>>> HELLO, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO "AMANPOUR AND COMPANY."

HERE'S WHAT'S COMING UP.

HOSTAGE FAMILIES STORM ISRAEL'S PARLIAMENT, DEMANDING A CHANGE OF COURSE, TO SAVE THEIR LOVED ONES.

AS BENJAMIN NETANYAHU'S POLL NUMBERS PLUMMET, EYE DISCUSS WHAT COMES NEXT WITH FORMER ISRAELI FOREIGN MINISTER TZIPI LIVNI.

>>> THEN, TO GAZA, WHERE THE DEATH TOLL CONTINUES TO RISE.

I'LL TALK TO THE FORMER PRIME MINISTER OF THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY SALAM FAYYAD.

>>> ALSO AHEAD, FOUR YEARS SINCE COVID-19 FIRST EMERGED, HAVE WE CONQUERED IT, AND, ARE WE PREPARED FOR THE NEXT SUPER VIRUS?

JOURNALIST DONALD McNEIL JOINS ME WITH HIS LESSONS FROM 25 YEARS OF COVERING PANDEMICS.

>>> AND -- >> IT'S CLEAR TO ME THAT A MAJORITY OF REPUBLICAN PRIMARY VOTERS WANT TO GIVE DONALD TRUMP ANOTHER CHANCE.

>> AS RON DeSANTIS DEPARTS THE REPUBLICAN RACE, LAWYER GEORGE CONWAY WITH MICHEL MARTIN ON TRUMP'S LEGAL WOES.

♪♪ >>> "AMANPOUR AND COMPANY" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- THE ANDERSON FAMILY ENDOWMENT.

JIM ATTWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS.

CANDACE KING WEIR.

THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LEILA AND MICKEY STRAUS.

MARK J. BLECHNER.

SETON J. MELVIN.

CHARLES ROSENBLUM.

KOO AND PATRICIA YUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG.

>>> ADDITIONAL SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THESE FUNDERS.

AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU.

>>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE, I'M CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR IN LONDON.

15 WEEKS IN THE OCTOBER 7 WAR, AND DIVISIONS INSIDE ISRAEL ARE SPILLING INTO THE OPEN.

HOSTAGE FAMILIES STORMED INTO KNESSET TODAY TO PROTEST PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU'S HANDLING OF THE WAR, AND DEMANDING NEGOTIATIONS TO FREE THEIR KIDNAPPED LOVED ONES.

A NEW POLL SHOWS NETANYAHU'S SUPPORT TO BE AT NEARLY ROCK BOTTOM AND HIS PARTY COMING A DISTANT SECOND IF THERE WERE TO BE AN ELECTION TODAY.

AS A SENIOR MILITARY VOICE IN THE WAR CABINET, THE FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF CALLED FOR IMMEDIATE ELECTIONS, AND DEMANDED THE GOVERNMENT TELL, QUOTE, THE TRUTH TO THE PEOPLE, ABOUT THE WAR'S STATED GOALS AND ACHIEVEMENTS.

OVERSEAS, THE EU TOP DIPLOMAT JOSEP BORRELL BLASTED NETANYAHU'S REJECTION OF THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION, WHICH THE UNITED STATES AND THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY BACK.

>> WHAT OTHER SOLUTION DO THEY HAVE IN MIND?

TO MAKE ALL THE PALESTINIANS LEAVE?

TO KILL OFF THEM?

25,000 ARE DEAD IN GAZA.

70% ARE WOMEN AND CHILDREN.

CERTAINLY THE WAY YOU'RE TRYING TO DESTROY HAMAS IS NOT THE WAY THEY'RE DOING, BECAUSE THEY ARE SEEING THEIR HATE FOR GENERATIONS.

>> JOINING ME NOW IS VETERAN ISRAELI POLITICIAN, FORMER FOREIGN MINISTER TZIPI LIVNI.

SHE'S WORKED BOTH IN OPPOSITION TO NETANYAHU AND IN COALITION WITH HIM.

TZIPI LIVNI, WELCOME BACK TO THE PROGRAM.

CAN I START -- >> THANK YOU.

>> BY ASKING YOU, ARE YOU SURPRISED AT THIS STAGE, 108 DAYS SINCE THE MASSACRE, AND THEN THE WAR ON HAMAS, THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN, THIS ANGER, THESE DIVISIONS WITHIN THE ISRAELI SYSTEM, ARE SPILLING OUT INTO THE OPEN?

>> WELL, I'M NOT SURPRISED THAT THE WORLD TAKE SO LONG, BECAUSE THIS IS A WAR BETWEEN THE COUNTRY AND A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.

WE ARE LOOKING FOR VICTORY, THEY ARE LOOKING FOR SURVIVAL, SO, IT TAKES TIME.

BUT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE MORE THAN 100 HOSTAGES THAT WERE TAKEN, AND THE STATEMENTS OF PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU ABOUT A DAY AFTER, HIS UNWILLINGNESS TO DEAL WITH THE DIFFERENT PLANS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE, INCLUDING BY THE UNITED STATES, CREATE NOW THE DIVISION AGAIN AMONGST THE ISRAELI SOCIETY.

>> SO, WERE YOU SURPRISED, LIKE A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE, THAT A MEMBER OF THE WAR CABINET, OBSERVER MEMBER, MADE THAT RATHER, YOU KNOW, QUITE BLUNT INTERVENTION ON ISRAELI TELEVISION, FIRSTLY CALLING FOR ELECTIONS IMMEDIATELY, OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, SAYING THAT THE PRIME MINISTER HAD NOT BEEN TELLING THE PEOPLE THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT WAS HAPPENING ON THE GROUND.

LET ME JUST PLAY A SMALL SOUND BYTE AND YOU HAVE REACT.

>> Translator: WE NEED, WITHIN A FEW MONTHS, TO RETURN TO THE ISRAELI VOTER AND GO TO ELECTIONS IN ORDER TO RENEW TRUST.

BECAUSE AT THE MOMENT, THERE IS NO TRUST.

>> SO, WHY IS THERE NO TRUST?

DO YOU AGREE WITH HIM THAT THERE IS NO TRUST?

>> FIRSTLY, I AM GLAD THAT HE AND BENNY GANTZ ARE PART OF THE ISRAELI WAR CABINET, BECAUSE I TRUST THEM MORE THAN I TRUST THE OTHERS THERE, AND THE MOMENT IN WHICH THEY DECIDE TO QUIT, THIS IS FOR ME A MESSAGE SAYING THAT THEY ARE NOT INFLUENCING ANYMORE BECAUSE OF THINGS.

BUT I THINK THAT IN THIS MOMENT, NOT ONLY IN TERMS OF ISRAELI POLITICS, BUT THIS WILL DEFINE THE FUTURE OF ISRAEL'S SECURITY, THE FUTURE OF ISRAEL AND THE PALESTINIANS IN GAZA, AND THEREFORE, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD ALL FOCUS ON, WHAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE FOR HAMAS.

HOW CAN WE KEEP ISRAEL'S SECURITY, AND HOW TO WORK WITH AND NOT AGAINST OUR ALLIES AND FIRST AND FOREMOST, THE UNITED STATES.

THAT STANDS WITH ISRAEL SINCE DAY ONE, AND OFFER SOME IDEAS ABOUT REGIONAL SECURITY MATTERS.

THE SAUDIS ARE SPEAKING ABOUT NORMALIZATION AND, OF COURSE, THEY CANNOT ABANDON THE PALESTINIANS, BUT THIS CAN CREATE NEW OPPORTUNITY FOR THE FUTURE, AND I'M SO SORRY THAT THE ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER IS NOT USING THIS OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE A BETTER FUTURE.

>> OKAY, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY?

I MEAN, LOOK, PEOPLE HAVE KNOWN THAT HE HAS BEEN ESSENTIALLY AGAINST A TWO-STATE SOLUTION FROM THE BEGINNING OF HIS MANDATE WHEN HE FIRST GOT IN POWER IN 1996, BUT NOW, HE'S COMING OUT AND SAYING IT PUBLICLY, AND SAYING IT IN RESPONSE TO, AS YOU SAY, HIS BIGGEST BACKER, THE UNITED STATES, NOT TO MENTION THE ENTIRE, YOU KNOW, ALLIES AND WESTERN COMMUNITY, AND, AS YOU SAID, SOME OF THE ARAB STATES, WHICH WANT TO NORMALIZE WITH ISRAEL.

FOR ISRAEL'S SECURITY, AND THE LIKE.

WHY IS HE SAYING THIS, AND IS IT -- WHAT DO YOU THINK HE'S SAYING THIS?

>> NETANYAHU TRIES TO DIVIDE THE ISRAELI SOCIETY ON THE SAME OLD COMPARING, WHO IS FOR OR AGAINST THE PALESTINIAN STATE?

HE IS ALSO SAYING THAT THE P.A., THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY, IS LIKE HAMAS, THEY ARE ALL THE SAME, SO WE SHOULDN'T FIRST AID OR HELP OR ACCEPT THE PRESENCE OF THE P.A.

IN GAZA STRIP, AND LATER, TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PALESTINIAN STATE.

NOW, I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S A NEED TO TAKE CARE OF ISRAEL'S SECURITY.

THIS IS CRUCIAL THESE DAYS, BUT THE REAL QUESTION, HOW CAN WE FORM DIFFERENT SECURITY STRUCTURE REGIONALLY?

