08.10.2021

August 10, 2021

Andrea Stewart-Cousins, majority leader of the New York State Senate, weighs in on Gov. Cuomo’s resignation. Anders Fogh-Rasmussen and Husain Haqqani discuss U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and Taliban advances. Pulitzer Prize-winner Louis Menand discusses his new book “The Free World: Art and Thought in the Cold War.” Actress Cecily Strong reflects on her career and new memoir.

Read Full Transcript EXPAND

> HELLO, EVERYONE.

AND WELCOME TO 'AMANPOUR AND COMPANY.'

HERE'S WHAT'S COMING UP.

> THE BEST WAY I CAN HELP NOW IS IF I STEP ASIDE AND LET GOVERNMENT GET BACK TO GOVERNING.

UNDER WITHERING PRESSURE OVER SEXUAL HARASSMENT ALLEGATIONS, GOVERNOR CUOMO FINALLY RESIGNS.

I TALKED TO A TOP NEW YORK STATE OFFICIAL ABOUT WHAT'S NEXT.

THEN --

BIDEN'S BIGGEST FOREIGN POLICY TEST YET, PULLING OUT OF AFGHANISTAN AS THE TALIBAN SEIZED MORE LAND, THE FORMER NATO CHIEF AND FORMER PAKISTAN AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED STATES JOINED ME.

PLUS --

IF YOU ASKED ME WHEN I WAS 12 OR 15, WHAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN LIFE, I WOULD HAVE SAID FREEDOM.

LOUIE TALKS TO WALTER ISAACSON ABOUT THE FREE WORLD, AMERICAN ART AND THOUGHT DURING THE COLD WAR.

> AND FINALLY --

I ASSUME YOU'RE NOT HAPPY WITH THE JOB PRESIDENT BIDEN IS GOING.

TALKING COMEDY AND STRATEGY WITH HER POIGNANT MEMOIR, THIS WILL ALL BE OVER SOON.

> 'AMANPOUR & COMPANY' IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- SUE AND EDGAR WACHENHEIM III.

CANDACE KING WEIR.

THE CHERYL AND PHILIP MILSTEIN FAMILY.

THE ANDERSON FAMILY FUND.

THE STRAUS FAMILY FOUNDATION.

JIM ATWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS.

BERNARD AND DENISE SCHWARTZ.

KU AND PATRICIA EWING, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.

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.

WE START WITH BIG NEWS OUT OF NEW YORK WHERE THREE-TERM GOVERNOR ANDREW CUOMO HAS RESIGNED TODAY FINALLY BOWING TO PRESSURE AFTER THE NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL RELEASED A REPORT CONCLUDING HE HAD SEXUALLY HARASSED 11 WOMEN.

CUOMO CONTINUED TO DENY HE CROSSED ANY LINE BUT ADMITTED IT WAS BEST FOR THE STATE IF HE DOES RESIGN NOW.

AND I LOVE NEW YORK.

AND I LOVE YOU.

AND EVERYTHING I HAVE EVER DONE HAS BEEN MOTIVATED BY THAT LOVE.

AND I WOULD NEVER WANT TO BE UNHELPFUL IN ANY WAY.

AND I THINK THAT GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE BEST WAY I CAN HELP NOW IS IF I STEP ASIDE.

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL WILL TAKE THE REINS IN TWO WEEKS TIME AND BECOME THE FIRST EVER STATE'S CHIEF EXECUTIVE.

WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, MAJORITY LEADER.

HOW SURPRISED WERE YOU THAT HE DID TAKE THIS STEP, AFTER -- HOW SURPRISED HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN THAT HE WAS DEFIANT, HE WAS DIGGING IN, THAT ACCORDING TO THOSE WHO STILL STOOD WITH HIM THAT HE WANTED TO FIGHT THIS OUT?

I WAS FRANKLY SURPRISED.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE THAT CERTAINLY HE DID THE RIGHT THING.

THE REALITY IS, AND THAT IS WHY IT IS FROM MARCH, I AND SO MANY OTHERS HAD SUGGESTED THIS WAS THE RIGHT THING FOR HIM TO DO BECAUSE IT HAD BEEN A DISTRACTION.

IT WAS BECOMING A LARGER DISTRACTION.

AND WE DO KNOW THE GOVERNOR TO BE A FIGHTER.

AND THERE WAS THAT EXPECTATION.

THAT HE WOULD GO AND CONTINUE TO FIGHT.

BUT THE REALITY IS WE DO HAVE SO MUCH TO DO IN NEW YORK.

FACING COVID AND TRYING TO GET KIDS BACK TO SCHOOL SAFELY AND DEALING WITH ECONOMIC RECOVERY AND THE LITANY OF ALLEGATIONS AND ACCUSATIONS AND -- WERE JUST PILING UP.

SO THIS WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

AND I ALWAYS AM GRATEFUL FRANKLY THESE WOMEN CAME FORWARD AND EXERCISED AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF BRAVERY AND THE GOVERNMENT WILL GO FORWARD UNDER KATHY HOCHUL, WILL BE ONE THAT WILL CONTINUE TO WORK TOWARDS A SAFER MORE INCLUSIVE, MORE CONSCIOUS WORKPLACE AND THAT IS WHAT THIS IS FRANKLY ABOUT.

IT'S A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT DAY, THOUGH, FOR ALL OF US.

WELL, I DO WANT TO GET OBVIOUSLY TO THE WOMEN WHO GOVERNOR CUOMO HAS SAID ABOUT THEM AND THE OTHER THINGS HE SAID IN HIS PRESS CONFERENCE WHILE RESIGNING.

BUT FIRST I WANT TO ASK YOU BECAUSE I THINK EVERYBODY WANTS TO ASK AND KNOW, DOES THIS HEAD OFF THE IP IMPEACHMENT PROCESS?

IS IT RESIGNATION OR IMPEACHMENT?

OR COULD YOU ALL CONTINUE THAT PROCESS?

WELL VERY MUCH AS IT HAPPENS IN THE FEDERAL LEVEL, THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS DOESN'T HAPPEN IN MY HOUSE, THE SENATE IT HAPPENS IN THE ASSEMBLY.

AND AS OF YESTERDAY THEY INDICATED THEY WERE PLANNING TO GO FORWARD WITH PUBLIC HEARINGS AND WORK THEIR WAY TOWARDS IMPEACHMENT.

FOR OUR SENATE HOUSE, WE WERE GETTING OUR DUCKS IN A ROW OF TRYING TO INTERVIEW COUNCIL TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN IT BECAME THE TRIAL IN THE SENATE, WE HAD ALL THE APPROPRIATE RESOURCES THAT WE NEED.

SO IT IS UP TO THE ASSEMBLY WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO CONTINUE DOWN THE PATH.

AGAIN, THE CONVERSATION FOR MANY OF US, ABOUT 40 OUT OF 63, WERE CALLING FOR THE GOVERNOR TO RESIGN SO WE COULD REALLY DO WHAT PEOPLE SENT US HERE TO DO, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY TO SERVE THEIR NEEDS.

WELL THE STATE DEMOCRATIC PARTY CHAIR JAY JACOBS, AS YOU KNOW, JUST A DAY AFTER ATTORNEY GENERAL LETITIA JAMES' REPORT SAID THE FOLLOWING ABOUT THE WRITING ON THE WALL.

I THINK AS CONSENSUS IN THE ASSEMBLY HE SHOULD BE IMPEACHED.

THAT COULD HAPPEN WITHIN A MART OF WEEKS IF NOT SOONER AND IF IT GOES TO THE SENATE, I DON'T SEE ANY WAY HE AVOIDS CONVICTION.

THIS WAS OBVIOUSLY BEFORE TODAY.

OBVIOUSLY BEFORE THE DECISION THE GOVERNOR HAS TAKEN.

BUT IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT THERE WAS NO SUPPORT FOR HIM AND THAT HE HAD TO TAKE THE DECISION?

I THINK AS I SIDE, THERE ARE 63 MEMBERS IN THE SENATE.

AND I BELIEVE AT LAST COUNT 40 OF THEM HAD CALLED ON THE GOVERNOR TO RESIGN.

NOW, I -- IT WAS CLEARLY NOT A GOOD PLACE FOR HIM TO BE IN.

AND IT WAS NOT ONLY JUST IN THE GOVERNMENT.

BUT POLLS AFTER POLL WERE SHOWING THE VAST MAJORITY OF NEW YORKERS WANTED THE GOVERNOR TO RESIGN.

I THINK THE LAST POLL I SAW WAS ABOUT 80%. I THINK IT WAS A QUINNIPIAC POLL THAT SAID 80% OF THE PEOPLE WANTED HIM TO RESIGN.

