wow, you get to watch all your favorite stuff. it's to die for. now you won't miss a thing. this is the way. the xfinity 10g network. made for streaming. geoff: good evening. i'm geoff bennett. amna nawaz is on assignment. on the “newshour” tonight, president biden vows to respond to a deadly drone attack on a u.s. base in jordan, and blames an iranian-backed militia for the latest escalation. the secretary general of nato discusses the uncertain future of western support for ukraine as the beleaguered nation's war with russia grinds on. and the biden administration cites climate concerns as it puts the breaks on a major liquid natural gas project and pauses new exports. ♪

>> 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. the william and flora hewlett foundation, for more than 50 years advancing ideas and supporting instituations to promote a better world. at hewlett.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. geoff: welcome to the “newshour.” the white house says president biden is considering options to strike back against the iran-backed militia that killed three american soldiers in jordan yesterday. from yemen, to iraq, to syria, and now jordan, american forces are engaging iranian-supported groups across the region. nick schifrin starts our coverage. nick: it is in a remote desert corner at the intersection of three countries, and the attack on tower 22 lead to a u.s. valve -- thou of revenge.

>> the president and i will not tolerate an attack on u.s. forces and we will take all necessary actions to defend the u.s. and our troops. >> we will respond decisively to any aggression and we will hold responsible people who attacked our troops. nick: u.s. military and defense officials say and iranian and got through the base's air defense because it was misidentified as a u.s. drone. the three soldiers killed were u.s. army reservist -- bases in iraq and syria have been targeted repeatedly since mid-october. this weekend was the first in jordan. tower 22 is located on the jordan side of a remote demilitarized zone where jordan, iraq, and syria meet. to the north -- is a garrison in syria that relies on tower 22 fort logistics and other support. for years, it's functioned as a launching point for special forces combating isis militants and monitors a weapons shipping

route along a highway leading into baghdad. the base has been the target of previous strikes. it is also next to a vast refugee camp. at its peak, more than 100,000 internally displaced syrians were crowded there, locked by jordan from crossing the border. >> we do not seek another war. we do not seek to escalate. nick: john kirby today said the u.s. would respond in a way that does not escalate but acknowledges iran's role. >> we will do that on our schedule and our time and in the manner of the president's choosing as commander-in-chief. we will also do it fully cognizant of the fact that these groups backed by tehran have just taken the lives of american troops. nick: iran's foreign ministry today said militia groups act on their own. >> the islamic republic of iran does not interfere in the decisions of the resistance

groups on how to support the palestinian nation or defend themselves and their people against any aggression and occupation. geoff: and nick schifrin joins us now. what is the administration weighing? nick: u.s. officials obviously will not telegraph the punch, as they put it. but until this weekend they have been very selective. in iraq and syria they responded to the 150-plus attacks before this weekend i going after things like weapons storage facilities, missiles, drones, factories. they have tried to calibrate it so they don't actually kill members of the militia so as to not escalate. same in yemen. targets over about 10 rounds have begun. missiles and drones that the houthis have been using to fire at ships, and not trying to attack houthi command and control. but this is a different size of attack. and the u.s. response is likely to be larger. there are critics of the administration today saying in

much -- must be much larger. we heard from a ranking member of the senate arms services committee. he wants to see a strike directly at a strike directly at iranian targets and his leadership. mike rogers, republican, criticized president biden, saying his fear of escalation has left him with a doctrine of appeasement. there is this argument that says the administration says a lot farther but administration officials say we do not want this to turn into a regional war. therefore we will continue to try and calibrate our response so it does not escalate. geoff: we know the cia director met over the weekend with israeli and egyptian counterpart in a meeting mediated by qatar. what came of that meeting? nick: this is about releasing hostages held by hamas in gaza in exchange stopping the war at least temporarily. that group you laid out has been effective.

