>> O'Connell: I'M SUE O'CONNELL.

TONIGHT ON "GREATER BOSTON," AFTER YEARS OF FIGHTING IN CONGRESS AND IN THE COURTS, SIX YEARS OF TRUMP'S TAX RETURNS ARE NOW PUBLIC.

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED?

WILL THIS ADD TO THE FORMER PRESIDENT'S GROWING LIST OF LEGAL TROUBLES?

THEN LATER, A LOOK AT FRONTLINE'S LATEST SERIES DIGGING INTO PEGAUSUS, THE SPYWARE GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD HAVE USED TO MONITOR DISSIDENTS, ACTIVISTS AND JOURNALISTS, INCLUDING A COUPLE OF PEOPLE CLOSE TO MURDERED "WASHINGTON POST" COLUMNIST JAMAL KHASHOGGI.

>> O'Connell: DONALD TRUMP WAS THE FIRST PRESIDENT IN DECADES TO REFUSE TO RELEASE HIS TAX RETURNS, AND NOW, AFTER THE HOUSE WRAPPED UP A LENGTHY INVESTIGATION BY RELEASING SIX YEARS WORTH OF THOSE RETURNS, IT'S BECOMING CLEAR WHY THE FORMER PRESIDENT HAS BEEN FIGHTING SO HARD TO KEEP THEM HIDDEN.

TAKE HIS 2016 AND '17 FILINGS, WHICH SHOWED THE SELF-PROFESSED BILLIONAIRE PAID JUST $750 IN FEDERAL TAXES, LESS THAN MANY OF US DID.

AND IN HIS FINAL YEAR IN OFFICE, TRUMP DIDN'T PAY A CENT.

THE RETURNS HAVE ALSO SHINED A LIGHT ON EYE-BROW RAISING FOREIGN BANK ACCOUNTS, LOANS TO HIS CHILDREN, AND QUESTIONABLE BUSINESS SPENDING, ALL OF WHICH MANY TAX EXPERTS HAVE ARGUED COULD BE EVIDENCE OF CRIMINAL TAX EVASION.

AT THE SAME TIME, ACCORDING TO "NEW YORK TIMES" REPORTING, MANHATTA'S TOP PROSECUTOR IS INDICATING HIS OFFICE HAS GROUNDS TO INVESTIGATE THE FORMER PRESIDENT FOR TAX FRAUD.

OF COURSE, IF YOU ASK TRUMP HIMSELF, HE'S THE REAL VICTIM HERE.

>> MY PERSONAL TAX RETURNS, WHICH SHOW ONLY THAT I'VE HAD TREMENDOUS SUCCESS.

IT'S SO SAD FOR OUR COUNTRY.

IT'S NOTHING BUT ANOTHER DERANGED POLITICAL WITCH HUNT, WHICH HAS BEEN GOING ON FROM THE DAY I CAME DOWN THE ESCALATOR IN TRUMP TOWER.

>> O'Connell: I'M JOINED BY RUSS BUETTNER, WHO'S BEEN DIGGING INTO DONALD TRUMP'S TAXES AND PERSONAL FINANCES FOR THE "NEW YORK TIMES" SINCE 2016, AND WAS ONE OF THREE REPORTERS AT THE PAPER TO WIN A PULITZER PRIZE FOR THAT WORK, IN 2019.

I'M ALSO JOINED BY JULIE WEIL, WHO COVERS D.C.'S LOCAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE "WASHINGTON POST," AND HAS BEEN CLOSELY FOLLOWING THE LATEST RELEASES.

WELCOME TO BOTH-OF-YOU, RUSS, I WANT TO START WITH YOU FOR JUST A SEFNLGTD I DO THIS FOR A LIVING AND GET CONFUSED ALL THE TIME AS TO WHICH THREAD I'M FOLLOWING ON THE TRUMP INVESTIGATION.

WHY WERE THESE TAX RETURNS RELEASED?

WHAT, WHAT LANE ARE WE IN WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRUMP AND THESE TAX RETURNS IN CONGRESS?

>> THE LANE THERE IS THAT CONGRESS WAS PURSUING THESE, THEIR STATED PURPOSE WAS TO SEE IF THE MANDATORY PRESIDENTIAL AUDIT PROGRAM HAD ACTUALLY FUNCTIONED WHILE HE WAS PRESIDENT AND WHETHER ANY LEGISLATIVE CHANGES WERE NEEDED FOR THAT LONG-STANDING POLICY.

SO THAT WS THE STATED PURPOSE OF THE AUDIT.

>> AND I KNOW BY YOUR REPORTING, RUSS, THAT THE LANGUAGE SHOULD AND WOULD IS ALWAYS TRICKY WHEN IT COMES TO THESE MANDATES THAT WERE KNOTTED NOT JUST LIKE-- IT WAS A TRADITION THAT PRESIDENTS AND CANDIDATES RELEASE THEIR TAXES T IS NO LAW.