AND FRANKLY, WHEN WE NEED TO CHOOSE WHO WILL CONTROL GAZA, SO THE OPTION, THE REAL OPTIONS ARE HAMAS, NO WAY, ISRAEL -- ISRAEL DOESN'T AND SHOULDN'T TAKE CARE OF 2 MILLION PALESTINIANS THAT ARE THERE, WE DON'T WANT TO REOCCUPY GAZA, WE JUST NEED TO TAKE CARE OF OUR SECURITY, SO THE THIRD OPTION IS A PALESTINIAN REGIME.

WHETHER IT'S THE P.A.

OR OTHERS, BUT WE NEED TO DEAL WITH IT.

WE NEED TO GIVE AN ANSWER TO THIS NOW, BECAUSE OTHERWISE, THE HAMAS WILL CONTINUE -- CAN, YOU KNOW, TRY TO SURVIVE THE NEXT DAY, TO BE THE REGIME IN GAZA AGAIN AND THREATENS NOT ONLY ISRAEL, BUT ALSO THE PALESTINIANS IN GAZA, AND THEREFORE, THIS IS TRULY URGENT, TO MAKE THIS DECISION NOW.

IT'S NOT THE DAY AFTER, IN THE FUTURE, IT'S HERE AND NOW.

>> SO, YOU JUST SAID THAT HE AND MANY OF HIS SUPPORTERS EQUATE THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY WITH HAMAS.

I MEAN, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT TO BE THE CASE, GIVEN THE FACT THAT IT IS THE ENTITY, THE PALESTINIAN ENTITY, THAT IS RECOGNIZING ISRAEL, THAT WORKS WITH ISRAEL, BY AND LARGE, FOR THE MOST PART?

IS THAT A SMART THING TO TELL THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL?

>> OF COURSE IT'S NOT THE SAME, BUT I WILL SAY THE FOLLOWING.

I'LL SPEAK ABOUT OUR INTEREST, IT'S NOT FOR ME TO CHOOSE THE PALESTINIAN LEADERSHIP, BUT YET, IT NEEDS TO BE CLEAR BY THE ENTIRE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE HAMAS OR ANY TERRORIST ORGANIZATION, AND WE NEED THE REGIME THAT IS WILLING TO WORK WITH ISRAEL ON SECURITY AND GIVE LEGITIMACY TO ISRAEL, WHEN WE NEED TO FIGHT AGAINST OR ALSO WITHIN GAZA STRIP, AND TO -- TO BE RESPONSIBLE TO THE LIFE OF THE PALESTINIANS THAT ARE THERE.

SO, WHETHER IT'S A NEW P.A., RENEWED P.A., PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY OR OTHERS, IT'S LESS IMPORTANT, BUT THIS OTHER PARAMETERS, THESE ARE THE CONDITIONS, AND FOR NOW, THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY IS NOT -- CANNOT WORK OR FIGHT TERROR WITHIN GAZA STRIP, THAT'S FOR SURE, IT'S TOO WEAK, BUT I THINK THAT WE NEED TO ENTER INTO AN INTERIM PERIOD OF TIME AND TRY AND WORK TOGETHER WITH REGIONAL STAKEHOLDERS, WITH THE UNITED STATES, TO MAKE -- TO BEGIN THESE STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE, AND -- WITHOUT ANY HESITATION.

>> HOW DO YOU THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, IF THE PRIME MINISTER IS JUST SAYING NO?

WHO IS GOING TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN?

AND AS I SAID, YOU KNOW, THE POLLSTERS SAY THAT HE APPARENTLY, IF IT WAS HIS PARTY GOING TO ELECTIONS, HE'S GOT, LIKE, 16%, COMPARED, WHICH IS, LIKE, YOU KNOW, LESS THAN HALF OF WHAT BENNY GANTZ HAS AT 37%.

WHO IS GOING TO CREATE AND ENABLE WHAT YOU ARE JUST SAYING?

THE NEED TO WORK WITH YOUR PARTNERS, TO CREATE A FINAL PEACE?

>> IT'S CLEAR THAT, FOR MANY, NETANYAHU'S OPPONENT IS NOW LOSING IN POLLS, AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS THE END OF NETANYAHU'S ERA IN ISRAEL POLITICS, AND I DO HOPE THAT THOSE THAT WILL REPLACE HIM FROM CENTER PART OF ISRAEL POLITICS WILL ADAPT THESE VIEWS THAT IS A COMBINATION OF ISRAEL'S SECURITY NEEDS WITH A VISION FOR THE FUTURE, AND HOPEFULLY, A NEW REGIONAL STRUCTURE.

>> AND CAN I ASK YOU ABOUT THE UNITED STATES?

I MEAN, WHAT IS THE COST TO AN ISRAELI LEADER, OR IS THERE NO COST, OF DISSING, YOU KNOW, REJECTING, YOUR CLOSEST ALLY, PARTICULARLY A PRESIDENT THAT GOT UP AND SHOWED THE WORLD THAT HE SUPPORTED ISRAEL IN ITS HOUR OF DESPERATE NEED, EMBRACED THE PRIME MINISTER HIMSELF, DESPITE POLICY DIFFERENCES, SUPPORTED THE RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENSE AND, FRANKLY, THE WAY THE WAR IS BEING CONDUCTED, VERY WORRIED ABOUT IT NOW, EVEN CALLING TO STOP, QUOTE, INDISCRIMINATE BOMBING.

IS THERE A COST TO AN ISRAELI LEADER WHO PUBLICLY DISSES THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?

>> I DO BELIEVE THAT ALL -- THE ISRAELI PUBLIC AND MOST OF THE ISRAELI POLITICIAN ARE -- TRULY APPRECIATE THE AMERICAN ADMINISTRATION WHO STANDS WITH ISRAEL SINCE DAY ONE, TRYING TO HELP SHARE OR SHOW DETERRENCE TO OTHERS, INCLUDING IRAN AND HEZBOLLAH, THAT AT FIRST WE ALL WERE WORRIED THAT THIS CAN TURN INTO A REGIONAL WAR, AND THIS IS THE RIGHT THING, WHEN THESE HORRORS, THESE -- HAMAS AS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION DID THESE HORRORS.

AND WE ARE GRATEFUL, AND IN MOST POLLING, IT LOOKS LIKE THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT IS DOING THE RIGHT THING, WITHOUT TAKING CARE OF HIS OWN INTERNAL POLITICS, WHILE THE ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER IS JUST THINKING ABOUT HIS OWN POLITICS WITHOUT TAKING CARE OF ISRAEL'S SECURITY NEEDS, AS HE SHOULD.

AND THEREFORE, IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT BEING POLITE, BUT IT IS ALSO ABOUT ISRAEL'S SECURITY NEEDS.

WE NEED THE UNITED STATES, IT IS PART OF ISRAEL STRATEGIC SECURITY NEEDS, AND THEREFORE, YOU KNOW, NETANYAHU'S CAMPAIGN IS, I'M THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN SAY NO TO THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY, INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES, AND I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED THE LEADER WHO KNOWS HOW TO OUR ALLIES IN DEFINING ISRAEL'S SECURITY NEEDS AND WORKING TOGETHER WITH THEM.

AND THIS IS MISSING THESE DAYS.

>> SO, TZIPI LIVNI, YOU JUST QUESTIONED NETANYAHU'S SELF-DESCRIBED ROLE AS MR. SECURITY, AND MANY ISRAELIS QUESTION IT AND WE KNOW IT AND WE'VE SEEN THE POLLS, BUT I WANT TO ASK YOU THIS, IT WAS SAID, IT IS TIME TO TELL THE PEOPLE THE TRUTH ABOUT, A, THE WAR ON HAMAS, THAT STILL TWO-THIRDS OF THEM, AT LEAST, BY YOUR OWN CALCULATION, STILL ARE SURVIVE, BUT MOST, OR MAYBE MORE IMPORTANTLY FOR THE PEOPLE, IS THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE MILITARY MIGHT, AS WE ARE TOLD, HAS NOT BROUGHT BACK YOUR HOSTAGES.

MOST PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT IT WAS A NEGOTIATION, IT WAS A DEAL, IT WAS, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A PAUSE, AND YOU GOT BACK HALF THE HOSTAGES.

HALF OF THEM REMAIN.

WHAT DO YOU THINK IS -- IT LOOKS LIKE ISRAELIS BELIEVE THAT, TOO, I MEAN, THEY WENT INTO THE KNESSET TODAY.

>> I THINK THAT WE -- THERE IS NO ISRAELI WHO IS NOT THINKING NOW ABOUT 1-YEAR-OLD HOSTAGE THAT WAS TAKEN WITH HIS PARENT AND HIS BROTHER AND ABOUT THE HOSTAGES.

AND THIS IS MOST IMPORTANT GOAL OF THIS WAR, BUT IT'S ALSO CLEAR THAT WE -- HAMAS THE REGIME THE NEXT DAY.

AND WE ALL SUPPORT THE WAR AGAINST HAMAS, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT SINCE WE DON'T WANT TO SEE THEM, AND NOBODY WANTS, AS A REGIME, THE IDEA OF WORKING TOGETHER WITH -- DECIDING NOW WHO IS GOING TO REPLACE THEM CAN LEAD TO A DEAL ON THE HOSTAGES AND ALSO ANOTHER REGIME AT THE END OF THIS WAR, THE SOONER THE BETTER.

