geoff: good evening. i'm geoff bennett. amna: and i'm amna nawaz. on the “newshour” tonight, the future of ukraine's fight against russia hangs in the balance amid a combat stalemate and questions over u.s. support. geoff: new documents from house democrats detail how donald trump's businesses received millions from foreign governments while he was president. amna: and palestinians report being arrested and mistreated by israeli forces because of their social media posts in the wake of the october 7 hamas attacks.

>> my phone has news groups and most of the people participate in them, and the policeman told me because of this that i am communicating with hamas. ♪ >> major funding for the "pbs newshour" has been provided by. the kendeda fund, committed to advancing restorative justice and meaningful work through investments in transformative leaders and ideas. more at kendedafund.org. carnegie corporation of new york, supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement, and the advancement of international peace and security, at carnegie.org.

and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. amna: welcome to the “newshour”" israel and hamas are still locked in heavy combat tonight in gaza, but much of the day's focus has been on lebanon. a top hamas commander, saleh al arouri, was buried in beirut, after being killed in a suspected israeli drone strike. geoff: that attack on tuesday sparked fears of a regional war between israel and the lebanese militant group hezbollah, which

is an ally of hamas. today, thousands turned out for arouri's funeral procession, waving palestinian and hamas flags. leaders of hamas insisted they are undeterred by his death. >> this crime will not affect the resistance nor hamas, because hamas has lost the best of its martyrs, including its founder, and continued in the resistance, culminating in the october 7 operation. it will continue, god willing, until liberation and return. amna: meantime, in gaza, israeli forces pressed their offensive, centering on the southern city of khan younis. the hamas-run health ministry reported another 125 deaths since wednesday. and in the occupied west bank, israeli troops ended a two-day raid in tulkarm. they said they detained hundreds of suspected militants. the islamic state group claimed responsibility today for a double suicide bombing in iran that killed 84 people. the sunni extremist group said it struck a blow at iran's

shiites. wednesday's attack targeted crowds honoring general qassem soleimani. he'd been killed in 2020 by an american drone strike in iraq. today, iranians paid tribute to those killed and 284 others who were wounded. state officials again vowed revenge. >> we will not be silent until justice is served. we have various capacities to deal with terrorist groups, and naturally, we will use all of them, such as intelligence and security capacities. and other tools we have for the administration of justice. amna: the bombing was the worst militant attack inside iran in decades. a u.s. drone strike in iraq killed a top commander of an iranian-backed militia today. the pentagon confirmed it, hours later. the baghdad attack left a charred hulk of a car. it followed a spate of attacks on u.s. troops in iraq and syria since the israel-hamas war began. in western japan, at least 84

people are now confirmed dead after powerful earthquakes this week. nearly 180 others are still missing, many of them elderly. officials sharply raised that number in the last 24 hours, as soldiers and others continue rescue operations. back in this country, a sixth grader was killed and five others were wounded at a school shooting in iowa today. police say a 17-year-old opened fire at the school in perry, iowa. it was the first day back for students after winter break. authorities did not provide any information about a possible motive. protesters shut down california's state assembly as they demanded a ceasefire in the israel-hamas war. the action was organized by anti-war jewish activist groups. lawmakers had just convened the year's opening day when they were drowned out by protesters singing and chanting. legislative leaders tried to continue, then called a recess and finally, adjourned.

on wall street, stocks were mostly lower again as investors awaited the december jobs report, due out tomorrow. the dow jones industrial average did gain 10 points to close at 37,440. but the nasdaq fell 82 points. and the s&p 500 lost 16. and a 13-year-old oklahoma boy has reached a pinnacle in the pantheon of video gaming. willis gibson is the first person to beat the original version of tetris, the nintendo game involving falling blocks. his livestreamed video caught the moment last month, when the game reached its limits and crashed, and left him stunned. >> oh my god. oh my god. amna: willis' mother says he spends about 20 hours a week playing tetris. he also plays competitively and has won about $3000 to date. congratulations.