THAT IS ALSO A BITS OF A MURKY AREA HERE.

BUT WORTH LOOKING AT WHY THE IRS DIDN'T INITIATE INVESTIGATIONS, RIGHT?

>> YEAH, THAT IS AN EXCELLENT QUESTION, DEFINITELY.

THIS WAS A POLICY WITHIN THE IRS.

IT HAD NEVER BEEN REQUIRED BY ANY LAW OR RESULTING STAPT OUT OR ANYTHING.

BUT I THINK THERE WAS A BILL THAT PASSED THE HOUSE AT THE END OF THE LAST SESSION TO TRY TO CHANGE THAT.

WE'LL SEE IF THAT MOVES FORWARD EVER BUT YOU ARE RIGHT, IT WAS NOT ACTUALLY REQUIRED BY LAW.

>> YOU KNOW JULIE, EVERY TIME I HEAR FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP TALK ABOUT HOW SUCCESSFUL HE WAS, I KIND OF FIND IT HARD TO ARGUE WITH HIM IS SINCE HE HAS CLEARLY DONE A LOT OF THINGS AND STILL GOT ELECTED PRESIDENT AND IS STILL NOT CRIMINALLY CHARGED IN MANY AREAS THAT SOME PEOPLE THINK HE SHOULD BE.

IS IT IN YOUR OPINION, DO YOU THINK THIS IS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FACT THAT HE DIDN'T THINK HE WAS REALLY GOING TO GET ELECTED BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE CLEAN UP THEIR TAXES.

SOME FOR TEN YEARS, AND MAYBE THERE IS WRONGDOING, MAYBE THERE IS NOT, MAYBE THERE ARE LEGAL LOOPHOLES THEY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF.

BUT HIS EFFORTS ARE RIGHT THERE IN THE TAX RETURNS, IF YOU LOOK AT THEM.

DIS YOU THINK HE IS YOU ARE IS PRICED TO THIS DAY THAT HE GOT ELECTED?

>> I'M NOT SURE THAT THE TAX RETURNS REALLY SHOW YOU WHAT HE WAS THINKING IN TERMS OF RUNNING FOR OFFICE.

THEY SHOW YOU THE WAY HE THOUGHT ABOUT RUNG BUSINESSES AND RUNNING FOR OFFICE.

WHEN HE WAS ASKED ABOUT HOW MINIMAL HIS TAX BURDEN HAD BEEN IN SEVERAL RECENT YEARS HE SAID THAT MAKES ME SMART.

IT SHOWS HIS APPROACH IS TO REPORT LOSSES WHEREVER HE CAN.

AND MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF TAXES HE PAYS.

>> >> O'Connell: SO RUSS OF COURSE THE CHALLENGE WITH THE IRS AS WITH MOST PEOPLE WHO ARE MAKING LOTS AND LOSSES OF MUP IS YOU HAVE EMPLOYEES WHO ARE UP AGAINST THE BAT ALL D-- COMBAT ALL ONOF LAWYERS AND ACCOUNTANTS WHO ARE PROTECTING THE FILER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ADVICE THAT THEY PROBABLY GOT FROM THEIR ACCOUNTANTS IS DIRECTIONALLY CORRECT IN TERMS OF IRS GUIDELINES BUT THERE ARE SOME THINGS IN THESE TAX RETURNS THAT EVEN MYSELF WAS SHOCKED TO SEE.

ONE OF THEM WAS, AND TO ME THIS ALMOST SEEMS SLOPPY.

CAN YOU DISCUSS FOR US THE INTEREST THAT HE CLAIMED FROM THE LOANS TO HIS KIDS.

AND MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT WAS THE SAME NUMBER FOR TWO YEARS IN A ROW WHICH IS ALSO UNLIKELY.

WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE OR WHAT ARE EXPERTS AND OTHER PEOPLE SAYING THIS LOOKS LIKE HE COULD HAVE BEEN DOING?

>> SO I BELIEVE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT HIS LOANS THAT HE MADE TO HIS KIDS.

AND THEN HE WAS REPORTING INTEREST INCOME BASED ON THAT.

THE OBVIOUS THING TO THAT POINT SUE, SINCE THEY WERE EMPLOYEES OF HIS COMPANY AT THE TIME WAS WHETHER THIS WASN'T REALLY ANY REAL BUSINESS PURPOSE AT ALL AND IT WASN'T ACTUALLY A LOAN, THAT IT WAS JUST A WAY TO GET AROUND THE GIFT TAX WHICH CAN BE QUITE ONEROUS COMPARED TO THE INCOME TAX.

AND THEN USE PART OF THAT AS LIKE A BUSINESS EXPENSE SHOW OR KIND OF A-- IT SEEMS TO BE A COMINGLING OF PERSONAL AND-- FUNDS THAT YOU KNOW, RAISES EYEBROWS AND THERE SHOULD BE QUESTIONS RAISED BY THE IRS AS TO WHY THOSE LOANS WERE NECESSARY TO HIS EMPLOYEES WHO ALSO HAPPEN TO BE HIS CHILDREN.