they brought about the november cease-fire that led to the release of more than 100 hostages. these are four men who have met many times before. bill burns on the left, the qatari prime minister, and israeli and egyptian intelligence chiefs. they believe they have made progress. and the progress they have an outline they believe israel accepts that would allow for the release of women and children in exchange for a certain amount of time for a cease-fire. officials will not give the exact details. that round would essentially lead to a second round of more releases and then the final round would be israeli soldiers and dead bodies. u.s. officials hope is if they can make progress on that deal, which is a temporary cease-fire for the release of hostages and release of palestinians, that could lead to a more permanent

cease-fire and with the u.s. is really hoping for, progress across the region. and steps towards a two-state solution. geoff: more to come on that front. the u.n. agency that delivers aid to gaza stands accused of being infiltrated by hamas. as i understand it, israel has created a dossier about that. what does it say? nick: it was obtained by pbs newshour and it is quite damning. it said 13 staffers were involved in october 7 and four other staff were involved in kidnapping, six other staff infiltrated into israel. it also says hamas fighters have used their facilities to hide. there's also longer-term collaboration between unrwa and hamas. hamas built tunnels under the headquarters and under a school, and that in total, 10% of all of unrwa is actually hamas and palestinian jihad, about 13,000

people. but the problem is unrwa is the only game in town when it comes to delivering humanitarian aid. the u.s. has stopped funding for unrwa temporarily. but u.s. and israeli officials are acknowledging how much unrwa does. all the medical help they need right now, the freezing of funding is expected to be temporary and u.s. officials are trying to make sure it is as short as possible so that unrwa activities are not stopped. geoff: nick schifrin, thank you for reporting and unpacking all of those developments. we appreciate it. ♪ stephanie: here are the latest headlines. the israeli military announced it has killed more than 2000 palestinian gunmen in days of heavy fighting around khan younis, in southern gaza.

israeli forces also launched a new assault on gaza city after pulling back in recent weeks. at the same time, hamas fired a new volley of rockets toward israeli cities. but the israeli defense minister told troops that the offensive is working. >> naturally, terrorists will remain. we will fight in terror hotspots, and it will take months. on the other hand, they don't have supplies, they don't have ammunition, they don't have reinforcements. we have already eliminated at least a quarter of hamas' terrorists and there is a similar number wounded. stephanie: also today, the hamas-run gaza health ministry reported more than 26,600 palestinians have been killed in gaza to date. it does not differentiate between civilians and militants. there's a new disclosure about the alaska airlines plane that lost a door panel earlier this month. the wall street journal and others report that boeing increasingly believe workers may have left off some bolts during production. the panel blew out of the 737 max 9 jet as it was flying

roughly three miles above portland, oregon. most of the max 9's are still being inspected. meanwhile, boeing withdrew a request today that sought a safety exemption for its max seven aircraft. it is awaiting faa approval to begin commercial service. boeing said it will incorporate an engineering fix for an anti-ice system that does not meet safety standards instead of pursuing the exemption filed last year with the faa. the supreme court of pennsylvania ruled today that access to abortion is a fundamental right under the state constitution and it said a state ban on medicaid appears to be unconstitutional. but it sent the case back to a lower court for a definitive ruling. meantime the u.s. supreme court announced it will hear arguments on limiting access to the abortion drug mifepristone, on march 26. a hong kong court has ordered chinese real estate giant evergrande to liquidate after failing to restructure $300 billion dollars in debt.

it's the most heavily indebted of dozens of chinese developers that buckled under government pressure to rein in the red ink. traders around the world said they're watching for possible ripple effects in the global economy. >> there is bad news coming out of china and that obviously rings alarm bells with capital markets around the world. in theory, the impact could be huge because the company's debt load is very, very large and because it has a worldwide network. stephanie: evergrande's collapse could also put new pressure on china's already slowing economy. the top court for international sports disqualified russian figure skater kamila valieva today from the 2022 beijing olympics. it followed a two-year doping investigation. valieva had led her team to a gold medal, but her positive test for a banned medication was revealed hours later. now, the russians will likely be stripped of their win, and the u.s. will get the gold medal instead.

a japanese moon lander is back in action, for now, after it landed wrong side up. the country's first lunar mission made a rough landing on january 20, and its solar panels were unable to catch sunlight. today, officials said the sun's position has shifted enough to charge the batteries and let the lander analyze rocks and take pictures. a pulitzer prize winning writer n. scott momaday has died at his home in santa fe, new mexico. he was a pioneer of modern native american literature and its culture and oral tradition shaped his novels, essays, and poetry. his debut novel, "house made of dawn," won the pulitzer prize for fiction in 1969. n. scott momaday was 89 years old. still to come on the “newshour”" tamara keith and amy walter break down the latest political headlines. a psychiatrist advocates for reforming america's approach to gun safety. and an effort to honor the music written by prisoners at

