hello and welcome to kqed newsroom. i'm thuy vu. the latest on climate change and the political developments including today's announcement by jeff sessions that he's tripling the number of investigations into leaks, more analysis ahead. but first a look at international affairs. the investigation into ties between russia and president trump's campaign continues to widen, as special counsel robert mueller and a grand jury issues subpoenas. tensions are mounting with russia after the president signed a new package of sanctions by congress. and the north korea escalating missile test are causing alarm with senator dianne feinstein calling it a clear and present danger.

and joining me now is congressman eric salwell on the house intelligence committee. thank you for being here. >> thanks for having me back. >> i want to ask you about today's news. what are your thoughts on the leaks and the investigation. >> i'm concerned about the leaks, that people on the president's team are concerned about his policies and governing that he's leaking out conversations but they are not the biggest national security issue and he said the leaks, the leaks, the leaks. i'm mostly concerned about north korea, russian's interference in our election and combatting isis across the world. but i think the president's focus on leaks is mostly an effort to distract away from more serious issues and some that are closing in on him more personally like the russia investigation. >> let's talk about russia. because we now that special counsel bob mueller has

impanelled a grand jury and they are issuing subpoenas. what does this tell you about the next phase of mueller's investigation. >> that is what progress in a criminal probe looks like to go to the grand jury level to reach deeper for documents and bring in witnesses you want to hear from. now on the house intelligence committee, we're not cob conducting a criminal probe. we want to know if we are still vulnerable and how this doesn't happen again. so he want him to conduct his investigation unimpeded without obstruction to the white house and get back to us soon on that but our responsible is to secure and protect the next election. >> and what is the status of your investigation right now by the house intelligence committee? >> i'm happy to say we've made more progress in the last few weeks than the five months prior. we brought in a number of witnesses, including percipient witnesses, people who were involved in the campaign. so that is important. >> you brought in jared kushner. >> he came before our committee and he also released a statement the day before he testified.

so now what we want to do is test what mhe told us and see i we could corroborate it or if it is repudiated by other evidence but we want to report back to the american people as soon as possible about what happened and how do we make sure a mess like this never occurs. >> what was your impression of jared kushner and do you believe everything he told you. >> i found him smart and worldly. he's a thoroughbred. his family was in the real estate business and he brought a business experience where he had in his own statement acknowledged a deep reach into the political, financial and digital communication parts of the campaign. i'm going to withhold judgment on whether he was truthful or not. i want to test some of what he said -- >> do you think he was a november is, the way he -- novice, the way he said. >> he was not a novice and i found him to be a very meticulous person. >> and does mueller's

investigation and the latest information on the grand jury being impanelled, does that change the scope of your investigation at all. >> no, we want to just follow the evidence wherever it takes us. now we know that there were deep personal political and financial ties that his team and family had with russia. that is not disputed. what we want to answer the question is did the contacts amount to a coincidence because they occurred during the russia campaign or was it a convergence. too early to tell right now but i'm comfortable we're making progress. >> and on the subject of russia, president trump signed into law new sanctions against russia that congress passed with veto proof majority in both houses but he was highly critical and putin has already retaliated by making the u.s. cut the embassy staff. what concerns you most now about our relations with russia. >> he signed it begrudgingly but that is what democracy looks like. congress has had a to step

forward and do what is best for the country. and we did that. as far as the relationship with russia, until we are able to speak, eyeball to eyeball with russia and say we know that you did this, and there is i price to pay and if you want to be part of the table of international countries taken seriously, you can't do it again. it is tough to work with them. they are disrupting syria and continue to move deeper into ukraine and there resort reports that are arming the talibban and we need a president that looks them in the eye and tells them and expects more. and the situation with north korea is getting more tense. just a week ago north korea launched a missile that flew for nearly an hour before crashing off the coast of japan. and we have a situation where we fired our only missile to test our own system. how worried are you about a north korean missile being able to reach the u.s.? senator feinstein has called it a clear and present danger. >> i'm very worried that

american leadership is on the side lines right now. and when you look through the history of america, when international challenges emerge, we are always leading the way to confront them. so i wish the president would look back at yetta and malta and casablanca, opportunities where an american president brought together allies and non-allies and said we are going to confront this but right now he is tweeting and complaining where he could set the stage and have the conversation and tell north korea we will not tolerate you having a nuclear weapon. >> but how much impact can we have. but doesn't china need to come into the equation and without them, it seems the u.s. can't really do a whole lot on the issue with north korea. >> china is the primary source for food and fuel to north korea and if you are antagonizing china, you are working against our interest of not being hit by north korean missiles. so we have to work with china.

