captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> sreenivasan: good evening. i'm hari sreenivasan. judy woodruff is on assignment. on tonight's pbs newshour: >> i really was not ready or equipped to run for president against a reality tv candidate. >> sreenivasan: one on one with hillary clinton. from north korea to racism, the former presidential candidate tells judy woodruff what she thinks are the greatest threats to the nation. >> in many ways, the trump presidency poses a clear and present danger to the country and to the world. >> sreenivasan: also ahead this friday, the voices of the vietnam war. in the second part of our look at ken burns' and lynn novick's new documentary, how telling the whole story takes all perspectives. >> we as americans always assume we're at the center of this story of vietnam, that the

vietnam war is about americans. >> sreenivasan: and it's friday. mark shields and david brooks are here to talk hillary clinton's election tell-all, and president trump's deal with the democrats. 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.

>> the ford foundation. working with visionaries on the frontlines of social change worldwide. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: and friends of the newshour. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> sreenivasan: british police launched a major manhunt after a homemade bomb exploded on a subway train in southwest london. the islamic state group claimed responsibility, and the british

government raised the threat level to "critical," meaning another attack could be imminent. paraic o'brien of independent television news has our report. >> reporter: this is the remains of a device detonated on a packed tube train at 8:20 this morning. the 5th terrorist attack in the u.k. this year targeted the morning commute, the school run. 29 people were treated in hospital. there were no serious injuries. two teachers, one stop from work, were near the device as it went off at the back of the train, and described a fire ball coming at the down the carriage. >> i saw the fire rush towards my side. so yes, i literally, i heard a lady screaming. >> i was falling over people myself, and i was just saying to myself, keep up, right? because either you can be crumpled to death or you have a madman behind you, because i still didn't know what was going on.

>> reporter: people described to us a flash of fire suddenly running up the walls of the carriage, burning those nearby. then, the panic. >> that moment when people are running towards me and pushing you out the way, and you're unsure of what's happening. you don't know whether to fight or run. it was at that, sort of, ten seconds of sheer panic and the whole train went through it and it was like a tidal wave. >> but now what's happening is, i think people are getting crushed on the stairwell. >> reporter: after the initial surge of people, this was the scene on the crowded platform. people trying to make sense of what had happened. still partly on fire when these pictures were taken, wires are clearly visible sticking out from a would-be bomb. it's still not known exactly why it failed to fully detonate. it's been reported that some sort of timer device may have been attached to the i.e.d. the official police statement today didn't speak to this point, but emphasized that the search is on for a perpetrator.

>> sreenivasan: president trump reacted to the attack with a tweet that suggested police could have done more to prevent it. british prime minister theresa may responded by saying: "i never think it's helpful for anybody to speculate on what is an ongoing investigation." later, the two spoke by phone. the white house said the president's criticism "may have come up" in the conversation. mr. trump voiced confidence today that u.s. options for dealing with north korea are "both effective and overwhelming." he spoke after the north koreans launched another ballistic missile over northern japan. at the white house, the president's national security advisor, h.r. mcmaster, called for rigorous enforcement of sanctions to cripple the north's economy. >> what's different about this approach is, we're out of time. we've been kicking the can down the road. we're out of road. for those who have been commenting on a lack of a military option, there is a military option. now, it's not what we'd prefer to do. so we have to call on all nations to do everything to address this global problem,

short of war. >> sreenivasan: the north's latest missile flight covered 2,300 miles. that would be far enough to reach the u.s. territory of guam. this afternoon, the u.n. security council condemned the launch. a judge in st. louis has acquitted a white former police officer, jason stockley, in a fatal shooting. he was charged in the killing of a black man, anthony lamar smith, after a high speed chase in 2011. after today's verdict, hundreds of protesters marched, most of them peacefully. a small group confronted police, and got pepper-sprayed. more glimmers of progress today in the recovery from hurricane irma. utilities in florida say they've restored power to more than 80% of the homes and businesses that lost it. even so, nearly 3.5 million people are still in the dark. meanwhile, local officials report more than 100 sewage overflows caused by the storm. a single spill near miami spewed about six million gallons of wastewater. chronic hunger around the world is rising again, after a decade

