated the surrounding land and waterways in one of the world's worst recorded mining disasters. mining giant va-lay is facing environmental charges for the dam's collapse, and its former ceo and 15 others are facing murder charges. in nigeria, journalist maxwell nashan has been killed in the eastern state of adamawa.

he was a reporter and newscaster with the federal radio corporation of nigeria. the committee to protect journalists is calling for an investigation to determine whether his journalism was the momotive for h his assassinatit. back in the united states, former production assistant miriam haley testified to a jury that disgraced hollywood mogul harvey weinstein raped her in his manhattan apartment in the summer of 2006. she is the second woman to testify against weinstein in his rape trial in new york, where he's facing life in prison. in a separate case, the united states attorney in manhattan is criticizing prince andrew for refusing to help prosecutors investigate sex trafficking allegations against the late serial sexual predator jeffrey epstein, despite prince andrew having promised to do so. prince andrew was a close friend of epstein's. one woman, virginia roberts giuffre, has also accused prince andrew of being involved in

epstein's alleged sex trafficking scheme, saying she was sexually trafficked by epstein and forced to have sex with the prince when she was 17 years old. in a bbc interview last year, prince andrew denied this allegation and said he did not regret his friendship with the billionaire convicted pedophile, who died in a prison cell in august. and in seattle, washington, thousands of nurses and caregivers at thee swedisish-providence medical center are launching a three-day strike today to demand fair wages, adequate staffing, and better conditions for patients. it's part of a statewide strike against corporate giant providence health and services, which healthcare workers say prioritize profits over patient care. with up to 13,000 workers poised to walk off the job, union leaders say it could be the largest healthcare strike in recent history. and d those arare some of the headlinenes. this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. we are broadcasting from park city, utah. "the president has done nothing

wrong." that was the message president trump's lawyers repeatedly voiced during eight hours of oral arguments at the president's impeachment trial on monday. but trump's legal team largely ignored the explosive revelations made by trump's national security advisor john bolton. on sunday night, "the new york times" published details about a draft of bolton's forthcoming book where he claims that president trump personally told him in august that he wanted to maintain a freeze on $391 million in security assistance to ukraine until ukraine turned over materials related to former vice president joe biden and supporters of hillary clinton in ukraine. the withholding of -- the withholding of congressionally approved military aid to ukraine is at the center of the impeachment trial. on monday, republican senators susan collins of maine and mitt

romney of utah said the bolton revelations underscore their case for allowing witnesses in the impeachment trial to testify. >> i think it is important to be able to hear from john bolton, rest of the able to make an impartial judgment. amy: on monday, the presidents case was made by a team of lawyers, including retired harvard university law professor alan dershowitz and former independent counsel kenneth starr, whose probe led to the impeachment of bill clinton. during oral arguments, starr referenced the clinton impeachment trial. >> the nation's most recent experience, the clinton impeachment, even though severely and roundly criticized, charge crimes. these are crimes proven in a crucible of the house of representatives debate beyond any reasonable observers doubt, so, too, the nixon impeachment. the articles charged crimes.

crimes alleged in the articles and the common law of presidential impeachment in nixon? yes. in clinton? yes. here? no. amy: president trump's personal lawyer jay sekulow accused democrats of lowering the bar for impeachment. >> we live in a constitutional republic where you have deep policy concerns and deep differences. that should not be the basis of an impeachment. if the bar of impeachment has then fored that l level, the sake of the republic, the danger that puts is not just this body, but our entire constitutional framework in, is unimaginable. every time there's a policy difference of significance or an approach difference of significance about a policy, we're going to start impeachment proceeding?

, i don't earlier really think this was about just a phone call. there was a pattern and practice of attempt over a three-year to not only interfere with the president's capability to govern -- which, by the way, they were completely unsuccessful at. just look at the state of the country. but also interfere with our constitutional framework. amy: that is president t trump's personal lawyer jay sekulow speaking on the senate floor during trumpmp's impeachment trial. to t talk more about the trial, we are joined by claire finkelstein, a professor of law & philosophy and the faculty director of the center for ethics and the rule of law at the university of pennsylvania. her recent piece for "the new york times" headlined "this question is more important than

removing trump can a sitting president block witnesses at his own impeachment trial?" professor, let's begin there. this issue of president trump privilege andtive the whole issue of witnesses. >> right. this is what we're facing right now. as i wrote in "the new york times," it is even more important than removing a president to push back on the notion of executive privilege, which has become a broader and broader concept in recent years. when you see arguments that seem to have a veneer of credibility, enough so that the president's legal team feels they can argue it with impunity saying the president actually has the right to block witnesses and refused to turn over documents in his own impeachment trial, you know that means that the senate cannot serve as the check and