but you don't work directly with china, you could indirectly apply pressure through other allies that deal with china but that requires making friends and keeping the friends but when you read the stories that the president is poking them in the eye and insulting mexican presidents and the allies wonder. >> thank you for being here. >> in addition to probing into leaks, jeff sessions is reviewing the rules for when and how journalists can be subpoenaed. this week president trump threw his support behind a bill that could slash the immigration in half. and it prioritizes job skills over family ties. critics say it could hurt the labor pool for low wage jobs by migrants. and also a justice department memo obtained by the new york times suggest that the trump administration may be looking to target affirmative action policies at college campuses.

joining me now is carla marinucci, senior righter at politico, melissa murray, professor at uc berkeley law school and university of san francisco political science professor james taylor. welcome to you all. so melissa, in addition to jeff sessions announcement of several investigations into leaks, he's also been aggressive about pushing the conservative agenda and describe what he's done in the last six months. >> president trump may be skeptical about jeff sessions and his recusal but he's been prosecuting a conservative agenda since his appointment and he has begun mandating that prosecutors bring forth and prosecute to the maximum in terms of charging decisions and sentences that they seek, they have expanded the rules for police authority for issuing as set seizures those that haven't been convicted or charged with a crime and mandated prosecution of immigration crimes on the border and in sanctuary cities. >> so this rose back the obama

era policies and 20 years worth of research into criminal justice reform. >> absolutely. california, there is a lot of concern, when you talk about things like civil rights, police brutality, he's called thesie issues sort of anecdotal on sanctuary cities, again this week he threatened california sanctuary cities. on legal cannabis which is an issue that involves billion dollars here in california we don't know whether the department -- where the department of justice will go. and his agenda is very conservative. >> and a lot of people look at this and say, that is great. people who support trump and say he's carrying out the agenda he said he would. >> it is not a popular agenda. as much as he would like it to be. his approval ratings are the worst in modern presidential history so he has no mandate or

political capital to mobilize. in fact one of the phrases i seek constantly with reference to trump, apart from popularity and the perceived power of the presidency, is presidential weakness. and i'm not talking about it in terms of whether he's a tough guy or not. but in terms of presidential history. whether congress is stronger or the executive is stronger is an ongoing inner play over time and it depends on how the video in the office behaves as to whether or not congress behaves. >> and he brought in a change for the staffers and to put in discipline. and kelly said he wants sessions to stay as attorney general. he's reigning in staff members. but can he reign in the president. >> that is the question. and i think can he reign in the leaks and the other part of that question. the president even this week was there in west virginia talking about a hoax in terms of the russia investigation.

just as we have new developments there. the president is refusing to stop tweeting. and meanwhile those within the white house, it is very clear, are just leaking, leaking these transcripts this week, which was absolutely phenomenal, and disastrous for the white house. >> you are talking about the transcripts on the conversations with the presidents of australia and mexico. >> at this point it is about whether trump can discipline himself and the record shows he can't. he isn't able to. >> kelly is the biggest babysitter in washington and there to impose discipline in the white house and a undisciplined commander-in-chief. what is broader picture that has emerged from that, and he was talking to allies of the united states, australia and mexico, so what could we take away from that. >> these calls were mind blowing. >> phenomenal. >> the call with mexico, we're

talking about a telenovella and the president there with the president of mexico saying you know what i said during the campaign, forget all of that. let's just play x, here and make it a reality show and tell them you'll go along with it. >> otherwise i will look bad. is what he said. >> the call to australia was even more mind blowing in the sense here was a loyal ally, he knew nothing about the policy and the only interest was you're making me look bad. and i think for a lot of reasons, there is concern that these kind of calls are getting out, are going to make world leaders say do i need to talk to him on the phone, but on the other hand, he's -- his lack of knowledge was just stunning. >> but again, i go back to the strong executive -- strong legislature tug. and again, when you see a president articulating this kind of weakness, congress asserts itself. now paul ryan and mitch

mcconnell has been unable to carry out the agenda they wanted to carry out, but there have been negative governing and before we started i talked about the presidential personality and styles category and the worst possible style a president could use is what is known as active negative, where the president is active but his world view is very negative in governing, going after affirmative action, going after transgender people, going after, reminding gay people in this country this past week they are not covered by law. things of that sort are targeting specific minority groups, muslims and others is a part of the negative world view. >> but his core supporters would counter that he is doing what they elected him to do. >> but carry out a negative world view that they support. they don't have a positive world view about the things i outlined. they don't support affirmative action or legal or illegal immigration and are inclined to any sort of compromise. >> but the business numbers look good and he's taking credit for that. >> but he should. >> there is a --