of decline. the united nations reports 815 million people went hungry last year-- up 38 million from the previous year. 60% were in war zones. the u.n. also cited floods and drought as causes. nasa's "cassini" spacecraft bade a fiery farewell today, burning up in saturn's atmosphere. it was the only vehicle ever to orbit the giant, ringed planet. nasa animation showed "cassini's" final plunge. it had nearly exhausted its fuel after recording more than 450,000 images and a huge trove of data. >> the discoveries that "cassini" has made over the past 13 years in orbit have re-written the textbooks of saturn, have discovered worlds that could be habitable, and have guaranteed that we will return to that ringed world. so, the fantastic discoveries that continue to be made with the last set of ring crossing

orbits, and in the grand finale of "cassini," haven't even been studied yet. >> sreenivasan: "cassini" was launched in 1997. flight controllers opted to destroy it today, to prevent it from crashing into one of two moons that could harbor life. a federal judge in chicago today blocked the justice department from withholding grants for cities that harbor undocumented immigrants. the temporary injunction applies nationwide to so-called sanctuary cities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration agents. chicago is one of at least seven cities and counties that have balked at enforcing tougher immigration rules. on wall street, the dow jones industrial average gained more than 64 points to close at 22,268. the nasdaq rose 19 points, and the s&p 500 added four-- hitting 2,500 for the first time. and, something new at the white house today-- an 11-year-old boy, mowing the lawn. frank giaccio of falls church, virginia got the gig after offering his services to president trump. this morning, he cut the rose garden grass, and he kept his focus, even when the president walked alongside him.

mr. trump called him "the future of the country." the boy said he usually charges $8 a lawn-- but he did the white house job for free. still to come on the newshour: judy woodruff's interview with hillary clinton about her new book, and the trump presidency. mark shields and david brooks take on the week's news. preserving voices from vietnam. the newest ken burns documentary, "the vietnam war." and much more. >> sreenivasan: she is one of the most prominent and polarizing figures in modern american history. this week, she is back in the spotlight promoting a new book. she opens up tonight to judy woodruff, revealing where she gives president trump credit, but also her fears that he is dangerous for the world. judy sat down with the former presidential candidate, secretary of state and first lady at the core club in new york city, and began by asking about the premise of the book: what happened in the 2016

election? >> i really was not ready or equipped to run for president against a reality tv candidate. i take running for president and being president really seriously. it's a-- maybe the toughest job in the world, right? and i knew that there was unfinished business from the successful two terms of president obama, whom i had served. but that we needed to go further on the economy, on healthcare, and so much else. i really prepared, and i prepared what i wanted to say, how i would defend what i wanted to do. it turned out, that was very hard to communicate. it was a time when an empty podium got more broadcast minutes than all of the policies that i was putting forth.

and now that there's been a lot of analysis coming from all sorts of independent observers, i think it was clear that the kind of campaign i was running, and the seriousness with which i looked at the agenda i wanted to represent and then execute, was just out of sync with the anger that a lot of the electorate felt, or the disappointment that another part of the electorate felt. so that my brand of leadership, which is very focused on bringing people together, solving problems, it's what i've always tried to do, just had a hard time being as powerfully compelling in that campaign as i think it has been in previous years, for other candidates. >> woodruff: you single out james comey, the former f.b.i. director. >> yes, i do. >> woodruff: my question though is, he was in the role he was in because the then-attorney

general, loretta lynch, had pulled back and essentially turned over the leading role in overseeing the f.b.i. or the investigation into your emails, because of that meeting on the airport tarmac with your husband, with former president bill clinton. so my question is, to what extent did loretta lynch and president clinton make a costly mistake? >> judy, i just don't buy that. i honestly reject that premise. partly because there's a chain of command in the justice department-- there's a deputy attorney general, we all now know who it was. sally yates, a woman of experience and integrity. we knew at the time, after it was reported, that, you know, both my husband and loretta lynch said they didn't say a word about this, that the optics were not good. i admit that.