BUT THE WAR IS BEING SUPPORTED, AS THE NEED TO RELEASE THESE HOSTAGES, BECAUSE ON ONE HAND, YOU HAVE ISRAEL'S SECURITY, ON THE OTHER, IT'S ABOUT ISRAEL'S SOLIDARITY, WHICH IS PART OF OUR STRENGTH, AND WE NEED TO DO IT -- WE NEED TO HAVE BOTH.

>> TZIPI LIVNI, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING ME.

>>> MEANTIME, THE PALESTINIAN AND ISRAELI FOREIGN MINISTERS MET IN BRUSSELS TODAY TO DISCUSS A ROAD MAP FOR THE FUTURE.

IS THERE ANY WAY TO PERMANENTLY END THE BLOODSHED AND BREAK THE CYCLE OF VIOLENCE AS WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING?

AS MUCH AS PEOPLE CALL FOR NEW LEADERSHIP INSIDE ISRAEL, THE SAME IS TRUE FOR THE PALESTINIANS, WHERE EXPERTS SAY THE PEOPLE DESERVE BETTER.

I'M JOINED NOW BY SALAM FAYYAD, HE SERVED AS PRIME MINISTER FOR THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY AND HE'S JOINING THE SHOW FROM PRINCETON.

WELCOME BACK TO THE PROGRAM, MR. FAYYAD.

I WONDER IF YOU CAN RESPOND TO TZIPI LIVNI IN TERMS OF THE IDEA OF WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO HAVE A REALLY EMPOWERED AND CAPABLE PALESTINIAN NEW LEADERSHIP, DO YOU THINK THERE SHOULD BE A NEW LEADERSHIP, FIRST AND FOREMOST?

>> THANK YOU, CHRISTIANE, FOR HAVING ME ON YOUR SHOW AGAIN.

LET ME FIRST SAY THAT ACTUALLY I HAVE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS BEEN CALLING FOR THE PALESTINIAN LEADERSHIP TO BE A PART OF MAKING, OR WORKING ON A BETTER FUTURE FOR THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE.

SO, THAT'S WHAT COMES TO MIND IMMEDIATELY, WHEN YOU SAY FUTURE LEADERSHIP.

AND THAT REQUIRES RECOGNITION OF THE BASIC FACT THAT A DIVIDED HOUSE CANNOT STAND.

CERTAINLY CANNOT CONTINUE TO STAND.

THAT, TO ME, IS THE MOST PRESSING PRIORITY FACING US.

WHEN IT COMES TO TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENT KIND OF P.A.

AND ALL OF THAT, EMPOWERMENT TO THE P.A., ENABLING THE P.A., I WAS FIRST TO ACTUALLY SAY EXPLICITLY THAT THE P.A.

AS CURRENTLY CONSTRUCTED OR CONFIGURED CANNOT REALLY CONTINUE TO GOVERN, AND CERTAINLY CANNOT ASSUME THE RESPONSIBILITY OF TAKING CARE OF THE NEEDS FOR OUR PEOPLE IN GAZA.

IN ADDITION TO WEST BANK.

I USE THE TERM RECONFIGURE.

BY THAT, I MEANT AND I AM REPEATING TODAY, POLITICAL ENABLEMENT, AND THAT REALLY BEGINS BY TRYING TO PUT THE PALESTINIAN POLITICS TOGETHER.

THAT'S AN ABSOLUTE MUST.

SECONDLY, IN TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT WITH ISRAEL, ON A SOLUTION, IT'S HIGH TIME, IT'S BEEN HIGH TIME FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS NOW THAT THE PATH THE PLO HAS BEEN ON, TRYING TO GET US TO THE STATE THAT WE WANTED TO HAVE, THE TERRITORIES ARE OCCUPIED, TURNED OUT TO BE AT BEST AN EXERCISE IN FUTILITY.

WORST THAN THAT A LOT MORE FAR REMOVED FROM THAT AS AN OUTCOME THAN WE WERE AT ANY POINT, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, RIGHT NOW.

IT'S KIND OF IRONIC, IN SOME WAY, THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE ONGOING WAR IN GAZA, A LOT OF INTEREST NOW RESURFACED, THE SO-CALLED TWO-STATE SOLUTION.

RATHER IRONIC, AFTER MANY YEARS OF MANY PEOPLE SAYING THAT IT WAS AT BEST ON LIFE SUPPORT, IF IT HAS NOT DIED ALREADY.

WELL AND GOOD, WHAT ARE WE PREPARED TO DO ABOUT THAT?

FIRST OF ALL, TO RECOGNIZE ACTUALLY THAT THE PATH WE ARE ON IS NOT REALLY GOING TO TAKE US TO A BETTER PLACE.

WHAT IS ACTUALLY A DIFFERENT POLITICAL PROCESS, ONE THAT BEGINS WITH RECOGNITION OF OUR NATIONAL RIGHTS AS A PEOPLE.

IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR OUR LEADERSHIP TO ACTUALLY ARTICULATE A VISION AS TO WHAT THAT REALLY ACTUALLY MIGHT MEAN.

SIMULTANEOUSLY, IT SHOULD ALSO PREOCCUPY ITSELF WITH WHAT IS, TO ME, THE MOST PRESSING PRIORITY OF ALL, BRINGING THE CURRENT ONGOING WAR OF AGGRESSION TO AN END.

THE TWO OBJECTIVES, IN MY VIEW, ON THE ONE HAND, TRYING TO PUT -- TO HAVE UNITARY PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY THAT GOVERNS THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT, CONSENTED TO AN EXPANDED P.A., IS NOT INCONSISTENT TO ANYTHING.

IT IS NECESSARY.

IT MIGHT PRESENT AN IMPORTANT INSTRUMENT IN TRYING TO BRING THE WAR TO AN END.

THAT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT.

SO, ALL THE TALK ABOUT WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN TO THE POLITICAL PROCESS, HOW TO REVITALIZE IT AND ALL, I THINK ALL OF THIS IS IMPORTANT.

IT WILL TAKE A LOT OF TIME BEFORE ALL OF THIS IS TRANSLATED INTO AN ACTION PLAN THAT'S AGREED TO AND ADOPTED INTERNATIONALLY.

IN THE MEANTIME, WHAT IS HAPPENING TO STOP THE WAR?

THAT, TO ME, IS THE MOST PRESSING PRIORITY.

WITH PALESTINIAN LEADERSHIP PREOCCUPYING ITSELF FIRST AND FOREMOST WITH THAT OBJECTIVE, BRINGING THE WAR TO AN END, BUT EMPHASIZING AND WORKING ON REUNIING OUR POLICY, I THINK IT WOULD MAKE ITSELF RELEVANT TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FUTURE.

THAT'S WHAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO REVITALIZE THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY IN MY JUDGMENT.

>> OKAY.

YOU'VE SORT OF LAID OUT A BIG MENU THERE.

LET ME ASK YOU A SPECIFIC QUESTION.

WHO DO YOU THINK CAN HELP THE PALESTINIANS MOST TO ACHIEVE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?

IS IT YOUR ARAB BRETHREN?

IS IT SAUDI ARABIA, WHO ISRAEL WANTS TO HAVE A NORMALIZATION WITH, AND APPARENTLY SAUDI ARABIA DOES, AS WELL.

SHOULD THEY BE MORE INSISTENT THAT PALESTINIAN RIGHTS AND ASPIRATIONS GET TAKEN CARE OF?

LET ME JUST PLAY A QUICK BUILT OF AN INTERVIEW I DID WITH PRINCE TURKI BIN FAISAL, FORMER HEAD OF INTELLIGENCE OF SAUDI ARABIA.

JUST LISTEN TO THIS.

>> SHOULD THERE BE A SETTLEMENT THAT THE PRESENT LEADERSHIP OF HAMAS, OF THE PLO, AND OF ISRAEL, SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM ANY PARTICIPATION IN ANY FUTURE POLITICAL ROLE.

THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE, IN THIS PROCESS.

ALL OF THEM ARE FAILURES.

>> SO, HE IS MAKING A CASE THAT EVERY PART OF THE CONSTITUENT PARTS OF THIS -- THIS ENDLESS CYCLE, HAVE FAILED, FAILED, FAILED, AND THEY ALL SHOULD GO.

I WANT TO TELL YOU, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY I QUOTED NUMBERS AND POLLS TO TZIPI LIVNI ABOUT THEIR PRIME MINISTER.

YOUR PRESIDENT, THE POLLS ARE WAY DOWN, AND HE HASN'T HAD AN ELECTION IN ABOUT 20 YEARS.

AND HE'S INCREDIBLY UNPOPULAR.

SO, DO YOU HAVE A STRUCTURE BY WHICH YOU THINK ONE CAN REVITALIZE THE P.A., AND, FURTHERMORE, YOU KNOW, OF COURSE, WHILE ISRAEL AND THE OTHERS SAY THERE'S NO WAY THERE CAN BE HAMAS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, YOU TOLD ME LAST TIME BE WE TALKED, THAT SOME VERSION OF HAMAS, THE POLITICAL ARM, WHATEVER IT IS, AS LONG AS THEY ACCEPT NONVIOLENCE, THEY ACCEPT THE PEACE PROCESS, ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE INCLUDED.

IS THAT STILL YOUR VIEW?

>> FIRST OF ALL, LET ME ANSWER THE QUESTION ASKED FIRST, ABOUT WHO CAN HELP US WITH THIS.