still to come on the "newshour," harvard remains embroiled in controversy after its president is forced out. we speak to the secretary of homeland security about strains on the u.s. immigration system. the remaable life and legacy of tap-dancing and broadway star maurice hines. plus much more. >> this is the "pbs newshour" from weta studios in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. geoff: the white house said today that russia has started firing ballistic missiles provided by north korea into ukraine. and the u.s. is concerned that iran will soon agree to sell russia missiles. we take a look now at the war in ukraine as it enters its third calendar year. for ukrainians, is a grim new year as the war grinds into 2024. the year had barely started when

air raid alarms started across the country and explosions lit up the predawn skylight. russia has stepped up its onslaught of aerial attacks throughout the region, scorching residential box in downtown kyiv. the port city of odesa. and kharkiv, among several other cities targeted in recent weeks. "what a present russia made us for this new year. they are black souls, simply black souls. geoff: on tuesday, ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy characterized the uptick as conscious terror. >> in just the last few days from december 29 till today, russia has already used almost 300 missiles and more than 200 drones against ukraine. geoff: at the same time, the conflict has spilled increasingly into russian

occupied territory. last month, ukrainian cruise missiles blew up a docked warship in crimea, hampering russia's fleet power in the black sea. and a recent explosion in belgorod killed 24 people. russian authorities blamed ukrainian shelling. on new year's day, russian president vladimir putin said the attack warrants yet another tit-for-tat response. >> of course, it's a terrorist attack. there's no other way to call it. should we respond the same way? of course, we can. we can hit squares in kyiv or in any other city. geoff: for over a year there have been no significant territorial gains by ukraine or russia. this map shows russian-controlled regions in ukraine, one year ago. today, it is virtually unchanged, despite ukraine's counteroffensive efforts on the frontlines, and despite high expectations from its western allies. the u.s. and european nations have armed ukraine with package after package of tanks, air defense systems, and enough resources to train and equip 17

armored brigades. the u.s. alone has contributed $75 billion in aid, most of it towards military assistance, since the war started nearly two years ago. but the future of that funding is in grave doubt. congressional republicans already balked on an aid deal with the biden administration last month, stuck weighing the money for ukraine against other concerns - namely, republican demands for a crackdown on migrants at the southern border. just like the war, negotiations remain frozen as the west grapples with what to do next. the front lines of the war have hardly moved in the last few months. but could the course of the war change in 2024? we have two perspectives now from charles kupchan, who served on the national security council staff during the obama and clinton administrations. he's now a senior fellow at the council on foreign relations and a georgetown university professor. and andrea kendall-taylor is a former senior intelligence official who focused on russia and eurasia. she's now at the center for a

new american security. that's a bipartisan national security and defense policy think tank. thank you both for being here. the war in ukraine has been described to me by a defense official as a war of inches at this point, that even with the extensive support that the west has given ukrainian forces, there have not been any significant breakthroughs. andrea, is what we're seeing, is this the definition of a stalemate? andrea: well, i think that certainly the narrative that is coalescing and it is true, as you say, that the front lines haven't meaningfully changed in many, many months. but i think that narrative of a stalemate is both wrong and it's unproductive. it's wrong because both ukraine and russia are really in a race to rebuild their offensive capability. we know that russia has not changed its objectives in ukraine, and if given any breathing room, it will progress in its goal to subjugate ukraine.

and i think it's unproductive because it's leading to a greater sense of fatigue both here in washington and in other european capitals in terms of their willingness to sustain the military aid for ukraine. so rather than a stalemate, i actually think 2024 is a really critical year that will shape the trajectory of this conflict. and that's why it's so important that u.s. congress passes the legislation to sustain the military aid to ukraine. geoff: charlie, how do you see it? is ukraine positioned to achieve anything more than incremental advances at this point, especially as the harsh winter sets in? charles: well, the ukrainians received an enormous amount of training, enormous amount of armor. over the course of 2023, they launched a major offensive primarily in the south, and they ran into miles of russian defenses -- tank traps, minefields, various kinds of fortifications. and as a consequence, they did not succeed in taking back a great deal of land.

in fact, over the course of this year, russia actually has advanced more than ukraine, not by much, but a little bit in the north, while ukraine was more or less stalemated in the south. and so the question then is. -- is, what now? i think we need to come forward with more economic assistance, more military assistance. but i also think we need to pivot ukraine from an offensive strategy in which it burns through more and more of what we give them to a defensive strategy aimed at defending themselves for the long term and rebuilding the 82% of the country that is under control. geoff: i want to come back to that, andrew, a question about the support, the $60 billion-plus that right now is a point of contention on capitol hill. if ukraine did get that money. what's the best case scenario? would they then be positioned to win the war? andrea: that aid will basically allow ukraine to fortify its

defensive positions, but while concurrently enabling ukraine to train its new units and equip those new units so that they would be positioned to wage a new offensive in 2025. i mean, i think the goal here is to really help ukraine get through what will be a very difficult year and position them to reapply pressure on russia in 2025 to try to change the kremlin's calculus about what it's willing to tolerate and for how long. right now, president putin is riding high. he believes that he's blunted the ukrainian offensive. he sees the fatigue in western capitals. and so he has no reason to get to the negotiating table. so it's really incumbent on the united states to position ukraine to be able to ride this year out and apply new pressure on the kremlin such that it judges that it can't win a long war. and in that case, they get into negotiations in a position where ukraine has the leverage to impose a lasting peace.