IT WAS JUST, YOU KNOW, TOO MUCH FOR TOO LONG.

AND TOO MANY ALLEGATIONS.

AND THERE REALLY DID NOT SEEM TO BE A PATH FORWARD THAT WOULD NOT EXHAUST EVERY ONE RESOURCES AND EVERYONE'S ATTENTION WHEN AS WE KNOW THE REAL ATTENTION IS SUPPOSED TO BE ON THE PEOPLE WE'RE HERE TO SERVE.

SO IT SEEMED LIKE IT WAS GOING TO BE A VERY, VERY LONG ROAD.

AND I IMAGINE PUBLIC SENTIMENT AS WELL AS THE LOSS OF CONFIDENCE WITH THOSE OF US THAT HE GOVERNS, AND HE LOOKED AT SO MANY THINGS AND TODAY HE DID THE RIGHT THING BY ALLOWING US TO NOT HAVE TO EXHAUST THE LEVEL OF RESOURCES THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO REALLY EXHAUST IN ORDER TO ADDRESS ALL OF THE DIFFERENT ALLEGATIONS WHAT.

THE ASSEMBLY WILL DO, I DON'T KNOW.

I IMAGINE THE SPEAKER WILL BE MEETING WITH HIS CONFERENCE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND I'M SURE AS SOON AS THEY DECIDE WHETHER THEY ARE GOING TO GO FORWARD OR NOT, WE WILL BE INFORMED.

BUT I REALLY, AGAIN, AM HAPPY THAT THIS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT PART OF, YOU KNOW, THIS -- I MEAN, THIS PAST COUPLE OF YEARS HAS BEEN HORRIBLE BETWEEN THE COVID PANDEMIC AND THEN TO BE AT THIS POINT.

I'M REALLY HAPPY THAT THIS IS OVER SO THAT WE CAN GET BACK TO OUR BUSINESS.

ON THE ONE HAND HE SAID A LOT OF ALLEGATIONS WERE NOT CREDIBLE.

THAT IS WHAT HE SAID AS HE WAS RESIGNING ABOUT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REPORT.

THIS IS WHAT HE SAID AS HE WAS RESIGNING.

WHEN THERE IS A BIAS OR A LACK OF FAIRNESS IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, IT IS A CONCERN FOR EVERYONE.

NOT JUST THOSE IMMEDIATELY AFFECTED.

THE MOST SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS MADE AGAINST ME HAVE NO CREDIBLE FACTUAL BASIS IN THE REPORT.

AND THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ALLEGED IMPROPER CONDUCT AND CONCLUDING SEXUAL HARASSMENT.

SO I GUESS I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT WHAT YOU MAKE OF THE CASTING OF ASPERSIONS AGAINST THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND AGAINST SOME OF THE WOMEN WHO CAME FORWARD.

WELL LET'S BE CLEAR.

I AM THE VERY FIRST WOMAN LEADER IN THE HISTORY OF NEW YORK.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ALSO HISTORIC IN TERMS OF THE FIRST WOMAN ELECTED TO BE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

WE ALL HAD CONFIDENCE IN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S ABILITY TO TAKE THESE WOMEN'S ALLEGATIONS SERIOUSLY AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.

THE 165 PAGE REPORT HAD CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE.

THE FACT THAT THE GOVERNOR WAS APOLOGIZING OR TRYING TO CHARACTERIZE IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT HE IS, YOU KNOW, ENTITLED TO DO.

BUT THE REALITY IS HERE IN NEW YORK, CERTAINLY UNDER MY LEADERSHIP WE HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR WHAT SEXUAL HARASSMENT LOOKS LIKE.

WE'VE BEEN VERY CLEAR ABOUT ZERO TOLERANCE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE AND WE'VE BEEN VERY CLEAR THAT TOXIC WORK ENVIRONMENT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE MORE INCLUSIVE, A MORE WELCOMING ENVIRONMENT HAS NO PLACE IN THE WORK SPACES.

AND WE ALSO KNOW THAT THE GOVERNOR WAS VERY PROUD OF THE LEADERSHIP ROLE HE TOOK IN MAKING SURE THAT WOMEN ALL OVER UNDERSTOOD THAT HE WAS AN ADVOCATE AND HE WAS VERY HAPPY TO SIGN THE LEGISLATION THAT WE PASSED.

WE HELD THE FIRST HEARINGS ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT UNDER MY LEADERSHIP IN 25 YEARS.

SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT AS A MAJORITY WE'VE TAKEN VERY SERIOUS.

AS A GOVERNMENT WE'VE TAKEN VERY VERY SERIOUSLY.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT GOING FORWARD AND THAT IS WHAT I SAID IN A STATEMENT I JUST RELEASED, THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A RESTORATIVE PERIOD.

BUT IT IS ALSO GOING TO BE A PERIOD THAT REAFFIRMS THOSE VALUES THAT WE HOLD TRUE.

IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO PROFESS THEM OR TO CREATE POLICIES.

WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY WALK THE WALK.

SO I THINK THAT THIS IS A RESET.

WE ARE FINDING NEW LEADERSHIP IN, YOU KNOW, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, SOON OR THE GOVERNOR, KATHY HOCHUL.

AND THAT IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OF US TO, YOU KNOW, GO BEYOND THIS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE INDEED LEADING THE NATION IN WHAT WORKPLACES ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT.

BOUNDARIES ARE IMPORTANT.

AND WE'VE MADE, YOU KNOW, GOVERNMENT POLICY TO SAY THEY ARE IMPORTANT.

WE HAVE TO ACT LIKE THEY ARE IMPORTANT.

AND I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A MAJOR STEP TO MAKING SURE THIS IS HAPPENING IN WORKPLACES ALL OVER OUR GOVERNMENT.

SO I WONDER WHAT YOU MAKE, BECAUSE WE WERE SHOWING THE VIDEO OF ACTUALLY SOME OF WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, ESPECIALLY IN 2018 T GOVERNOR WAS SIGNING A BILL EXTENDING THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS TO RAPE CHARGES AND SAW A NUMBER OF HOLLYWOOD STARS AND OTHER LUMINARIES, WOMEN, YOU KNOW, ACCOMPANY HIM AS HE SIGNED THAT.

AND HE'S LONG POSITIONED HIMSELF AS A CRUSADER FOR WOMEN'S RIGHTS.

HE SPOKE ABOUT BEING ONE OF THE FIRST STATES IN THE NATION TO MAKE SAME SEX MARRIAGE LAW.

AND YET HE ALSO SAID THAT THE WOMEN WERE CORRECT TO HAVE BEEN UPSET IF HE HAD CROSSED A LINE.

BUT THAT HE DIDN'T REALIZE HOW FAR THE LINES HAVE CROSSED AND YET THIS IS A POST#METOO ENVIRONMENT.

SO WHAT DOES A CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF ANYTHING HAVE TO KNOW THESE DAYS ABOUT WHERE THE LINES ARE?

WELL, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I THINK THAT THIS, IF THERE WERE CHIEF EXECUTIVES AROUND THAT REALLY DON'T KNOW WHERE THE LINES ARE, THIS IS GOING TO BE A LESSON ON WHERE THE LINES ARE.

AGAIN, YOU MAY THINK IT IS PERFECTLY FINE TO KISS PEOPLE, YOU MAY THINK THAT IT IS PERFECTLY FINE TO ASK PEOPLE BEFORE -- YOU MAY THINK A LOT OF THINGS.

BE THANK YOU REALITY IS NOT WHAT YOU THINK.

IT IS WHAT THE PEOPLE EXPERIENCE.

AND CLEARLY, AT LEAST 11 WOMEN EXPERIENCED SOMETHING VERY VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE GOVERNOR THOUGHT HE WAS CONVEYING.

CLEARLY.

NOW, I HOPE, AGAIN, GOING FORWARD, THAT WE WILL ALL UNDERSTAND THE BOUNDARIES.

WE ARE IN A TIME WHERE THESE THINGS MATTER.

A LOT OF THINGS MATTER.

AND MAKING SURE THAT AS MORE AND MORE WOMEN COME INTO OUR WORK SPACES, I'M IN A WORK SPACE THAT HAD BEEN PREDOMINANTLY MALE.

PREDOMINANTLY WHITE MALE.

THIS IS CHANGING.

AND WITH THOSE CHANGES HAS TO COME CHANGES IN OUR BEHAVIORS.

SO IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW, YOU SHOULD KNOW.

THERE ARE BOUNDARIES, AND, YOU KNOW, DON'T CROSS THEM.