I THINK FIRST AND FOREMOST, THIS IS A NATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

THIS IS A PALESTINIAN RESPONSIBILITY.

AND IT REALLY HAS TO COME FROM WITHIN.

IF, YOU KNOW, AFTER ALL OF THE CASUALTIES THAT WE HAVE SUSTAINED AND SUFFERED, AND CONTINUE TO SUSTAIN AND SUFFER CONTINUALLY, LAST 24 HOURS, BY LOST 178 PEOPLE KILLED, IF THAT IS NOT ENOUGH TO REALLY MOVE US TO THE POINT INTERNALLY, BEFORE WE EVEN LOOK FOR HELP FROM OTHERS, INCLUDING ARAB BROTHERS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT MIGHT.

SO, AS PART OF REALLY BEING RELEVANT TO THE CONVERSATION, I THINK THIS IS FIRST AND FOREMOST.

IT HAS TO BE UTMOST PRIORITY ON THE PART OF OUR LEADERSHIP.

SECONDLY, IN TERMS OF THE POLLS, I'M AWARE OF THE POLLS.

THEY HAVE BEEN NEGATIVE FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

AND ESPECIALLY THIS WAR IN RECENT MONTHS, AFTER THE WAR BROKE OUT.

AND I HAVE TO SAY, PREDICTABLY.

FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, WITHOUT GOING INTO THE HISTORY NOW, BUT THIS IS WHERE WE ARE, THE REALITY.

THE QUESTION IS, HOW?

IT'S WELL AND GOOD TO STAY PRINCIPLED, BUT THE HOW DO WE GET THERE, HOW DO WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE HAVE LEADERSHIP RESPONSIVE ENOUGH TO THE NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE?

BOTH IN TERMS OF THEIR REQUIREMENTS TO CONTINUE TO STAND THE ADVERSITY OF THE OCCUPATION ON THE WAY TO ENDING IT, BUT ALSO, IN TERMS OF THE -- WHICH IS, HOW DO WE RESPOND TO OUR NEED TO SEE OUR RIGHTS AND ASPIRATIONS FILLED?

THIS IS CRITICAL.

IT'S THE PALESTINIAN RESPONSIBILITY.

ANY HELP THAT WE CAN GET FROM OUR ARAB BROTHERS WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED FOR SURE.

NOW, HOW DO GET THERE?

ISRAEL HAS THE LUXURY OF TALKING ABOUT ELECTIONS, AND I HEARD THE FIRST SEGMENT ON YOUR SHOW MS. LIVNI SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT ELECTIONS AND THE NEED FOR ISRAELI ELECTIONS.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE THAT LUXURY.

WE HAVEN'T HAD ELECTIONS AS A MATTER OF FACT.

LAST TIME WE HAD GENERAL ELECTIONS WAS IN 2006.

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS, 2005.

WE HAVEN'T HAD ELECTIONS IN TWO DECADES NOW, A RATHER LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

WE ARE NOT LIKELY TO GO TO ELECTIONS IN THE MIDST OF AN ONGOING WAR?

WHAT I SUGGESTED, AS A MATTER OF FACT, WAS TO TRY TO FIND A WAY TO CREATE A NATIONAL CONSENSUS TO GET US TO THE POINT WHERE WE'RE ABLE TO HAVE ELECTIONS.

I ACTUALLY OUTLINED THAT AS A TRANSITIONAL PERIOD THAT IS BOOKENDED BY NATIONAL ELECTIONS AGREED TO AT THE START OF THAT TRANSITIONAL PERIOD.

IF I MAY COMMENT BRIEFLY, ALSO, ON SOMETHING I HAVE SAID DURING THE FIRST SEGMENT OF YOUR SHOW ABOUT WHERE ISRAEL IS ON THE QUESTION OF WHO -- THE RESOLUTION OF THE CONFLICT, AND WHERE MR. NETANYAHU IS ON THIS ISSUE.

FIRST OF ALL, LET ME SAY, THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE COME AS A SURPRISE TO ANYONE.

MR. NETANYAHU RAN ON A PLATFORM TO DESTROY OSLO, WHEN HE RAN FIRST FOR PRIME MINISTER IN 1996.

HE'S PROUD OF THAT, HE REPEATED THAT CLAIM MANY TIMES, INCLUDING RECENTLY.

WHEN HE NEW, HE'S SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT OSLO FRAMEWORK DID NOT HAVE IN IT THE CERTAINTY OF A PALESTINIAN STATE.

IT WAS A PROMISE.

BUT THEN HE RAN THAT WAY.

HE NEVER RAN A CAMPAIGN SINCE THEN FOR PRIME MINISTER WITHOUT SAYING REPEATEDLY, NOT ONLY MY WATCH.

AND BY THAT, HE MEANT A PALESTINIAN STATE WOULD NOT SEE THE DAY, THE LIGHT OF DAY ON HIS WATCH.

AND HE SAID FAMOUSLY THAT THERE CAN BE NO SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE TERRITORY BUT ISRAEL'S.

NOW, WHERE IS THAT IN THAT LEXICON?

NOWHERE.

HE SAID WHAT HE SAID RECENTLY, THAT, FIRST OF ALL, SHOULD NOT HAVE COME AS A SURPRISE.

NOW, IN TERMS OF YOUR OTHER POINT ABOUT, DOES HE NOT WORRY ABOUT GOING PUBLICLY AGAINST A POSITION STATED BY THE UNITED STATES?

I THINK WHEN HE SEES THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES TO ACTIONS AND THINKS HE SAYS, HE WOULD.

FOR ALL, HE MIGHT BE -- I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S IRRATIONAL.

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, WHAT HE SAID WHAT HE SAID ABOUT TWO-STATE SOLUTION, CERTAINLY, HE IS REINFORCING, CONTINUING TO DO THESE THINGS, IF HE HEARS WHAT ISN'T TRANSLATED, WELL, THERE MAY BE DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF TWO-STATE SOLUTION.

LET ME BE VERY CLEAR ON THIS.

THE END GAME FOR PALESTINIANS MUST BE A FULLY SOVEREIGN STATE ON THE TERRITORY ISRAEL OCCUPIED IN 1967.

THAT HAS TO REALLY BE IT.

AND THE TIMETABLE HAS TO BE IDENTIFIED.

ALL OF THIS HAS TO BE ENSHRINED IN AN INTERNATIONAL RESOLUTION BY SECURITY COUNCIL.

BUT WE CANNOT -- UNTIL ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE DONE, WHAT CANNOT WIN IS A DETERMINED EFFORT TO END THE WAR.

HE CANNOT CONTINUE TO SAY NOT ONLY NO, BUT TELL NO TO ANYTHING.

NO TO STOPPING THE WAR.

NO TO A TRANSITIONAL DEAL TO RELEASE ISRAELI PRISONER.

AND NO TO A PALESTINIAN STATE.

HE JUST CANNOT CONTINUE TO DO THAT, AND HE DOES NOT THINK THAT HE'S MESSING AROUND WITH A GIANT.

HE THINKS THAT HE'S MESSING AROUND WITH A -- THAT'S HOW HE CALCULATES.

>> WELL, WE'LL SEE HOW THIS CONTINUES.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US, SALAM FAYYAD.

>>> NOW, IT'S FOUR YEARS SINCE THE U.S.

REGISTERED ITS FIRST COVID CASE.

WHILE THE WORLD HAS MOSTLY MOVED ON, WE DO REMEMBER THE VIRUS KILLED MORE THAN 7 MILLION PEOPLE WORLDWIDE, COST TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS, AND DEMANDED THAT WE LEARN FROM ALL THE MISTAKES THAT WERE MADE IN ORDER TO PREPARE FOR THE NEXT BIG ONE.

JOINING ME NOW, AWARD-WINNING FORMER "NEW YORK TIMES" HEALTH CORRESPONDENT DONALD McNEIL.

HE'S JOINING ME NOW FROM NEW YORK.

DONALD McNEIL, WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

>> THANK YOU FOR INVITING ME.

>> YOU KNOW, I SORT OF SAID DEMANDS THAT WE LEARN FROM THOSE MISTAKES.

IN SHORT, YOUR BOOK, "WISDOM OF PLAGUES," HAVE YOU CONCLUDED THAT THE WORLD IN THESE FOUR YEARS HAS LEARNED THE MISTAKES AND WILL BE BETTER PREPARED FOR THE NEXT BIG ONE, OR DISEASE X, AS IT'S CALLED?

>> IT'S COUNTRY BY COUNTRY.

I'M AFRAID -- MY ARGUMENT IN THE BOOK IS THE UNITED STATES LOST ALMOST TWO TIMES AS MANY PEOPLE AS IT, QUOTE, NEEDED TO LOSE, IN THIS PANDEMIC, THAT WE COULD HAVE DONE A WHOLE LOT BETTER ABOUT IT, AND IT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH LEADERSHIP AND IT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH OUR FAILURE TO MAKE TESTS IN TIME, AND MANY OTHER THINGS.

SO, I DON'T THINK WE ARE BETTER PREPARED FOR A PANDEMIC THAN WE WERE THE LAST TIME.

OTHER COUNTRIES DID VERY DIFFERENTLY, TOOK VERY DIFFERENT APPROACHES THAN WE DID AND I THINK SOME OF THEM DID BETTER.

THE ONE THING YOU CAN SAY ABOUT DISEASE X, WHICH IS A CONCEPT THAT'S BEEN AROUND LONG BEFORE COVID CAME ALONG, AND IT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT AT DAVOS, BUT IT'S BEEN AROUND BEFORE DAVOS, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NEXT PANDEMIC IS GOING TO BE.