but in this chain of command, if the attorney general is recused, you know, the deputy attorney general. and what we know happened is that the investigation was getting nowhere, there was nothing to find, and he was in a position of having to accept the evidence that there was no case. i think what he did, against the advice of people around him in the f.b.i. and the justice department, was in large measure due to political pressures that he was under from people that he had worked with before in the f.b.i. and outside the f.b.i. and so, when you're a prosecutor or you're an f.b.i. director, if there's no case, there's no case. and instead, he had a press conference and really, you know, went after, not just me, the entire state department. okay, that was over on july 5th, right. that i, you know, that i thought was a breach of professional

ethics and responsibility and a rejection of the protocols within the justice department. it was over. and we were doing fine going forward. what really was costly, and what i believe was the proximate cause of my defeat, was his october 28th letter, which has never been adequately explained or defended-- had nothing to do with what happened, you know, months before. >> woodruff: but my point is, he wouldn't have been in that position had loretta lynch not pulled back after that meeting with president clinton. >> i just don't, judy, i don't believe that. i mean, he was in a position that was subordinate to the chain of command in the justice department. so loretta lynch recuses, it's like when sessions recused, the deputy attorney general steps forward and starts, you know, running the investigation. there was, there were plenty of people who were in the chain of command who were telling him, i'm told, you know, okay, nothing there, end it. and that's not, that's not what

he did. >> woodruff: you also write about the role of gender; the fact that women are treated differently in politics, held to a higher standard. you quote your friend, cheryl sandburg, talking about how women, the more successful they are, the less they are liked. >> people all the time say, "oh, if you only knew hillary clinton the way i know hillary clinton." well, it's really hard to get to know me, or any candidate, and i would be asked questions like, "well, why are you really running for president?" i didn't hear marco rubio or ted cruz or bernie sanders asked that question, as though there was something hidden or, or, or so unusual about a woman stepping forward and saying, you know, "i think i could be a good president, i hope you'll support me." so, i do believe, and in this chapter called "on being a woman in politics," that we have to come to grips with the endemic sexism and misogyny. of course, it's not just in politics. it's in business. we've seen a lot of that coming out of silicon valley, and it's in the media, it's in culture. we know that.

but in politics in particular, where now some of my former colleagues and friends in the senate are being attacked and they're being attacked in very sexist ways. you know, elizabeth warren told to, you know, sit down and basically shut up, don't persist. kamala harris being attacked. kirsten gillibrand talks about being manhandled by fellow members of congress in the gym. you know, i want to blow this up so that people have to confront it. and then maybe whoever comes next won't have to face it as much. >> woodruff: the trump campaign. you think trump operatives cooperated, colluded with the russians in order to prevent you from winning this election. you're a good lawyer; do you think that meeting in new york last year between a russian lawyer, donald trump, jr., jared kushner was illegal? that laws were broken by that meeting? >> i don't know enough about

whether that's the case. i mean, this investigation that's going on is necessary and incredibly important, because what happened, certainly so far, proves there was communication between the trump campaign and russian representatives, that they've gone to great lengths to try to hide and not disclose. there were meetings like the one you're talking about, there were others as well. there were now, we know, russian paid ads that played into the trump campaign. we now know that some of the placement of ads and the weaponization of information by the russians was very skillfully injected into our campaign, which suggests that they were getting advice from someone and somewhere. we know that the wikileaks drop within one hour of the hollywood access tape on october 7th was meant to do exactly what it did, divert from trump's admission on

tape that he was a, a sexual assaulter. so, you can add all of this up and you can just say it's all coincidence, but were campaign finance laws broken? were foreign agency laws broken? were financial dealings irregular or illegal? we don't yet know, but i have a lot of confidence in the work that is going on in the senate to delve into these issues. and i have a lot of confidence in, you know, robert mueller and his investigation, to tell us whether there's something there or not. but my point is bigger than that. let's put what happened to one side. if i had been elected president, and the intelligence community came to me and said, "well, you won, but putin was trying to defeat you"? even though i won, i would still say, we've got to get to the bottom of this. right now, we don't have any