AND OBVIOUSLY, IF YOU ARE NOT SURE, ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION.

A SIMPLE 'HELLO' IS ALWAYS GOOD.

ESPECIALLY DURING THIS TIME WE'RE ALL CONCERNED ABOUT COVID.

NO NEED TO HUG.

NO NEED TO KISS.

YOU KNOW, A SIMPLE HELLO AND EXPRESSION OF APPRECIATION IS REALLY ALL THAT'S NECESSARY.

SO LET ME FINALLY ASK TO YOU REFLECT ON THE FACT THAT THIS IS A LEGENDARY NEW YORK FAMILY.

HIS FATHER WAS GOVERNOR FOR THREE TERMS.

HE HAD BEEN FOR THREE TERMS.

WANTED A FOURTH TERM.

KATHY HOCHUL WILL COME IN AS THE FIRST EVER WOMAN GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK.

JUST REFLECT A LITTLE BIT ON THE FAMILY THAT HAS GONE AFTER YEARS OF LEADERSHIP AND THE NEW LEADERSHIP THAT WILL COME IN ITS PLACE.

WELL, I THINK WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS TRUE.

THE CUOMO LEGACY IS LONG.

IT HAS REACHED THREE GENERATIONS.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK, HOPEFULLY, NO MATTER WHETHER YOU SPENT A SHORT TIME OR A LONG TIME IN GOVERNMENT OR PUBLIC SERVICE THAT YOU COME TO DO PUBLIC SERVICE.

AND THAT'S WHAT THIS IS REALLY ALL ABOUT.

IT'S ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE LEFT BEHIND, HOW YOU HAVE HELPED PEOPLE.

HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO DO GOOD?

AND, SO, I THINK ALL OF US WITH A MIND SET TOWARDS SERVICE ARE JUST HAPPY TO DO THAT SERVICE.

SO I AM SURE THAT THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR AS SHE STEPS UP WILL ALSO BE MINDFUL.

I WORKED WITH HER FOR SOME TIME.

SHE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TRAVELING NEW YORK.

SHE KNOWS NEW YORK AND NEW YORKERS AND AGAIN SHE'S BEEN VERY SUPPORTIVE OF WOMEN IN WAYS THAT ARE VERY MUCH APPRECIATED.

ESPECIALLY, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE ARE STILL NOT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN THESE SPACES.

AND SO TO HAVE A WOMAN OF POWER REACHING OUT A HAND OR BEING SUPPORTIVE IS ALWAYS GOOD.

AND PUBLIC SERVICE WILL BE, I'M SURE, AT THE FRONT OF WHAT SHE WANTS TO DO.

I'VE SPOKEN TO HER EARLIER.

I TOLD HER THAT I WAS LOOKING FORWARD TO BEING HELPFUL.

AS SHE MOVES FORWARD IN THIS POSITION.

AND LIKE I SAID.

I -- I THINK THAT WE WILL, YOU KNOW, BE IN A BETTER PLACE POST THE GOVERNOR'S RESIGNATION AND WITH AN OPPORTUNITY, FRANKLY, TO RESTORE AND TO CONTINUE TO REBUILD NEW YORK IN ALL OF ITS GREATNESS.

SO YOU DON'T BELIEVE WHAT HE SAID WITH THIS IS ALL JUST POLITICALLY MOTIVATED AGAINST HIM?

I DON'T.

I MEAN, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS POLITICALLY MOTIVATION.

IT ISN'T.

IT IS THE REALITY OF WHAT PEOPLE EXPERIENCE IN THEIR WORKPLACE.

AND AGAIN, IT WAS A VERY, VERY LONG REPORT.

I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO READ IT.

THERE WERE A LOT OF, LOT OF VERY DIFFICULT THINGS IN THERE.

THE FACT THAT THE TROOPER EXPERIENCED SOMETHING THAT HE DIDN'T THINK SHE SHOULD HAVE FELT THE WAY SHE DID ABOUT DOES NOT REALLY STOP US FROM WONDERING WHY SHE WAS EXPERIENCING ANY OF THESE THINGS.

I THINK PEOPLE KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, A SLAP ON THE BACK AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE DESCRIBED THROUGHOUT THE REPORT AND THE CORROBORATING EVIDENCE WAS REALLY BEYOND THE PALE, BEYOND THE PALE CERTAINLY FOR A WORKPLACE.

SURE, I'M NEVER GOING TO DISCOUNT PEOPLE'S MOTIVES.

BUT AGAIN WE LET THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, HE ASKED THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO INVESTIGATE, AND I WAS CERTAINLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE INVESTIGATION.

IT WAS AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION.

AND IT WAS EXTENSIVE.

THERE WERE 74,000 DOCUMENTS THEY COMBED THROUGH.

THERE WERE 179 WITNESSES, AND I UNDERSTAND THE ATTORNEY FOR THE GOVERNOR WAS SAYING THINGS WERE CHERRY PICKED OR WHATEVER.

BUT THE REALITY IS THAT THERE WAS EVIDENCE.

THERE WAS EVIDENCE THAT CORROBORATED A GOOD DEAL OF WHAT WAS IN THE REPORT AND OBVIOUSLY IF WE WERE GOING THROUGH AN IMPEACHMENT THEY WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO WHATEVER REBUTTAL THEY HAD TO DO.

I BELIEVE THAT THE RIGHT THING HAPPENED TODAY.

I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS ENOUGH EVIDENCE IN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S INDEPENDENT REPORT.

AND WITH ALL THE DOCUMENTATION AND EVIDENCE TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE GOVERNOR CAME TO.

I CERTAINLY WISH HIM WELL.

BUT I DO THINK THAT THE RIGHT -- THE RIGHT END HAS HAPPENED.

MAJORITY LEADER STEWART COUSINS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH INDEED FOR JOINING US TODAY.

> CUOMO'S RESIGNATION A MAJOR STEPBACK FOR DEMOCRATS BUT IN THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS TODAY, THEY DID SCORE A BIG VICTORY.

THEY DID PASS PRESIDENT BIDEN'S INFRASTRUCTURE BILL.

19 REPUBLICANS JOINED DEMOCRATS TO MAKE IT BIPARTISAN AND ADVANCE THE LEGISLATION WHICH NOW HEADS TO THE HOUSE.

BUT BIDEN IS UNDER INTENSE PRESSURE TO CHANGE COURSE ON AFGHANISTAN.

AMERICA IS ALMOST OUT FROM THERE AND THE TALIBAN IS MOVING IN WITH RAPID SPEED.

THE OFFENSIVE BY THE AFGHAN FUNDAMENTALISTS IS HAPPENING MUCH FASTER THAN FEARED.

THE GROUP CLAIMS THEY HAVE NOW TAKEN OVER ITS SEVENTH PROVINCIAL CAPITAL IN JUST FIVE DAYS.

THIS IS ALL HAPPENING SINCE THE PRESIDENT DECIDED TO LEAVE AFGHANISTAN TO FEND FOR ITSELF.

HERE IS PENTAGON SPOKESMAN PUTTING THAT BURDEN ON THE GOVERNMENT AND THE SECURITY FORCES THERE.

THEY HAVE AN AIR FORCE, THE TALIBAN DOESN'T.

THEY HAVE MODERN WEAPONRY.

AND ORGANIZATIONAL SKILLS AND TALIBAN DOESN'T.

AND THEY HAVE SUPERIOR NUMBERS TO THE TALIBAN.

AND SO AGAIN, THEY HAVE THE ADVANTAGE.

ADVANTAGES.

AND IT IS REALLY NOW THEIR TIME TO USE THOSE ADVANTAGES.

WITH ME NOW A FORMER NATO SECRETARY GENERAL AND FORMER PAKISTANI AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED STATES.

GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US.

AND YOU HAVE BOTH BEEN IN YOUR POSITIONS AT CRUCIAL MOMENTS IN AMERICA'S LONGEST WAR.

SO LET ME ASK YOU, WHO MONITORED OR OVERSAW SO MANY TROOPS THERE.

IS THIS A GAMBLE THAT YOU THINK WILL PAY OFF?

WHAT DO YOU THINK RIGHT NOW WHEN YOU HEAR THE BURDEN BEING PUT ON THE AFGHAN FORCES AS THE TALIBAN IS SWEEPING UP TERRITORY SHORTLY BEFORE THE U.S. PULLS ITS FINAL SOLDIER OUT?

WELL I THINK THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS DECISION IS RIGHT.

BUT THE TIMING IS WRONG.

THE OBJECTIVE IS RIGHT BECAUSE WE SHOULD LEAVE IT TO THE AFGHANS TO DECIDE THE FUTURE OF AFGHANISTAN.

