captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. on the newshour tonight: james comey breaks his silence. the former f.b.i. director, in a statement to the senate, details how president trump asked for his personal loyalty, asked to drop the investigation into michael flynn, and called russia a "cloud" hanging over the presidency. then, the pressure is on. top u.s. intelligence officials remain tight-lipped in a high- stakes congressional hearing about whether the president has tried to influence them. >> you could clear an awful lot up by simply saying "it never happened." >> i don't share-- i do not share with the general public, conversations that i have with the president. >> woodruff: also ahead, a twist on terrorism in the middle east.

a stunning dual attack in iran leaves at least 12 dead and 40 wounded, with isis claiming responsibility. all that and more, on tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us.

>> supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the world's most pressing problems-- skollfoundation.org. >> the lemelson foundation. committed to improving lives through invention, in the u.s. and developing countries. on the web at lemelson.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. >> woodruff: our lead story tonight: james comey tells his

story. in a prepared statement to the senate intelligence committee, released one day ahead of his hearing tomorrow, the former f.b.i. director details his personal conversations with the president. nine in total, compared to just two during three years with president obama. comey describes how mr. trump asked repeatedly for a pledge of personal loyalty, asked that he drop the investigation into general michael flynn, and complained that allegations surrounding russia were a "cloud" over his presidency. comey also confirms that he told president trump that he was not under investigation himself. moments ago the president's attorney responded saying the president is pleased that comey has publicly confirmed his private reports that the president was not under investigation in any russia probe. continuing he wrote, "the president feels completely and

totally vindicated." there is a lot to unpack in this statement. we're going to walk through it now with reporter matt apuzzo of the "new york times." and, john carlin. he served as assistant attorney general for national security from 2014 until october of last year. he's now an attorney in private practice. and let's start with their first meeting on january 6, at trump tower in new york. and, matt, we're going-- i'm going to ask both of you right now about this. to set a little background. it was new york city, james comey was meeting the president for the first time. he showed up at trump tower to meet the president's national security team, and then privately, he and the president-elect then had a one-on-one session where comey shared with mr. trump information-- he called it sensitive information of a salacious nature that had been gathered as part of the russia investigation. so with that background, here is what james comey goes on to say.

they had a meeting-- here are some specifics now. beginning with a dinner at the white house three weeks later-- now, this is january 27, after mr. trump is president. on that day, the president invited comey over. they dined alone in the green room. and here's how comey describes its.

a few minutes later the president said: matt apuzzo, how does this square with the reporting you've done? >> well, a lot of the-- a lot of the details here, my colleagues and i have been reporting out here over the last several weeks. but it's hard to overstate just the extraordinary nature of the portrait we're seeing here. we're really get ago we're really getting the back story to the jim comey firing. we're seeing a president who was preoccupied with, as you said, getting the cloud lifted, the cloud of this russia investigation that was-- become a real liability for the trump administration from day one. and the idea that at this private dinner that the president starts their relationship by asking for this loyalty pledge, you just read these memos, you can see comey,

his anxiety here in the words. it just it's uncomfortable-- you know, the discomfort he has is palpable. and you can see trump getting more and more frustrated that, you know, why is thissify gooi not doing what i'm asking? >> woodruff: john carlin from your perspective what, is the significance over the change of the president asking for loyalty? >> well, the f.b.i. has a unique institutional role, as does the department of justice. and so, because both the f.b.i. and prosecutors in the department of justice may be called upon to investigate potential criminal activity by members of the president's party, by actual members of the administration, and in some circumstances, investigate conduct of a president him or herself, there's been a history where the department has attempted to shield itself from political interference. and there have been times in that history where maintaining that independence has been particularly fraught.

>> woodruff: right. >> in my tenure as chief of staff at the f.b.i., and in my time at the department, i can't recall something quite like this. >> woodruff: and i just want to pick up on-- later on in that january 27 dinner, alone with with the president in the white house in the green room, mr. comey writes, he says: is that something, john carlin, that was appropriate? >> well you can see how the president's demanding loyalty that might be appropriate in some other context of a political campaign, or even worrying parts of the administration. but director comey is very focused, it look likes in that exchange and understands the unique independence that the role of the f.b.i. director, and the reason why want statute was changed so that want f.b.i.