>> AND RUSS ALSO, THE FOREIGN INCOME IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK MOST VOTERS WOULD HAVE BEEN INTERESTED IN KNOWING DURING THE CAMPAIGN, ESPECIALLY IT LOOKS LIKE A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT TRUMP RECEIVED FROM CHINA OR CHINESE BUSINESS, IT IS UNCERTAIN, ST EVEN UNCLEAR WHAT THAT WAS.

IS THAT A RED FLAG AS WELL?

>> I MEAN IT COULD BE.

HE HAD THE BANK ACCOUNT FOR A LONG TIME IN CHINA.

WE REPORTED THAT AS PART OF OUR SERIES IN 20120.

HE HAS BUSINESS FROMS ALL OVER THE WORLD, PRETTY MUCH ANYWHERE THAT HE OPENS UP A BANK ACCOUNT.

PERSONALLY I THINK THERE ARE MUCH BIGGER ISSUES, THERE IS JUST NOTHING IN PLACE TO CATCH WHICH IS THAT HE RUNS HOSPITALITY BUSINESSES.

IF YOU WANTED TO GET CASH YOU DON'T NEED A BANK ACCOUNT IN THAT COUNTRY, YOU COULD RENT A BLOCK OF ROOMS AT ONE OF HIS HOTELS, OVERPAY AND NOT SHOW UP.

YOU HAVE NOW JUST GIVE ENTHE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 100,000, 200,000 FOR NOTHING IN EXCHANGE.

COULD YOU TAKE OUT A HUNDRED MEMBERSHIPS IN ONE OF HIS GOLF CLUBS AND IS NEVER HAVE ANYBODY PLAY GOLF.

THAT HAS THE PATINA OF A LENGTHITY MAT BUSINESS EXPENSE BUT BUT THERE IS IS NOTHING CONSUMED ON THE OTHER SIDE IT IS ISN'T.

AND THERE IS NOTHING THE IRS IS DOING TO CAPTURE THAT AND NOTHING IN OUR FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE TO CAPTURE THAT AT ALL STVMENT JUST A HUGE VULNERABILITY THAT NOBODY HAS LOOKED AT.

>> TO RUSS' POINT, MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, I STOPPED SAYING PRETTY EARLY ON, THIS IS IT.

THIS IS WHAT IS GOING TO GET HIM, THIS IS WHAT IS GOING TO RESULT IN CRIMINAL CHARGES OR HE WON'T BE ELECTED OR NOAKS WON'T BE SUPPORTING HIM.

WHAT IS THE REACTION BEEN TO THE RELEASE OF THESE RETURNS.

AND I WOULD SAY ALSO AS SHOCKING AS SOME OF THE INFORMATION IS, ST NOT SURPRISING.

WHAT ARE YOU HEARING FROM PEOPLE AND ALSO FROM SOME OF HIS SUPPORTERS OR CRITICS.

>> RIGHT, I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF INTEREST IN THE TAX RETURNS SIMPLY BECAUSE HE HAS TRIED FOR SO LONG TO PREVENT THEM FROM BEING PUBLIC AND PEOPLE WANT TO SEE WHAT THEY DON'T KNOW, THAT IS IN THEM.

HIS SUPPORTERS HAVE HEARD HIM SAY THAT THIS IS UNFAIR AND HE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN TARGETED AND THAT THIS OPENS UP SOME HOW POSSIBLE FUTURE PROBLEMS FOR OTHER PEOPLE, AND HAVING THEIR TAX RETURNS EXPOSED SHOW, AND ARE GENERALLY INCLINED TO SAY WELL, NOW THAT THESE TAX RETURNS WERE FAIRLY OR UNFAIRLY EXPOSED, THERE IS NOT EVEN ANYTHING THAT INTERESTING IN THEM, NO BIG BOMBSHELLS, SO WHAT WAS ALL THIS ABOUT.

HIS CRITICS ARE MORE INCLINED TO SAY WELL, LET'S KEEP LOOKING WHICH HAS BEEN TRUE FOR YEARS NOW.

AND I THINK THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE RETURNS, THERE IS A LOT TO KEEP LOOKING FOR.

THE RETURNS RAISE MORE QUESTIONS THAN THEY ANSWER IN SOME WAYS.

YOU LOOK AT HIS TAX RETURNS AND YOU SEE PAGE AFTER PAGE AFTER PAGE WHERE HE IS JUST ADJUSTING OTHER BUSINESS EXPENSES.

I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THOSE EXPENSES ARE.

IF I WERE AN IRS OFFICER I WOULD WANT TO SEE SOME RECEIPTS.

THERE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS RAISED HERE.