auschwitz. >> 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: russia's full-scale invasion of ukraine will soon enter its third year. now, u.s. support for ukraine is in question because of republican resistance on capitol hill. nato's secretary general is here in washington this week, and he spoke with our nick schifrin from the pentagon a short time ago. nick: secretary general jens stoltenberg, welcome back to the "newshour." i want to start on the front line in ukraine. here is what one of the top u.s. defense officials who work on ukraine told journalists last week. >> we have heard reports from the ukrainian government that they have concerns that units do not have the stocks and stores of ammunition that they require. nick: from your perspective

today, how short is ukraine of the weapons it already needs? sec. stoltenberg: they need more weapons. and in particular they need more ammunition and spare parts and sustainment and that is exactly why it is important for not just the united states all of their allies commit to long-term support to ukraine. and ensure there is a steady flow of ammunition and spare parts, ammunition to ukraine. nick: there are long-term american contracts that will be going to ukraine for the next couple years, but the task at hand in washington is congress is blocking the $60 billion the administration wants to send ukraine weapons today. at this point, what do you believe nato members are able and willing to do, given that the u.s. right now cannot send further weapons short-term to ukraine? sec. stoltenberg: i believe all allies, also the united states,

will continue to provide support to the ukraine. the u.s. has demonstrated leadership, provided 10% of support to ukraine. but the reality is that european allies have also really stepped up. and if you take them altogether, european allies and canada, the total support is actually bigger than total support from the united states. i see that as there is actually broad support for continued support in the u.s. congress for support for ukraine. the challenge is that this is linked to other important issues, the situation on the border. it is not for me to go into that discussion, but i just hope there is a way to find an agreement on ukraine. nick: as we started this interview acknowledging ukraine needs weapon today, doesn't even have enough today for what it needs, and u.s. officials are

beginning to acknowledge that 2024 is likely to be a year in which ukraine just needs to hold the line, and it is actually 2025 when american weapons come online, when more european weapons come online, and ukraine weapons come online as well. that in the spring of 2025, ukraine can launch another offensive. is that how you see it? sec. stoltenberg: i will not go into the operational issues. it is for ukraine to comment on those issues. then i think it's extremely important also are timber -- also to remember when we started when russia invaded ukraine in february 2022. at that time, most experts felt ukraine would come under russian control within weeks and kyiv would be taken by russia within days. what we have seen is that ukraine has been able to liberate 50% of the land that russia controlled in the

beginning of the full-fledged war. they have been able to push back the russian fleet from the western part of the black sea, so they have opened a corridor for the export of grain and other commodities. that is extremely impressive. and strikes with cruise missiles from the u.k. and france, they have been able to inflict heavy losses on the russian armed forces. so they have achieved a lot, and they have demonstrated that the support we have provided them is making a huge difference on the battlefield every day. nick: but today, ukraine has still not found a solution for the defenses that russia has set up, especially in southern ukraine. right? sec. stoltenberg: wars are unpredictable and wars are difficult, and no one can say exactly how this war will develop in the next year. but what we do know is that the ukrainians have the courage, the determination to defend their

own land. and we also know that when they get the support from us, they are able to inflict heavy losses and gain territory in the fight with the invading russian forces. we need to stand by ukraine, both in good times would also in bad times. we cannot only be good weather supporters. and therefore, i count on all allies to continue to support ukraine, not only because it is in our security interest to ensure president putin wins in -- does not win in ukraine. if he wins, then all leaders, in china, it emboldens them to violate international law, use force, and we must prevent that from happening. nick: let's talk about political support for ukraine. last summer nato members dropped the requirement for ukraine to complete a membership action plan before it joins nato.

will there be more concrete measures taken at the summit in washington in july for nato's 75th anniversary that will send the message to both kyiv and moscow that this war will end with ukraine inside nato? sec. stoltenberg: i cannot preempt the exact conclusions from the washington summit. but first of all, that will be an important summit we want to mark the 75th anniversary of the most successful alliance in history. and i expect that allies will agree to further steps to move ukraine in closer to nato. ukraine will become a member of this alliance. that has been clearly stated by allies. and we will move them closer by turning a two-step process into a one-step process before they can become a member, which shortened the path for membership by establishing an -- nato-ukraine council.