director's term of years is 10 years, designed to cut across administrations to ensure that the president who appointed the director, that the director would outlast the tenure of that president. and so director comey, i think, is trying to explain in this awkward context why he'll be honest, not disloyal in some sense, but loyal ultimately to the constitution and the country. >> woodruff: well, now i want to turn, both of you, to this-- i think it was their next meeting, february the 14th, in a meeting in the oval office. now, this time it was with the president, the vice president, the attorney general, several other senior administration officials. at the end of that meeting, the president asked everyone to leave, except for comey. and according to mr. comey's statement, mr. trump turned back to the subject of general michael flynn, who had been fired just the day before, and he said:

matt apuzzo, how does that square with what you've reported? >> my colleague, michael schmidt, broke that exchange a few weeks ago. but it's no less-- it's no less remarkable seeing it i in that full context, seeing the president ask everybody to leave the oval office and speak alone with the head of the f.b.i. and say, you know, let flynn go. just the very nature-- people-- we don't have to be in washington to understand why that makes-- you know, makes us feel uncomfortable. i mean, anybody who has ever fought a ticket in court, you know, knows that they don't-- they don't want to feel like the criminal justice system is rigged for people who are friendly with the politicians. and so if you're at the f.b.i.,

yes, you are part of the administration. you're part of the department of justice. but they just don't see themselves as working for the president when it comes to criminal justice stuff. and as john said, certainly not when the investigation touches on the president's own associates. >> woodruff: so, continuing that now, this is afterward, the same day, february 14, comey writes he spoke with the attorney general in person. he said: -- the attorney general was one of those who had been asked to leave the oval office-- john carlin, how do we read this? >> i'll tell you, there have been instances before, let's say

in a terrorism incident or a major shooting, in my appearance, where the white house would sometimes reach out directly to the f.b.i. and it raised concerns even when that was the context, and there were usual media calls over to the attorney general to ensure that the department was aware of the contact directly with the white house or with immediate aides to the president. but to have the president of the united states order people out of the room in order to-- you know, if true. according to this account-- in order to implore the director of the f.b.i. to drop an investigation of a friend or associate, that's the core of why many of our rules and customs were in place was to prevent exactly that type of conversation or interference from occurring. >> woodruff: so now, here we are, a month and a half later, this is march 30, the president phones jim comey at the f.b.i. he repeatslet idea of a cloud

over his administration because of the russia investigation. h so, matt apuzzo, we're back to that same scenario, back and forth, where the president is asking the f.b.i. director to do something. >> yeah. i mean, look, you can see why donald trump might be frustrated, right. setting aside the fact that he's the president. if you've been told "you are not under investigation personally," but yet your administration can't escape the cloud of this investigation, and you kind of just want it to be over, you can see why you would say, "hey, what do i have to do to make this go away? if i'm not under investigation, why can't you just say that?" that's a very human response. but as john said, there's a reason, and there's a process that you're supposed to go

through when you reach out on stuff like this. >> woodruff: and just finally, john, we're not showing anymore graphics from the statement, but it was on march 30, there was another phone call where the president again called, complaining about the cloud over his presidency. and in that conversation, he said, "if there were some satellite associates of his who did something wrong, it would be good to find that out. but that he hadn't done anything wrong and hoped i would find a way to get it out there." and then he called mr. comey again on april the 11th, and talked about loyalty, back and forth. he said, "i've been very loyal to you." in essence, saying, will you be loyal back to me? and he said at this point, "i didn't answer him." and you also, today, finally now, john carlin, have the president's attorney saying the president feels vindicated. >> well, i think in those conversations and in that back-and-forth, you also had director comey informing the

president, according to this opening statement, that he had recounted their previous conversation to the then-acting deputy attorney general dana bente. when the president called i think the second tiernlg the president referenced and said, "should i reach out?" and it sounds like director comey tried to say yes, you should, through white house counsel. and the idea of making a potentially making public the results of an investigation, the appropriate channel, the one that's set up-- there's actually a memorandum on white house contacts that's designed to ensure that that type of contact takes place lawyer to lawyer, white house counsel to deputy attorney general, to avoid either the actuality of interference with an investigation or the appearance. and you can see this kind of confused back-and-forth. to meesh the most troubling of the exchanges that are detailed-- and the rest do provide context for it-- would be the direct request to end an

investigation of an associate, if true, related to the investigation of flynn. >> woodruff: and, matt apuzzo, finally, very quickly, the fact that director comey made these notes immediately after each one of these meetings or phone calls i think adds to the remarkable nature of all this. >> that's right. i mean, you have a-- you have an f.b.i. director who cleecial was so uncomfortable with these interactions he felt he had to document them. not just documented them. "this is where he was sitting and this is where he was sit expig walked out the door near the grandfather clock and halfway through, this guy knocked on the door." i mean, it is really detailed stuff that is clearly intended for future consultation and to say this isn't just my memory. i sat down and did this in real time. >> woodruff: we should point out once again the president's attorney has issued a statement today saying the president feels vindicated. he, in essence, thanked james comey for repeating the fact, he said, that the president himself was not under investigation.