>> the same way obama did. >> that is right. and i think on the other thing, his supporters are still with him, as you mentioned, and that is where the republican party is going to look at the poll numbers an they are following, but have not fallen enough yet to have a lot of people fall off the wagon. >> and a lot of the things that he's been doing, i think you cannot discount the effect of robert mueller investigating everything going on with the russia investigation and suddenly you have trump throwing out red meat to the base. part of this a politicians of distraction and keeping the base occupied while there is a real threat to the legitimacy of this administration. >> and i want to ask you about mueller, he's impanelled the grand jury and they are issuing subpoenas. explain to us the role of grand jury, melissa, how they work, and what are some of the tools that they would give mueller that he would not have otherwise. >> so the grand jury is an in ishl phase of a criminal investigation, when a prosecutor

has enough information, enough evidence to make a charge, bring an indictment, and present to to the grand jury which a secret group of 23 people and it is just a prosecutor and no defense attorney and they could, depending on the way they view the evidence, if there is probable cause that a crime has been committed, they could issue a true bill and have that indictment go forward. and that begins the criminal prosecution. so the fact that he's impanelled a grand jury is a serious, serious matter and i don't think it is a coincidence that you are having trump making the speeches, talking red meat to the base at a time when robert mueller is assembling a grand jury and issuing subpoenas. >> and could the president himself be subpoenaed to testify. >> there are a lot of questions about what the president can do. could the president be prosecuted. probably not. he would have to be impeached first because it might impede his ability to perform the duties of office but he could certainly testify before congress and probably before a grand jury and all of these

proceedings are secret so it is unclear whether we would know. >> the line in the sand moment here, what everybody is watching, is if he has to appear before the grand jury, as clinton did and nixon did, he has to tell the truth, we know he's had a little problem with that. there won't be an attorney there. he won't know what other witnesses have said. and it is a felony to lie to the grand jury, impeach. and he said -- so there is a lot at stake here. there is a lot of dominos that have to fall and that is why this is a moment everyone is watching now. >> and let's talk about the other headline of the week which is the immigration policy. he came out and backed a bill that was proposed by two republican senators but it was introduced back in february. it was severely reduced the number of legal migrants to come to the country and slash in half the number of refugees allowed. why did he decide to throw his weight behind this bill now? >> this is more dog whistling to the base. this is a bill that would cut in

half the number of green cards that would eliminate family based immigration is the hallmark of our immigration system for the last hundred years for as far as i know and would instead folks in a way that canada does, more on highly skilled and college educated migrants. >> and at that. >> merit-based system. and when he made -- when he threw his support behind the cotton bill, he talked about the fact that these low wage migrants were coming to the u.s. and taking jobs from hard working americans. that is fodder for the base. that is exactly about the base at a time when this administration is in peril. >> and does legal immigration reduced immigration mean more jobs for people. >> over all, no, it is negligible and there is no clear evidence this would have an effect on average american workers. in certain cities like say service industries in washington, d.c., hotel services is where you find african-american and entry level workers competing with latinos

and that is not a problem here in california in general and in other places throughout the country. so this is not a one size fits all problem and then there can't be a all size fits all solution. >> this could affect california because we are the largest state and of course when you have a merit based system where you give points for speaking english and you can't bring your family with you, silicon valley is worried. how do they recruit really top people when they can't bring the families here. that is why canada and mexico are already trying to recruit people, high-tech people from india, with that very thing in mind. so i mean, it is a big issue for california when you are talking about changing the immigration system from the ground up. >> it is not just silicon val, it is the central valley. we depend on low wage workers for farming. so good luck getting this out of committee, good luck getting 50 senators to sign on to this because there are republican senators in places like texas and iowa, who are not going to be able to sign on this bill in

good conscious giving the strength of farming and agriculture. >> and historically in california if you look back at the brassero program and ended in 1964 under president johnson the the mexican worker to come and pick tomatoes and once that ended, there weren't more jobs once they left, they put machines to work. all of the tomatoes then started being picked by machines. so it doesn't mean an increase in jobs. >> we've seen in social media where there is empty seals of where workers used to be in mississippi where you have farm workers who are gone because of immigration and i.c.e. policies and in certain industries people know this will have a effect on americans in general. >> well much more to come. every week there seems to be something. thank you all for being here. carla marinucci, james taylor, and also melissa murray. this week the film an

inconvenient seek well, truth to power, opens in theaters across the nation. 10 years after winning an oscar for an inconvenient truth, the sequel follows al gore as he follows the world to champion clean energy and while in town last week the former vice president gave his reaction to president trump's decision to pull the u.s. out of the paris climate accords. >> well i was worried when he made that speech, but i was hardened when immediately afterward the entire rest of the world redoubled his commitment to the paris agreement, as if to say we'll show you mr. trump. and then so many governors and mayors and business leaders here in the u.s. said we're going to stay in the paris agreement and we're going to meet the u.s. commitments regardless of what president trump does and by the way, california's governor jerry brown led the way and then followed up with the historic legislation here last week. so it looks now as if the u.s.