we are deepening political cooperation. and by helping them to ensure the ukrainian armed forces are fully interoperable with nato forces. all of this is moving ukraine closer to nato, demonstrating that putin made a big mistake that he wanted to prevent ukraine from joining the eu. it's been the exact opposite. nick: let me ask you about a little american politics. donald trump has won the first two republican contests in the u.s. we went back to the archive and found this moment from a breakfast you held with the former president in 2018. >> germany as far as i'm concerned is captive to russia because it is getting so much energy from russia. so, we're supposed to protect germany, but they are getting their energy from russia. explain that. and it can't be explained, you know that. nick: does that kind of moment bring back thoughts with your relationship with the former president? sec. stoltenberg: i am the secretary-general of nato, responsible for working with 31

allies. and of course allies are elected, they elect different political leaders. the strength of the alliance is that despite differences, despite different political parties in power in different countries on both sides of the atlantic, we have always been able to unite around a core task, to protect and defend each other. and i expect that to continue to be the case. because it is a great advantage for the united states to have nato. nato is important for european security, but nato is also important for the united states. together, we represent 50% of the world's gdp, and that makes us and the west agar. -- stronger. nick: some governments are making contingency plans if donald trump were to become president again and withdraw from nato. is nato making those contingency plans? sec. stoltenberg: i am confident the united states will remain committed -- a committed nato

ally because in the interest of the united states. when they see the size of the military buildup in china and the size of the chinese economy. i also see broad bipartisan support for nato in the united states. and then when you listen to what former president trump has stated many times, his primary criticism is not about nato, it is about nato allies not spending enough on nato, not investing enough on defense. last year all allies increased spending, more allies spend 2% of gdp, and in total we added $450 billion u.s. so different organizations have called for different spending. now this is happening. nick: jens stoltenberg,

secretary-general of nato, thank you very much. sec. stoltenberg: thank you. ♪ geoff: the biden administration is hitting pause on new projects involving the export of an important source of global energy, natural gas. while the u.s. is currently the largest exporter of natural gas in the world, the white house argues the climate effects of these projects are too great to ignore. william brangham breaks down what this is all about. william: geoff, the biden administration will not approve, or even consider any new terminals that export liquified natural gas, or lng, until it completes a thorough review of their climate and national security implications. industry groups criticized the decision, while environmentalists hailed what they saw as a key victory in trying to reduce the fossil fuels that are driving climate

change. coral davenport covers energy and environmental policy for the new york times. good to have you back on the program. what are the broader implications of this pause? natural gas is not going to go away. we still all use it every single day. but especially for the markets where there is such demand for it, given the war in ukraine, what are the impacts of this? coral: this decision comes as the u.s. is the largest natural gas exporter in the world and still has more of these terminals under construction. u.s. natural gas exports are projected to double over the next four years given all the natural gas export terminals already being built even with this pause. that takes you up to about four years out. that means the u.s. is actually dominating the natural gas export market. but you have these 17 terminals waiting approval. these are the ones that will be paused. this really is a very significant shift. the white house has not said that they will be denied, but

they are really raising the environmental bar of what it takes. the u.s. government has never denied a permit to build one of these natural gas export facilities. now they are saying we are going to take climate impact of these into account and if they use a new methodology that finds the climate impact of one of these is too great to approve it, that absolutely could have a long-term systemic effect. maybe not meeting zero are ever built, but beyond five years out, this could be something that we do not see new construction of very much at all anymore. so it is a big deal. william: the industry, as you have reported, is serious about this. they say it will cost jobs, it will drive up costs. they also call this a win for russia. tell us more about their argument. coral: their argument is particularly that the u.s. has

successfully used its ability as a natural gas exporter to, for example, weaken the power that vladimir putin has, that russia has in cutting off natural gas supplies to europe. the u.s. has been able to redirect its own natural gas, supplies to send it to our allies in europe, to weaken the influence of russia. that is very powerful. that is sort of the big geopolitical argument. that said, again, the glut of natural gas exports is only growing. so it really kind of depends on what the market looks like beyond five years. and there are some analysts who say we are already reaching a place where these natural gas exports are a glut, where there is so much production, there is not enough demand. that said, we don't know what markets are going to look like in the future.