so this will clearly continue. we're going to hear from mr. comey tomorrow himself. john carlin, matt apuzzo, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> woodruff >> woodruff: so, the release of the comey statement today came not long after top intelligence officials appeared before the senate intelligence committee. in public session, at least, they declined to discuss conversations with the president about russia, or james comey. our lisa desjardins begins our coverage. >> reporter: this was supposed to be about "fisa"-- the foreign surveillance law used to thwart terror attacks. instead, the senate intelligence hearing became a high-stakes dance over the russia investigation and president trump. national security agency director michael rogers began by saying: >> i have never been directed to do anything i believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical, or inappropriate. and to the best of my recollection during that period,

i don't recall ever feeling pressured to do so. >> reporter: but after that, it was a day of senators' questions and intelligence officials' sidesteps. >> did the president-- the reports that are out there-- ask you in any way, shape or form, to back off or downplay the russia investigation? >> i'm not going to discuss the specifics of conversations with the president of the united states. >> reporter: adding gravity today, a flurry of new headlines overnight: the "new york times" reported that former f.b.i. director james comey asked not to be left alone with president trump, for fear of being pressured; the "washington post" said the president asked the director of national intelligence to intervene in the f.b.i.'s probe of former national security adviser, michael flynn; that d.n.i. dan coats was in today's hearing and would not confirm or deny the story. >> i'm willing to come before the committee and tell you what i know and what i don't know. what i'm not willing to do is to

share what i think is confidential information, that ought to be protected, in an open hearing. >> reporter: republican marco rubio began by defending the president. >> i actually think, if what is being said to the media is untrue, then it is unfair to the president of the united states. >> reporter: but in an effort to bolster that view, he got confusion. >> is anyone aware of any effort, by anyone, in the white house or elsewhere, to seek advice on how to influence any investigation? >> my answer is absolutely no, senator. >> no one has... anything to add to that? >> i don't understand the question. >> reporter: democrat martin heinrich went further, pressing coats if trump asked him to blunt the investigation. >> you could clear an awful lot up by simply saying "it never happened." >> i don't share-- i do not share with the general public, conversations that i have with the president or many of my colleagues within the administration that i believe

are-- should not be shared. >> well, i think your unwillingness to answer a very basic question speaks volumes. >> reporter: independent angus king hammered the intel chiefs for neither answering, nor explaining why they weren't answering. >> is it an invocation of executive privilege? if there is, then let's know about it. if there isn't, answer the questions. >> i stand by the comments i've made. i'm not interested in repeating myself, sir. and i don't mean that in a contentious way. >> well, i do mean it in a contentious way. i don't understand why you're not answering our questions. >> reporter: ultimately, the top two intel chiefs said they were the white house, while deputym attorney general rod rosenstein and acting f.b.i. director andrew mccabe indicated they don't want to harm the current special investigation. as for president trump himself, he was in cincinnati for an infrastructure event, and avoided all talk of russia or the f.b.i. but online, he did announce

christopher wray as his nominee for the new f.b.i. director. wray is a criminal defense lawyer and former federal prosecutor who headed the criminal division at the department of justice. he's also known for representing new jersey governor chris christie in his so-called "bridgegate" scandal. but before any new director starts, the spotlight remains on the man just fired from the job, who testifies on capitol hill tomorrow. >> woodruff: and lisa joins us now from the capitol. lisa, it was a rivetting hearing. you talked to some of the senators afterwards. what are they saying? >> i think they're actually drawing two conclusion from today, one, judy, democrats feel increasingly that this trump administration has a real problem with both the investigation and how it is handling it. two, the second conclusion, democrats and republicans alike are not just frustrated. they're now concerned about the lack of answers that they got today and that they've been getting in the congressional probe here. i spoke to senator john mccain, a man who you will remember wished he was an ex-president right now.

he said after walking away from that hearing he felt that the balance of power has clearly shifted to the executive. what they're saying here, judy, is they're worried about congress' power and congress' responsibility to look into these matters. >> woodruff: now, on james comey, he did get his opening statement, and we have been dissecting that on the program. but what are the senators looking for tomorrow? >> that statement has shifted expectations here on capitol hill. for one, i think democrats now are very happy to see that comey, indeed, plans to lay out all the red flags he saw in his conversations with president trump. they will certainly spend a lot of time on that. republicans, meanwhile, we'll see what they ask. we know some of their questions will push back on mr. comey. he testified previously in committee, he indicated that he didn't think there was any anypolitical pressure on him. expect that kind of push-back. but i think overall, judy, this day began here on capitol hill with many people thinking james comey's testimony might not live up to its very prominent bilge. but now, judy, it looks like it

