We are here with editorinchief megan murphy. Lets start with economics and canada. We are tired of malls here but let us talk about a mall that is popular. Megan its a larger story about canada and what is happening with indigenous people. It has been a big issue in terms of giving his group of people, giving the same Economic Opportunities and bringing them up the economic ladder. A policy issue for justin trudeau, the boy wonder of canada and how to develop this. This is an example of something where, largely through this woman who went door to door to door, kim, and redeveloped how this community negotiated its deal with local promises and local governments to redevelop what the community is doing. Now it is a community was almost full employment, a dramatic change from 10 years ago. It is an encouraging story. Julia how did she do it . How did she prove that the community is open for business essentially . Megan she is only 28. That is exactly as what youre talking about, being seen as open for business, being seen as probusiness, encouraging investment, development, relocating the jobs that are sustainable over time. We may be said of malls over here but it attracts people in. That is a virtuous circle. Julia talking about boston for things know what to take across to the cover story this week which is basically about one lawyers crusade against the opioid epidemic. Megan this is a lawyer that crusaded earlier in the last decade, decades ago now, to create the tobacco litigation which ended up in this record settlement, over 250 billion. Still is used to fund antitobacco campaigns. What he is doing is rolling out the same way that he did it again, stitching together various different communities to really take this fight to the opioid industry and really take some of the tactics he used in securing a settlement from tobacco manufacturers and bringing this into what we know is such a project, escalating almost daily crisis in this country. Carol it is a personal story. We have more on this from the reporter. Mike moore played himself. He held the position in the 1990s and the reason why he was in that movie is that he was the architect of this untested legal strategy as at the time to sue Big Tobacco Companies and hold them accountable for a lot about dutch for lying for lying about the risks of nicotine addictions and to help states and cities pay the cost to care for sick smokers. He was the architect behind that new legal strategy that ended federal sleep well it ended in victory in the 50 state 450 billion settlement which is the largest in corporate history. What he is trying to do is to apply that to the opioid epidemic. Carol talk to us about that and specifically he is going after. And where is he in that process . This is really about a war, this is about a war brewing between the states and companies primarily that manufacture opioids. 10 states and dozens of cities and counties have filed lawsuits against Companies Like purdue, johnson and johnson. They are trying to hold them liable, responsible for the opioid epidemic. The lawsuits say that the only way that they could have created the market for opioids where people are being prescribed for chronic back pain and arthritis is that it had to lie about the addiction risks that opioid posed. This crisis is incredibly lethal, killing more than 90 people a day. It has also been incredibly expensive. State governments and local governments are paying billions of dollars each year on things like increased law enforcement, health care, treatment, incarceration. What these suits say is that it is not fair for taxpayers to foot the bill for all that stuff. Who should be accountable are the companies who in essence created this crisis. It is those companies who should pay to clean up the mess we are seeing today. Julia it is not just about the manufacturers of these pills. It is also about the distributors, he is trying to clear this up to get as many people involved in providing these drugs accountable. Right, it is primarily opioid manufacturers targeted right now, but he says that by the time this is done, every Company Related to the epidemic will be sued. So the more states that he can get on board and the more companies that are being sued, the bigger headache it becomes for these companies. It becomes an economic problem. Do we risk going to court and risk fighting each one or do we come to some National Settlement between companies and states . That is of the goal. Mike moore and his allies are preparing to go to trial but the idea is to get a National Settlement like the tobacco era. That would really go towards paying for treatment and prevention education. That is the main goal, to get a lot of money to clean up this mess, to stop the epidemic by really getting addicts treatment and preventing new addicts from being created. Carol imagining his fight against the opioid industry as a cover was the job of the creative director. We managed to get a photo shoot with him. We were not expecting this, but he looks mean and imposing and, i dont know carol like a western wanted. That sound in the background. He is not a mean guy but he certainly has this certainly aggressive presence in the photos. Julia you make the claim as well, opioid avenger. It is personal. It is obviously a huge fight because the Pharma Industry is huge and they have their own massive legal teams. It is like one man against, yet again, these massive corporations. We play to that with the headline opioid avenger. And this photo of him that matches the tone of the headline. Carol it is blackandwhite like a wanted poster. Was that the plan . Not that he was wanted . That was not totally intentional. We had a few versions and color and a few in black and white and it seemed more graphic. Julia up next, the tension building between the