THERE AREN'T HUGE GLARING THINGS THAT ONE WOULD SAY OH, THAT IS CLEARLY WRONG.

>> JULIE, I KNOW HERE IN THE MASSACHUSETTS AREA, AND IN BOSTON THERE ARE CANDIDATES FOR A LOCAL OFFICES WHO ARE MAKING IT STANDARD PROCEDURE TO PUT THEIR TAX RETURNS UP ON THEIR CAMPAIGN WEBSITES WHILE OTHERS STILL ARE WAITING UNTIL THEY AT LEAST GET THROUGH THE PRIMARY TO DO THAT IF AT ALL.

DO YOU THINK THAT WE ARE CHANGING, THAT INFORMATION THAT IS COMING OUT OF THIS, WHETHER IT RESULTS IN CRIMINAL CHARGES OR NOT.

DO YOU THINK THAT VOTERS WILL START DEMANDING CANDIDATES BE MORE TRANSPARENT WITH THEIR TAX HISTORY?

>> IT CERTAINLY RAISES THE SAL YENS OF THE ISSUE.

I THINK WE WERE ALL USED TO PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES RELEASING THEIR TAX RETURNS SORT OF AS A MATTER OF COURSE AND IT WASN'T THAT INTERESTING.

AND AS SOON AS SOMEBODY DECLINES TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CUSTOM, THE CUSTOM BECOMES A SOURCE OF DEBATE.

>> RUSS, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE NEXT STEPS ARE?

AGAIN, WE TALKS ABOUT HOW THERE IS CERTAINLY DATA IN THESE RETURNS THAT COULD BRING THE ATTENTION OF SOMEBODY WHO MIGHT THINK THAT THERE HAS BEEN CRIMINAL ACTIVITY-- ACTIVITY OR AT LEAST WORTHY OF OF A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.

WHAT IS THE LIKELIHOOD OF THAT HAPPENING?

>> I'M NOT SURE.

THAT IS HARD TO HANDI CAP.

I THINK HE HAS SOME EXPOSURE FROM THE MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

THEY HAD THIS INFORMATION FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS NOW.

THEY HAD A VERY PROMINENT FORRENCIC AUDITING FIRM GOING OVER THEM.

SO FAR THERE HAS BEEN ONE CRIMINAL CHARGE AND PROSECUTION THAT ARE RELATED TO UNCAPPED BENEFITS TO HIS EMPLOYEES.

AND THERE IS-- THERE ARE SOME AUDITS THAT ARE STILL ONGOING.

THE IRS HAS AN AUDIT DATING BACK TO 2009 TO, A 73 MILLION DOLLAR REFUND HE GOT THEN AND IT HAS STILL NOT BEEN CLEARED ON.

AND THEY HAVE ROLLED MORE ISSUES INTO THOSE.

THAT COULD CATCH UP TO THEM.

WE SAW IN THE REPORT OUT OF THE COMMITTEE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO THAT AFTER THE ARTICLE IN 2020, THE IRS JUMPED OP SOME OF THE ISSUES WE HAD RAISED INCLUDING 21 MILLION DOLLAR DE DUCTION HE HAD TAKEN OFF FOR SOME LAND HE PROMISED NOT TO DEVELOP.

THOSE KIND OF THINGS COULD HAVE A FINANCIAL IMPACT.

IF THE IRS DECIDES ON ANY OF THOSE THAT HE HAS COMMITTED ACTUAL FRAUD, IT COULD ACTUALLY GO INTO POSSIBLY THE CRIMINAL REALM, THAT IS A VERY HIGH KIND OF BAR.

BUT I THINK THE REAL IMPACT FOR HIM IN TERMS OF SORT OF HAVING AN EFFECT ON HIM PEMPLY IS PROBABLY MORE FINANCIAL, SOME OF THOSE THINGS WITH PENALTIES CAN BE QUITE LARGE.

AND THEN THERE IS JUST THE ISSUE WHETHER THIS WILL RESULT AS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IN A CHANGE IN HOW WE DO THINGS IN THE FUTURE.

ESPECIALLY I THINK IN AUDITING THESE BIG PARTNERSHIPS.

THAT HAS JUST BEEN I THINK JUST SHOCKING REVELATIONS, HOW LITTLE STREUT KNEE THERE WAS ON THESE MASSIVELY COMPLEX RETURNS.

>> O'Connell: THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY NEXT QUESTION TOO, IF TRUMP HADN'T RUN FOR PRESIDENT AND IF IT DIDN'T INVITE SCRUTINY BECAUSE HE DIDN'T RELEASE HIS TAX RETURNS, BOTH OF YOU AND ALL OF THE JOURNALISTS AT YOUR LEVEL WEREN'T WORKING ON THIS, CERTAINLY WE DON'T HAVE THE LOCAL JOURNALISM IN THE NEWSPAPER WORLD THE WAY WE DID BEFORE WHEN IT COMES TO MAYORS AND GOVERNORS.