balance that the founders designed it to serve. and so this is a moment a moment of very serious constitutional crisis for our democracy, not because word not only because we have a president who is governing corruptly and who thinks he can do whatever he wants, but most importantly, because we have a senate that is unable to act to remove the president because they are unable to push back on the president's own obstruction of the process involved in impeachment. on monday, deputy counsel to the president patrick philbin argugued executive privilege isa constitutional principle grounded in the separation of powers and mt be respected. this is what he said. principle that the trump administration asserted,

someme of the subpoenas reported to ruiuire t the senior adviser, his close advisors toto testiti. following at least 50 years of precedent, the department of justice's ofoffice of f legal counsesel advdvised the three sr advisers to the president, the acting white house chief of staff, the legal advisor to the national security council, and the deputy national securityty advivisor, were absolutely immue from compelled congressional testimony. basesed on that advice from the office of legal counsel, the president dirirected those advisorsrs not to testify. ministrations ofof both politicl parties have asserted this immunity since the 1970's. president obama asserted it as to the director of office of political strategy and outreach. president george w. bush started asked his former counsel andrew is white house chief of staff. president clinton asserted it as

two of his councils. president reagan asserted astor fred fieldingg. president nixon asserted it. this is not t something that was just made up recenently. there e is a dececades long hisy of the department of justice providing the opinion the senior advisers to ththe president are immune from compelled congressional testimony. amy: so that is trump's lawyer patrick philbin. professor, your response? >> this is a really important issue to deal with. there were a lot of points that were not worth dealing with among the trump legal team, but this is an issue that is worth dealing with because there is some truth to their argument that executive privilege has been used by other presidents consistently over time and has been expanding over time. but there was a lot of misleading argument regarding executive privilege and what

patrick philbin said. first of all -- first and foremost in the history that he cited is that those presidents were not asserting executive privilege in the context of an impeachment. it should be clear that executive privilege really has no role to play when the president himself is being investigated for misdeeds that could remove him from office. now, the one exception to that is nixon, who try to assert executive privilege to withhold the tapes but, in fact, the supreme court ruled that he did not have the right to do that and in fact he had to turn over the tapes. and so we do not see executive privilege used in this kind of context to actually bar witnesses from coming to testify in our president's impeachment.. there other reasons why that is misleading statement on patrick

philbin's part, which is that the supreme court has ruled on other occasions that executive privilege goes too farar. and so we see this is an issue that needs sorting out rather urgently. claimed thathas bolton should not testify because he knows his views on different world leaders and could make trouble in the future for him for divulging those views. if you could respond to that and then we will talk about ken starr. >> so it is critical that national -- the national security interest be protected, but beyond the mere restriction of classification ---- which wod absolutely be respected in this instance, so there is going to be no public testimony to classify information before the senate -- beyond protecting

classification, it is a pretty weak argument to suggest that if the president has been engaging threateningeals and other world leleaders like zelensky, that that can remain private because otherwise it will damage in a general sort of way his relationships with other leaders. it is a national security issue that the president thinks that presidentong-arm the of another independent country into digging up dirt on a political rival. that is a national security issue. congress has every right to investigate that issue. it is important that bolton testify because he e really knos what the president did in that regard. amy: professor, it is amazing when you look at the chronology of what we now understand. the manuscript a bolton boat --

bolton's book. yes to get it approved before it is actually published. the manuscript was sent to the white house december 30. president trump then has soleimani assassinated -- i don't know if there's any connection -- on january 3, a few days later. bolton tweets that this was long in the works or this is something that had worked on for a long time, leading some to wonder if trump wasn't throwing up a bone to bolton because he knew exactly what he would say if he testified because the information was in the book that the white house had. i want to turn -- i want to get your comment on that and then we will go to the next clip. >> the most amazing part of that whole revelation is the fact that mitch mcconnell was so taken aback and thrown off guard by it that the white house could be in perfect coordination with mitch mcconnell as mcconnell

claims, but not tell them that this book was out there and in fact they had received it a month before shows the coronation was not so perfect. about soleimani, it is very possible that the president was throwing a bone to john bolton, but it is also possible there was a wag the dog scenario here and that the president, as he is a master at doing, was trying to distract from the coming impeachment hearings. amy: because he saw it was coming. but very interestingly, though the bolton revelations predominating the media and the talk in washington, that is not true at the senate impeachment trial. though he was mentioned in one of the only brief references to him, bolton, by retired harvard law professor alan dershowitz speaking at the impeachment trial. >> a president, , any president,