geoff: picking up on that point, what would those negotiations look like, adding your perspective that ukraine should focus on consolidating as opposed to continuing with continuing its offensive? charles: i think we need to have a plan to make sure that ukraine has what it needs to defend itself. and i think that the prospect of a new offensive of trying to break through russian lines, of taking back donbas and crimea, that doesn't look likely. and as a consequence, i think you have to say, let's make sure that ukraine 2024, 2025 and onward has what it needs to defend itself. and then once we get a stalemate that the russians and the ukrainians both agree is the case, that's when i think the door opens to diplomacy. will the ukrainians in the near term get back their land? i doubt it.

but i think their chances of restoring territorial integrity are better at the negotiating table than on the battlefield, especially after putin leaves power, although that may take quite a while. geoff: and andrea, what's your read of the new york times reporting recently that putin had signaled through intermediaries that he was willing to negotiate an end to the war? i mean, what's his cost benefit analysis at this point? andrea: yeah, i personally don't put a lot of stock in that reporting, in large part just watching his demeanor and his public statements. he believes that he has the upper hand in this conflict and he's watching a west that appears to be tiring in its support for ukraine. and so, it's hard to imagine that he would be willing to enter into any negotiations that ukraine would find acceptable. i think at this point, if putin is even thinking about negotiations, which i don't think he is, but if he is, when he's thinking about negotiations, he's thinking about the subjugation of

ukraine, and those terms would be entirely unacceptable. so it's not a productive place to enter into negotiations. geoff: and president biden has said repeatedly that if putin is successful in seizing ukraine, that he won't stop there, that other parts of europe could be at risk. do you share that assessment, that view? charles: i think it's unlikely that putin, however, the war in ukraine goes, is going to attack nato country. he's having a very hard time fighting a war with ukraine. i don't think he wants to fight a war with ukraine plus 32 -- assuming sweden joins -- nato members. so i think so far both sides have avoided an escalation in the war. but i do think that we also need to ask not just what ukraine needs, but what can ukraine get. and the debate here in the united states is a tough one. the debate in europe is also essentially put on hold more assistance to ukraine. and i also think we need to ask

what are the blowback effects here? does this undermine the political center in europe? we have upcoming european parliament elections this spring. we've got a big election here in 2024 in this country. we have to keep an eye on how the war in ukraine is playing domestically as well as what how the war is going there. and that's part of the reason that i think a defensive strategy, telling the american people that we're giving ukraine what it needs to defend itself for the long haul, is the best case to be made. andrea: the one point i would articulate a bit differently than charlie is i do think that russia is likely to remain a durable threat, including the nato countries. and you look at russia's mobilization of its economy, it's put its economy on a wartime footing. it's increased production of drones, of missiles to levels that are greater than they were before the war started. the war in ukraine really has become the primary justification for putin's regime.

and i worry quite a bit that particularly if he's successful in ukraine, that he could turn his sights, including against a nato country under the right conditions. and so this isn't something that's going away. and really, the united states and nato need to prepare for a long-term confrontation with russia. geoff: thank you both for your insights, andrea kendall-taylor and charles kupchan. appreciate it. ♪ amna: house democrats released a new report showing foreign countries spent millions at former president donald trump's businesses while he held office. the release appears to be a political counter-punch to republicans' impeachment inquiry into president joe biden and his family's foreign business dealings. lisa desjardins joins us to unpack it all. good to see you. let's start with this report. what does it allege? lisa: at the center of this

report is the emoluments clause. article one of the constitution prohibits any u.s. officeholder from accepting emoluments from a foreign power, meeting some form of compensation. the argument from house democrats is that by not divesting himself when he became president, president trump was accepting emoluments by still getting profit from the trump organization which is run through a trust in which he still earned profits. what is new in the report are the numbers. at least $7.8 million the democrats say booking through accounting filings and other filings did he receive from foreign powers including 20 foreign governments. when you break that down a little more it is about trump tower and trump hotels almost entirely. and it is from 2017 to 2019. let's look at a map of the countries they say are involved. all around the world the biggest one is china.