leadership from this white house to try to understand what our principle foreign adversary was doing to interfere with our elections, to, in effect, destabilize our democracy. so, i think this is, this should be of interest to any american. >> woodruff: you are very tough in the book, and now, on president trump. after the birther issue he raised over president obama, his campaign rhetoric, and now as president, his comments on charlottesville, and he repeated some of those yesterday, do you believe the president is racist? >> here's what i believe. i believe that he has given a lot of encouragement and rhetorical support to the ku klux klan. he accepted the support of david duke. i believe that he has not condemned the neo-nazis and the self-proclaimed white supremacists in charlottesville and other settings.

i believe that the congress had to, on a bipartisan basis, pass a resolution asking that white supremacy be condemned by this president, which he then signed. and we'll wait and see what he does. so, i can't tell you what's in his heart, judy, i don't know. it could be total rank, cynical opportunism. he's got a hardcore base that believes these things, and he's going to keep feeding it. he took advantage of some of the conspiracy theories that these people propagate, like birtherism, so i can't tell you what's in his heart. i know that he was sued for racial discrimination in his business. so i think that what's important is that, as a leader, he speak up on behalf of the rights of all americans and the respect we should show for the diversity of our country, which i think is one of our great strengths. >> woodruff: having said all that, if he is able as president to oversee the passage of

legislation to protect the dreamers, these young people who came to this country as children, undocumented, but they came here young. if he's able, if president trump is able to get that done, something we're seeing movement on in the last few days, he'll deserve credit for that, won't he? finally, after so many presidents tried to do it. >> yes, he will deserve credit. i will be among those giving him credit for it because memorializing that protection for these 800,000, you know, striving young people, in legislation would be a legitimate accomplishment and that would only come about because of bipartisan support, that he would then be able to sign such a bill. >> woodruff: there have been deals, speaking of the dreamers, there have been deals cut in the last-- what appear to be deals in the last few days, between democratic leaders in congress, and the president. not just on the dreamers; on the

debt, on funding for the hurricane ravaged areas. why shouldn't democrats cooperate with this president, if it's going to lead to the kind of legislation that democrats believe in? >> well, i think that we are seeing, from the two democratic leaders, chuck schumer and nancy pelosi, very skillful negotiations that are leading to positive outcomes, that are going to help people, that are part of the broader democratic agenda. that's what should be happening in washington, and it's certainly what i would have done had i been president. i would have worked with republicans if they'd been willing to work with me, and i would look for ways to make that possible. but that doesn't mean it wipes out a lot of the other behavior and rhetoric that we hear coming from the president, which we hope will, you know, not continue at the pace it has over the first nine months of his

presidency. but i think to get protection for dreamers, to save the full faith and credit of the united states by raising the debt limit, all of that is in the interest of america and it shouldn't be a partisan issue. and i hope that there'll be more of that. >> woodruff: you mentioned the democratic leaders. your former new york colleague, the senate minority leader, chuck schumer, has said he gets trump. he said they get along, he said "we can get deals done," he can successfully work with him. do you agree? >> well, i think he's showing that he can, and i've had many conversations with chuck since the election, and i'll have you know certainly, i've seen him firsthand as a very experienced legislator and someone who is consistent with his principles and values. he'll see whether there's a way to make progress.