AND IT -- IT USED TO BE THAT EVERYBODY, WHEN YOU ASKED EXPERTS WOULD SAY, I WORRY ABOUT FLU, AVIAN FLU GOING PANDEMIC.

THEN A CORONAVIRUS CAME ALONG.

IT BE DRUG RESISTANT BACTERIA, IT MIGHT BE A FUNGUS, THERE ARE LOTS OF THINGS WAITING TO GET US AND WE HAVE TO BE MUCH BETTER PREPARED.

AND I ARGUE FOR SORT OF A PENTAGON-LIKE RESPONSE TO DISEASE.

>> YOU BASICALLY SAID, JUST NOW, IN YOUR PREVIOUS ANSWER, YOU SAID, SOME COUNTRIES DID BETTER THAN THE U.S., YOU NAMED GERMANY, YOU NAMED CANADA, AND THEN YOU SAY, SOME AUTOCRATIC NATIONS.

WHICH AUTOCRATIC NATIONS, AND YOU SAY, YOU KNOW, IF IT WAS ME, I'M GOING TO QUOTE YOU, I THINK YOU SAY, I WOULD BE A PUBLIC HEALTH FASCIST.

WORD FASCIST, BUT WHAT DO YOU MEAN?

>> WHAT I SAID WAS, AND I WAS WARNED MANY TIMES NOT TO SAY THIS -- >> DONALD McNEIL.

>> THE LONGER I COVERED DISEASE, THE MORE OF A PUBLIC HEALTH FASCIST I TURN INTO, MEANING, I THINK WE NEED -- IF MY BOOK'S AIMED AT ANYBODY, IT'S AIMED AT PEOPLE THAT ARE NOW IN MEDICAL SCHOOL AND PUBLIC HEALTH SCHOOL AND MAY SOME DAY BE RUNNING THE CDC OR NIH OR WHATEVER REPLACES THEM, AND IN SOME WAYS, THEY NEED TO STOP WANTING TO BE AS LOVED AS THEY NOW ARE AND HAVE THIS SWEET BEDSIDE MANNER AND BE TOUGHER ABOUT SAVING LIVES, TO THINK MAYBE MORE LIKE GEORGE PATTON AND LESS LIKE FLORENCE NIGHTENGALE.

THAT IT USED TO BE THAT IF YOU WERE A PUBLIC HEALTH LEADER, YOU HAD TO MAKE REALLY TOUGH DECISIONS ABOUT HOW YOU WERE GOING TO STOP AND INFECTIOUS DISEASE.

I MEAN, WE'RE VERY LUCKY NOW.

WE NOW HAVE BOTTLED OXYGEN, WHICH WE DIDN'T HAVE IN 1918 DURING THE 1918 FLU.

WE HAVE ANTIBIOTICS FOR SECONDARY INFECTIONS.

WE HAVE VENTILATORS, ALL THESE OTHER THINGS.

HAD WE NOT HAD THOSE THINGS, 2020 MIGHT HAVE BEEN WORSE THAN 1918 IF WE HAD THE TECHNOLOGY BACK THEN.

AND YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO STEP IN TO BUY TIME UNTIL YOU CAN PRODUCE THE VACCINES, THE ANTIBODIES, AND THE DRUGS THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO STOP THE PANDEMIC THROUGH PHARMACEUTICAL MEANS.

AND SOME COUNTRIES DID BETTER AT THAT, NOBODY LIKES ITS WHEN YOU USE THE EXAMPLE OF CHINA, BUT IN FACT, CHINA MADE ITSELF VIRUS-FREE FOR ALMOST THREE YEARS, AND HELD ITS ECONOMY TOGETHER WHILE WE FLOUNDERED AND WATCHED, YOU KNOW, 1.1 MILLION AMERICANS DIE, I MEAN, THE DEATH RATE OF EVERY COUNTRY IN ASIA, WHETHER IT'S AN AUTOCRACY LIKE CHINA OR A SEMI-DEMOCRACY LIKE SOUTH KOREA OR JAPAN, I SHOULDN'T SAY SEMI.

THEY DID MUCH BETTER THAN WE DID.

AND THEY DID IT BECAUSE OF GOOD LEADERSHIP AND BECAUSE OF THE POPULATION COOPERATED WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE MADE.

>> OKAY.

>> YOU KNOW, SOME COUNTRIES LIKE CUBA DID WELL.

SOME COUNTRIES LIKE AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND DID WELL.

IT'S ENORMOUSLY -- VARIES COUNTRY BY COUNTRY.

IF YOU TAKE OUR CLOSEST PEERS, CANADA AND GERMANY, THEY HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN HALF THE DEATHS WE HAD, AND THE DIFFERENCE WAS LEADERSHIP AND PEOPLE COMING TOGETHER, BELIEVING THE LEADERS, ACCEPTING THE LOCKDOWNS WHEN THEY WERE NEEDED, EXCEPT IN TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS WHEN THEY WERE NEEDED, AND ACCEPTING VACCINES WHEN THEY WERE AVAILABLE.

>> ALL RIGHT, SO WHAT HAPPENS NEXT TIME?

CLEARLY IN THE UNITED STATES, ALSO DOWN SOUTH IN BRAZIL, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE THE, YOU KNOW, THE GROUP OF DENIERS, CONSPIRACY THEORISTS, GENERAL CHAOS AGENTS THAT CAUSED A LOT OF MISINFORMATION AND LACK OF CLARITY.

SO, YOU KNOW THAT SINCE THERE HAS BEEN AN ARGUMENT AND A DEBATE, EVEN IN THIS COUNTRY, THE UK, WHERE I AM, ABOUT THE ACTUAL EFFECTIVENESS OF LOCKDOWNS, WAS IT THE RIGHT THING TO DO?

DID -- DID IT COST TOO MUCH ON THE ECONOMY AND ALL THE, YOU KNOW, THE SORT OF DOMINO EFFECTS THAT THAT HAD?

YOU -- YOU STILL COME DOWN ON THAT THEN, DO YOU, ON THE STRICT LOCKDOWNS, THE MASK WEARING, THINGS LIKE THAT?

>> WELL, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND, EVERYBODY SORT OF FOCUSES ON, OH, LOCKDOWNS, SCHOOLS, RUINED -- LOCKDOWNS SHOULDN'T HAVE LASTED AS LONG AS THEY DID.

IT -- MASKS SHOULDN'T HAVE LASTED AS LONG AS THEY DID.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT IF YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, A SORT OF LOCKDOWN-LITE, IF YOU HAVE MASKS WHERE SOME PEOPLE ARE MASKED AND SOME PEOPLE DON'T, PEOPLE GET TIRED OF IT AND PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO ACCEPT THE VACCINES, OF COURSE IT DOESN'T WORK VERY WELL.

YOU KNOW, THE COUNTRIES -- ALL THE, QUOTE, NONPHARMACEUTICAL INTERVENTIONS, LIKE MASKS, LIKE QUARANTINES AND STUFF, ONLY WORK FOR SHORT PERIODS OF TIME WHEN PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY SCARED AND EVENTUALLY THE DAM BREAKS, PEOPLE GET FED UP WITH IT.

AND NOW, HOPEFULLY, BY THAT TIME, YOU'VE GOT SOME SORT OF COUNTERMEASURE THAT WORKS.

BUT INSTEAD, PEOPLE BEGAN TO BELIEVE IN COUNTERMEASURES THAT CLEARLY DIDN'T WORK, AND YOU HAD MISDIRECTION COMING FROM THE TOP.

AND SO -- I'M NOT OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THE NEXT PANDEMIC.

>> AND ESPECIALLY IF THOSE LEADERS GET BACK INTO OFFICE, PRESUMABLY.

>> WHETHER THEY DO OR NOT, THE COUNTRY IS SO POLARIZED AND THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE INCLINED TO JUST THINK ALL SCIENTISTS ARE LYING ELITISTS AND OUGHT TO BE IGNORED, OR I OUGHT TO BE STRUNG UP, GETTING HATE MAIL AGAIN SINCE THIS BOOK HAS COME OUT, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS THAT PERSISTS, WE'RE GOING TO SUFFER FROM THE RESULTS OF THE NEXT PANDEMIC.

>> AND CAN WE JUST MAKE A FACT, YOU KNOW, THE CONSPIRACIES ABOUT MMR, MEASLES, MUMPS, RUBELLA, HAVE CAUSED AND CONTINUE TO CAUSE, YOU KNOW, FLAREUPS OF DEATHS BY MEASLES, BOTH IN THE U.S. AND IN THE UK, COUNTRIES WHICH HAD OBLITERATED THIS STUFF, BECAUSE OF THESE, YOU KNOW, AS YOU CALL, CANCER OF RUMORS AND THE CONSPIRACIES AND ALL OF THE REST OF IT.

SO, WE KNOW THE DAMAGE THAT DOES.

BUT WHAT I WANT TO ALSO ASK YOU IS, DO WE KNOW -- ARE YOU -- HOW IMPORTANT IS IT, AND ARE YOU CLEAR ABOUT THE ORIGIN OF COVID?

AND THE ORIGIN OF ANY PANDEMIC THAT COMES UP IN THE FUTURE?

>> THE BATTLE OVER WHETHER COVID CAME OUT OF A LAB OR WHETHER COVID CAME OUT OF THE WET MARKET IS STILL ON.