the big growth in demand will be in asia. if in the long run the u.s. is not supplying that growth in asia, what does that mean for long-term geopolitical questions? we don't have answers to those. william: the environmental community, as you know and have reported, is thrilled about this. they are surprised in some way at how fast the biden administration. moved. does this meaningfully achieve the goals they are all searching for, which is a reduction in emissions? meaning, will this have a net impact on our climate emissions? coral: climate emissions are global and they are caused -- there are so many forces that influence emission. ultimately economists will tell you the thing that reduces emissions is reduction and demand. fewer people driving gasoline powered cars, fewer people using fossil fuels for electricity. there needs to be sort of a global shift. so, will this one specific action change that?

no. but it does seem like it has really created a big shift in this one piece of the u.s. fossil fuel picture. i would say that we have seen big fights from the environmental groups, that climate activist community over the last 10 years, over the willow project, which was a big oil project in alaska. they tried to get biden to turn that down, he did not. keystone pipeline, they had a victory in stopping one single oil pipeline. this is much bigger than those, because this is not one individual project. this is a systemic change. this is a turning of the tide in a really significant way. they got a big win. william: how much of this was about politics? coral: this was an explicitly political campaign. climate activists were very disappointed in president biden for proceeding with the willow

oil drilling project in alaska last year. they felt that a lot of young voters, not necessarily would vote for donald trump, but would stay home and not work to get out the vote. the explicitly found this issue and found this project, these gas export terminals, and said we want to elevate this on social media, and we want to bring it to the president's front door, and we will punish or reward him, their words, based on what he does here. he gave them what they wanted and they are now preparing to go to swing states and use this as a moment to to turn out young voters, who are of course the largest voting demographic, hoping to bring out a couple more young voters and swing states specifically in response to this decision. william: coral davenport of the new york times, thank you so much. coral: great to be here. ♪ geoff: the u.s. senate is

nearing a vote on a bipartisan immigration and border deal, but its prospects in the house remain uncertain. that's as republican lawmakers move closer toward impeaching the homeland security secretary. with us on this monday are amy walter of the cook political report with amy walter, and tamara keith of npr. happy monday, as they say. let's talk immigration. president biden is embracing stricter border measures, speaking in support of this emerging border security and immigration deal on the hill. he is supporting policies that are tougher than the ones he has advocated for in the past. here is what he said to south carolina voters over the weekend. pres. biden: it would also give me, as president, the emergency authority to shut down the border until it can get back under control. if that bill were the law today, i'd shut down the border right now and fix it quickly. geoff: so he says he is willing to shut down the border. at the same time donald trump is trying to take the agreement, urging house speaker mike johnson not to support it. here is what donald trump says.

>> a lot of the senators are trying to say, respectfully, they're blaming it on me. i said that's ok. please blame it on me, please. because they were getting ready to pass a very bad bill. and i'll tell you what, a bad bill is -- i'd rather have no bill than a bad bill. geoff: the politics of this are so transparent. it appears that for donald trump, the problem of immigration is more politically useful than an immigration solution. tamara: he has been fairly transparent about saying that. having an issue that you can beat joe biden over the head with for the next 10 months, and an issue that independent voters, even many democratic voters, say is a real concern, and that republican voters are off the charts worried about, that is absolutely something that former president trump wants to be able to have as he campaigns against president biden.

and if somehow through magic that may not exist, a bipartisan deal were reached on immigration like and border security that problem allowed president biden to take actions and actually address this problem that everyone says is a crisis, that would be good for president biden. that would inoculate him against the charges that he is soft on the border, and certainly that is why you are hearing president biden using that language, saying i would shut it down right now. he is daring republicans to say, yeah, we want the issue, we don't want the solution. geoff: the former president trying to be magnanimous saying it is ok, blame me, as if he is not the main one driving the opposition. amy: first of all, as tam pointed out, is not just that trump wants to talk about this issue for the next few months just because. if you look at the polling, there was a wall street journal poll out a couple months ago, and he has a 25 point lead over biden on who do you trust on

border security. if we are talking about lately political, there is your reason. i do think -- and we will see if this is the case once we get to november -- there is a difference between border security and immigration. on the issue of border security there is no doubt that this is a big challenge for the child administration. this is definitely a weakness for this administration, for this president. but on immigration, you have donald trump and those around donald trump saying look, our agenda agenda on immigration will be mass deportations, it will be setting up detention centers. we are going to deputize people all to be able to go into cities and deport citizens. we have not really had that conversation yet, and that is what i am curious to see as we now move from now all through the summer and into the fall, how those two issues are playing off against each other.