werere thave done what "the times" reported about the context of the bolton manuscript, that would not constitutution an impeachable offense. let me repeat. nothing in the bolton revelations, even if true, would rise to the level of an abuse of power for an impeachable offense. that is clear from the history. that is clear from the language of thehe constitution. you cannot turn conduct that is not impeachable into impeachable conduct simply by using words like "quid pro quo" and "personal benefit." amy: professor, if you could to alan dershowitz? and then also talk about the significance of ken starr. >> right. dershowitz can say it all he wants, but making the argument

that you can't turn an impeachable conduct into impeachable coconduct by usining words like "quid pro quo" doesn't respond to the allegation. there is been very little here in response to the substance of the allegation to the extent that there has been an argument if there is insufficient proof that the quid pro quo actualllly existed.d. they showed when ambassador sondland saying "i presume it was a quid pro quo," "i assume it was good pro quote is my own assumption." that is casting doubt by raising questions about the burden of proof in suggesting an effect as though it were a real criminal trial that there is reasonable doubt about whether or not the quidid pro quo existed. but when you have bolton giving chapter and verse in suggesting that he e is willing to testify and ready to come into the senate and tell what he knows,

there goes the republicans argument because it is going to be very hard for them to maintain that in fact the quid pro quo did not happen. in a cup final comments, professor finkelstein, to leave us with today? >> it looks as though it is very likely that john bolton will testify. at this point it will be very difficult for the republican senators who have been saying they favor witnesses not to vote in favor of bolton's testimony. this is a really important development. it is important not just because it could be a game changer as far as the result goes, but it is important because it is pushing back on the president's own obstruction of the process. and so it is a little bit of incremental resistance to donald trump's ability to block witnesses and make the process meaningless. it is very important that john

bolton is willing to step up to the plate and do this, and we will see what that brings. amy: claire finkelstein, thank you for being with us, professor of law and philosophy, and the faculty director of the center for ethics and the rule of law at the university of pennsylvania. speaking t to us from philadelphia. we will link to your piece in "the new york times," "this question is more important than removing trump can a sitting president block witnesses at his own impeachment trial?" when we come back, feminist and artist isabel cabanillas has beenen slain in whereas, mexico. we will talk about the issue of feminist site. stay with us. ♪ [music break]

amy: the late mexican singer. this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, , the war and peace report. i'm amy y goodman. we now turn to the city of juarez, mexico, where the assassinatation of beloved feminist artist isabel cabanillas has resurfaced the spotlight on the border city's painful legacy of femicides and violencece against women. less than two weeks ago, isabel was reported missing on social media by her friends after she never returned home. on was riding her bicycle saturday, january 18, the 26-year-old was found shot to death on a sidewalk next to her like in downtown juarez. she reportedly was biking home after leaving a friend's gathering when cabanillas was

shot in the back of the head. she is survived by her four-year-old son. was a memberllas of the juarez feminist collective hijas de su maquilera madre. she was a local painter and a local painter and clothing designer. she was also involved in the observatory project that tracks crimes against women in juarez. n apriler eakingng 2019. >> one of the reasons why i paint t come aside f from the fa it has helelped me overcome e at of h hard timeses, one ninight e up and s started thinking i eded too something for myselelf and child. this isis for him. i sincerelyy want to be a gogood role model f f h him, let him kw if he is passionatate about something, he can pursue it he just has to work really hard for it. amy: that was isabel cabanillas. in the past three years, more than 300 women have been murdered in juarez. activists say at least seven

women have been killed since the beginning of 2020. allies dressed in black with pink masks gathered cutter bridge between the sister cities tojuarez and el paso, texas, protest t her murdrder. for more w we are going to juarz enjoyed by skype by a frfriend f a feminist rebell,, i dressed in juarez. she is using a pseudodonym and covering her face because of fear of retaliation. thank you for joining us. tell us about isabel, who she was and what you understand about hohow she died d in the conditions for womomen in juarez today. was -- she alwaysys presented herselflf as a painter and as a mother. her only four-year-old son. she e was a really sensisitive d loving woman..