you know, compromise can't be a dirty word in american politics. there's plenty to argue about, you know. this administration is still talking about ridiculous tax cuts for the wealthiest of the wealthy. that should be resisted with every fiber of our being. but where there might be areas to try to cooperate, to get positive results, you know, i think that both chuck and nancy have a lot of proven skills in, you know, finding where those are and then trying to, you know, get them passed. >> woodruff: let me ask you quickly to put your foreign policy hat on. what's your assessment of the trump national security team? >> i don't know what the team is. you fundamentally don't have a team. i think that's one of its biggest deficits. you have a secretary of state who's largely invisible, except for his obsession with cutting the budget of the state department. you have a... >> woodruff: has he reached out to you? >> no. >> woodruff: secretary tillerson? >> i don't know, i don't know who he's reached out to. he certainly hasn't reached out

to me. you have secretary mattis, who often acts like both secretary of defense and secretary of state, because there's a big void to kill there. you have a white house that has been, you know, in disarray over national security from the very first day. and so many of the people in our government with great expertise-- let's take north korea, which is a very serious threat right now. there were, and maybe still are, a number of people in the state department who speak the language, understand the history, have studied kim jong- un, are ready to be part of a diplomatic offensive. they're not being called upon. so, i think that you've got a president who makes diplomatic pronouncements on twitter, who gives aid and comfort to people like kim jong-un and vladimir putin. because often, what he says is not about them and the threat

they pose, so much as going after our friends and allies. as, you know, president trump just did, going after south korea. that makes no sense at all. and he's being played by these dictators in a way that undercuts our credibility and the capacity to come up with a diplomatic solution in that region and other places. so i'm deeply concerned and i think, in many ways the trump presidency poses a clear and present danger to our country and to the world. >> woodruff: well, on north korea, how dangerous a moment is this? i mean, they flew another missile yesterday, or last night, over japan. do you sense that we could be close to some sort of military action? >> well, he's-- kim jong-un is certainly being more and more provocative, and taunting japan as he is doing with these missiles raises really serious questions for the japanese

government. so here's what i believe. i believe we should have a full court press diplomatic effort. if trump doesn't want to listen to the experts inside his own government, then go to people outside, in think tanks and academia, who know about this very complicated region and particularly, north korea. make it clear that we will do everything in our power to protect our allies, south korea and japan, including installing even more missile defense. now, the chinese don't like that, but then the chinese better be more onboard with us in trying to reign in kim jong- un, and the japanese are not for long going to leave their defense against this aggressor in north korea, to us, when they can't really rely on trump's understanding of our promises. that means japan may well consider re-arming even more. that will make the koreans and the chinese upset, so we have a

lot of cards to play in getting people to work together as well as protecting our allies, and at the end of the day, there is a military threat that has to be posed, and it should be very clear: if kim jong-un attacks our allies or any part of america, including guam, we will retaliate with devastating force. we don't want to do that. we're not interested in that kind of confrontation. but i don't, at least, see in any public way, an effort by this administration to do what i would be doing right now, and that is, china, south korea, japan, get them all on the same page and go after what would be ways into influencing kim jong- un. most cards are held by china, but some threats can very well be made by not just us, but south korea and japan as well. >> woodruff: is it frustrating for you not to be able to be in there working on this? >> well, it is frustrating, and it's not just because i'm not there.

i don't see enough people who have experience and understanding, their being part of the decision making. i just, i haven't seen it. and you know, you don't have to agree with how i see the world, but you need people who can bring substance to the table, and i don't think there's enough of that. >> woodruff: finally, you've been saying that you don't plan to run for office again, but you'll be very active in public life. >> i'm excited about this next chapter in my life. i think there's a lot to be done, and in the book i try to sound some alarms because what happened to me is not very generous. like "okay, it happened to her, we can move on." voter suppression will make it more and more difficult. you have a white house commission that was set up under the guise of fraud, which hardly exists anywhere in america, to

suppress even more voters. you've got the russia unanswered questions. you've got sexism and misogyny, and i think the press has to do some soul-searching. how can it, in a democracy-- and you know, that's really one of the real shining contributions of your program, judy-- in a democracy, if people don't have accurate information, how can they be active citizens? how can they be part of the debate? and if you are facing powerful forces on the right and in this administration who want to create an alternative reality that feeds into their objectives for our country, you more than ever need the press to cut through that, and to be as accurate as possible. and so i think all of us have some work to do. because look, we love this country. i, for one, am deeply grateful for the opportunities that i've been given. i think we all have a role to play in making sure it's there for my grandchildren, in a way