these are the countries where more than $25,000 was spent at trump properties while president trump was president. the argument is not just that he profited but that he violated the constitution. trump himself said he gave the preface to the u.s. treasury. amna: since the report has come out, has president trump anyone explained the numbers? lisa: the campaign says this is a trump organization issue, it is not a political campaign issue. what the trump organization said was interesting specifically about the big amount of money coming from china. it represents $5 million of the $7 million. that is the most of the foreign mesh -- payments. china, we are talking a large industrial bank of china, one of the largest in the world. $5.4 million that bank spent at trump tower during president trump's time in office.

but the trump organization and verified by the committee later said that was part of a 20 year lease. that chinese bank entered into in 2008 before trump had even entered the race for president. so the democrats are not establishing a quid pro quo. what they're saying is it violates the emoluments clause. that there was money being given to the trump organization that he profited from that he should not have. the trump organization said he gave all the prophets back and this was no conflict of interest and this is entirely political. the republican chair of the house oversight committee says this is a parity. he said this is about quote, president trump has legitimate this is but the bidens do not. so, no surprise. it is about this back-and-forth dual investigations. amna: this is about the emoluments clause. what democrats are alleging is a constitutional violation. what is the likelihood trump

faces and issues? lisa: i don't know who had this on their bingo cards this week. but it is important because the truth is there are no cases in court right now pending for mr. trump when it comes to the emoluments clause. there were three major federal cases that work at the rate the court system. but in the end one of them was dismissed for lack of standing. the others were dismissed because president trump was about to leave office and the supreme court said it no longer had bearing. so the short answer is there is no possibility really of any emoluments problems for former president trump unless he is reelected. and if he is reelected i think this is an issue we will see again. amna: it is fair to say we will. lisa, again, thank you as always. lisa: you are welcome. ♪

amna: inside israel's war against hamas in gaza, there's a different type of war on information. since october 7, hamas has pumped out its own propaganda on social media, prompting israel to start its own media campaign to drum up support. but those efforts have also resulted in a social media crackdown with deep consequences for palestinians living inside israel and the occupied territories, which some claim goes beyond credible threats. so far, more than 2000 palestinians and arab citizens of israel have been arrested since the war began, and hundreds of them for social media posts. leila molana-allen has some of their stories. leila: it wasn't the first time 17-year-old omran okkeh had been chased by jerusalem police. but a couple of weeks after he escaped a raid on a public square in early october, they followed him home. after forced their way into his house, omran says police beat him in his bedroom and then in the police car after arresting him.

>> the policeman told me to clean my blood from the car. i want to help you clean the wound, he said. but then he sprayed pepper gas on the handkerchief and wiped my face with it. leila: when omran's mother rola tried to intervene, she was arrested too. >> i asked them, why were they hitting my son? and they assaulted me and pushed me over. they injured my hand and handcuffed it and tied my legs too, and then they took me to the car. and when we got to the police station, the policeman gave me water out of the toilet and told me to drink it. what is this hatred? leila: omran's crime is still unclear. he says police accused him of being in whatsapp groups criticizing israel's war in gaza and supporting hamas. >> my phone has news groups and most of the people participate in them. and the policeman told me because of this that i am communicating with hamas.

i told them i didn't do anything, why are you attacking me? they said it's enough that you are an arab. leila: a police spokesperson told the "newshour" omran had aroused suspicion, with no detail as to why, and said officers used force because rola assaulted them as they detained her son. after a period under house arrest, omran's deep bruises have healed. he has not been charged with anything. but rola is just waiting for the next time. >> i'm very afraid for my children. when they're out at night i can't sleep waiting for them to come back. there is no security for us. there's no rest. leila: omran isn't the only palestinian to claim unfounded arrest and abuse at the hands of israeli authorities since october 7. in the weeks since the war began, israeli arabs and palestinians have been interrogated, harassed, and arrested by israeli security

forces in their hundreds for social media posts and messages in support of palestinians in gaza. the crackdown raises questions over not only whether it's a proportionate response, but the future of free speech in this country. 21-year-old engineering student bayan khatib, an arab citizen of israel, didn't know a social media post could ruin her life. on the morning of october 8, she posted a short reel of her breakfast shakshuka, a tomato and egg dish, with the caption, soon we will eat victory shakshuka, and a palestinian flag. hours later, her life began to unravel. her fellow israeli students refused to sit in class with her. then she was summoned by the university and dismissed. >> when the war happened, everything changed. they are now pursuing all arab students and photographing their posts on social media for anything they consider incitement. we do not want to learn with