just might. >> stewart: glg well, it was already-- everybody was watching it, and now more than everyone will be watching. i know you will be there with us at the capitol. lisa, thank you. and we will be here with live coverage of tomorrow's senate hearing with former f.b.i. director james comey, beginning at 10:00 a.m. eastern. that's here on pbs, and online at www.pbs.org/newshour. in the day's other news, the islamic state, or isis, stunned the nation of iran with an attack into the heart of its capital city, tehran. the targets: parliament, and the shrine to the revolutionary leader, ayatollah ruhollah khomeini. when it was over, 13 people were dead, plus six attackers. we will have a full report, right after the news summary. in britain, the death toll rose to eight in saturday's london bridge attack. teams had been searching the river thames. today, they recovered a body, and the president of france said it was a 45-year-old frenchman

who had been missing. police also made another arrest today in connection with the bridge killings. president trump spoke by phone today with the ruler of qatar. the white house says he offered to help repair a breach with arab states, who accuse the oil kingdom of supporting terror. a day earlier, mr. trump appeared to support claims made by saudi arabia and other nations against qatar. meanwhile, russia's foreign minister denied a cnn report that russian hackers planted a fake story with qatar's state news agency, that led to the diplomatic break. >> ( translated ): i think that cnn-- like some other mass media outlets, that are not fully are just waiting for the type of story that stinks, or some scandal, to automatically, without any evidence, add this episode to the list of russian sins, russian hackers or someone else linked to the russian federation. >> woodruff: the african nation of mauritania today became the latest to cut diplomatic

relations with qatar. a warning today to american armed forces inside syria. militia groups supporting president bashar al-assad threatened to hit u.s. targets if the u.s. crosses what they call any more "red lines." just yesterday, american planes bombed pro-government fighters in southern syria. the pentagon says they came close to u.s.-backed opposition forces. back in this country, president trump renewed his call to commit $1 trillion in the years ahead to overhauling the nation's infrastructure. in cincinnati, he said he has heard the pleas of voters, and the days of rebuilding other countries are over. >> we spend trillions and trillions of dollars outside our nation, but we can't build a road, a highway, a tunnel, a bridge in our own nation. and we watch everything falling into disrepair. it's time to rebuild our country, to bring back our jobs, to restore our dreams.

>> woodruff: the president also met with family business owners he said were victims of rising insurance premiums under obamacare. and, he vowed republicans will replace it, "or bust." and, on wall street today, the dow jones industrial average gained 37 points to close at 21,173. the nasdaq rose 22, and the s&p 500 added three. we return to the attacks in iran, the implications and consequences, and the wider picture in a greatly-unsettled region. in a moment, william brangham will speak with experts on those questions. but to begin, chief foreign affairs correspondent margaret warner reports on today's terror in tehran, that killed 13 and wounded more than 40. ( gunfire ) >> reporter: it was mid-morning when the first shots echoed from the iranian parliament building. gunmen-- some reportedly dressed as women-- stormed in with rifles and suicide vests. at least one blew himself up

outside the parliament chamber. another ran back outside and began firing in the streets. >> ( translated ): when we were close to the parliament in a taxi, there were more gunfire sounds. people were panicked and started running away and seeking shelter. >> reporter: the resulting siege with police went on for hours. near the same time, the shrine of iran's revolutionary founder, ayatollah khomeini, was hit. >> reporter: authorities say, in the end, six attackers were killed and five arrested. the islamic state group immediately claimed responsibility, the first time the sunni extremist group has struck successfully inside shiite iran. the militants put out video of the assault while it was still under way. one attacker says: "do you think we will go away? no! we will remain, god willing."

ayatollah ali khamenei, the islamic republic's supreme leader, was defiant. >> ( translated ): the firecracker play that took place today will have no effect on the people's will. however, these incidents proved that if the islamic republic had not resisted at the epicentre of these seditions in iraq and syria, we would be dealing with many troubles caused by them inside the country now. >> reporter: but charlie winter of the international center for the study of radicalization at king's college, london, says that for isis, attacking iran is like taking the crown jewel-- a major coup. >> striking iran like this is akin to striking the united states, or israel. i mean, this is really a huge symbolic victory for the islamic state. in terms of its propaganda, i think the group will be talking about this moment for years to come. >> reporter: this attack comes as isis is under pressure from iranian-backed militias in syria and iraq, as well as from the u.s.-backed coalition.

the isis-controlled iraqi city of mosul has all but fallen to government forces, aided by the shiite militias. and in syria, u.s.-backed kurdish fighters have opened a full-on assault to reclaim the islamic state's capital, raqqa. it also occurs amidst a spike in the tense rivalry between iran and the sunni arab states led by saudi arabia. last month, president trump rallied arab nations to oppose terror, and iran, especially. and on monday, the saudis and others cut ties to qatar, citing, in part, its ties to iran. moreover, just hours before today's attack, saudi foreign minister adel al-jubier said iran "must be punished" for its interference in the region. after the attacks, iran's revolutionary guard accused the saudis, saying: "the fact that islamic state has claimed responsibility proves that they