I WROTE AN ARTICLE, YOU KNOW, THREE YEARS AGO NOW, SAYING, WE NEED TO LOOK INTO THE COVID -- THE LAB LEAK THEORY MORE SERIOUSLY.

CLEARLY, THE CHINESE WERE COVERING UP WHAT THEY KNEW.

CLEARLY THEY ARE STILL COVERING UP WHAT THEY KNEW.

I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO KNOW THE ANSWER ANYMORE WE KNOW THE ANSWERS IF CUBA WAS INVOLVED IN JFK'S ASSASSINATION, UNTIL AN AUTOCRATIC STATE OPENS UP ITS FILES AND I DON'T EXPECT THAT TO HAPPEN DURING MY LIFETIME.

NONETHELESS, GIVEN EVERYTHING I LOOK AT, I THINK IT IS MORE LIKELY THAT THE OUTBREAK STARTED IN THE MARKET THAN IT DID IN A LAB, BUT I CAN'T PROVE IT AND NEITHER CAN ANYBODY ELSE.

AND IT'S AN ONGOING BATTLE AND IT'S POLARIZING AND GIVEN THE REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS A LOT OF AMMUNITION TO BEAT UP ON TONY FAUCI WITH AND BEAT UP ON SCIENTISTS WITH.

BUT THE TRUTH IS, IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE.

WE NEED BETTER LAB PROTOCOLS, IF YOU ARE GOING TO DO ANY SORT OF DANGEROUS RESEARCH, AND DOING THIS RESEARCH IS LIKE DOING NUCLEAR WEAPONS RESEARCH.

IT IS DANGEROUS, BUT MAYBE YOU NEED TO DO IT.

AND WE NEED BETTER CONTROLS OVER THINGS LIKE WET MARKETS.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, DONALD McNEIL.

>>> NOW, IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL POLITICS, FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP CONTINUES TO BOUNCE AROUND FROM COURTHOUSE TO THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL.

THIS MORNING, HE WAS BACK TO FACE TRIAL FOR HIS STATEMENTS ABOUT FORMER COLUMNIST E. JEAN CARROLL'S SEXUAL ASSAULT ALLEGATIONS IN 2019.

JUST AHEAD OF THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY, HE GOT A BOOST FROM FLORIDA GOVERNOR RON DeSANTIS, WHO DECIDED TO DROP OUT OF THE RACE AND BACK HIM.

CONSERVATIVE LAWYER GEORGE CONWAY NOW JOINS MICHEL MARTIN WITH ANALYSIS ON HOW TRUMP'S LEGAL WOES ARE PLAYING OUT AND SHAPING THIS CAMPAIGN.

>> THANKS, CHRISTIANE.

GEORGE CONWAY, THANK YOU FOR TALKING WITH US.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> SO, LOOK, I KNOW YOU'RE A LAWYER AND A LEGAL ANALYST, YOU'RE NOT A POLITICAL ANALYST PER SE, BUT I DID WANT TO GET YOUR TAKE ON WHAT WE'VE JUST SOUTHEASTERN IN IOWA, AS WE ARE SPEAKING NOW, THE IOWA CAUCUSES ARE JUST BEHIND US, YOU KNOW, IT'S -- BY ALL ACCOUNTS, DECISIVE VICTORY FOR THE FORMER PRESIDENT THERE.

JUST -- WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT?

>> WELL, I MEAN, THIS IS WHERE WE ARE, I MEAN, I'VE BEEN SAYING FOR QUITE SOME TIME THAT I THOUGHT THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE FIRST -- FOR THE FIRST TIME, RUNNING AS A MAJOR PARTY CANDIDATE A CONVICTED FELON.

AND THAT'S WHAT HE, I THINK HE WILL BE THAT BY THE TIME THE FALL ROLLS AROUND, BECAUSE I DO THINK THE TRIAL HERE IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OF THE JANUARY 6th TRIAL, THE ONE BROUGHT, THE CASE BROUGHT BY JACK SMITH, BEFORE JUDGE CHUT CAN HERE IN THE DISTRICT, I THINK THAT ONE'S GOING TO GO TO TRIAL.

AND JUST A REMARKABLE CONFLUENCE OF FIRSTS.

WE HAVE THE FIRST ADJUDICATED RAINIST WHO IS GOING TO WIN A MAJOR PARTY NOMINATION, THE FIRST PERSON WHO HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, WHO IS UNDER INDICTMENT IN FOUR SEPARATE JURISDICTIONS WITH 91 COUNTS, I MEAN, IT IS JUST ABSOLUTELY UNPRECEDENTED.

BUT WITH DONALD TRUMP, IT'S ALMOST INEVITABLE THAT THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ABOUT WHY THESE VERY SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS DON'T SEEM TO MAKE MUCH DIFFERENCE IN THE POLITICAL REALM?

I MEAN, YOU HAVE CLOSE CONNECTIONS TO PEOPLE IN THE REPUBLICAN POLITICAL WORLD AND I'M JUST INTERESTED IN WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THAT.

>> IT'S PARTISANSHIP RUN AMUCK, IN PART.

AND I THINK A LOT OF THIS -- AND I DO THINK THERE'S SOME SEGMENT OF THE POPULATION THAT WANTS A STRONGMAN, AND I DON'T MEAN THAT IN A COMPLIMENTARY WAY.

I MEAN THAT IN THE -- IN THE SENSE OF A QUASI-DICTATOR, AUTHORITARIAN FIGURE.

THEY WANT TO JUST BASICALLY ASSUME THE FACTS THAT THINK THINK ARE TRUE ARE TRUE.

THEY DON'T WANT TO THINK.

THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN EVIDENCE.

BUT I THINK ANOTHER THING THAT'S GOING ON HERE, I THINK A LOT OF THIS IS THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO ADMIT THAT THEY WERE WRONG ABOUT DONALD TRUMP.

THEY DON'T WANT TO ADMIT THAT HE'S A BAD PERSON, BECAUSE IF THEY ADMIT THAT HE'S A BAD PERSON, THEN THEY, BY EXTENSION, ARE ADMITTING THAT THEY ARE NOT GOOD PEOPLE FOR SUPPORTING HIM, OR AT LEAST IT TARNISHES THEM IN THEIR OWN EYES.

SO, THEY HAVE TO JUSTIFY WHERE THEY'VE BEEN AND WHERE THEY'RE GOING BECAUSE THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO MISS THAT HE LED THEM ASTRAY AND THAT THEY'VE BEEN SUCKERED AND THAT THEY'RE WRONG AND THAT HE'S BAD.

I THINK THAT'S JUST A BIG PART OF IT.

>> IS THAT TRUE?

YOU THINK THAT'S TRUE FOR PEOPLE IN YOUR OWN ORBIT?

>> I MEAN, MY ORBIT'S CHANGED A BIT OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.

BUT PART OF IT IS NOT WANTING TO ADMIT YOURSELF WRONG, BUT PART OF IT ALSO IS, THERE'S AN IDENTITY THERE, THERE'S A -- A TRIBALISM THERE, AND, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T -- YOU DON'T WANT TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE TRIBE, BECAUSE YOU DON'T -- YOU THINK THE OTHER TRIBE, THE LIBERALS WHO YOU'VE BEEN HATING ON FOR SO MANY YEARS, THEY'RE NEVER GOING TO ACCEPT YOU.

AND IF YOU -- IF YOU DARE QUESTION THE LEADER, YOU'LL BE CAST OUT OF YOUR OWN GROUP AND YOU'LL BE HOMELESS.

THE OTHER THING THAT I THINK IS GOING ON IS, THERE'S AN ECONOMY THAT HAS BEEN BUILT AROUND TRUMP, AND TRUMPISTS.

I THINK THERE'S A WHOLE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE ALL OF THESE CONSULTANTS AND ALL THESE POLITICIANS WHOSE LIVELIHOODS, THEIR CHOSEN CAREERS, THEIR CHOSEN COURSE OF -- OF THEIR LIVES, IS DEPENDENT UPON NOT ANTAGONIZING OTHER PEOPLE IN THAT COMMUNITY.

AND SO, I MEAN, YOU SEE THAT WITH MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO ARE -- WHO HAVE TO FEAR BEING PRIMARIED, YOU SEE THAT WITH POLITICAL CONSULTANTS, I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE, THE -- IT WAS REPORTED JUST THE OTHER DAY THAT THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN IS SAYING NOBODY SHOULD HIRE JEFF ROWE, WHO WAS A CHIEF POLITICAL ADVISER FOR RON DeSANTIS, THAT HE'S GOING TO BE BLACKLISTED, NOBODY WANTS TO BE BLACKLISTED.

NOBODY WANTS TO BE CAST OUT OF THE TRIBE.

AND ALSO FEAR OF INTIMIDATION.

WE SAW THAT TO SOME EXTENT WITH LINDSEY GRAHAM BACK IN JANUARY OF 2021, WHERE HE DARED UTTER THAT HE WAS DONE WITH TRUMP, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND HE WAS ACCOSTED AT AN AIRPORT BY TRUMPERS.

AND YOU SAW IT ALSO, I MEAN, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE SEEN, WHEN LIZ CHENEY WAS RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION IN WYOMING, SHE HAD TO HAVE A BIG SECURITY DETAIL IN WYOMING.