isabel [indiscernible] to label herself like e that. atat the end of the day in her day-to-dayay life, she was a feminist. i don't hold the microphone? find.e are hearing you just keep on speaking. looks ok. basis, she was a feminist because she always [indiscernible] she always was there on the protest for women's rights. shows had the fine sense of

justice for women who suffered misogyny in their life. was part of what she did for a living in her artistic job was painting on clothing, jackets and t-shirts. a lot of labor she did on the given in the winter of 2019, collection of food and blankets and clothing for immigrants. she was really public with her activism. she was really in the spotlight. paintingg mururals on the border, boyoys and girls playing on the border. w was always active. she was always there. thewas also part of feminist movement in juarez

because she was fighting against the comedian mind that wants to be [indiscernible] amy: we don't have much time and i was wondering if you could talk about the issue of femicide and the issue of police and how they deal with these murders? a major protest now demanding information about whwhat happend to isabel.l. what are you demananding now? isfemicidide in juarez something, sadly, very comommon. police and state don't t do anything t to solve this crime.. stayt of the crimes will unpuninished forever. c courtugh men gogo into and they declare they killedd their wife or their daughter or

maybe theirr neighbor, they will be unpunisished. this is somethining really unbelievable. we have reported eight women a and we onlyarez haveve 27 d days on january. it is a really red flag for women here in juarez. amy: nanana rebell, thank you so much for being with us. we will continue to follow this isabelbout the murder of and continue to talk about the protests taking place as you speak to us from juarez with your name changed to protect you from retaliation with the level of femicide what it is in juarez , mexico. when we come back, the renowned

chinese artist and activist ai weiwei. we will talk about mexico as well. ♪ [music break] amy: this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report.. i'm amy goodman. we are broadcasting from park city, utah, from the sundance

film festival. as we continue to look at the legacy of state violence in mexico, now to the devastating story of the ayotzinapa 43 -- the 43 students who disappeared in septemberer of 2014 after thy were brutally attacked and abducted by police forces in iguala, mexico. they have not been seen since. more than five years after their disappearance, the families of the students are still fighting for justice. their struggle is the subject of a stunning new dococumentary b y the world-renowned chinese artist and activist ai weiwei. it's called "vivos." it premiered here at sundance. i sat down w with ai weiwei and asked him about why he made the film about the ayoyotzinapa 43. started with art in mexico. because i don't know mexico toture that much, so i have find a project which i can get also to go in

layayers of the society so i can learn the culture and what mexican is about. out there isfind 43 students that disappeared. lot because ie a researchched in china, when i ws were also many, many students disappeared. people commitoung we think of is the future of society and how that could happen, what really happened to them. peoplet is after when disappear, never come back home.

so i have a very strong curiosity. a case fort will be me to understand mexican culture , it's past, and the current situation. thiss how it got me into filmmaking. case whichthis is a is not very uncommon in mexico. disappearance and the violence happens every day. beenery few cases have really solved. over 90% of the murder cases find -- they will never relating to those very

violent, very brutal killings. amy: in this case, though, with these 43 young students who are going to a teacher's college, very progressisive, deeply concerned about educating the poor in their country, many of them for themselves, they disappear. although you don't focus on exactly what has happened, it is very clear from your documentary that there was some kind of collusion between the state, the federal and local and state police, and drug gangs. tookin what you believe place, and then we will talk about your main emphasis, which this slow-moving it riveting documentary how has integrated into the life of the mayan people, the people who lost their loved ones.

, what i have learned is mexico is a society which has a ofy deep corruption in terms .udicial corruption and also in this case, the local police andand the --o the army and the cartels the crime family -- they all are involved. they are all part of this incident. case, it is of great concern because this is such a special case. it relates to the students and the government. it so internationally,

grabbed our attention. of course, the investigation has been stopped by the government. to this day where these 43 students are. there's a lot of different assumptions, but none of them are really have a solid base. that makes me really wonder how could this happen in such a condition that the truth cannot even come out? at the e same time, you realize in the world many cases may look different, but have -- similar condition because the truth never comes out. and then what i concerned is not

just what happened, but what really happened is when someone never comes back home and those people are still alive and there is a consequence of this kind of with the fact that society and the culture. not is why the filmlm is investigation type of film, but --her to see the clear facts one, children not come back home the fact parents and cial jtice is not achiev. stateyou talkbout the , together with these drug gangs -- what is believed to taken

place -- and the united states. can you talk about thehe effectf war on drugs on the people of mexico? the so-called war on drugs? drugs is-called war on the local government, very powerful in terms of the military and police come and also one of the cause of huge corruption because that becomes a moneymaking machine for the local government. causes cororruption with ofofficials become connected wih drug lords. economyions as local depends on the so-called drug wars. come to the drugs

market, which is the united states. u.s. cannotys, , the say they are not responsible what happened in mexico. amy: yet but the crisis of what is happening in mexico, the u.s. -funded mexican military and police that crackdown on the mexican people, and then you have the wall the u.s. is trying to build on the border. walls mean.ell what of course, you come from china, the great wall of china. if you can talk about what the significance of this wall is the president trump tries to build on the southern border? the wall between u.s.