geoff: let's talk more about 2024, because nikki haley says she intends to stay in the race through super tuesday. she now says he doesn't necessarily have to win south carolina, she only has to do better than she did in new hampshire and show that trendline of improvement. is she right about that? tamara: she is right that that is her message. her message coming out of iowa was that i need to do better in new hampshire. now she is headed to south carolina, she is not talking about winning. math does not favor a path where you just do a little bit better better along the way. that is because when you get to super tuesday for instance, a state like california, they changed the rules. it used to be your could pick up some congressional delegates, and she could then now she could win the suburban districts, for instance. now, if someone were to get more

than 50%, then it becomes winner take all. and it is quite likely in a two-person race with republicans voting that donald trump, based on what we have seen in the past and what we have seen in polling, donald trump is going to do better than 50%. now a state like california with a huge number of delegates on the line, she gets a goose egg. it's really hard toeep competing, to win this war of attrition to build up the delegates if you just don't win. amy: that is where the republican and democratic rules are so different. on the democratic side, as long as you hit a threshold, you got a certain number of delegates. that is not how it works on the republican side. this is especially true in a state like california, where not only if someone gets 50% they get basically all the delegates, but that registered independents do not get to vote in the republican primary. that is a big state to lose

voters who are registered as independents because many of those voters would maybe be more open to nikki haley. geoff: as we talk about the obstacles that lay before nikki haley, she is also saying that the rnc, in her view, are not playing fair. what can she point to to back that up? tamara: ronna mcdaniel on television said basically now we need to consolidate. i wish i had the exact quote, but she went on television and said nikki haley does not have a path to the nomination. she is the head of the republican party. that makes haley's case that the party is not staying independent here, it makes the case for her. now, haley can stay in the race as long as she has money to stay in the race. and what she has said is that donald trump going out there, and she described as being unhinged on new hampshire primary night, and criticizing

her dress and all of that, all of that has helped her raise small dollar donations. so she actually has the money to keep going, at least for a while. amy: and she is on a fundraising tour. she is going all across the country this week raising funds. it is not enough to really compete in these super tuesday states like california and texas which cost millions of dollars. but it keeps the campaign staff in the operations going. geoff: we have about one minute left. there is another primary this saturday, the democrats in south carolina. what are you watching for? tamara: we know that there are still two other democrats on the ballot. we have dean phillips and marion williamson. now, dean phillips put a lot of effort into new hampshire to only get somewhere around 20% of the vote. has not put much effort into south carolina, if any. let's see what those numbers look like.

if indeed there is an enthusiasm problem, there is a base problem for the president, it would show up in that total. tamara: obviously watching turnout as well as everything else. geoff: tamra keith and amy walter, thank you so much. ♪ already this year, there have been more than 3000 firearm deaths in the u.s., according to the gun violence archive. william brangham is back now with a look at a new book that critically examines how america addresses gun violence. william: in april 2018, a mentally ill white man took an ar-15 into a nashville waffle house and shot dead four young people of color. for one researcher at nearby vanderbilt university, a man who'd studied gun violence for years, that shooting prompted a deeper reckoning.

had the various gun control approaches he and others had long championed, failed? that researcher is dr. jonathan metzl. he's the director of the department of medicine, health, and society, at vanderbilt. his new book is "what we've become, living and dying in a country of arms." dr. metzl, thanks for joining us. the key message here in your book is that people who have long fought for better gun-control measures including yourself, things like red flag laws and background checks, that they have been arguing for this public health approach and you argue that approach is wrong. can you explain a little bit? dr. metzl: i would not say it is wrong. i would say i have done the last five years doing a deep dive into very traumatic and racially charged mass shooting that happen here in my hometown of nashville. what i found is that on the one hand, i'm an advocate for gun laws. i think we need stronger national gun laws. but as i uncovered the before