white houses top lawyers and how to deal with special counsel Robert Mueller. Carol and what happened in the equifax hack. Julia this is Bloomberg Businessweek. Carol welcome back to Bloomberg Businessweek. Julia you can find us online at businessweek. Com. Carol and on the mobile app. In the finance section, the Bloomberg TechnologyTeam Investigates how the equifax pack unfolded. Julia to what might be the true intentions and here is reporter mike riley. Mike we tried to take what we knew about the timeline which was not very much and add to it i reporting that included people involved in the investigation, and the investigation the u. S. Government is doing. It is clear that the timeline starts in early march. That is when a cybersecurity researcher named zane identified a vulnerability in a widely used software that helps build databases or web applications that connect to databases. He publishes this, he gives the information to apache, which is the company that makes it, and they send it out in early march. Saying this is a really big deal, people should fix it, and they offered a six for it at this point. Almost immediately, and this is the way that hackers work, they pay a lot of attention to this and they start looking around the internet using sophisticated scanners and other methods to find what websites might be vulnerable to it and they get a hit in atlanta, which is one of equifaxs servers. At that point they put in a piece of software which is a backdoor. Even if equifax fixed the vulnerability, which they had not, it would have been too late. And beginning around may and continuing through july, there was a very expensive brief that goes on one of the hackers spend a lot of time where the hackers spend a lot of time analyzing the data inside of equifax, querying them into smaller bits so they can get them out unnoticed. The customized tools so they work better. In other words, they have a lot of time to operate in this network completely undetected and the result is one of the most significant data breaches we have seen in the u. S. Julia the speed at which the hackers identified vulnerability in equifax, and you say it in the story, the hackers handed off to more sophisticated hackers very quickly. What extent do we see statesponsored hacking . And my second question would be equifax did get help. They went to a company to tackle some of the Cyber Security issues. That also did not have the effect they were hoping for. Just explore those 2 issues. Michael to begin with, in terms of who is behind the hack, one of the places where attribution for Something Like this is typically difficult, but it is even more difficult in this case because the hackers did not go into what is called the enterprise network, the thing that controls in your desktop or the laptop. They basically stayed in the zone where websites are connected to the databases. They used easily available but pretty sophisticated tools. Again, they tweaked some of the tools so they worked better. There are signs of a Sophisticated Group at work. One of those is that the initial hackers who got in and found the vulnerability were having some problems in terms of their ability to get through firewalls and twitter had the databases. And to effect the databases. At some point, the data shows a significantly more advanced group gives access and starts with much greater success. And that is not a smoking gun for a nationstate but it is certainly one of the indicators that a nationstate might be involved. Julia and the politics section, the Russian Investigation is causing the pressure investigation is causing conflict in the white house. Carol two lawyers cannot seem to agree on how to comply with requests from Robert Mueller. Julia we talked to our editor. Our lead this week is a look inside the White House Office and the fight that is brewing and has been for months now between white House CounselDonald Mcgann who represents the office of the presidency and ty cobbs was brought in to handle the Robert Mueller investigation. These are the two guys in charge of defending the president from the Russian Investigation and they are at each others throats about how much to share and how quickly to go. And that is really the heart of the piece we are doing this week. Julia cobbs said we would have this wrapped up by christmas. Donald victim seems more reticent. Why would he be reticent . What does he know . Is not so much what he knows, but it is how much he might be exposed personally. Mcgann as a front row seat, he was the lawyer on the campaign, he was brought in on the transition, he was brought in and he was present for the transition from a day one, she has had a front row seat for a lot of things that mueller is interested in. One the Michael Flynn situation, the firing of james comey. He is exposed in a way that ty cobbs is not. He will probably be a key witness for Robert Mueller. He will be a witness. Mcgann needs to be careful with how quickly they go. The heart of the tension is that cobb wants to be as quick as possible while mcgann has a lot of other considerations to weigh, including setting some sort of precedent that conflicts future white houses but also the future of this presidency as well. Carol matt, lets talk about that a little bit because you dig into attorneyclient privilege. You give us a History Lesson to remind us it does not always hold between a president and his counsel. Matt that is right. In a normal situation, Donald Mcgann would have at his disposal two Legal Protections that allow him to claim confidentiality for dealings. One, executive privilege that the white house extends around these kinds of conversations and your basic attorneyclient privilege. But because of the last two big white house investigations, namely watergate and whitewater, rulings were set that