AND THERE IS, CERTAINLY, A DEGREE OF PHYSICAL INTIMIDATION, AND THAT, YOU KNOW, FRANKLY, THAT'S WHAT JANUARY 6th WAS ALL ABOUT.

>> SO, LET'S PIVOT AROUND TO THE SUBJECT THAT SORT OF BROUGHT US TOGETHER TODAY, WHICH IS, YOU HAVE ACTUALLY SAID THAT YOU THINK THAT TRUMP WILL, QUOTE, SPEND THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN JAIL.

YOU REALLY THINK THAT?

>> I DO THINK THAT.

I MEAN, HE'S EITHER GOING TO BE PRESIDENT OR GOING TO SPEND THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN PRISON.

HE CERTAINLY DESERVES TO SPEND THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN PRISON.

IF YOU TAKE ANY COMBINATION OF THE COUNTS IN THE FOUR INDICTMENTS WITH WHICH HE'S BEEN CHARGED, IT WILL TAKE ALMOST ANY CONVICTION AND ALMOST ANY COMBINATION OF THEM IS GOING TO PUT HIM IN JAIL FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A 77-YEAR-OLD MAN.

SO, I -- I THINK THERE'S A VERY GOOD CHANCE HE'LL SPEND THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN JAIL, AND THAT'S PART OF THE DYNAMIC THAT IS GOING ON HERE.

HE KNOWS THAT.

I MEAN, HE'S NOT A STRATEGIC THINKER.

HE'S A SOCIOPATH, HE'S A MAN WITH A REP TILL YAN -- I'M NOT GOING TO SAY INTELLECT, BUT HE UNDERSTANDS THAT HE IS CORNERED, AND THAT'S WHEN PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE LIKE HIM WITH THAT KIND OF PSYCHOLOGY ARE THE MOST DANGEROUS.

BUT HE UNDERSTANDS THAT, AND HE UNDERSTANDS THAT THE ONLY WAY FOR HIM TO ESCAPE THE TROUBLE THAT HE'S IN IS TO BE ELECTED PRESIDENT.

>> DO YOU THINK THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN IS TO KEEP HIM OUT OF JAIL?

>> I THINK THAT IS ONE MAJOR PURPOSE.

I THINK ANOTHER MAJOR PURPOSE IS -- HE'S MOTIVATED BY THE THINGS THAT MOTIVATE NARCICISSTIC SOCIOPATHS, WHICH IS POWER, PRAISE, AND A DESIRE TO -- TO INFLICT REVENGE ON PEOPLE WHO HAVE DEFIED HIM.

AND I THINK THAT'S -- WE'VE SEEN THAT IN SOME OF WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT HE -- HIS PEOPLE ARE PLANNING FOR 2025, SHOULD HE BE ELECTED.

I MEAN, THEY'RE GOING TO -- THEY'RE GOING TO SEEK RETRIBUTION.

HE SAYS IT'S ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC, OR AT LEAST HIS SLICE OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC, BUT THAT'S WHAT MOTIVATES HIM.

I DON'T THINK YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT DONALD TRUMP SAYS AND DOES ON A DAILY BASIS SIMPLY BY SAYING, OH, HE'S A BAD GUY, HE'S A REPUBLICAN, HE'S AN AUTHORITARIAN, HE'S RACIST, HE'S THIS OR THAT -- YOU HAVE TO TIE IT INTO HIS FUNDAMENTAL PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE.

PEOPLE SHOULD NOT SHY AWAY FROM THAT.

OKAY?

BECAUSE I DO NOT THINK YOU CAN UNDERSTAND HIS BEHAVIOR WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING HIS PSYCHOLOGY.

AND I THINK WE'RE SEEING THAT IN THE COURTROOM AS IT'S HAPPENING TODAY, THIS WEEK IN THE E. JEAN CARROLL TRIAL, GOING TO SEE IT EVEN MORE IN THE FUTURE.

>> SO, LET'S TALK ABOUT, OF THE -- HE'S GOT -- THERE ARE 91 FELONY COUNTS ACROSS FOUR CASES.

WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE STRONGEST OF THOSE?

>> OH, I THINK THE STRONGEST ONE, THE STRONGEST CASE, I THINK, WHICH IS A SLAM DUNK CASE, BECAUSE IT'S SO SIMPLE, IS THE CASE IN FLORIDA, THE MAR-A-LAGO DOCUMENTS CASE.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO QUESTION -- THERE'S REALLY NO FACTUAL DISPUTE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED THERE, BECAUSE HE WAS CAUGHT RED-HANDED, WITH THE DOCUMENTS, THE DOCUMENTS DID NOT BELONG TO HIM, THEY BELONGED TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

THEY HAD CLASSIFIED DOCUMENT MARKINGS.

AND IT DOESN'T EVEN MATTER THAT THEY WERE CLASSIFIED, BECAUSE THE CHARGES THAT HE'S BEEN -- THAT WERE FILED AGAINST HIM, INCLUDE CHARGES UNDER THE ESPIONAGE ACT AND THOSE CHARGES DO NOT TURN ON SPECIFIC -- WHETHER THEY WITH SPECIFICALLY MARKED AS CLASSIFIED.

THEY SIMPLY TURN ON WHETHER OR NOT IF IT'S NATIONAL DEFENSE INFORMATION.

AND YOU HAVE THAT, AND THE FACT THAT THERE ARE WITNESSES AND THERE'S VIDEO, AND ALL SORTS OF EVIDENCE THAT HE TRIED TO HIDE THOSE -- AND DID HIDE THOSE DOCUMENTS FROM THE FBI AND THAT HE FAILED TO PRODUCE THEM WHEN HE WAS SERVED WITH A SUBPOENA BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, AND THAT HE HAD HIS LAWYERS LIE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.

AND THAT'S -- THOSE ARE SIMPLE, SIMPLE, EASILY PROVABLE ACTS.

AND WHEN THAT CASE GOES TO TRIAL, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO GO TO TRIAL THIS YEAR, BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO SAY WHAT THE JUDGE THERE IS DOING IN TERMS OF SCHEDULING, BUT I DON'T -- HE DOESN'T HAVE A DEFENSE IN THAT CASE.

JUST NOT A SHRED OF A DEFENSE.

>> THE OTHER CASE THAT'S GOTTEN A LOT OF ATTENTION AND YOU HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT IS THE CASE CONNECTED TO THE FORMER PRESIDENT'S ROLE IN THE JANUARY 6th MOB ATTACK ON THE CAPITOL.

AND IN THAT CASE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS GOTTEN A LOT OF ATTENTION FROM LEGAL ANALYSTS AND LEGAL SCHOLARS IS THIS VERY SWEEPING CLAIM, BASICALLY SAYING THAT HE HAS TOTAL IMMUNITY FOR ANYTHING THAT HE DOES OR ANYTHING THAT HE DID WHILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY.

SO, YOU WROTE ABOUT THAT, AND THE HEADLINE OF THE PIECE WAS THAT TRUMP'S LAWYER WALKED INTO A TRAP.

WHAT'S THE TRAP HE WALKED INTO?

WOULD YOU JUST LAY THAT OUT FOR US?

>> WELL, THE TRAP THAT THEY WALKED INTO WAS THAT THEY WERE PUSHING ARGUMENTS THAT ARE WITH IN TENSION WITH EACH OTHER.

THEY WERE PUSHING -- FOR EXAMPLE, THEY WERE -- THEIR PRINCIPLE ARGUMENT IS THAT THERE IS AN INHERENT IMMUNITY IN THE CONSTITUTION THAT COMES WITH THE PRESIDENCY THAT MEANS YOU CANNOT BE SUBJECT, ESSENTIALLY, TO ANY LEGAL PROCESS.

THEY -- THAT DOES NOT -- THAT LINE OF CASES HAS NEVER BEEN APPLIED TO PRESIDENTS IN THE CRIMINAL CONTEXT, IT'S BEEN APPLIEDCONTEXT, AND THE CASES ARE BASED UPON THE NOTION THAT IF YOU -- YOU KNOW, PRESIDENT DOES THINGS THAT EFFECT SO MANY PEOPLE, THAT IF YOU ALLOW THEM ALL TO SUE, IF HE DID SOMETHING THAT HARMED THEM, THE PRESIDENT WOULD BE CONTINUALLY SUED, TO SUE THE PRESIDENT PERSONALLY FOR DAMAGES.

YOU'D END UP WITH A SITUATION WHERE THE PRESIDENT WOULD BE WORRYING ABOUT EVERYTHING HE DOES AND WHO IS GOING TO SUE HIM FOR WHAT.

AND THE PRESIDENT WILL BE WORRIED MORE ABOUT HIS PERSONAL FINANCES AND MORE ABOUT THE COST OF DEFENDING LITIGATION THAN HE WOULD BE ACTUALLY DOING HIS JOB.

BUT AGAIN, THAT RATIONALE ONLY APPLIES TO, IN THE CIVIL CONTEXT AND IT ONLY EXTENDS, BY THE TERMS OF THE CASE LAW, THE CASE, THE LEADING CASE BEING A CASE CALLED NIXON AGAINST FITZGERALD WHICH WAS DECIDED IN 1982, TO THE OUTER PERIMETER OF THE PRESIDENT'S OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITIES.

NOW, THAT'S A BROAD STANDARD.

IT'S BASICALLY AS BROAD AS YOU CAN MAKE IT REASONABLY, BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T APPLY TO, ESSENTIALLY, CONDUCTING A COUP.