IT BEGS THE QUESTION OF HOW MANY PEOPLE ON THE TRUMP LEVEL OF INCOME ARE JUST GETTING AWAY WITH SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE BEYOND LEGAL LOOPHOLES AND IN THE LEAST, THE LEGAL LOOPHOLES THEMSELVES ARE ENOUGH TO WONDER WHY AN AVERAGE TAXPAYER ISN'T REVOLTING IN THE STREETS, NO?

>> ST AN EXCELLENT POINT.

YOU LOOK AT THIS AND YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT MOST OF US ARE CONCERNED WITH THE AUDIT.

THE IRS WILL SHOIP.

OUR W-2S WILL MATCH WHAT WE REPORT EXACTLY.

WE HAVE EXPENSES FOR A HOME OFFICE, WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE RECEIPTS AND SHOW SQUARE FOOTAGES.

HE HAS 500 BUSINESS ENTITIE THAT FILE TAX RETURNS EVERY YEAR.

I'VE GOT MOST OF THOSE GOING BACK 20 YEARS.

THE IRS REVEALED IN THE COURSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION WITH CONGRESS THAT THEY HAD NO INTENTION OF LOOKING AT ALL 500 OF THOSE.

THEY WERE GOING TO PICK ISOLATED INCIDENTS ON THREE OR FOUR OF THOSE CLAIMS AND EACH ONE OF THOSE INCIDENTS TO DRAW THEIR ATTENTION HAD TO BE BIG ENOUGH TO CHANGE HIS TAX STATUS.

A THAT RESULTS IN LIKE A 10 OR 20 MILLION IMPACT.

THEY WEREN'T AT ALL INTERESTED IN FIGURING OUT WHETHER WE LOOKED AT ALL 500 OF THESE WOULD THERE BE 50 ITEMS THAT WOULD HAVE THAT MUCH EFFECT COMBINED.

THAT WAS NOT UNDER CONNECTION.

THEY-- CONSIDERATION.

THEY WERE LOOKING FOR BIG POTS OF MONEY THAT THEY COULD PUT ONE AND RAISE IT TO THREE AUDITORS ON TO LOOK AT A COUPLE OF ENTITIES AND SEE IF THAT ONE INCIDENT COULD PUT HIM INTO A DIFFERENT TAX SITUATION.

I THINK THAT IS JUST STUNNING THAT YOU HAVE TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF EXPENSES, AND REVENUE AND NO ONE IS REALLY GOING TO LOOK AT THOSE EVER.

THERE SAN INVITATION TO FRAUD FOR THESE LARGE COMPLEX PARTNERSHIPS.

>> I HAVE A FRIEND AUDITS WHEN SHE WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL AND SHE WAS A WAITRESS.

SHE MADE I THINK 10,000 THAT YEAR, NOT LONG AGO.

AND BECAUSE IT WAS A CASH BUSINESS SHE WAS AUDITED.

AND I THINK ABOUT THE 10,000 DOLLARS THAT ARE PROBABLY BURIED IN A NUMBER OF THESE MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES TAX RETURNS.

I WANT TO FINISH WITH YOU AND TO THE POINT OF THE PEOPLE WHO WOULD CHANGE THIS, ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN CONGRESS.

AND THEY SEEM TO BE THE LEAST LIKELY TO HAVE-- HAVE THE LEAST APPETITE TO ACTUALLY MAKE ANY CHANGES HERE WHEN IT COMES TO THE IRS.

THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE PAST THAT HAVE TAKEN UP THE MANTLE.

YOU HAVE A PREDICTION THAT WE WILL EVER MAKE ANY CHANGES IN OUR TAX CODE THAT WILL BE MORE FAIR IF NOT AT LEAST LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD FOR MY FRIENDS WHO ARE WAITERS AND WAIT ESES-- WAITRESSES VER US THE THE SO CALLED MULTIBILLIONAIRES.

>> WELL, WHAT HAPPENS WITH DONALD TRUMP IS REALLY TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

THERE IS WHAT HAPPENED WITH DONALD TRUMP WHEN HE WAS A WEALTHY BUSINESSMAN.

AND THEN THERE IS WHAT HAPPENED WITH DONALD TRUMP ONCE HE WAS PRESIDENT.

AND WHEN HE WAS A WEALTHY BUSINESSMAN, THIS WAS VERY NORMAL.

AS RUSS WAS SAYING.

HE WOULD HAVE THESE ENORMOUSLY COMPLICATED TAX RETURN, HUNDREDS OF PAGES AND THE IRS DOESN'T HAVE THE PERSONNEL TO REALLY DIG INTO WHAT IS HAPPENING THERE.

AND THEY ARE OVERLOOKING ENORMOUS BUSINESSES AND BUSINESS PEOPLE ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES WHERE THEY JUST DON'T INVESTIGATE.