the saudis, were involved." charlie winter says this turn of events further complicates regional politics and the fight against isis. >> regional politics are kind of balancing on a knife edge, at the moment. the more actors there are involved in this war, the more confusing it'll get, the more bogged down states around the world will get. >> reporter: in a statement this afternoon, the white house voiced sympathy for the victims, but said, "states that sponsor terrorism risk falling victim to the evil they promote." for the pbs newshour, i'm margaret warner. >> brangham: so what does this first-ever isis attack inside actually iran mean, and how might tehran respond? to help us with that, i'm joined by two people with deep knowledge of iran and its role in the region: randa slim is director of the track ii dialogues initiative at the middle east institute. and, karim sadjadpour is a senior fellow in the middle east program at the carnegie endowment for international peace. welcome to you both. randa slim, i would like to start with you. i wonder if you could just help

us-- give us your sense, your first reaction to this attack. and in particular, why you believe, perhaps, these two targets were chosen in tehran. >> well, they are important symbols for the islamic republic. and they-- especially the moz moslium, the attack outside is something that is seen by the isis community, or the community that is pro-isis, as being an important symbol attack because it symbolizes the heart and founder of the islamic republic. and so it is-- it is a first attack claimed by isis in iran. they have been trying to do this attack for some time. and i think the fact that they have been able to succeed today will not diminish iranian regime

resolve to fight isis if in iraq, for example-- although i have to say, in syriaing, they are not devoting much resources to fight isis. leaving the americans to that. and fighting the syrian opposition, the non-jihadi syrian opposition. >opposition. >> iran has been heavily invested in regional conflictss. they poured billions of dollars. they had thousands of casualties likewise in iraq. but they've been largely immune to the casualties in the middle east. the iranian people haven't suffered the same way as peoples in the region have suffered. so this was a major breach in tehran. but i still think the fact that iran is a country which is about 90% shiite muslim, the city of tehran is probably over 95% shiite muslim, i don't think

that isis is going to continue to be able to make these kinds of attacks in iran because they don't have the reservoir of support in iran that they may have elsewhere in the arab world. >> as we heard in margaret warner's package in the beginning, isis hitting iran in particular was like them stealing the crown jewels. for those of us who don't understand, why is that such an attractive target to them? >> isis represents a-- the caliphate jihadi wing of radical-- radical wing of sunni islam. and this is a form of sunni islam that looks at shi'as, which is the main religion of iran, as being apost eights. and they look at their vision of islam and their mission of islam is to cleanse islam of these apostates, meaning the shi'a.

also, isis is fighting for its survival. this is isis basically staking a claim in the leadership of this sunni radical jihadi form of sunni islam, even after they are defeated in mosul and after they are defeated in raqqa. >>ica karim, we saw iran immediately blamed saudi arabia for this attack. what do you make of that accusation? >> iran and saudi arabia have long been accusing one another of fueling isis. for the iranians, isis is a by-product of saudi... ideology and saudi financing. sot saudis, isis is a by-product of iranian support for-- shi'a militias in iraq which are killing sunnis en mass. the reality is that isis poses a grave threat to iran, but an even griever threat to saudi arabia.

so in theory these two countries have a mutual adversary in isis. but what iran has been doing which i think is quite dangerous is conflating saudi arabia and isis, and they put their finger on something which has a powerful resonance amongst iranians and whether you're a shiite cleric, or a secular iranian opponent of the regime living in los angeles, there is this kind of persian nationalism against saudi arabia. they're trying to harness that. but what's dangerous about that is not that they blamed saudi arabia for this attack and retallation, this really has a danger of escalatin escalating e regional war between iran and saudi arabia, which has really eclipsed the conflict and the destabilization of the middle east. >> very strong tensions between iran and saudi arabia. we also have a proxy war going on between the two nations in yemen. do you think this attack today--

i guess i'm asking, are we getting potentially closer to an all-out conflict between iran and saudi arabia? >> look, this attack definitely contributes to further escalation in an already-volatile region and in an already-tense relationship between the two regional powers. and as we have seen in the past, when iran and saudi arabia fight or escalate their fight, it doesn't stay with saudi arabia and iran. it reverberates throughout the region. and because one way by which they wage this competition between them is through proxy fights in the rest of the region, be it in yemen, be it in syria, be it in iraq, or even be it in lebanon. so we are likely to see as tensions and as things escalate between the two countries, we are likely to see that being played out again in yemen and being played out in syria and being played out in iraq. what's problematic here is that

instead of the two regional countries-- iran and saudi arabia-- focusing their resources and working together on fighting a common economy to both of them, which is isis, we are seeing this now escalation in the relationship between them, leading both to divert their resources and their attention from the real joint enemy which is isis and focusing it on waging this fight and this competition between them in different proxy sites around the region. >> kaare, im, i wonder what you believe the trump administration's response to all this is going to be. >> the trump administration has gone back to the status quo anti-u.s. policy which is cooperation with saudi arabia and containment of iran. i oftentimes think president trump views this as simply siding with one team against another, and that's a dangerous recipe in the middle east. >> all right, karim sadjadpour, randa slim, thank you both very much. >> thank you.