and after of the case and really tracked the story of how not just a mentally ill white man, but a naked white man, how did a guy like that even get a gun, how did he get to the waffle house in south nashville, and what happened afterwards. and as i uncovered that story, i started to realize that a lot of the positions i had been advocating for, background checks, red flag laws, they are vitally important, but not only would they have not stopped the shooting, but for me, they spoke to the bigger issues i address in the book about race and violence and guns in america. william: you mention in your book that the way we have treated, or thought to treat gun violence with campaigns similar with what we did with cigarettes or secondhand smoke or car safety, is not effective. why is that? dr. metzl: i tracked the history of that going back to the 1990's and i think at some point it

made sense. we had these campaigns in public health in the past. here is someone whose product is killing people. and we came in as public health advocates and experts and said, what we need to do is impose government regulation. we need to have common sense laws. we need to hold the manufacturers liable. and that approach worked in cigarettes, it worked in cars for a couple reasons. ultimately those manufacturers were liable for their products. and the second was that a lot of people across the country had relatives who had died of lung cancer, or knew people who had died in car wrecks. but unfortunately, it was a wrong turn in the gun debate because guns just meant something really different. gun manufacturers were protected from liability, from the liability lawsuits. but guns also were not amenable to the kind of government databases and regulations we were advocating because they were tied to the much longer history of the meetings of just who got to carry a gun in america, what that meant, that

tied into some of our deepest racial faultlines in this country. william: i know that as part of your research you talked with a lot of gun owners, people in the south, conservatives, second amendment absolution nests -- how do they reckon with this toll of gun violence? how do they see this as a problem? dr. metzl: four white conservative gun owners, the issue is this. they will be a mass shooting in this country. again, they don't want this kind of trauma. but then liberals like me rush in and say what we need are more government databases or more laws that empower police to put people in front of judges. they hear more regulation and more government. so really what they hear is, for a lot of gun owners i spoke to, is the reason they own guns in the first place, is they feel they mistrusted government. i ask a lot of people in the book, how do you think we can resolve this? how can we feel safe? and for them it was not more

regulation, it was basically improving community structures, improving community safety. so in the book i end up being a structuralist to take seriously, what would it mean to make communities, what would it mean to invest in communities, and really look at the upstream drivers not just of gun violence, but the upstream drivers of why people feel like they need to carry guns in public in the first place. william: help me understand something i often struggle with. you often do see reports of large polling institutions who say majorities of americans, including gun owners, support what we call quote-unquote common sense gun reforms, the kind of things you have been talking about in the past. if even gun owners support those things, why do they have such a difficult time getting connected? -- getting enacted? dr. metzl: i think there is a misnomer in that kind of data. that data is true, many people do support red flag laws, but it does not mean they vote on those

issues. that is the misperception. so if you hear somebody say i support red flag law, is not like they are going to go out if they are a liberal or democrat. they are going to vote based on many different things. they might support somebody who supports climate, or the economy, or other factors. in the difference really is historically at least, republicans vote on gun issues. that has really been the case, certainly here in tennessee and across red state america. and so part of the story is people support those laws, but that is different from if they are going to go out and vote. william: we are, as you well know, entering a year-long presidential race. there could not be a more clear delineation between how we ought to approach guns between former president trump and joe biden. how do you envision that playing out? dr. metzl: i think that shifting popular opinion, plus some of the troubles happening on the very sternly pro-gun side,

create an opening for democrats towards the end of the book, i discuss an eight part plan i think and improve the ways democrats talk to red state gun owners, that really speaks their language a lot more about gun safety entrepreneurialism, fixing larger structures, addressing the upstream drivers of why people feel like they need to carry guns. because right now what we have is trump, who is basically telling red state gun owners, i am going to let you keep your guns and keep your power, and biden who is saying i support regulation. at least for many gun owners, they are going to hear the let me keep my guns and keep my power, because it is just something that is very deep. we need to really disrupt that binary. william: jonathan metzl, thank you so much for being here. dr. metzl: thank you so much. ♪

geoff: observances were held across the world over the weekend for the annual international holocaust remembrance day. fred de sam lazaro has the story of one effort to preserve and honor the music performed by prisoners in orchestras that were a fixture in the concentration camps. his report is part of our arts and culture series, canvas. ♪ >> this is a concert about music and jewish identity. in particular, my own. fred: an unlikely theme perhaps in a minneapolis lutheran church, but coming just days after october 7 as violence erected in the middle east, a timely one. >> this is a particularly painful and perilous time for all of us.