allow investigators to reach into the white house and grab as evidence things that would normally be hidden. So mcgann, because of the failures of the Nixon Administration and the failures of the Clinton Administration to protect these things, is exposed in a way that he would not otherwise be. So he needs to tread very carefully. Carol up next, how apple is fighting a socalled qualcomm attack. Julia video visiting between prisoners and their families. Carol this is Bloomberg Businessweek. Julia welcome back to Bloomberg Businessweek. Carol you can also listen to us on radio on sirius fm channel 119 on am 11 300 in new york, and 1061 fm in boston. And a. M. 960 in the bay area. Julia and in london on dba mux 3 and in asia on the Bloomberg Radio plus app. In the features section, the battle between apple and qualcomm. Carol the fight is around a Key Technology in the iphone, the cellular modem. Julia here is our reporter. Max the way that we are able to watch movies online, the way that you are able to talk on your phone, it all goes through a baseband processor, also known as a modem. Qualcomm makes of those, it is one of Six Companies that does, it is probably the most successful. It owns the technology and oversees the giant of patents that is needed to move data through the air. They have made it central to their identity. There is this thing called the patent wall. It has hundreds of them. In total, qualcomm has 130,000 of patents. From qualcomms point, this is a testament to research. This is one of the few Big American Companies that is doing a ton of fundamental research into the wireless industry. They spend about billion a year basically on Wireless Research alone. Come and they do it inhouse, so it is theirs. Max it is theirs, but the way it works with cell phones is want to invent something and it gets into the wireless standards, 3g, the next thing, probably 5g. If your patents go in there, you basically a great to give it away to everyone at a set price. And so a lot of qualcomms patents or standard essential, meaning that any cell phone manufacturer can license them. And the licensing is set and the prices are high. Carol it is 30. Max it is a fixed royalty of the price of the phone. Carol a percentage of the phone . Max it can be up to as we understand 5 of the price of the phone. If you buy a 650 phone, which would not be that expensive, qualcomm might get 30 out of that. And that is before the price of the modem. Carol apple and samsung are working together against qualcomm . Max that is the allegation. This lawsuit and we talk about it in the story contains an explosive allegation, which is that qualcomm believes that apple and samsung sort of conspired to get the south korean regulatory body to fine qualcomm and put an end to the qualcomm tax as it is known. Basically, both Companies Deny this and it is hard to go but qualcomm believes that apple has gone around the world trying to get regulators to crack down on qualcomm. Qualcomm is not sure that it has happened but regulators have indeed been cracking down. Carol are they allowed to do that . Is that something they can do because i thought they had to back off . Max that is part of the way that qualcomm basically gave these better deals is that it said to these cell phone carriers, look, you pay us a little bit less but you agree not to challenge our patents. What qualcomm alleges happens is that at a conference in idaho in the summer, which is all likelihood the sun valley conference, two Senior Executives at apple and samsung talked it out and came out with a plan to have the regulatory body call apple as a witness. Once apple is called as a witness, they can say whatever they want. And so they were allowed to testify. But what basically, what qualcomm alleges is that once they show up in south korea, they misled regulators. That caused qualcomm to promptly cancel the sweetheart deals which caused apple to sue and here we are. Carol in the technology section, video visiting is a lucrative business for prison phone companies. Julia but the benefit might not be so great for prisoners and their families. Let us start by talking about Barbara Hughes and the fact that she drove three hours to visit her son in jail but never saw him. For the first nine months or so of 2016, barbaras son was in jail across state lines. She would drive back and forth between illinois. While she was allowed one, free, in person, 20 minute visiting session with her son per week, inperson is sort of a relative term here because the jail had abolished actual face to face visiting hours. You could only sort of visit electronically via video screen. Julia you said free . 20 minutes free . That is another big part of this story. About 650 other jails in the country, mostly county jails, that have started introducing video visiting, or a video screen visiting, which can be done remotely. More than three quarters of these facilities unfortunately for many of the friends and loved ones of inmates, have eliminated in person fully face to face visiting entirely. And the companies that they have contracted out to set up the video visiting systems, they get to more or less right the terms of how these visits were to have been able to extract significant profits from that. Carol why our prisons doing this . As you said, more and more prisons are doing this. Why . Partly so that they can automate the process. Even contracting out to a thirdparty, that gives them more budget flexibility. It means they do not have to deal with administering the visits themselves, which some arguments means that it makes it harder for friends and loved ones to smuggle in contraband to prisoners. But critics, prisoners rights advocates would charge that it is making it easier for private companies to profit off of for the most part people earning le