you, and we will not accept that you return to the university and that we will kill you, and many threats. leila: next, she lost both her jobs. then, the police came. bayan was held for three days. >> they sent me to three prisons. they are so full that there is no empty space. the cell can accommodate four people. there were nine people in it and we slept on the floor. i had my hijab, but the other girls, they seized them from their bedrooms and did not allow them to put veils on their heads. then they put garbage bags on their heads. can you imagine? leila: bayan says her experience shows israel's claim that arab citizens of israel are equal is a lie. >> we cannot speak or move. we cannot say stop the war. we cannot express opinions. and we cannot live freely. leila: muhammad dahleh is an east jerusalem lawyer working on dozens of cases like these. while existing israeli laws

allowed arrest for incitement to violence or materially aiding terrorist organizations, dahleh says the new measures since october 7 go much further. >> anybody who is posting anything that can be construed or can be looked at as inciting to terror or as understanding that incentives for this attack or somehow trying to put it into context is seen by the israeli police as a criminal offense. leila: the israeli authorities' new crackdown on civil liberties has been so widespread that even dahleh is afraid to say too much. he fears imprisoning people for their words rather than their actions is a slippery slope that israel, once championed by some as a bastion of free speech in the middle east, may not be able to climb back from. and israeli authorities are trying to quash the dissemination of dissent as well as the source.

a recent human rights watch investigation found israel's cyber unit sent 9500 content removal requests to meta, which runs facebook and instagram, and other social platforms since october 7. >> i think it is going to be counterproductive. i mean, when you suffocate a people and when you don't let them even speak, when you don't let them have this freedom of speech and being able to express their views, eventually, those people will rebel somehow in a different way. they might not post, but then you are pushing those people into a corner, actually a risky corner. leila: ahed tamimi has been one of those rebelling since childhood. at just 11 years old, she became well-known for confronting an israeli soldier trying to arrest her brother in their west bank village of nabih saleh. the decade since then has been spent in and out of prison. in late october, her words landed her in trouble again.

after a social media post calling for the death of israelis, which she claims she didn't write, soldiers stormed the family home in the middle of the night. >> everything inside the closet they threw on the ground. even the make-up box they opened. i don't know what they were searching for. they threw the make-up everywhere. even ahed's bed they searched. they ruined everything. does this make-up pose a danger to them? our occupiers are afraid of a young woman's make-up? leila: far-right national security minister itamar ben gvir posted about his joy at her arrest, and called for a wider crackdown on dissent. nariman says they are scapegoats for israel's anger. >> the soldiers were bad. they hit ahed against the wall and on the sofa. they were acting crazy because of what happened on october 7 and israel's failure to protect its borders made them very angry and they behaved brutally and unconsciously. leila: nariman has spent decades watching her outspoken children go in and out of jail. she expected the soldiers from the moment the war began.

>> this is painful. international law and human rights are not applied to the palestinians. israel does not need a charge against the palestinians to arrest them, and an influential palestinian who says what is in his heart will be targeted by israel. they fear that we will influence international public opinion, so they arrest us. leila: ahed was later released as part of the hostage-prisoner swap. she claims she was beaten and humiliated while detained. bayan still has no idea when or if her case will be tried. her documents have been confiscated and she's been hit with a travel ban. with no way to complete her education or earn money, the future is bleak. >> we are losing our basic rights of expression, expression of opinion, education, and work. leila: as voices against the war in gaza grow louder in the west, palestinians increasingly feel gagged, fearing swift retribution if they speak freely.

for the "pbs newshour," i'm leila molana-allen in nabih saleh, the west bank. ♪ geoff: the resignation of former harvard president claudine gay has hardly settled any of the debate surrounding her short tenure, or how the university handled a number of issues. in fact, many, including gay herself, are raising concerns about the potential impact the harvard case may have on higher education more widely. william brangham has our conversation. william: gay's departure came after conservative activists unearthed multiple examples of alleged plagiarism in her work. while gay did admit to several mistakes, she argues she's been unfairly targeted because of her race, her ideology, and her push for diversity in academia. her resignation also followed her widely panned congressional