AND JUST THIS PAST YEAR CONGRESS DID BUDGET A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY TO GIVE THE IRS MONEY TO HIRE MORE INVESTIGATORS AND START LOOKING INTO THOSE WEALTHY TAXPAYERS AND LOOKING FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE AVOIDING TAXES.

>> WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS THERE.

>> O'Connell: WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS, WE'LL SEE AS FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYS >> O'Connell: RUSS BUETTNER, JULIE WEIL, THANKS.

THREE YEARS AFTER JOURNALIST JAMAL KHASHOGGI WAS MURDERED BY SAUDI AGENTS IN THE COUNTRY'S EMBASSY IN ISTANBUL, NEW REPORTING FROM THE "WASHINGTON POST" REVEALED THAT SOME OF THE PEOPLE CLOSEST TO HIM HAD BEEN TARGETED WITH POWERFUL SPYWARE, BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER HIS DEATH.

AND NOW, A NEW DOCUSERIES IS DIGGING INTO THE ORIGINS OF THE HACKING TOOL, KNOWN AS PEGASUS, AND THE ISRAELI COMPANY, N.S.O., THAT CREATED IT AND SHARED IT WITH GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD.

>> THIS TECHNOLOGY IS SO FAR AHEAD OF GOVERNMENT OF REGULATION.

AND EVEN OF PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S HAPPENING OUT THERE.

>> ALL OF US SUSPECTED THAT IF N.S.O.

GROUP WAS GIVING AUTHORITARIAN AND OPPRESSIVE REGIMES SUCH A POWERFUL INSTRUMENT OF SURVEILLANCE, THAT IT WAS PRETTY LIKELY THAT THIS TECHNOLOGY WOULD BE ABUSED.

BUT NONE OF US HAD BEEN ABLE TO PROVE IT ON A SYSTEMIC SCALE.

>> O'Connell: THE TWO-PART SERIES IS CALLED "GLOBAL SPYWARE SCANDAL: EXPOSING PEGASUS," PRODUCED BY FRONTLINE AND FORBIDDEN FILMS, AND IT TELLS THE STORY OF THE YEAR-LONG, INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATION, FILMED AS IT HAPPENED.

AND I'M JOINED NOW BY ONE OF THE FILM'S PRODUCERS AND THE FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF FORBIDDEN FILMS AND ITS PARENT COMPANY, FORBIDDEN STORIES, LAURENT RICHARD.

LAWYER LAWYER ENT-- LAURENT, WELCOME, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US, HAVE I BEEN FOLLOWING THIS STORY FOR A LONG TIME STRKS COMPLICATED TO EXPLAIN.

I'M HOPING YOU WILL HELP US, WHAT EXACTLY IS PEGASUS.

>> HI, AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME, PEGASUS IS A SPYWARE, BASICALLY ONE OF THE MOST SOPHISTICATED SPYWARE SOLD BY A PRIVATE COMPANY CALLED NSO GROUP MADE IN ISRAEL.

AND PEGASUS IS A SPYWARE THAT IS ABLE TO TAKE ENTIRELY THE CONTROL OF YOUR DEVICE, OF YOUR PHONE.

IT CAN ACTIVATE YOUR MICROPHONE T CAN WATCH WHAT YOU ARE WATCHING.

IT BASICALLY IS LIKE A PERSON OVER YOUR SHOULDER, YOU KNOW.

IT CAN READ, OR THE PERSON CAN READ WHAT YOU ARE READING AND PEGASUS IS ABOUT THAT.

SO THAT IS ABOUT GETTING ALL YOUR SECRETS AND TRANSFERRING THAT TO THE PERSON, TO THE SERVICES THAT ARE SURVEILLING YOU AND MAYBE THIS INFORMATION THEY COLLECT FROM YOUR DE VIETION WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU AT SOME POINT.

SO THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST ADVANCED SPYWARE WE KNOW SO FAR.

ST CONSIDERED AS A WEAPON.

TO EXPORT THAT KIND OF SPYWARE YOU NEED-- FOR THAT.

>> O'Connell: THE SCARY PART ABOUT THIS AT LEAST TO ME IS YOU DON'T REALLY NEED TO DO ANYTHING TO BE INFECTED BY THE SPYWARE.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO CLICK ON A LINK SO MUCH.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE YOUR CONSENT.

IS THAT TRUE.

>> YEAH, THAT IS TRUE.

WE CALL THAT-- INFECTION, INFECTION OR BEING INFECTIONED OR TO INFECT SOMEONE IS CLEARLY THE LANGUAGES THAT THE INDUSTRY, THE CYBERINDUSTRY IS USING WHEN THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT TARGETING SOMEONE.

SO YOU DON'T KNOW THAT YOU ARE THE TARGET.