is going to meet our commitments under par is any way. >> we sat down with san francisco based filmmaker rodney cohen and john shank to talk about the making of an inconvenient sequel, monica lam has the interview. >> thank you for being here. >> thank you for having us. >> so why now, ten years after the documentary, an inconvenient truth, why is the sequel needed. >> what happened ten years later is the potential for renewable energy and the sustainable energy revolution as al calls it has come to fruition in a big way. >> we are seeing a tremendous amount of positive change. >> the cost of solar and wind, the down curve is as dramatic as the upcurve that he showed in the movie and so there is drama that will move faster toward the solutions and mother nature which is screaming louder and louder, hey, the storms are move

intense, the seas are rising, the ice is melting, it is worse than we thought it would be, it is a real drama. >> you show that in this documentary. you who do you think will win the race. >> between mother nature and the sustainability revolution, hopefully mankind will get on top of this. al gore talks about the drama of the sustainability revolution being as intense as the industrial revolution. but it is going to happen, hopefully, with the speed of the digital revelation. so with the cost down curves where they are, more and more countries can get on board and start to implement, the question is how quickly can we do it. so it is actually a hopeful film, all told, we spent time with a republican mayor in the heart of oil company in texas who has decided to take his entire community 100% renewable. >> so i assume that the reason you did that is that the two of you are rabid environmentalists. >> not exactly.

but year in georgetown, which is the reddest city and county in texas and i'm a conservative republican. okay. but our duties, is to provide them with the lowest possible utility costs. >> and money talks. >> but then doesn't it just make sense from a common sense stand point, the less stuff you put in the air, the better it is. >> there are wonderful examples in ways that we're turning the ship around. >> and yet there are still so many people that remain to be convinced that climate change poses real dangers or let alone that it even exists. why do you think it is such a hard sell? >> well going back to the 80s, the fossil fuel industry felt the science and they took a page out of the tobacco industry playbook and hired the same companies to sue the seeds of doubt of the reality of climate change because in the meantime our planet is really suffering. >> hurricanes, slamming into new

york city, flooding the world trade center site. >> as mother nature screams louder and louder, in the last seven years we've had once in a thousand year storms an the sea level is at high tide there is water in the streets of miami where we followed al in this film. regular every day americans are seeing climate change firsthand. so it is harder and harder to deny that it is happening. and on the other hand, jobs and solar and wind are happening -- are taking shape much faster than other industries. it is several times the rate of job creation and other industries. so it is harder and harder for people who are on the denial side to deny what is happening with the hopeful sustainable energy and the climb has gotten worse. >> and you liken the fight of al gore to a social movement and in this case, is there a bad guy, an oppressor, that you are

fighting against. >> unfortunately, this issue is a partisan issue. much like with the tobacco industry, fossil fuel have done a convincing number on a lot of the population and sort of forced it into the political realm where now ordinary people are falling down when comes to the environment and we have recapture that back and take it out the realm. >> and india is one of the largest consumers of coal and how do they view climate change. >> they are in the middle of their industrial revelation and the burnding of coal is creating jobs, it is creating an economy there that they are entitled to. it happens to be happening 150 years after those of us in the developed world have already done that work. and created damage to the environment. so there is a kind of a

push-pull con fliblflict with t developing world about who is responsible and the indians right rightly so, i feel, think it is their turn and they should be allowed to burn coal but the argument needs to be made if you can't breathe, it's a little difficult for citizens to live in the country. so it's complicated an that is why there is a scene in the film where al gore is meeting with the environmental minister in india and they actually talk out that -- this act conflict that i'm describing and al gore tries to kind of bring them around and make them realize that, yes, you are deserving of this, let's figure out a way to bring you on board and do something for the environment at the same time. >> that is great. well thank you so much for your work and for documenting the work of al gore. >> thank you for having us. >> appreciate it. >> and that will do it for us. you could find more of our coverage at kqed.org/newsroom.

i'm thuy vu, thank you for joining us.

captioning sponsored by wnet >> sreenivasan: on this edition for sunday, august 6: diplomats try to reduce tensions after the u.n. imposes more sanctions on north korea. are members of the republican party already planning to run for president in 2020? and in our signature segment, from hawaii: growing concern over an invasive species-- how parakeets are wreaking havoc on local farms. next, on pbs newshour weekend. >> pbs newshour weekend is made possible by: bernard and irene schwartz. the cheryl and philip milstein family. the j.b.p. foundation. sue and edgar wachenheim, iii. the anderson family fund.