WE SHOULDN'T BE THERE FOREVER.

IT IS NOT AN OCCUPATION FORCE.

BUT WE SHOULD HAVE TOLD THE TALIBAN WE WOULD LEAVE BUT NOT UNTIL YOU STOP THE ATTACKS ON THE LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT.

AND THE MISTAKE WAS TO APPROVE SO CALLED PEACE DEAL WHERE THE UNITED STATES PROMISED TO LEAVE AFGHANISTAN ON A CERTAIN DATE.

BECAUSE THE TALIBAN JUST WAITED US OUT AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE WITNESSING NOW.

-- AND THAT'S WHY THE TIMING IS WRONG.

SO LET ME TURN TO YOU AMBASSADOR.

WHO HAS A HUGE EXPERIENCE, AT LEAST YOUR COUNTRY, WITH WHAT THE TALIBAN ARE UP TO.

DO YOU AGREE IT IS THE WRONG TIME?

AND HOW DID THE UNITED STATES GET HOODWINKED INTO ALLOWING THE TALIBAN TO SIMPLY CONTINUE WITHOUT MAKING ANY OF THE PROMISES AND COMMITMENTS SECRETARY RASMUSSEN IS TALKING ABOUT?

FIRST OF ALL LOT IS SAID ABOUT AMERICA'S LONGEST WAR BUT THE TRUTH IS AMERICA NEVER PLANNED TO STAY IN AFGHANISTAN FOR 20 YEARS.

INSTEAD WHAT WE HAD WERE TWENTY ONE-YEAR PLANS AND THIS IS THE LATEST OF IT.

LET'S TURN IT OVER TO THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT WITHOUT TALKING TO THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT ABOUT WHAT WERE ITS NEEDS AND HOW IT WOULD TAKE OVER THE FIGHTING FROM NATO TROOPS.

AS FAR AS THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT'S ABILITY TO WITHSTAND THE TALIBAN PRESSURE IS CONCERNED I THINK WE WILL SEE A STIFFENING OF RESOLVE IN KABUL AND PEOPLE OF AFGHANISTAN WILL RESIST THE TALIBAN.

BUT FROM THE AMERICAN PERSPECTIVE, IT WAS A MISTAKE TO PROLONG THE WAR WITHOUT A PLAN.

AND IT WAS A MISTAKE TO RELY ON PAKISTAN THE WAY THE RELIANCE WAS HAD.

AND LASTLY, AS THE MISTAKE TO LEAVE WITHOUT MAKING TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS AS THE SECRETARY GENERAL SAID, ALLOWING THE TALIBAN TO WAIT THE WITHDRAWAL OUT.

SO I'M INTERESTED.

YOU ARE A FORMER PAKISTANI AMBASSADOR AND YOU SAY IT WAS A MISTAKE TO RELY ON PAKISTAN.

IS THAT BECAUSE WHAT EVERYBODY KNOWS AND THAT PAKISTAN FRANKLY HAD THE TALIBAN'S BACK THROUGH OUT ALL OF THIS?

YOU KNOW I HAVE BEEN A CRITIC OF PAKISTAN'S AFGHANISTAN POLICY BUT THAT SAID, LET US UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING FOR THE LAST MANY, MANY YEARS.

PAKISTAN'S CONCERN IN AFGHANISTAN IS WHAT IT SEES AS A EXISTENTIAL THREAT FROM INDIA.

THE WEST NEVER AGREED WITH PAKISTAN'S PERCEPTION BUT THEN THEY NEVER DID ANYTHING ABOUT RECOGNIZING THAT AS LONG AS THAT PERCEPTION EXISTS, PAKISTAN WILL DO WHAT IT SEES IN ITS INTERESTS RATHER THAN DOING WHAT THE REST OF THE WORLD TELLS THEM TO DO.

SO THIS WHOLE GAME THAT'S BEEN PLAYED FOR 20 YEARS OF TELLING THE PAKISTANIS THAT WE KNOW YOU ARE SUPPORTING THE TALIBAN, BUT NOT RECOGNIZING WHY THEY ARE DOING IT AND AT THE SAME TIME NOT GIVING UP ON HOPING THAT PAKISTAN WILL HELP IN ENDING THE MILITARY CAPABILITY OF A GROUP THAT THEY SEE AS ACTING IN THEIR BENEFIT.

THAT I THINK HAS BEEN A HUGE POLICY MISTAKE IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

AND SECRETARY GENERAL, LET ME ASK YOU WHAT THE UNITED STATES IS SAYING NOW.

MOSTLY THEY ARE SAYING THAT WE HAVE GIVEN AS MUCH AS WE CAN OVER 20 YEARS TO GET THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT AND ITS SECURITY FORCES UP AND RUNNING.

LET ME JUST PLAY THIS SOUND BITE WHICH IS THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY TALKING ABOUT THIS.

PRESIDENT MADE CLEAR AFTER 20 YEARS AT WAR IT IS TIME FOR AMERICAN TROOPS TO COME HOME.

HE ALSO FEELS AND HAS STATED THAT THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT AND AFGHAN NATIONAL DEFENSE FORCES HAVE THE TRAINING EQUIPMENT AND NUMBERS TO PREVAIL AND NOW IS THE MOMENT FOR THE LEADERSHIP AND THE WILL IN THE FACE OF THE TALIBAN'S AGGRESSION AND VIOLENCE.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE FUTURE, I MEAN, ANSWER THE QUESTION, WHY DIDN'T ALL THESE TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS STEP -- YOU KNOW, STAND UP A TOUGHER AFGHAN SECURITY FORCE?

AND DO YOU THINK GIVEN WHAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE GROUND RIGHT NOW THEY CAN ACTUALLY FEND OFF THE TALIBAN?

YEAH, IT IS A GOOD QUESTION.

OF COURSE.

AND I THINK WE SHOULD TELL THE AFGHANS THAT THEY HAVE TO UNITE.

THEY HAVE TO ENSURE MORE COHESION IN THE AFGHAN RESIGN TO FIGHT THE TALIBAN.

BUT HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK WE CAN DO MUCH MORE TO ASSIST THE AFGHANS.

FIRST MILITARILY BY TARGETED AIR STRIKES, TO HELP THEM.

WE SHOULD PROVIDE MILITARY EQUIPMENT.

WE SHOULD CONTINUE OUR TRAINING MISSION.

AND WE SHOULD HELP THEM KEEP KABUL AIRPORT.

ECONOMICALLY WE SHOULD PROMISE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN AID PROVIDED THAT A AFGHAN GOVERNMENT FULFILLS -- DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES, RESPECT HUMAN RIGHTS.

AND FINALLY I WOULD SAY WE HAVE TO HELP THE INTERPRETERS AND OTHERS THAT HAVE ASSISTED US DURING OUR PRESENCE IN AFGHANISTAN.

AND WE SHOULD DO THAT RIGHT AWAY WITHOUT HESITATION.

BECAUSE THAT'S ALSO A QUESTION OF CREDIBILITY.

HOW CAN WE COUNT ON PEOPLE TO HELP US IN THE FUTURE?

IF THEY RISK THAT WE WILL LET THEM DOWN WHEN WE ARE LEAVING.

SO THE AFGHAN SECURITY FORCE S CAN DO A LOT BUT I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO ASSIST THEM.

I WANT TO GET TO THE WOMEN AS WELL AND THE MORAL CASE FOR THE INTERVENTION AS WELL AS THE ANTI-TERRORISM CASE FOR THE INTERVENTION.

IT APPEARS THE UNITED STATES HAS CONCLUDED THAT THE TALIBAN OR AB ISIS ON AL QAEDA REGROUPING THERE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO USE IT AS A TERRORIST SAFE HAVEN FOR ATTACK ON THE HOMELAND.

AMBASSADOR, DO YOU THINK THAT IS REASONABLE THOUGHT?

I'VE BEEN AROUND LONG ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT SUCH ASSESSMENTS ARE OFTEN WRONG.

WE REMEMBER WHEN THE AMERICANS MADE THAT ASSESSMENT AFTER THE SOVIETS LEFT AFGHANISTAN.

AND OF COURSE WE SAW THAT 9/11 BROUGHT THE AMERICANS BACK INTO AFGHANISTAN.

I THINK INSTEAD OF RELYING ON ASSESSMENTS OF CONSULTANTS SITTING IN WASHINGTON, D.C., PEOPLE SHOULD LISTEN TO PEOPLE WHO ARE ON GROUND.

AND THE FACT REMAINS THE TALIBAN REMAIN CLOSE TO AL QAEDA.