>> woodruff: campaigning has ended in the fiercely contested british general election. prime minister theresa may, of the conservative party, called the vote in order to boost her authority as britain negotiates its withdrawal from the european union. her main challenge comes from labour party leader jeremy corbyn. but the campaign has been overshadowed by two recent terrorist attacks. special correspondent malcolm brabant reports from london. >> reporter: along with many young britons, steve and keeley whitton dream of raising their children in a home of their own. london's expensive real estate is beyond their reach, and so they live with steve's parents. but, affordable housing isn't top of their election agenda. saturday's terrorist attack, two miles from where they live, is. >> a couple of times when we've gone out, we've had the

conversation, what are we going to do if something happens? >> if something did happen, just having a plan, basically. so i'll grab one kid, she'll grab the other. in the past couple of weeks after the terrorist attacks in manchester and london, security has gone up in my own agenda, as far as who i'm going to vote for, and i think a lot of people are looking at who's going to be best going to deliver security. >> reporter: vigilance, tolerance and remembrance unite these people. they're from borough market, where the three islamist terrorists lashed out with knives before being shot dead. the traders have been kept away from their businesses, while forensics experts gathered evidence. >> so we're going to keep a moment of silence. they're keeping it at the other end of the bridge in st paul's cathedral. they know we're here. we know they're there. we're standing in solidarity. the two cathedrals and our communities together. >> reporter: sir simon hughes

was the area's member of parliament for 32 years, for the liberal democrats, the third largest party. he lost his seat to the labour candidate in 2015. winning it back would hurt labour and help theresa may. >> actually, the public services are at the top of people's agenda. people want us to have the police we need, the nurses we need, the doctors we need. it is now an issue, the security of the country. dealing with the very few people who want to disrupt us is a major political issue now in this country, and it will be the biggest single issue on the desk of the incoming prime minister and the incoming government. >> reporter: the belief that radicalization and terrorism are fuelled by deprivation, social isolation, and britain's military campaigns abroad will guide jill rose at the ballot box. >> there are two issues. there are the immediate, about how we stop, or try and stop more terrorist attacks, and then, the bigger picture, which is equally important. and for me, that means voting labour in terms of the approach, changing this world that really goes back to the cuts and the

approach of the current government. >> welcome the leader of the labour party, jeremy corbyn. >> reporter: jeremy corbyn's achilles' heel is security, say his critics. they fear britain's defense would be weakened by a lifelong self-professed pacifist taking control of britain's trident nuclear missile system. >> we obviously have to try to protect ourselves. we would not use it as first use. and if we did use it, millions are going to die. you have to think these things through. >> close down nato! >> reporter: this conservative ad uses corbyns past and words to attack him. >> fight all the cuts, except those in the armed forces. our friends from hezbollah, friends from hamas. >> i don't think people need fear because he said something 30 years ago, or appeared with somebody. you know, we've all had our past and our histories. >> reporter: kate hoey has been a labour m.p. for 28 years, and is being targeted because she

supported brexit. >> i think jeremy would know that being p.m., the first duty is to protect the british public. and i think, even though he has said things in the past, people grow into a job. and i think i've seen changes in jeremy, i've known him for a very long time, and even over the last year, i have seen how he's changed, in terms of the way he puts his views. >> please welcome the leader of the conservative party, the prime minister, theresa may >> reporter: when theresa may called the snap election in april, the conservatives were 17% ahead of labour. her refusal to debate corbyn helped erode the advantage. >> you've called a general election for the good of the conservative party, and it's going to backfire on you. >> no, i called a general election because i believe the british people have a right to vote and to say who they want to see leading them through the brexit negotiations. >> she has personally been winged like a bird's been winged. she has appeared inadequate and indecisive. she has changed her mind, and

pretended that she hasn't changed her mind, and i don't think people will ever see her in quite the same way again. >> reporter: from his thames- side warehouse loft, former conservative m.p. matthew parris, now a respected columnist, has written some damning commentaries about the prime minister. >> she doesn't have those "quicksilver qualities," that are perhaps needed in a statesman and in negotiation. she's rigid. >> the conservative party can build a better britain. >> reporter: this song, banned from the air by the bbc, has hit the top of the british charts. >> ♪ she's a liar, liar, liar you can't trust her oh, no, no, no ♪ >> reporter: but above this betting shop in east london, there's optimism in the campaign office of conservative candidate lee scott. he's trying to reclaim a seat lost to labour in 2015, and says he's reaping the benefit of may's promise to crack down on extremists. >> they are totally committed to going out and voting for me.