that is just as vigorous, contentious, argumentative, but reality-based, evidence-based, reason-based, which was at the core of who we've been as a democracy for 240 years. >> woodruff: hillary clinton, the book is "what happened." >> "what happened." >> woodruff: thank you very much. >> thanks, judy, good to talk to you. >> sreenivasan: you'll want to tune in monday for part two of judy's interview, where secretary clinton cites "well- executed" voter suppression of african american voters as a reason she lost wisconsin. and now it's time now for the analysis of shields and brooks. that's syndicated columnist mark shields and "new york times" columnist david brooks. your reactions so far. >> what's interesting is i don't pay any attention to books from politicians. and the only time i listen to any politician waxing semi can tid is when they are over 70.

mrs. clinton is not 70 or close to it i fes guess but obviously given up all hopes to the height house. that's a lot more cantor and it certainly seemed in past books an admission that every canned tate is ultimate leroly coy -- e is ultimately responsible. shesshest accept responsibilityt stntd to it exclusively. she wants to share it with with the press, with other forces in our society. >> as to the book, it's sufficient to btough tobe a if e public sphere. you tonight have time for reflection. it's interesting, she's right as she said in the interview it was

validation nojust not her year. she's pushed up to comey and all that other stuff and the russians in plameing this but she has tufts of thoughts. she said she loved the parable of the prod full son. she is like the older brother, the rule follower and bill clinton is the younger brother. she's on the cusp on her relationship with him. but she never never takes the next step. that's because active people, so much active not a writer not reflective not getting the analysis you actually want. that's just a product of being in the public sphere. i think the book with is far more interesting than most political books. >> obama wrote a very if book but he wasn't a presidential canned tate. there's a section in there about foreign policy where she slips pack into secretary of state

mode. you can see she's excited to weigh in on this and she also says well he never called me, i don't know what their foreign policy is. >> that was, it was really memorable passage her interview with judy. what's interesting is that trud, trud -- donald trump, rex tillerson serves at the advertise pleasure of donald trump and donald trump unlike anybody else after winning the presidency made no attempt to reach out. in fact he's continued to berate her and pete her up at -- beat her up at his rallies. it's almost made her toxic to his administration. but i'm surprised tillerson, once he got the job at any time call her and have a sit town. i just think it's part of it. but with if you think about it,

trud onctruddonald trump once hr reached across, he never talked to jimmy carter or george w. bush. i guess tillerson isn't surprise me but no question he's totally advertise awe poantd and advertise en-- advertise appointed and disenchanted with his stewardship. and the michael flynn period, mick master spent the last seven months trying to get rid of the people that flynn brought in and had to wait for swren carr gene. >> she understood the rules. when she was secretary of state she was very much of the building and running around the world interviewing people. i like institutionalists. organizations will change history, rarely a ran actual person. but let's say if this election was about anti-institutionalism. we tonight like the way those things are working in washington

let's burn the place town. it's not surprising the trump administration and the institutions, they were sort of hired to do that. this was a mistake but that sort is what they are held to do. >> there's a section on race where she weighed on the deviciveness she says trump exacerbates. >> let's a mixture here. trump clearly plays politics. and race has been a strong factor in this election. there's no question about that. i think it's always necessary to be careful and not say trump won because of race. a lot of the people who voted for trump voted him for a winnive reasons and legit must reasons. in her interview, judy gets a little close saying he's a kkk candidate. that's simplistic. is there identity stream running through him which is teamly advertise turbing. i don't think you want to play this election that racism won this election.