AL QAEDA REMAINS DETERMINED TO DO WHAT IT DID BEFORE.

AND IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE THEY THREATEN THE U.S.

HOMELAND ONCE AGAIN.

JUST BECAUSE THERE IS NO IMMEDIATE OR IMMINENT THREAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE GOING TO ALLOW A TERRORIST SAFE HAVEN TO REEMERGE AS IT EXISTED BEFORE NINE ELEVEN.

LASTLY, WHEN YOU HAVE SPENT SO MUCH IN BLOOD AND TREASURE TO TRY TO CREATE A COUNTRY THAT CAN BE YOUR ALLY, WHY ABANDON THAT ALLIANCE?

THERE WERE THREE THINGS THAT WERE DONE THAT WERE HORRIBLE.

FIRST A DEAL WAS DONE WITH THE TALIBAN RATHER THAN THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT ABOUT AMERICAN WITHDRAWAL.

SECOND, THE TALIBAN'S REQUEST OR DEMAND FOR THE RELEASE OF 5,000 PRISONERS THAT THE AFGHAN GOVERNMENT WAS FORCED DOWN THE THROAT OF THE AFGHAN GOVERNOR AND THOSE 5,000 PEOPLE ARE NOW BACK ON THE BATTLE FIELD AND LASTLY THE WITHDRAW WAS SUCH A PRECIPITATED MANNER THAT THE TWO OR THREE THINGS THAT NATO HAVE KEPT IN ITS HANDS, LOGISTICS, AIR POWER, MAINTENANCE OF AIRCRAFT FOR THE AFGHAN AIR FORCE, THAT THOSE THINGS COULD NOT GO THROUGH A PROPER PROCESS OF TRANSITION.

I AM HOPEFUL THAT THE PEOPLE OF AFGHANISTAN WILL RESIST THE TALIBAN.

BUT THE TALIBAN VICTORY IS NOT GOING TO BE A LOCAL MATTER.

IT WILL CREATE A SAFE HAVEN FOR THESE ISLAMIST GLOBAL JIHADIST MOVEMENT.

ON THAT NOTE LET ME ASK YOU FINALLY SECRETARY GENERAL, YOU KNOW, AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS IN THE UNITED STATES SAID, WE HAVE SEEN THIS MOVIE BEFORE.

THIS IS WHAT A BIDEN/OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DID AFTER 2011 PULLING OUT ALL U.S. FORCES FROM IRAQ ONLY TO SEE ISIS SWEEP INTO THE VACUUM.

AND THEN YEARS AND YEARS OF PUTTING BACK U.S. FORCES AND YEARS AND YEARS OF AIR STRIKES TO GET RID OF ISIS.

DO YOU -- ARE YOU CONCERNED THAT THIS MIGHT HAPPEN AGAIN?

AND BY THE WAY WHAT DOES ALL OF THIS MEAN FOR THE MORAL CAUSE, FOR THE WOMEN, FOR ALL OF THOSE WHO PUT THEIR FAITH IN DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM?

YEAH, I'M VERY MUCH CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

I HAVE TO SAY I FULLY AGREE WITH THE AMBASSADOR AND ASSE ASSESSMENT.

IT IS CORRECT THAT WE HAVE ACHIEVED OUR GOAL.

AFGHANISTAN DOES NOT SERVE ANY LONGER AS A SAFE HAVEN FOR TERRORISTS.

WE HAVEN'T SEEN TERRORIST ATTACKS LAUNCHED FROM AFGHANISTAN DURING THOSE 20 YEARS.

IN THAT RESPECT WE HAVE ACHIEVED WHAT WE WANTED.

BUT WE HAVE NO GUARANTEE THAT WILL CONTINUE.

ON THE CONTRARY WE RISK IN PARTICULAR IF THE TALIBAN WILL GET A STRONG POSITION IN THE NEW GOVERNMENT.

WE RISK TERRORISM, ORGANIZED CRIME, DRUG TRAFFICKING, ETC.

AND YOU MENTION THE FATE OF WOMEN AND GIRLS.

AND I THINK THAT IS REALLY A MATTER OF CONCERN.

WE HAVE ACHIEVED A LOT OF SOCIAL PROGRESS IN AFGHANISTAN, ON TOP OF THE MILITARY.

WE HAVE SEEN LIFE EXPECTANCY HAS RISEN.

WE HAVE SEEN IMPROVED LITERACY, INFANT MORTALITY HAS DECREASED.

WE HAVE SEEN MORE STUDENTS IN SCHOOLS.

AND AT LEAST MANY MORE WOMEN, MANY MORE GIRLS HAVE GOT AN EDUCATION.

ALL THAT IS AT RISK NOW.

THESE ARE VERY SOBERING WORDS.

SOBERING CONVERSATION.

WE'LL CONTINUE TO FOLLOW IT.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TONIGHT.

> NOW, THE WORD 'FREEDOM' GETS THROWN AROUND A LOT THESE DAYS BUT WHAT DOES IT ACTUALLY MEAN?

PULITZER PRIZE WINNING AUTHOR WANTED TO FIND OUT IN HIS NEW BOOK 'THE FREE WORLD' EXPLORES THE VERY CONCEPT OF THAT FREEDOM.

HE JOINS WALTER ISAACSON TO DISCUSS HOW IT HAS BEEN EXPRESSED IN THE BEST POSSIBLE WAYS THROUGH MUSIC, ART AND LITERATURE.

THANK YOU.

AND WELCOME TO THE SHOW PROFESSOR.

THANK YOU.

I'M VERY EXCITED TO BE HERE.

YOU AND I WERE BOTH BORN IN 1952, AND WE GREW UP WITH THE CONCEPT OF THE FREE WORLD, WHICH IS THE TITLE OF YOUR BOOK.

WHAT DID THAT CONCEPT REALLY MEAN?

WELL, THAT WAS THE SLOGAN OF THE LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES IN THE COLD WAR, PARTICULARLY THE EARLY COLD WAR WHICH IS THE PERIOD I COVER IN THE BOOK BY 1965 AND IF YOU GREW UP THEN, AT LEAST FOR ME.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS LIKE FOR YOU, WALTER.

BUT I KIND OF INTERNALIZED THE CONCEPT OF FREEDOM AS A KIND OF ULTIMATE VALUE IN LIFE.

AND IF YOU WOULD ASK ME WHEN I WAS 12 OR 15 WHAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN LIFE, I WOULD HAVE SAID FREEDOM.

WITHOUT REALLY THINKING TOO HARD ABOUT WHERE THE IDEA CAME FROM.

SO THE TITLE OF THE BOOK REFERS MOST EXPLICITLY TO THE COLD WAR CONTEXT.

BUT THEN WHEN I WROTE THE BOOK DEPARTED WRITING ABOUT ARTISTS AND WRITERS AND SON, I FOUND EVERYBODY USES THE WORD FREEDOM TO DESCRIBE WHAT THEY WERE DOING.

THAT WAS FASCINATING TO ME THE.

HOW DID THIS CONCEPT OF AGREEMENT DUET REFLECTED IN THE ART OF THE FIFTIES AND EARLY SIXTIES.

THERE ARE ALL KIND OF DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF WHAT COUNTS AS FREEDOM.

SO THE ART, MAINTAIN IDEA BEHIND IT IS THE ARTIST IS FREE TO EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS OR THEIR INSPIRATIONS IN ANY FORM THEY WANT.

THAT'S IMPORTANT IN A COLD WAR CONTEXT BECAUSE THE SOVIET UNION HAD AN OFFICIAL AESTHETIC.

SOCIALIST REALISM.

AND IF YOU DIDN'T WRITE OR PAINT OR COMPOSE MUSIC IN THE APPROPRIATE FORM, YOUR WORK WAS BANNED.

YOU COULDN'T BE PUBLISHED.

PEOPLE COULDN'T HEAR YOUR MUSIC AND A LOT OF VERY WELL KNOWN ARTISTS SUFFERED IN THE SOVIET UNION.

AND THAT WAS WELL KNOWN TO PEOPLE.

SO FOR THE UNITED STATES, COUNTRIES IN THE FREE WORLD, FOR PROPAGANDA PURPOSES, WE WANTED TO PROMOTE THE IDEA THAT THERE IS NO OFFICIAL AESTHETIC IN THE UNITED STATES.

YOU CAN PAINT ABSTRACT PAINTING, REPRESENTATIONAL PAINTING, YOU CAN PAINT SOUP CANS.

YOU DO ANYTHING YOU WANT BECAUSE THE STATE DOESN'T TELL YOU HOW TO EXPRESS YOURSELF.