testimony about anti-semitism on university campuses. for two perspectives, we turn to khalil gibran muhammad. he's a professor of history, race, and public policy at harvard's kennedy school. and to tom nichols, who's a staff writer for the atlantic, a professor emeritus at the u.s. naval war college. gentlemen, thank you both so much for being here. the conventional wisdom is that claudine gay resigned because of this rolling series of plagiarism revelations. those were brought to light by conservative activists and fanned into flames by those same people. but the evidence is there. i know you believe there is much more afoot here. i wonder if you could explain that a little bit. khalil: sure. they have been involved in a concerted movement beginning in the fall of 2020 to censor knowledge in this country. to prohibit the teaching of race

and racism, of gender discrimination in the k-12 arena. in florida and texas as of just this past fall, they began to extend that reach into the public universities and colleges of that state. so i see what they are telling us is happening is that they are attacking everything that has to do with racial equity and gender equity in this country. and the person who convened a december 5 hearing opened her remarks by naming the problem as antiracism, intersectionality, and critical race theory that is causing racism on harvard's campus. she happened to mention my class i taught last fall as a prime example. finally, she promised, as of two days ago after the resignation, to continue to go after harvard and presumably other universities that are harboring "woke" faculty and partisan administrators.

they are telling us that is the primary focus right now for private colleges and universities, as has been the case for public ones. william: tom nichols, what do you make of this? do you believe that because these revelations came from people who are admittedly claudine gay's ideological enemies, that that obviates any evidence about her plagiarism? tom: we are having a strange conversation here. because i agree with the professor. i think the american right and the activists on the american right are intentionally attacking american higher education as an institution, for various reasons, some of them ideological and some of them out of pure resentment, that they simply want to displace the current elites who run universities and be the new elites who run american universities. but none of that has anything to do with whether or not what

professor gay did as misconduct. as i wrote, there's a term for misconduct that is discovered by bad-faith actors and bad people. it is called misconduct. and that is not relevant. i agree completely she was targeted because of her race, because of her gender, because of her position at an exalted university, because of things she said during the congressional hearing. but in the end, as strange as it sounds to say this, the source of that charge does not matter. all that matters is whether or not the charge is true and whether she committed academic misconduct. that just makes it impossible for her to lead america's -- one of america's greatest universities. i should add i have nothing but affection for harvard. i taught there for 18 years. so i find this heartbreaking.

but on the other hand, trying to conflate all of these attacks together i think does no good because in effect what these right-wing activists are doing are trying to bait people in the academy into defending double standards, into appearing like hypocrites. i think no one should take that bait. the only question should be whether or not this was actual misconduct. william: what do you make of that? khalil: it is a compelling argument but to me, it misses a bigger truth. there are two things here i think matter. one, the nature of the plagiarism, let's call it on a three point scale, was a one. mr. nichols may not agree with me, but that is fine. it is debatable the degree to which the allegations of plagiarism rise to be the most severe kind. i call this a situation of death by 1000 paper cups. what is interesting to me, and this is my second point, is if

it is death by 1000 paper cuts, harvard should still retain the right to judge for itself whether or not the instances of poor citation, or generous use of language by others, rises to the point of expulsion, or in this case, to be fired from harvard university. i think those two reasons are very strong reasons for why this issue is actually more about political pressure. and i don't believe that any university at this time should allow governors or congressional representatives, or any federal official, to determine how it uses discretion and ultimately makes decisions about its own faculty. william: tom, i want to ask you about this issue of race very directly. in her resignation letter and her op-ed she published today, gay noted she had been subjected to a torrent of racist abuse, been called the n-word, received

death threats. additionally she talked about something broader. quote, it is not lost on me that i make an ideal canvas for projecting every anxiety about the generational and demographic changes unfolding on american campuses. a black woman selected to lead a storied institution. someone who views diversity as a source of institutional strength and dynamism. how much of a factor do you believe, given you have -- given everything you have already said, how much do you think race played in all of this? tom: i suspect that the right have been looking for a reason to attack claudine gay for the moment she has become president of harvard. but i think professor mohammed just made a better defense of her then she makes herself in that letter, because i think that letter plays right into the idea that you cannot look at my academic work, everything is about race, this is because of racist attacks.