>> anyone slightly to the right is being made to feel almost guilty to be center right. >> do you know they want to make people feel guilty to love their country, guilty to stand up for what's right, guilty for wanting to have a firm law and order policy? they're not going to work. and on the doorsteps, people are saying to me, it's about strong leadership. strong leadership is coming from theresa may, certainly not from mr. corbyn. >> reporter: the latest opinion polls suggest that theresa may's gamble will pay off, and that she'll be returned to office with an increased majority. but, many pollsters have been wrong in the recent past, most notably failing to correctly predict the brexit vote in last year's e.u. referendum. for the pbs newshour, i'm malcolm brabant in london. >> woodruff: thank you. and we'll be back shortly with our continuing student reporting lab series, "limitless," about people living with disabilities. but first, take a moment to hear from your local pbs station.

>> woodruff: next, we take a second look at the specific skills some companies want their entry-level employees to have, and what colleges can do to prove their graduates are ready to hit the ground running. hari sreenivasan has this story, which originally aired last fall. >> sreenivasan: graduation day at georgetown university. it takes four years, more than $200,000, and a lot of hard work to get here. but now, more employers are asking, what does a four-year degree really mean? what true, marketable skills can new graduates offer the workforce? georgetown university is trying to answer that question. >> we're hearing from employers, "how do you differentiate between two graduates?" >> sreenivasan: professor randall bass leads the college's designing the future initiative. >> if you have got a pile of ten graduates who all have degrees

from quality liberal arts schools and they all look more or less alike in terms of their formal credentials, are there ways to differentiate them? >> sreenivasan: last semester, bass and colleagues at georgetown offered a free experimental course for students who want to further distinguish themselves. instead of receiving a traditional credit, students who meet the requirements are awarded a digital badge. >> what we see in the badges is a way of trying to help students tell a story about some dimension of their learning that might otherwise be merely a line on their resume. >> a resume has never been enough. that's why the concept of badging is appealing to me. >> sreenivasan: job recruiters, like desy osunsade, see digital badges as a way to better define talent. >> we spend a lot of time and money as recruiters trying to make sure that we have the perfect fit because recruiting is expensive. >> sreenivasan: osunsade recruits for arabella philanthropic investment

advisors. she says a degree doesn't say enough about a potential hire. >> it tells me the person's line of study. it doesn't tell me if they are good at things like critical thinking, problem-solving, do they work well in teams, do they have oral communication? a resume, in itself, with a degree from anywhere doesn't tell me that. >> sreenivasan: the digital badge offered by georgetown is called a catalyst badge. alexis oni-eseleh participated in the pilot. >> the catalyst badge is just affirming that when we see something that needs to be changed, we just go about it, proving that you are an agent of change in accomplishing the goals you set for yourself. >> sreenivasan: don fraser, from the education design lab, works with georgetown, george mason university, and university of virginia, as part of a larger effort called the 21st century skill badging challenge. if i'm an employer, i'm going to get a better employee if they have badges that say they are a creative problem solver or critical thinker, a good oral communicator?

>> if there's rigor in those badges, i would... and those are skills that you find valuable in the work that you're doing, i would say yes. >> sreenivasan: more so than just if they came out of a specific school with a certain degree? >> exactly, right, because they have been working specifically to acquire those skills, which is totally different than the implicit way in which we believe they are getting those right now, hoping that by the time they graduate and get this degree, they have gained these skills in some capacity. >> sreenivasan: anthony carnevale is the director of the georgetown university center on education and the workforce. >> what's happening is that the on-the-job training is no longer sufficient because employers don't commit to employees for a lifetime the way they used to. so, we have got to get our own job training. >> sreenivasan: in may, alexis oni-eseleh graduated from georgetown with a major in global health and a minor in women's gender studies. since graduation, she has been helping with her parents' company and will start a more

serious job search this fall. >> here it is, certification catalyst credential. i had to pass a certain level of criteria, which you can find here. and if you click there, it will take you to this web site, which tells you everything i needed to do to become a catalyst. the catalyst credential is awarded to a student who embraces challenges, demonstrates initiative, pursues positive social change. >> you host them online, and they're hosted digitally. people have the ability to click on that badge and get at the metadata associated with how the learner, the student, achieved that particular badge. so, if i am so inclined, i can look at assessments that were a part of that badge. i can look at the work, the body of work that the student did in order to earn that badge. >> the same degree from different schools produces different workers. >> sreenivasan: some emerging for-profit education ventures see a much bigger role for digital badges. >> a degree doesn't say a lot; a badge or a micro-credential can say a lot more.