♪ fred: the works performed by the minnesota-based aisles ensemble ranged widely. a viola and piano duet, and various works highlighting jewish experience in musical influence. this string quartet by felix mendelson, for instance, a classic jewish folksong embedded. then there was one medley that did not quite fit in. or did it? here's how it was introduced. >> this music you are going to hear is utterly shocking in its banality. heads up, it is charming cafe music. ♪

fred: banal, he added, until he -- it was performed by prisoners for the entertainment of nazi ss guards at the camp, guards apparently briefly setting aside their loathing of the presenter musicians. >> i cannot even imagine, let's put it aside for a sunday afternoon and we will pretend that we have this relationship that is not based on ethnic cleansing. ♪ fred: equally jarring, the cheerful, upbeat tempo and titles of these pieces. this tango was called, a dream of haiti. ♪ to provide more context or perspective during their

performance, it was punctuated by testimonies from the diaries of the prisoners. >> the slope from the crematorium really annoyed my colleagues. it was polluting the air, and it was hard to see the notes. >> it's unimaginable. some of those quotes, i cannot see the notes but at least i get to play, meaning, i get to live another day. and the reason i cannot see those notes, because the crematorium is bellowing smoke from dead jews. fred: the original manuscripts used by the minnesota ensemble reside permanently in the museum at auschwitz today. but they were first brought out into the world if you years ago here at the university of michigan school of music. >> i personally cannot write a manuscript that is at neat as these are. fred: patricia hall is a

professor of music theory. in 2018, she discovered hundreds of manuscript at the auschwitz museum, popular german songs of the 1930's and 1940's, arranged and adapted by prisoners for the camp orchestras. >> they took the time to create a symbol of a bird out of musical symbols. fred: in nazi death camps, being selected to play music was a much preferred assignment, and an alternative to backbreaking labor. still, it was a precarious existence. >> there was a particularly sadistic guard at the camp who would take prisoners out of the orchestra and take them to block 11 and shoot them. so there's one anecdote of one of the musicians estimating that up to 50 musicians were executed in this way. fred: just on a whim of the guard watching them? >> yeah, just a whim. you see this number, 5665.

through that number, we have this photograph. fred: hall selected a representative sample of 10, some with vocals, to reproduce for modern-day performance, trying to stay faithful to how they would have sounded in the camp. ♪ with the university ensemble, the music was performed and recorded here in ann arbor. >> i was extremely careful about retaining exactly the instrumentation. i thought these pieces were going to sound really quirky. ♪ i could not believe how beautiful they sounded. i was completely surprised.

fred: another surprise, audience reaction. she had originally planned to simply archive these recordings in the university's music library, figuring they would be too painful to hear. but hall says there was strong interest and subsequent concerts. and it peaked the interest of various musicians like ken and the isles ensemble. ♪ >> a lot of people i think were almost reluctant to applaud. >> i felt that too, until we stood up. i guess we should, but what are we clapping for here? fred: in the post concert, he saw how the music had taken the audience, as he put it, to a new

dimension. >> i just have chills. playing the music would have been one thing. but playing those quotes, so you really did imagine yourself as in the camp. >> that is kind of the reason i did today's concert. it was to provide context. because you feel music before you start to think about it. ♪ fred: music drawn for this concert from the historical breadth of jewish tradition, offered as medicine to a world wracked by conflict. for the pbs "newshour," i am fred de sam lazaro. geoff: fred's reporting is a

partnership with the under-told stories project at the university of st. thomas in minnesota. and that is the “newshour” for tonight. i'm geoff bennett. thank you for joining us and have a great evening. >> major funding for the "pbs newshour" has been provided by. >> cunard is a proud supporter of public television. on a voyage with cunard, the world awaits. a world of flavor, diverse destinations, and immersive experiences. a world of leisure, and british style. all with cunard's white star service. >> the kendeda fund, committed to advancing restorative justice and meaningful work through investments in transformative leaders and ideas.

more at kendedafund.org. supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation, committed to building a more just, verdant, and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org. and with the ongoing support of these 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. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.] >> this is pbs newshour west, from weta studios in washington and from our bureau at the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university.

>> you're watching pbs.

wow, you get to watch all your favorite stuff. it's to die for. now you won't miss a thing. this is the way. the xfinity 10g network. made for streaming. ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ -today on "america's test kitchen," erin makes bridget erbazzone, adam reveals his top picks for milk frothers,