there is no doubt that the people attacked her and i have been harassing her are coming from a place of racism and racial animus. but that does not obviate the bigger problem. and i take your point -- and this was my an action -- my reaction initially. i said, i wrote a dissertation, i probably have some bad footnotes and with the paraphrases like all of us who have done academic work. we are not perfect and we will all have mistakes in our written work. but i think when then the second and third round of these came out -- and i suspect her red explained a bit of rope a dope where they dripped this out trying to draw the foul, to get people to keep defending this -- i don't think those errors then lead to the inclusion that, well, this now has to all be about race. . i think in a university setting,

the only question is, are the errors real errors? i take your point, and actually your point about harvard simply caving here, that is a reasonable point. but on the other hand when you have this much stuff that piles up, university presidents are different. this is not the closed the liberation of a department. this is someone leading the university and being the public face. and to come out and fire back and say it is all about racism, i think just plays into exactly the kind of dialogue -- not even dialogue, it plays into the kind of trap a lot of her opponents wanted to set, and i think that is important. there is a lot of truth in it, but that is obviously not the whole story. william: all right. khalil gibran muhammad and tom nichols, appreciate it so much. thank you for being here. khalil: thank you for having us. ♪

geoff: a legend of tap dance for seven decades has died. maurice hines gained fame with his brother gregory as the hines brothers, delighting audiences on stage, television, and film. jeffrey brown has our remembrance as part of our arts and culture series, "canvas." jeffrey: the art, the energy, the sheer joy of their movement. maurice and younger brother gregory hines helped revitalize and bring tap back to the forefront of popular culture. they began dancing as young children in harlem, gained a large following through tv appearances and on stage, and starred in the 1984 francis ford coppola film, "the cotton club." the film was a nod to an earlier

part of the tap tradition, including one famed model for the hines brothers, the nicholas brothers. intent on continuing that tradition, gregory hines would become a mentor to contemporary tap phenom, savion glover. and maurice hines took that role seriously as well. we met him in 2010 when he was 66 and working with young dancers on a new production of sophisticated ladies, a review based on the life of duke ellington, at washington, dc's lincoln theater. two high school brothers, john and leo manzari, now well-respected professional tappers in their own right, caught his attention. what does a good tap dancer have to have? >> well, first of all, they have great feet. and they're improvisational. and that's what my brother was. and so they can do anything that i want them to do -- anything. and, also, they have the -- the one thing, they love dancing together, like greg and i did.

and they have the one thing that you're either born with. you cannot make it. you cannot hype it up. either you have charisma or you don't. and they have it. gregory and i had it. they have it. jeffrey: gregory hines died of cancer at age 57 in 2003. maurice hines continued to dance, performing on tour as recently as 2019. he died last friday at age 80. for the "pbs newshour," i'm jeffrey brown. ♪ amna: the u.s. government is set to partially shut down in 15 days, unless a funding agreement is reached. but immigration is a key sticking point in those talks, and it's an issue that has plagued congress and the white house for years. homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas is the biden administration's point man on those negotiations and he joins us now. welcome back to the "newshour."

thank you for joining us. sec. mayorkas: good evening. thank you so much for having me. amna: the good news is you are starting from a place of agreement. everyone agrees the immigration system is broken and has been for decades. you have said that you are hopeful some kind of fix will come out of those talks. what specific fix or fixes is there agreement on right now, even if the details are not sorted yet? sec. mayorkas: well, i really don't want to get into specifics of the subjects of negotiation. i am incredibly proud to participate in those negotiations, to provide technical and operational advice to both of the republican and democratic senators that are working to fix a fundamentally broken immigration system. you correctly note that that is the one thing in immigration about which everyone agrees. that we are dealing with a system that is broken and in

desperate need of repair. it has not been fixed for more than 30 years. amna: you previously was reforms necessary such as meeting -- needing more immigration and asylum officers. it does not seem as though any of those would slow or stop the flow of migrants coming to the u.s. border, which we have seen and massive increase of, part of a global increase we have seen of migration. republicans are pushing for moves that will stop or stem the flow. so what step would do that, in your mind? sec. mayorkas: there are a few things that are being discussed. and i should say that the president's supplemental funding request does ask for resources that would indeed stem the flow. one of the biggest obstacles that we have in doing so is the fact that the time in between when we encounter an individual at the southern border and when their claim for relief is

finally adjudicated can be six or more years. and by asking for more immigration judges, which the president has done in the supplemental funding request, we would have those additional resources to really collapse that time period. to really make us able to deliver justice more rapidly. and when migrants learn that if they have an unsuccessful claim, they will be moved more rapidly, that will serve a deterrent effect. it impacts the risk calculus of intending migrants. amna: wouldn't the same impact on risk migrants be had if you raise the bar on credible fear claims, which is what people need to make to reach an asylum claim. right now you're given a court date which could be years away, people are allowed to stay in the u.s. most of those cases are ultimately denied.