>> sreenivasan: ryan craig is the author of "college disrupted: the great unbundling of higher education." >> the primary credential that we use in our labor market is the degree. that's the sort of default credential. micro-credentials, or badges, breaks that down into literally competencies. what micro-credentials are signaling is the shift from degree-based hiring to competency-based hiring. >> that's right, linkedin, i's not just for top executives. it's for you, and it's the perfect place for you to start your professional story. >> sreenivasan: craig points to microsoft and its recent purchase of linkedin as new players in the field of post- secondary education, because they offer educational training, certificates, and a marketplace to display skills. >> competency marketplaces, we think, are the way in which, a decade from now, most post- secondary education will be purchased. >> sreenivasan: but anthony carnevale cautions that

commercial badges, micro- credentials, and certificates need more scrutiny. >> it's a whole industry where there's no transparency, no consumer protection. so, let the buyer beware of what happened to the people who took this course, got this badge, so that people can tell if something is worth the money. >> sreenivasan: alexis oni- eseleh says she recently used the catalyst badge in a job interview. >> the interviewer asked me to talk about a time where i showed initiative, and i was able to talk about the digital badge and all the steps i had to take in order to get it and to qualify for it. and i even encouraged her to go look up the digital badge on my linkedin page. >> sreenivasan: this fall, designers of the badge challenge are expanding their reach to colleges who serve non- traditional students, who often have a harder struggle to find jobs. in washington, d.c., i'm hari sreenivasan for the pbs newshour. >> woodruff: now we continue our series, "limitless:" conceived

of, filmed and edited by middle and high school students, who take a look at how people with disabilities deal with the challenges of everyday life. tonight, a remarkable young boy who was born with a heart defect the story was produced by our student reporting lab at dalton middle school in dalton, georgia. the student correspondent is eighth grader emma kate woods. >> i was born with a hypoplastic left heart, which, it's very rare, and, it's, you're born with literally half of heart. >> reporter: jerry bruce hennon is a happy, easygoing, 11-year- old boy who was born with a congenital heart disease. >> your heart beats like ba bum, ba bum. mine was that, but, ba bum, ba bum, ba bum, twice as fast. and it had to work for left and right. and this hand's always been weak. it's getting stronger. >> reporter: hypoplastic left heart syndrome is a birth defect where the left side of the heart does not form correctly,

severely restricting blood flow through the heart. as a result, the heart cannot pump oxygen-rich blood through the body properly, causing a life-threatening condition. when he was three days old, jerry bruce suffered a stroke, leaving his left side partially paralyzed. in order to live, jerry bruce needed a heart transplant, which he fortunately received on june 4, 2016, a procedure he knows has changed his life. >> the transplant-- i feel like that's the greatest and worst possible thing that could ever happen to me. >> reporter: jerry bruce is very close with his family, especially his mother. >> this bond is the strongest between a mother and a son to ever live. i promise you that. >> you know, i don't know if anybody else with a special needs child will understand that. you do love all of your

children, but it's just different. his little classmates are tight and take good care of him, you know. i think they'll always be there and he's got a good support group in his class. >> reporter: a student at westwood elementary school, his classmates and his fourth grade teacher ms. bailey have seen his struggles first hand. >> he's had such a tough little life. he's had to go through so much from birth. so, i think all of the surgeries and things like that he's had throughout his entire existence on earth make him stronger as an individual, but he's still the same little boy. he's no different. >> reporter: jerry bruce's strength and determination have made him a local hero, earning the nickname "superman." >> i think he just loves, like, superman, like, batman, and all that stuff. our school has really reflected on that, just him being like superman and like saving the world and all that.

>> just the joy that god's given you is like a chance because most people don't get that. >> you just want your child to live, or that's, that's how i felt. and i, you know, he could be a rocket scientist. you don't have to play football to be a man or a successful person. >> jerry we are in awe of you, and emma kate, you have a future as a reporter. that's the newshour for tonight. and a reminder, we will be back tomorrow morning with live coverage of former f.b.i. director james comey's testimony before the senate. that begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern right here on pbs, and online at www.pbs.org/newshour. i'm judy woodruff. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you, and we'll see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> bnsf railway.

>> supported by the rockefeller foundation. promoting the wellbeing of humanity around the world, by building resilience and inclusive economies. more at www.rockefellerfoundation.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and individuals. >> 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 sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by

>> rose: welcome to the program. we begin this evening with a preview of former f.b.i. director james comey's testimony to the senate intelligence committee on thursday. also a conversation about global politics. we talk to zanny minton of "the economist" magazine and roger cohen of the "new york times." also al hunt of "bloomberg view" and robert costa of "the washington post." >> there's a sense in new york that the u.s. is no longer exerting the leadership of the western system, that, under donald trump, the america-first agenda is one way he views the world as a zero sum world where america's interests can't be different to those of the rest of the world, it's no longer a community of nations as h.r. mcmaster and gary cohn penned in the "wall street journal" last week and i think it's a big shot. i