YOU DON'T RECEIVE ANYTHING AS TRANSFERRED TO THE DEVICE AND YOU ARE TRUST, ONCE YOU INVECTED THE TRUST THAT MEANS WE KNOW EVERYTHING BUT, THERE IS NO WAY FOR YOU, NO MECHANISM TO PROTECT YOURSELF AGAINST THAT KIND OF WEAPON.

>> O'Connell: I WANT TO SHOW A LITTLE BIT OF THE FILM.

THERE WAS A JOURNALIST WHO WAS WORKINGS TO EXPOATION GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION.

SHE FOUND OUT THAT HER PHONE HAD BEEN HACKED BY PEGASUS.

LET'S TAKE TAYE LOOK.

>> I FEEL GUILTY.

I FEEL GUILTY TO FOR THE MESSAGES I HAVE SENT.

I FEEL GUILTY FOR THE INFORMATION SOURCES THAT, WHO SEND ME THINKING THAT SOME ENCRYPTED MESSAGING WAYS ARE SECURE.

THEY DID IT AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW THAT MY PHONE IS INFECTED.

>> I MEAN MY FAMILY MEMBERS IS ARE ALSO VICTIMIZED.

THE RESOURCES ARE VICTIMIZED.

I'M ANGRY WITH THE GOVERNMENT, I'M ANGRY WITH THE COMPANIES THAT PRODUCE ALL THIS TO, AND SELL IT TO THE BAD GUYS.

LIKE-- IT IS REALLY, IT'S DESPICABLE.

>> O'Connell: LAURENT, THE ISSUE HERE TOO, I UNDERSTAND THAT COOLS, A HAMMER CAN BE USED FOR GOOD OR A HAMMER CAN BE USED FOR BAD.

AND THIS TOOLT WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED OR MARKETED THAT IT WAS GOING TO CATCH THE BAD GUYS, CATCH THE TERRORISTS, THE ISRAELI COMPANY FLRKS SO WHICH IS THE OWNER OF PEGASUS, SAID THAT IS ALL, THE ONLY REASON THEY HAVE IT IS TO STOP TERRORISTS AND BAD GUYS BUT WHAT YOU DISCOVERED IN THE FRONT LINE DOCUSERIES IS IT IS NOT BAD GUYS BUT ALSO JOURNALISTS, RIGHT?

>> YES, ABSOLUTELY.

THAT IS THE MAIN-- OF THE PEGASUS PROJECT.

WE WERE CALLED ANYTHING WAY 16 ORGANIZATIONS INCLUDING CBS FRONTLINE THAT WE WERE REVEALING THE FIRST TIME THE FACES AND VICTIMS AND NAMES OF THE-- THE WOMAN THAT YOU JUST SAW IN THIS VIDEO, IS ONE OF THE VICTIMS.

SHE IS NOT A TERRORIST.

SHE IS NOT A CRIMINAL.

SHE IS JUST A JOURNALIST, MAYBE ONE OF THE VERY LAST JOURNALISTS IN AZERBEJIAN AND SHE HAS BEEN SUFFERING VIOLENCE FOR YEARS, JAILED.

SHE IS THE KIND OF PERSON FIGHTING FOR DEMOCRACY, THAT IS WHY SHE WAS ON THE LIST, SHE WAS TARGETED BY THE SPYWARE.

AND SHE WAS TELLING HOW TRAUMATIC IT WAS TO KNOW THAT SHE WAS A VICTIM OF THAT.

AND THAT IS VERY CRUCIAL TO UNDERSTANDINGS THAT ONCE YOU ARE INFECTED, YOU BECOME A VICTIM AND YOUR LIFE WILL CHANGE.

AND THAT IS CREATING A TRAUMA.

THIS IS WHY OFFICIALLY THEY ARE HAVE AING THAT WE ALWAYS SAY TO CATCH TERRORISTS AND CRIMINALS, WHAT IS CONCERNING IS THERE IS NO WAY TO CONTROL THAT.

THERE IS NO WAY FOR CITIZENS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES, THERE IS NO MECHANISM TO SUE EVEN NSO OR THE GOVERNMENT WHO WILL USE THAT AGAINST YOU.

>> O'Connell: AND I THINK PART OF THE BREAKTHROUGH OF THIS, IN YOUR REPORTING AND THE PIECE IS THAT IF THE WORLDWIDE ISSUE.

LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT A CLIP FROM AN ANONYMOUS SOURCE IN MEXICO WHO WORKED FOR A GOVERNMENT AGENCY THAT USED PEGASUS.

>> SO LAURENT, THIS MIGHT BE IF YOU ARE WATCHING AT HOME, THIS DOESN'T IMPACT ME AT ALL, I'M JUST SOMEONE WHO OBVIOUSLY MY INFORMATION IS OUT THERE.

THEY KNOW WHERE I CLICK, THEY KNOW WHERE I SHOP, I WALK BY A MALL, I GET A MESSAGE TO COME IN AND GET THE FIVE PERCENT SALE OFF.