BUT THE OTHER POINT IS, IT'S NEVER BEEN APPLIED TO THE CRIMINAL CONTEXT.

AND THAT'S THE THING THAT I THINK HE'S GOING TO ABSOLUTELY LOSE ON, WHICH IS THE NOTION THAT SOMEHOW YOU CAN EXTEND THIS CIVIL LIABILITY DOCTRINE TO THE CRIMINAL CONTEXT.

NOW, THE TRAP THAT HE SET FOR HIMSELF IS -- HE MADE A SECONDARY ARGUMENT, AN ARGUMENT THAT IS EXTREMELY WEAK, BASED UPON SOMETHING CALLED THE IMPEACHMENT JUDGMENT CLAUSE.

AND WHAT THE IMPEACHMENT JUDGMENT CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION, WHICH IS IN ARTICLE ONE OF THE CONSTITUTION, BECAUSE IT DEALS WITH CONGRESS'S POWERS, IT SAYS THAT IF AN OFFICER OF THE UNITED STATES IS REMOVED FROM OFFICE BY THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS, IN OTHER WORDS, IMPEACHED BY THE HOUSE AND CONVICTED BY THE SENATE AND REMOVED AS A RESULT OF A SENATE CONVICTION, HE CAN NONETHELESS BE CHARGED IN THE COURTS OF LAW THEREAFTER FOR ANY CRIMINAL CONDUCT THAT WAS COVERED BY THE IMPEACHMENT.

WHAT TRUMP HAS BEEN ARGUING IS THAT BY -- YOU FLIP THAT OVER AND SAY, YOU CAN ONLY BE CHARGED IF YOU ARE CONVICTED BY THE SENATE.

AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THE CLAUSE SAYS.

BUT WHAT HE DID ALSO IN -- WHAT HIS LAWYERS DID WITH THIS ARGUMENT WAS, AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY WERE MAKING THIS BROAD, ABSOLUTE CRIMINAL IMMUNITY ARGUMENT, THEY WERE SAYING -- AND THEY WERE SAYING THAT, WE NEED THAT BROAD CRIMINAL IMMUNITY BECAUSE WE HAVE TO FEAR POLITICAL PROSECUTION WHEN ONE ADMINISTRATION GOES IN AND TRIES TO PROSECUTION THE PEOPLE IN THE LAST ADMINISTRATION, HE'S SAYING, WE CAN'T HAVE THAT, BECAUSE WE NEED TO PROTECT FROM POLITICAL PROSECUTIONS.

BUT THEN, THEY'RE SAYING AT THE SAME TIME, THE EXCEPTION IS, IF THE PRESIDENT IS CONVICTED BY THE SENATE, YOU CAN NONETHELESS CHARGE HIM.

WHICH IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CLAIM OF ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY.

>> RIGHT.

AS A POLITICAL PROCEEDING, THE IMPEACHMENT IS A POLITICAL PROCEEDING, IT'S NOT A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING.

MR. CONWAY, YOU WERE IN THE COURTROOM.

CAN YOU JUST TRY TO DESCRIBE THE ARGUMENT AND THE EXCHANGE BETWEEN ONE OF MR. TRUMP'S LAWYERS AND JUDGE FLORENCE PAN, WHERE YOU KIND OF LAID OUT WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING AS THE -- THE DIFFICULTIES OF THAT ARGUMENT.

>> YEAH, I MEAN, WHAT SHE WAS DOING WAS, SHE WAS TRYING TO PIN HIM DOWN AND GET A CONCESSION FROM HIM THAT HE WAS ARGUING FOR IMMUNITY SO BROAD AND SO ABSOLUTE THAT A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES COULD SEND S.E.A.L.

TEAM SIX UP TO THE CAPITOL OR WHEREVER TO ASSASSINATE A POLITICAL RIVAL AND BE IMMUNE FROM PROSECUTION FOR THAT CRIMINAL ACT.

AND HE WAS REFUSING TO GIVE THAT CONCESSION CLEANLY.

HE WAS SAYING, YES, BUT -- AND THE BUT WAS, OH, BUT A PRESIDENT COULD STILL -- CERTAINLY A PRESIDENT THAT DID THAT WOULD BE IMPEACHED AND REMOVED, AND THEN COULD BE PROSECUTED BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE IMPEACHMENT JUDGMENT CLAUSE THAT I DESCRIBED EARLIER SAYS.

THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS, THAT MEANS THE PRESIDENT ISN'T ABSOLUTELY IMMUNE, AND THAT WAS SORT OF THE GOTCHA, THE TRAP THAT JUDGE PAN WAS LEADING THE LAWYER INTO.

AND THE LAWYER REALIZED HE WAS BEING CORNERED AND HE KEPT TRYING TO AVOID FALLING INTO THE TRAP BY TALKING AS FAST AS HE COULD AND TALKING ABOUT THINGS OTHER THAN THE -- THAT WEREN'T RESPONSIVE TO HER ANSWER.

AND THEN, THERE'S THE TENSION INVOLVED BETWEEN HIS POSITION THAT THE PRESIDENT SHOULDN'T BE PROSECUTABLE, BECAUSE WE FEAR POLITICAL PROSECUTIONS, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME SAYING, BUT A PRESIDENT CAN BE PROSECUTED IF THE MOST POLITICAL BODY IN THE UNITED STATES, OR IN THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, WHICH IS THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, SAYS SO.

AND SO, BASICALLY, WHEN SHE GOT DONE WITH HIM, HIS POSITION LOOKED NONSENSICAL.

IT LOOKED RIDICULOUS.

AND THAT WAS ONLY ABOUT 10 OR 15 MINUTES INTO THE ARGUMENT, AND YOU KNEW WHICH WAY THE PANEL WAS GOING TO COME OUT AT THAT POINT, BECAUSE HE DIDN'T GET ANY HELP FROM ANY OF THE OTHER JUDGES.

>> YOU KNOW WHAT, LOOK, HE IS, LIKE ANY DEFENDANT, ENTITLED TO A VIGOROUS DEFENSE, RIGHT?

>> YES.

>> SO -- AND HE IS INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW, LIKE ANY DEFENDANT.

BUT I MEAN, SORT OF THE AXIOMS OF THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE, THAT NO ONE IS ALLOW THE LAW IN THE UNITED STATES.

NO ONE.

IT IS SORT OF FUNDAMENTAL, NOT JUST TO AMERICAN IDENTITY, BUT TO AMERICAN LAW.

LIKE, THAT IS WHO WE SAY WE ARE.

AND I SORT OF WONDER, IS THERE ANY PART OF YOU THAT WORRIES, AS AN OFFICER OF THE COURT, THAT SOMEONE IS MAKING AN ARGUMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT SOMEONE, THIS PARTICULAR SINGULAR FIGURE, CAN NEVER BE PROSECUTED OR HELD TO ACCOUNT IN COURT FOR ANYTHING THAT HE DOES.

I JUST WONDERED IF YOU THOUGHT ABOUT THAT.

>> WELL, I DO -- I MEAN, I DON'T THINK IT'S AN ARGUMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, SHOULD CAUSE SOMEONE TO LOSE THEIR BAR LICENSE, BUT I DO THINK IT'S AN ARGUMENT THAT IS VERY, VERY DANGEROUS, IF IT WERE EVER TAKEN TOO SERIOUSLY.

AND HERE'S WHY IT'S NOT JUST THAT WE ARE A NATION OF -- OF LAWS, AND NOT OF INDIVIDUALS.

BUT IT'S THE FACT THAT THIS IS PART AND PARCEL OF WHAT AN AUTHORITARIAN LEADER WANTS TO HAVE.

AUTHORITARIAN LEADERS, IF YOU TALK TO STUDENTS OF HISTORY AND STUDENTS OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL SCIENCE, AND WHAT THEY WILL TELL YOU IS, YOU KNOW, AUTHORITARIANS ARE CRIMINALS.

AND THEY -- ONE OF THE THINGS THEY SEEK IS THE ABILITY TO DO WHATEVER THEY PLEASE AND MAKE THE LAW WHATEVER THEY WANT, AND MAKE IT THE -- MAKE PEOPLE OF THEIR CHOOSING SUBJECT TO THE LAW, WHILE NONETHELESS NOT BEING SUBJECT TO THE LAW THEMSELVES.

THIS IS NOT REALLY THAT NEW FOR TRUMP, I MEAN, TRUMP IS SOMEONE WHO SAID, I THINK BACK IN 2019 OR 2018, ARTICLE TWO OF THE CONSTITUTION, THE PART OF THE CONSTITUTION THAT DEALS WITH THE PRESIDENCY, ALLOWS ME TO DO -- TO DO WHATEVER I WANT.

HE ACTUALLY BELIEVES THAT, BUT THAT'S, AGAIN, THAT'S BECAUSE OF -- THAT'S -- HE BELIEVES THAT NOT BECAUSE HE'S A LEGAL SCHOLAR, BUT THAT'S HIS SENE SURE.

>> GEORGE CONWAY, THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING WITH US.

>> THANK YOU.

>> CLEARLY MANY TWISTS AND TURNS TO COME IN THIS TRUMP LEGAL SAGA.

THAT'S IT FOR OUR PROGRAM TONIGHT.

IF YOU WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT'S COMING UP ON THE SHOW EVERY NIGHT, SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER AT PBS.ORG/AMANPOUR.

THANK YOU FOR WATCH, AND GOOD-BYE FROM LONDON.