if people knew it was harder right to enter the united states, wouldn't that discourage them from making the journey in the first place? sec. mayorkas: one of the things that is a subject of consideration in the negotiations is how the asylum system can be fixed. and how we can deliver justice more rapidly. while adhering to our international obligations. what the president has committed to do is to enforce our immigration laws and at the same time, adhere to our nation's values. please remember where we were when we took office in january of 2021. the damage to the immigration system and the damage to the department of homeland security that the prior administration had inflicted. it had gutted u.s. citizenship and immigration services.

it had ripped families apart. we had to undo so much damage at the same time that we had to rebuild the system that had been decimated. amna: i understand that those changes also added to the backlog in the asylum cases we have seen. what do i hear you saying you don't think you need to change where the credible fear bar is? you would rather speed up the processing once people are already here? sec. mayorkas: i will not speak to the specific details of the reforms that the republican senators are considering and are discussing. each and every day, understanding the desperate need to fix a fundamentally broken immigration system. amna: are expanding legal pathways any part of these negotiations? we do have a labor shortage in this country. many advocates say we don't have enough legal paths open. would more legal paths discourage people from trying to enter legally? sec. mayorkas: president biden has built an unprecedented

number of safe, orderly, and legal pathways for individuals who qualify for relief in the united states, for them to access those avenues of relief. amna: all due respect, we have seen an increase even as those legal pathways have been added. an increase in illegal entries, i should say. sec. mayorkas: i would say two things. number one, for measures as fundamental as we have just begin to build, for them to really take hold is not something that happens overnight. we saw immediate results upon the end of the use of title 42 in may of this year. we did see immediate results. migration is an extraordinarily dynamic phenomenon. numbers ebb and flow. and the dynamism of migration is

something that we are experiencing not exclusively at our southern border, but is being experienced by countries throughout the western hemisphere and around the world. amna: some of the changes as you mentioned will have time to have an impact, but many democratic governors are asking for help immediately, and saying the federal government needs to do more. we know the texas governor greg abbott has been busting migrants to northern cities. i know you have criticism -- criticized him for not -- they say they do not have enough housing or funding or support. what can the federal government do for those cities in the short term? sec. mayorkas: well, president biden in his supplemental funding request, has indeed requested additional funds for the cities. the shelter and services program. he has asked for more funding for that. at the same time, what we need is a governor in one state to communicate, to cooperate with other cities and states, rather

than purposefully and unilaterally bussing migrants, using them as tools to score political points in an effort to achieve disorder and chaos. that is not responsible governance. amna: i need to ask you about the house republicans' effort to move ahead with plans to impeach you. i know you have said before you are focused on solutions and the work. but what they allege is not that you cannot enforce the border, they are alleging that you won't. house speaker johnson was at the border yesterday and he says he believes it is not incompetence. he says he believes you have done this intentionally. he said i think these are intentional policy decisions he has made. what is your response to that? sec. mayorkas: i don't have time to address political rhetoric like that. you correctly noticed -- noted that i am focused on the work at hand, achieving the mission,

delivering solutions, working with republican and democratic senators alike to fix a fundamentally broken immigration system. i am focused on leading the department of homeland security with tremendous pride and inspiration, watching and leading the work of 260,000 talented and dedicated men and women. amna: that is homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas joining us tonight. mr. secretary, good to see you. thank you for your time. sec. mayorkas: thank you so much. ♪ amna: and remember, there's much more online, including before and after satellite images that provide a look at the devastation caused by the new year's day earthquake in japan. that's on our instagram. geoff: and we invite you to join

us again here tomorrow night. i'm geoff bennett. amna: and i'm amna nawaz. on behalf of the entire "newshour" team, thank you for joining us. >> major funding for the "pbs newshour" has been provided by. the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions, and friends of the "newshour," including leonard and norma klorfine, and the judy and peter blum kovler foundation. >> architect. beekeeper. mentor. a raymondjames financial advisor tailors advice to help you live your life. life well-planned. >> the ford foundation, working with visionaries on the front lines of social change worldwide. and with the ongoing support of these institutions. and friends of the "newshour."

this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.]

wow, you get to watch all your favstuff. it's to die for. now you won't miss a thing. this is the way. the xfinity 10g network. made for streaming. ♪ hello, everyone, and welcome to "amanpour and company." here's what's coming up. a wider middle east war? explosions in iran leave dozens dead near the grave of military commander kasim sool manny. a day after israel allegedly assassinated a senior hamas leader in lebanon. i'll ask the country's foreign minister how it will respond. then, how all of this overshad ows the ukraine war, a russian missiles rain down. i speak to foreign minister