WHY SHOULD REGULAR PEOPLE CARE ABOUT THIS?

>> WE ALL SHOULD CARE ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THAT IS CLEARLY A THREAT AGAINST DEMOCRACY.

BECAUSE WE NEED TO BE WORRIED ABOUT THAT.

BECAUSE FIRST THERE IS NOTHING TO PROTECT US.

THERE IS NO LAW, THERE IS NO REGULATION, THERE IS NO TRANSPARENCY THERE IS NO ACCOUNT AIBLGHTD.

THERE IS NO WAY FOR YOU AS A VICTIM TO KNOW FIRST YOU ARE A VICTIM.

BECAUSE IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO FIND TRACES OF INFECTION.

BUT EVEN IF YOU FIND TRACES OF INFECTION, THERE IS NO WAY TO GET JUSTICE FROM THAT.

SO THERE IS REALLY ABOUT, ST UP TO ALL GOVERNMENTS TO DEAL SOME REGULATION ABOUT THAT, TO PROTECT OURSELVE.

WE SHOULD BE VERY WORRIED ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THE BUSINESS FOR THAT KIND OF, FOR THE CYBERSURVEILLANCE INDUSTRY IS A VERY LUCRATIVE AND PROFITABLE BUSINESSES.

YOU HAVE A LOT OF TRY RANTS, DICTATORS READY TO PAY BILLIONS OR MILLIONS TO BUY THAT KIND OF SPYWARE, SO THERE IS A LOT OF BUSINESS AND MONEY TO MAKE.

SO NO REGULATION, A LOT OF MONEY TO MAKE, WE CALL THAT THE ZERO CLICK ERA INFECTION.

SO THERE IS NO WAY TO KNOW THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE A VICTIM.

SO THIS IS WHY IT DID VERY CONCERNING.

AND WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO REVEAL, THAT ALL THE PEOPLE WERE VICTIMS OF PEG SON-- PELG SUS, WE WERE ABLE TO FIND SOME TRACES OF INFECTION, WERE WHETHER THEY WERE LAWYERS, JOURNALISTS, HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS, POLITICAL OPPONENTS, ALL OF THESE PEOPLE WERE HAVING SOMETHING IN COMMON.

THEY WERE FIGHTING FOR DEMOCRACY.

THEY WERE TRYING TO CHANGE THEIR-- AND BECAUSE OF THAT THEY WERE ON THE LIST AND BECAUSE OF THAT THEY WERE TRACKED.

AND THAT KIND OF SPYWARE BECAME YEAR AFTER YEAR, A KIND OF MAGIC TOOL FOR TYRANTS, FOR DICTATORS AND A WAY FOR THEM TO EXPORT THE TERROR.

VERY FAR AWAY AS WE WERE ABLE TO-- THEY WERE BOTH TARGETED BY THAT KIND OF SPYWARE SO THIS IS, THIS CAN TELL YOU ABOUT WHAT KIND OF SPYWARE-- .

>> O'Connell: JUST AS WE WRAP, IT SOUNDERS LIKE WE NEED SOME SORT OF INTERNATIONAL TREATY TO ASK GOVERNMENTS NOT TO USE THIS SORT OF SPYWARE, WOULD THAT BE A STEP TO KEEP TRACK OF THIS PROBLEM?

>> THE THING IS, I THINK THE QUESTION IS NOT ABOUT SHOULD WE HAVE A BAN ON THAT KIND OF SPYWARE BECAUSE THAT SPYWARE CAN CATCH SOME CRIMINALS OR TERRORISTS.

AND IF THERE IS A SPYWARE WHO CAN PRESENT TERRORIST ATTACKS THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE ALL-- THE THING IS MORE ABOUT HOW TO CONTROL THAT.

HOW TO CONTROL, WHO WILL NORTHBOUND CHARGE OF THAT, WHO WILL BE IN CHARGE TO GET ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY.

AND SO FAR THERE IS NO MECHANISM, NO TRANSPARENCY AND I REALLY THINK THAT IN IS WHAT WREA ARE MISSING TODAY AND THIS IS WHY WE SHOULD BE VERY CONCERNED.

>> O'Connell: LAURENT RICHARD, THANKS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS PIECE.

I LEARNED A LOT, I HOPE EVERYBODY WATCH, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, THE SERIES AGAIN IS "GLOBAL SPYWARE SCANDAL: EXPOSING PEGASUS."

PART 1 IS ONLINE NOW, AT PBS.ORG/FRONTLINE AND IN THE PBS VIDEO APP.

AND PART 2 PREMIERES NEXT TUESDAY, JANUARY 10th ONLINE, AND RIGHT HERE ON GBH 2, AT 10:00 P.M. THAT'S IT FOR TONIGHT.

WE'LL BE BACK TOMORROW.

THANKS FOR WATCHING, AND GOOD NIGHT.

Captioned by Media Access Group at WGBH access.wgbh.org