ONE OF THE WONDERFUL THINGS ABOUT YOUR BOOK 'THE FREE WORLD' IS IT IS FILLED WITH THESE FASCINATING CHARACTERS THAT ARE PUSHING THE BOUNDS OF ART AND CULTURE WITH THE NOTION OF FREEDOM UNDER THEIR BANNER.

LET'S TALK ABOUT SOME OF THEM AND LET'S ME START WITH JACKSON POLLACK.

YOU SAID HE SOLVED A PROBLEM IN ART.

WHAT WAS THAT.

THE PROBLEM THAT HE SOLVED, QUOTE/UNQUOTE WAS THE PROBLEM OF CREATING AN ABSTRACT PAINTING.

THAT IS HARDER THAN IT SEEMS.

SO LATE 1940s WHEN POLLACK COMES ON THE SCENE THERE IS A LOT OF INTEREST AMONG AMERICAN PAINTERS, PAINTERS WE NOW CALL THE ABSTRACT EXPRESSIONISTS ABOUT PAINTING AN AN SUBTRACT KIND OF PAINTING.

BUT HE ARRIVED AT THAT ALMOST ACCIDENTALLY.

WHY DID THAT SOLVE A PROBLEM?

THE PROBLEM WITH PAINTING FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF ABSTRACTION IS THAT MOST PAINTING IS ILLUSIONISTIC.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT A MONET PAINTING OF A HAY STACK, LET'S SAY, YOU THINK YOU ARE SEEING A HAY STACK.

IT IS AN ILLUSION OF A HAY STACK.

WHAT YOU ARE REALLY SEEING IS PAINT.

WITH POLLACK IT IS JUST PAINT.

THERE IS NOTHING BEHIND THE PAINT.

SO IT WAS PURE ABSTRACTION.

AND ALSO INCREDIBLY EFFECTIVE PAINTING.

NOBODY HAD SEEN THAT BEFORE.

WHEN YOU GO TO THE MUSEUMS TODAY AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF MAJOR MUSEUMS OF COURSE HAVE POLLACKs.

PEOPLE HAVE A HARD TIME TRIO PRODUCE THOSE.

LOOKS LIKE ANYBODY COULD PUT A STAKE IN A CAN OF PAINT AND GO LIKE THIS BUT ONLY POLLACK KIND OF KNEW HOW TO MAKE IT A PAINTING.

I KNOW YOU ARE INTERESTED YOURSELF WALTER WHERE THE BIOGRAPHY OF THE PAINTER COINCIDES WITH A PARTICULAR MOMENT THAT MAKES THAT PAINTER'S WORK SUDDENLY VISIBLE AND IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE.

AND THE INTEREST OF POLLICIS GOES UP TO THE 1970s IN AMERICAN ART.

NOT ONLY THE ABSTRACTIONS BUT THE WAY HE MADE THEM AND DANCED AROUND A CANVAS AND WAY HE IS OWN BODY WAS PART OF THE PROCESS.

PERFORMANCE ART AND EVEN FEMINIST ART LOOKS UPON POLLACK AS KIND OF FIGURE.

YOU TALKED ABOUT JAMES BALDWIN.

AND NOWADAYS THERE'S BEEN A REVIVAL WITH TANAHASE COATS AND -- HAVING DONE A GREAT NEW BOOK ON HIM.

WHY WAS IT IN THE 1950s WHITE PEOPLE IN PARTICULAR HAD REEL TROUBLE WITH HIM.

HE'S A FASCINATING FIGURE.

VERY COMPLICATED MAN.

AND THERE ARE SORT OF TWO PARTS OF THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, WALTER.

ONE IS THAT WHAT'S INTERESTING ABOUT HIM JUST FROM THE POINT OF VIEW HOW HIS OWN STORY INTERSECTS WITH THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT IS HE SPENT NINE YEARS IN PARIS.

IN 1948 EXILED HIMSELF TO PARIS.

WANTED TO GET OUT OF THE UNITED STATES.

SUFFERING FROM RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, HOMOPHOBIA.

HE WAS VERY UNHAPPY HERE SO HE WENT TO PARIS WHICH WAS MUCH MORE WELCOMING.

AND HE SPENT -- HE DIDN'T COME BACK UNTIL 1957.

AFTER THE BOYCOTT WAS OVER.

AND WHEN HE CAME BACK, FROM FRANCE, HE GOT INVOLVED IN CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT BECAUSE HE MET MARTIN LUTHER KING JR., WENT TO THE SOUTH TO WRITE FOR MAGAZINES AND HE MET KING AND HE WAS VERY IMPRESSED BY KICK.

BALDWIN WAS A BOY PREACHER IN HARLEM AND HIS FATHER WAS A PREACHER SO HE KNEW THE WORLD OF BLACK MINISTRY.

GOT HIMSELF INVOLVED WITH THE MOVEMENT.

AND THEN HE WROTE THIS BOOK 'THE FIRE NEXT TIME' WHICH IS PROBABLY HIS MOST FAMOUS BOOK WHICH IS BASICALLY TWO ESSAYS THAT HE WROTE.

IT WAS ABOUT RACE RELATIONS.

AND THEN THERE IS A BACKLASH AMONG WHITE LIBERALS AGAINST BALDWIN.

A NUMBER OF FIGURES START CRITICIZING BALDWIN.

WHY ARE THEY DOING THE?

THEY ARE DOING THIS BECAUSE BALDWIN'S MESSAGE FROM THE BEGINNING WAS THIS IS A WHITE PEOPLE'S PROBLEM.

THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH WHITE PEOPLE AND THEY NEED TO OWN THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE REGIME OF WHITE SUPREMACY.

WHITE LIBERALS DID NOT WANT TO HEAR THAT.

WHITE LIBERALS DID NOT THINK OF THEMSELVES AS PART OF REGIME OR WHITE SUPREMACY.

AND BALDWIN, YOU HAVE TO FIX YOURSELF BEFORE YOU CAN FIX RACE RELATIONS.

DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT.

THEY DIDN'T LIKE THAT.

SO BY END OF THE 1960 HE'S VERY MARGINALIZED.

TOLD THE STORY IN THE BOOK A REPORTER FOR 'TIME' IN 1970s WENT TO SOUTH OF FRANCE TO INTERVIEW BALDWIN FOR PEACE.

AND HIS EDITORS SAID WE'RE NOT INTERESTED.

THIS IS LESS THAN TEN YEARS AFTER THE FIRE NEXT TIME.

SO BALDWIN'S MESSAGE JUST DID NOT RESONATE WITH CERTAIN KIND OF WHITE READER.

AND SAYING SAME THING, WHICH IS THAT ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE INVOLVED IN THE REGIME OF WHITE SUPREMACIST.

AND NOW WE GET IT.

BUT FIFTY, SIXTY YEARS AGO THAT WAS A TOUGH MESSAGE.

SO BALDWIN IS PRESCIENT I THINK ABOUT IDENTIFYING SOMETHING ABOUT THE NATURE OF AMERICAN RACE RELATIONS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE DIDN'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT.

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. IN YOUR BOOK FRAMES THE STRUGGLE AS THE STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM.

HE'S ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT LET FREEDOM RING, INSTEAD OF EQUITY.

HOW DOES THAT PLAY INTO TODAY?

I DO THINK THAT IS AN EXAMPLE OF KING'S UNDERSTANDING THAT AT THAT MOMENT, THE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD APPEAL TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

BECAUSE BASICALLY HE'S APPEALING TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO INTERVENE IN SOUTHERN RIGHTS RELATIONS.

THAT IS WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO.

THE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD APPEAL TO THEM, THEY COULD GET BEHIND IS THE LANGUAGE OF FREEDOM.

SO IN THE 'I HAVE A DREAM' SPEECH, AUGUST 1963.

HE USES THE WORD EQUALITY ONCE IN THE ENTIRE SPEECH AND USES THE WORD FREEDOM OR LIBERTY LIKE 20 TIMES.

SO KING BELIEVED IN EQUALITY.

BUT EQUALITY WAS A SLOGAN OF AN OLDER GENERATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS LEADERS AND HE DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS -- I THINK.

HE DIDN'T EVER SAY THIS.

HE DIDN'T FEEL THAT WAS GOING TO WORK IN APPEALING FOR PEOPLE LIKE JOHN KENNEDY AND LYNDON JOHNSON BUT THEY COULD GET BEHIND THE LANGUAGE OF FREEDOM.

BECAUSE IT CAST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THE ROLE OF RESCUING AN OPPRESSED PEOPLE.

THEY COULD MAKE A TRIUMPH OF DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT OUT OF WHAT HAD BEEN A FAILURE OF DEMOCRAT GOVERNMENT.