and mexico is really a symbolic one. we all know the wall cannot stop the harkey and cannot stop -- hierarchy and cannot stop people freedom to moral survive. they choose the location. the wall really functions as a symbolic, wall agreed in our tod and heart and to refuse bury responsibility and refuse to share and refuse to have those immediate neighbor. many is caused by us. globalization, and prosper or the west, condition is very much based on

the conditions of the underdeveloped nations. theyexican police, when sheet to students, the guns they use are from germany. in some instances, can easily nations thatf rich profit from the property, from the people eager to make it in china, many,uous -- many other nations that dump the pollutions and impossible in protection labor market into those nations. , they are notme supporting the democracy in

those kind of states because they know democracy will not make them so easy to be profitable. amy: you talk about western from areasfiting that are less developed. both your film -- you just finished your film and mexico and you're now making another film in hong kong. explain what has brought you back to china, the hong kong to do this film about the protests there. kong started protesting since last june, already lasting for over half a year. every weekend, sometimes even weekdays, hong kong young people arare trying to demand the freem and to demand the chinese

apply its not to authoritarian practice into hong kong. that will be the end of hong kong, so young people are very --ve and very idealistic almost naive. gradually, they become very educated and know what kind of power they are facing, but they are so determined. let them back off. this is a very beautiful revolution, i should say. it set a perfect example of the next generation on how they would fight these kind of powerful state power. course, there being crashed -- they are being

crashed. they jump out the window was brutal cover-up from the police part. with basically the leader from hong kong is a product of chinese government. the lady, she has refused any kind of conversation were real communication -- for real communication. so despite will continue. there is no way to solve it. , thee side there is china and never use to .egotiating and they don't care but on the other side, young people demand the very essential

living condition, which is their freedom. relate to myo much struggle. i am my team have been there from the beginning, covering the whole struggle and it is still going on. we are trying to give the moral to signal images and trying to come out to make a film about it. amy: explain what you understand is happening in xinjiang province right now with the uighurs, what we understand and what we don't understand. is xinjiangee today camps for uighurs,

which contains millions of uighurs. that is the informatation we get from all kind of research or leak to the papers. thewhat we don't know is policy since 1949, communists start to get to power. policyve this heightened minorities -- they call minorities, different races -- and the way they're doing this is to understand more chinese people into the area.

amy: he wrote a column for "the new york times" called "capitalism and culturecide: the idea of culture has been used as a different -- justification of some of humanity's worst crimes." you say it is not so distant. you talk about "the new york times" publishing t these 400 papages of internal governrnment documents on the rationale and technique of this culturecide. beijing denying the existence of the camps, but it never claimed that the documents were inauthentic. and announced the trainees nusra education centers have all graduated. what does that mean? it is hard to explain. use allese government kinds of other line were

language whihich would confuse e people. in the beginning, they refused this ever even exist, these kind of camps. gradually they said, yes, there are camps, but that is just for education to help them to get new jobs or to help them to understand some kind of harmonious society. then they say -- the papers found out this is a very dramatic were designed to camp to try and really make the different races disappear. then they said, ok, does heidi say, -- how do you say, they graduated. how many are they? where are they after graduation? do you have names?

can you openen to let international journalists to go in to really examine the situation? they would never do it. amy: what does culturecide mean? means trying to destroy culture or trying to hide, culture to or racist act to make a control or make them disappear. amy: you talk about how withrecide is converging predatory capitalism. he say multinational corporations, including volkswagen, siemens communal lever, nestle have factories

there, supply chains foror othes to plan on changing & co. such as h&m entity does use the cotton. we might ask about what is it about this remote place to which the emperors of old finnish criminals in lieu of sending them to prison that makes it so attractive. >> it globalization, the capitalism developed into the whichm speed work scale, will never imagine in the colonial time. really the capitalism viewed the strongest possible relations with the authoritarian society. orders -- the

borders are not a real border. the corporations, would realizeion, withlled china and u.s. -- it isis rereally just an illusion. it is not really possible because, basically, china has economic -- how do you say? amy: benefit? >> not benefit. it is very much integrated in the u.s. economy, the treasurer and the bank, all of those things are chinese investments. we cancannot really say

separate. amy: ai weiwei, world-renowned chinese artist and activist. his documentary "vivos" just ferment here at the sundance film festival.