YOU WRITE ABOUT SUSAN SONTAG AND YOU SAY HELPS US OPEN UP TO ALL DIFFERENT FORMS OF ART HIGH AND LOW.

IS THAT PART OF THE FREEDOM.

I THINK IT WAS.

SHE COMES ON SCENE.

INCREDIBLE INTELLECTUAL.

AND SHE KNEW ABOUT EVERYTHING.

THE CLASSICAL MUSIC TRADITION.

SHE KNEW FILM.

SHE KNEW EUROPEAN LITERATURE.

SHE KNEW CONTINENTAL THEORY.

VERY FEW CRITICS IN THAT PERIOD WHO MATCH HER FOR THAT.

AND SHE'S OF COURSE VERY SMART PERSON AND SHE WAS INTERESTED ALWAYS IN FIGURE ON WHAT WAS GOING ON AT THE MOMENT.

SO SHE WRITE THIS IS ESSAY CALLED 'AGAINST INTERPRETATION' 1964 AND CALLS FOR QUOTE AN EROTICS OF INTERPRETATION.

UNCLEAR A WHAT THAT MEANS EXCEPT THAT YOU SHOULDN'T RESPOND TO ART INTELLECTUALLY.

YOU SHOULD RESPOND SEXUALLY.

YOU SHOULD LET THE WORK OF ART EFFECT YOUR FEELINGS, INDEED EFFECT YOUR BODY, THE WAY YOU FEEL AND NOT JUST TRY TO FIGURE OUT IT THAT.

OPENS UP A LOT OF STUFF THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY NOT CONSIDERED IMPORTANT TO PAY ATTENTION TO.

LIKE HOLLYWOOD MOVIES, POP MUSIC.

SO THIS IS THE TIME '64 WHEN THE BEATLES COME AND EVERYONE LISTENING TO THE SUPREMES.

AND EVERYONE GETTING INTERESTED IN HOLLYWOOD MOVIES AGAIN.

THERE IS A MOMENT SOMEONE HAS TO TOM ALONG WHO IS A REAL INTELLECTUAL AND SAY IT IS OKAY TO LIKE THIS STUFF.

HERE IS WHY.

YOUR BOOK YOU HAVE HANNA ARAND.

AND IT SEEMS TO BE A THEME THROUGHOUT THE BOOK.

HOW WORRIED ARE YOU ABOUT THE TOTALITARIAN TEMPTATION AND DO YOU SEE A RISE OF AUTHORITARIANISM COMING BACK?

RIGHT NOW.

YEAH.

SO THIS IS A BIG PREOCCUPATION OF THE PERIOD.

YOU KNOW ABOUT GEORGE CANNON.

BUT ORWELL PARTICULARLY.

SO 1984, IS A WARNING.

THIS IS WHAT THE FUTURE COULD BE LIKE FOR EVERYBODY.

THAT BOOK IS NOT ABOUT COMMUNISM.

THAT IS ABOUT A TOTALITARIAN FUTURE THAT THE WHOLE PLANET WILL BE LIVING THROUGH.

SO PEOPLE DID THINK WELL, THIS COULD HAPPEN HERE.

IT HAPPENED IN GERMANY.

HAPPENED IN RUSSIA.

WHY WOULDN'T -- IT COULD HAPPEN HERE.

SO THIS IS A BIG ANXIETY OF THE PERIOD.

WE HAVE SOMETHING OF THE SAME ANXIETY NOW.

I WOULD SAY, I WOULD USE THE TERM YOU USED WALTER, AUTHORITARIANISM.

WE WORRY THAT PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF LIBERAL DEMOCRACY.

IT IS VERY DEMANDING BECAUSE REQUIRES US TO --. AND PEOPLE THINK OH THERE IS A WAY OUT OF THIS AND SILENCE THOSE PEOPLE AND MAKE THINGS THE WAY WE WANT AND NOT WORRY ABOUT WHAT'RE PEOPLE THINK.

ALWAYS A CHALLENGE TO KEEP LIBERAL DEMOCRACY ALIVE.

IS FREE THOUGHT AND FREEDOM UNDER ASSAULT THESE DAYS ON CAMPUSES?

IT IS ALWAYS UNDER ASSAULT EVERYWHERE.

AS YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE HISTORY OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS PEOPLE TRYING TO ERODE IT.

LOOK, IF YOU SAY SOMETHING I DON'T LIKE, I'M NATURALLY INTERESTED IN PREVENTING YOU FROM SAYING THAT AGAIN.

SO THE FIRST AMENDMENT OR AND JUST THE PROTOCOLS OF FREE SPEECH PROTECT YOU FROM PEOPLE WHO TRY TO SILENCE YOU.

BUT THERE IS ALL KINDS OF WAYS OF SILENCING PEOPLE THAT DON'T TRY TO --. YOU CAN BE SHUNNED.

YOU COULD BE, YOU KNOW, TOLD SHUT UP OR WHATEVER.

SO THAT IS JUST PART OF FREE SPEECH.

IT IS WHAT I SAID EARLIER.

THAT LIBERAL DEMOCRACY IS VERY DEMANDING ON PEOPLE BECAUSE IT REQUIRES THEM TO PUT UP WITH THINGS THEY DON'T FEEL THEY WANT TO PUT UP WITH.

SO SPEECH IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT RIGHT NOW.

BUT AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN IN THE BUSINESS, I'VE BEEN TEACHING FOR 40 YEARS, THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN QUESTIONS ABOUT POLITICALLY CORRECT SPEECH AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

IT IS JUST PART OF CAMPUS LIFE.

AND IT IS IMPORTANT THAT IT IS BECAUSE SCHOOLS ARE A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS WITHOUT BLOOD BEING SHED.

AT LEAST IDEALLY.

WHERE YOU CAN TALK TO PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT COUNTS AS AN APPROPRIATE EXPRESSION AND WHAT MIGHT BE OFFENSIVE TO PEOPLE AND SO ON.

AND THAT IS KIND OF WHAT WE'RE IN BUSINESS TO DO.

IT IS DIFFICULT.

IT IS VERY SENSITIVE BUT IT IS IMPORTANT.

WHY IS FREEDOM IMPORTANT?

SO AS I SAID EARLIER, WHEN I WAS A KID OF COURSE, I THOUGHT OH FREEDOM IS THE YOU WOULDN'T ULTIMATE GOAL.

WHAT DOES THAT ACTUALLY MEAN?

FREEDOM IS A FEELING.

I HAS TO DO WITH HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT YOURSELF.

I DO FEEL I'M FREELY MAKES CHOICE FOR MYSELF?

THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE.

EVEN IF I GIVE THE EXAMPLE OF THE SOUTH VIETNAMESE WHO FLED AFTER THE NORTH TOOK OVER THE SOUTH IN 1975.

THEY DIDN'T HAVE A WORD FOR FREEDOM BUT THEY KNEW WHAT IT MEANT NOT TO BE FREE.

THEY KNEW WHAT THE FEELING WAS WHEN THEY FLED THAT COUNTRY.

SO I THINK THAT FEELING IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE.

RIGHT NOW IN THE SIXTIES, THE IDEA OF FREEDOM WAS KIND OF A LIBERAL OR LEFT WING VALUE.

TODAY IT IS A RIGHT WING VALUE.

BUT THE PEOPLE ON THE RIGHT WHO SAY THAT FEEL THAT THEY ARE BEING DEPRIVED OF FREEDOM.

WE FEEL LIKE, I LIKE WHAT'S'S WEARING A MASK, WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL?

WHAT IS THE THING TO DO.

BUT THEY FEEL LIKE THEY ARE BEING DEPRIVED OF THEIR OWN AUTONOMY AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE WHEN PEOPLE FEEL THAT BECAUSE I THINK AS FUNDAMENTAL VALUE OF BEING A HUMAN.

AND WHY IS IT A FUNDAMENTAL VALUE TO VALUE HUMAN FREEDOM?

BECAUSE WE'RE NOT HERD ANIMALS.

WE HAVE THE ABILITY BECAUSE WE HAVE MINDS TO MAKE CHOICES.

WE'RE NOT BIOLOGICALLY DETERMINED IN WHAT WE DO.

AND WE WANT TO -- THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT ASPECT OF OUR SPECIES.

I THINK WE WANT TO RESPECT IT AND HONOR IT AND CHERISH IT AND PROTECT IT.

AND I THINK I'D ASSUME MOST OF OUR LISTENERS FEEL THE SAME WAY.

THEY WANT TO FEEL THAT WAY.

YOU COULD LIVE IN AN AUTHORITARIAN COUNTRY AND IDENTIFY WITH THE COUNTRY'S CAUSE AND LEADERS AND VALUES AND FEEL FREE.

I WOULDN'T.

BUT OTHER PEOPLE MIGHT.

BUT IT IS IMPORTANT ASPECT OF PEOPLE.

WE'RE ALL DIFFERENT.

PLEURISM.

WE'RE NOT ALL PART OF A SPECIES LIKE A HERD.

WE'RE ACTUALLY THESE INDIVIDUALS AND SHE MOUGT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING ABOUT POLITICAL STRUCTURE IS THEY HAVE TO RECOGNIZE PLURALITY.

THE WAY PEOPLE ARE DIFFERENT.

MEMBERSHIP IN OUR SPECIES, PREREQUISITE IS THAT WE'RE NOT THE SAME AS EVERYBODY ELSE.

PROFESSOR MENAND.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU.

BEEN A PLEASURE.

> AND FINALLY TONIGHT, THE FREEDOM TO BE YOURSELF.

MY NEXT GUEST IS A DOUBLE EMMY-NOMINATED COMEDIAN AND VETERAN OF 'SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE.'

CECILY STRONG IS A HOUSEHOLD NAME FOR THE COLORFUL CHARACTERS SHE PORTRAYS BUT IT IS NOT ALL LAUGHS AND SKITS FOR HER.

THE SUDDEN DEATH OF HER BELOVED COUSIN FROM BRAIN CANCER LAST YEAR AND HER OWN ISOLATION FROM THE PANDEMIC HAS CAUSED HER TO REFLECT ON LIFE AND STRUGGLES.

THE RESULT IS A NEW MEMOIR, THIS WILL ALL BE OVER SOON.

AND CECILY STRONG JOINS ME NOW FROM NEW YORK.

WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

THANK YOU.

I WANT TO ASK YOU BECAUSE EVERYBODY WANTS TO KNOW CECILY, FIRST AND FOREMOST, ARE YOU THEIR BELOVED SNL COMEDIAN GOING TO SIGN UP FOR ANOTHER SEASON?

I STILL UMM, DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER YET.

BUT I PROMISE I WILL SOON.

I THINK MY TEAM AND I -- WE HAVEN'T EVEN HAD A BIG TALK YET.

WE'VE BEEN WE WANTED -- TO COME OUT AND NOW I GET THE BOOK TODAY SO I THINK PROBABLY IN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO WE'LL HAVE THE REAL TALK.

SO SCHMIGADOON.

THIS AMAZING SERIES ABOUT MUSICALS AND THE THROWBACK TO THE PAST AND PARTICULARLY YOUR BOOK IS REVEALING.

I GUESS WHEN I SAID FREEDOM TO BE YOURSELF IN MY INTRODUCTION, YOU HAVE PUT YOURSELF OUT AND TRYING TO TELL PEOPLE THAT IT IS NOT ALL LAUGHS INSIDE.

AND YOU HAVE HAD A DIFFICULT TIME.

DEPRESSION, YOUR BROTHER HAS SUFFERED WITH THAT.

THERE'S BEEN SUICIDE ATTEMPTS AND IT IS NOT ALL EXTROVERTISM.

HOW AND WHY HAVE YOU DON'T THAT NOW?

I THINK WHEN I WROTE -- I WAS UNABLE TO REALLY PROCESS AND WRITE ABOUT LOSING MY COUSIN IN JANUARY 2020 TO GLIOBLASTOMA.

IT WAS SO BIG AND SO HEAVY AND I REALLY DID FEEL LIKE I HAVE SO MUCH GRIEF AND I HAVE SO MUCH LOVE AT THE SAME TIME AND DIDN'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT AND THE WAY PEOPLE RESPONDED FELT LIKE MAYBE THAT HAD HELPED A COUPLE OF THEM OR BEEN HELPFUL AND I GAVE THEM SOME KIND OF PEACE AND I THOUGHT, THAT'S HOW CAN I TALK ABOUT MY COUSIN, IF IT FEELS LIKE IT IS ABOUT HELPING OTHER PEOPLE, BECAUSE THAT IS SO MUCH HIS SPIRIT AND WHAT HE DID FOR ME.

AND SICILY, YOU ARE SUCH A PUBLIC PERSON.

AND WE HAVE SEEN SIMONE BILES AND WE HAVE SEEN NAOMI OSAKA AND QUESTION NAME ANY NUMBER OF OTHERS WHO HAVE TAKEN THE MENTAL HEALTH ASPECT OF THE PRESSURES ON THEIR LIFE AND DECIDED TO COME OUT WITH IT AND SAYING IT IS NOT ALL ABOUT WINNING.

IT IS NOT ALL ABOUT PUSHING OURSELVES, WE HAVE TO THINK OF OUR EMOTIONS TOO.

DID THAT CRYSTALLIZE FOR YOU DURING COVID UNLIKE ANY OTHER TIME?

YES.

ABSOLUTELY.

I MEAN I THINK EVERYBODY HAS BEEN THROUGH A LOT AND I FEEL LIKE EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES THAT.

AND I FEEL LIKE MY EDGES WERE SOFTENED.

AND I'M A BIT MORE VULNERABLE.

AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT IS EASY TO BE VERY SNARKY IN COMEDY.

AND I SORT OF PREFER WHEN COMEDY HAS A HEART.

AND I THINK NOW IS A GREAT TIME TO SHARE OUR HEARTS.

SO YOU LED ME INTO THE SNARKY COMEDY PART OF THIS.

FUNNY.

YOU ARE CONSTANTLY PORTRAYING JUDGE JENINE AND PARTICULARLY SHE LIKES A GOOD DRINK SOMETIMES AND HERE A GOOD CLIP EVERYBODY LOVED OF YOUR LAST SCENE ON SNL, JUMPING INTO A VAT OF VINE.. ♪

AND SPIT IT OUT!

I'VE FACED IT ALL AND I STOOD TALL AND DID IT MY WAY ♪

SO, I MEAN IT'S GREAT.

AND THERE YOU GO SINKING INTO THE VAT.

AND APPARENTLY IT WAS REALLY QUITE STINGING ON YOUR EYES.

WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY THERE?

YOU KNOW, REALLY THAT WAS JUST -- AT THIS POINT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT JUDGE JANINE.

IT IS MORE I GET TO PLAY THIS BIG CLOWN CHARACTER THAT'S BECOME ON OUR SHOW, THAT SHE IS NOT IN REAL LIFE.

AND IT WAS VERY FUN TO PERFORM.

IT WAS THE FIRST TIME WE HAD A LIVE AUDIENCE.

AND THEY WERE SO WONDERFUL.

IT JUST FELT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS VERY ELECTRIC.

AND IT FELT IT WAS REALLY EXCITING TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PERFORM FOR THAT CROWD.

AND WHY NOT THEN GET INTO A GIANT VAT OF WINE?

WHAT A WAY TO CELEBRATE IT.

DUNK YOURSELF.

AND WITH A FAMOUS SONG TOO.

A BAPTISM.

YEAH.

INDEED.

FINALLY ON YOUR BOOK 'THIS WILL ALL BE OVER SOON' YOU SAID IS WORLD IS UPSIDE DOWN.

I'M HOLDING DEVASTATION AND LOVE IN EQUAL MEASURE.

WHAT IS BAD TIMING WHEN THE TIME LINE SEEMS IRRELEVANT.

DO YOU THINK THIS WILL ALL BE OVER SOON?

, YOU KNOW, I THINK -- I THINK SOME THINGS WILL BE OVER SOON.

I THINK THINGS CHANGE.

AND THEY WON'T BE WHAT WE THOUGHT THEY WERE.

THAT'S NOT VERY CLEAR.

BUT IT IS KIND OF -- IT IS NOT A VERY CLEAR TIME.

AND I DON'T KNOW -- I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE GO FORWARD OR BACKWARDS.

YOU BRING PEOPLE INTO YOUR LIFE THAT YOU THOUGHT WERE OUT OF YOUR LIFE.

IT IS JUST THERE'S BEEN A WEIRD TIME.

AND I THINK IF, WE'LL DO IT BEST IF WE SORT OF EXPECT THE UNEXPECTED AND STAY OPEN AND TRY TO BE AS LEAST FEARFUL AS WE CAN.

CAN.

THANKS A LOT FOR JOINING US.

WE'LL WAIT FOR YOUR ANNOUNCEMENT IN A WEEK OR SO.

IN A WEEK OR SO.

AND THAT IS IT FOR NOW.

YOU CAN FOLLOW ME AND THE SHOW ON TWITTER.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING ON PBS AND JOIN US AGAIN TOMORROW NIGHT.