wrote that's fair. >> i advertise agree t disagree. sh i don't think anybody can are with that. number nine on charlesvill char, there are bad to do so on both sides. he isn't know who david duke was. he's the great original sin of america which has been so prominent in american politics and so central to our presidential experience over the past 60 years. but donald trump is an outlier. he isn't see the beauty or the responsibility of the president to bring together the country racially. i think she's legitimate and certainly the language has been loose. >> there's a pivot we make in conversation where she actually physician credit to donald trump

on sort of the taka conversation -- the daca conversation that's now happening with tracks. for what seems t -- democrats. to be the second time trump has sided with tracks. >> all my life i was running with president when the merits on their side and going to the republicans when the merits are on their side and now it's donald trump who is to go this. oh well. two things, i think the strategic teleif it is a teleis teleis -- strategic deal, it is a if deal. it's a pretty popularity cision to want to some way layer fi their position in this country. and the law's a stupid idea. i don't think donald trump believes we should build a wall. can trud continue t donald trume a bipartisan president. i wish we had a skilled political operator to do that.

i don't think he has that. it takes great skill to go with one party and end up with another. he'll isolate himself and distrust with both parties, isolating himself from the administration which is pretty down the line conservative and advertise crediting the partnership along the way. if we have an independent president which is what we need i wish it was somebody a little more skilled. >>st the presidentity serve credit. >> yes, he doesity serve credit. if americans can come out from the shadows and not be at the whim or the caprice of the employers who wants to expose them, some personal enemy or some sheriff who is looking for headlines, yes, i mean that is if, that is if for america, i awe forty threagree with that. you're talking about folks and

single percentage numbers of people who want to punish and send back kids who brought here at the able of three and grown up and working here. i think what i find most fascinating to me is it's a 22 tame winning streak and donald trump has been on an uninterrupted losing streak since january. you change the line up or batting a little, he changed teams. the republican team, i'm together to work with chuck schumer and nancy pelosi, you know. it will last the extent of most his relationships have very short shelf life and politically relationships anyway. but yes, if thisst aw thisst awe that, the house and the senate have their feelings hurt. more than that, they've had

their prestiged undermined, their power sabotaged by the president to go this. >> he's going to be filling in for mark on his weeks off. >> it's open here. continuing with that sort of sports analogy whatst this to his tie hard fans the ones that show up in the metal of winter. >> everything so far is it isn't hurt him. there are some die hard fans like ann coulter and brushing their great -- burning their make america great again. if he tboaz against mitch mcconnel, so far they are willing to stick with trump and not really walk away from him. >> mark. >> the republican vote is supported in the primaries in 2016. three out of five thought that immigration has weakened the

country. among republicans at large, three out of five believe immigration has strainened the country and overwhelmingly that is the case. i to think that he probably, he has great political insights and he said -- hest, h he has a verl constituency. i don't think it hinges on this issue. you have to come away with something and what could kill us in the house is the republican in the house have never passed immigration reform at any time because they could not get a majority of the majority. they're going to have to come up with something that's tough, whether it's a wall or bamboo shoots under the fingernails of people who come in illegally or something. which may be a telefor the weigh

deal foweigh -- deal for the de. this will be signed into lavas sreenivasan mark shields and david brooks, thank you. >> sreenivasan: let's turn our attention again to "the vietnam war," ken burns and lynn novick's latest landmark documentary. the 18-hour film begins on sunday night. judy woodruff sat down with the co-directors to discuss how history shows the war was actually a long time in the making. >> we've reconciled with vietnam, but we haven't reconciled with ourselves. the news flash is also that they haven't reconciled with themselves. >> woodruff: by talking firsthand to north vietnamese soldiers and civilians, vietcong guerillas and south vietnamese civilians, soldiers, diplomats, the filmmakers hope to fill out the picture of what was happening in vietnam and the u.s. i've been to hanoi, so i've seen

some of the remembrances of the war. but they don't have anything like this. they don't have any grand or great or big... >> it would stretch to the capitol building if they did this. >> woodruff: the burns-novick team spent a decade talking to hundreds of veterans from both sides of the bloody conflict in which more than 3.5 million people may have died. estimates are about 58,000 american military deaths and the rest, vietnamese, cambodians and laotians. >> we as americans always assume we're at the center of this story of vietnam, that the vietnam war is about americans. >> woodruff: the first episode looks at how, after one long and brutal war with the french, vietnamese revolutionaries led by ho chi minh ended nearly a century of french colonial occupation. with the cold war intensifying, vietnam is divided into two at geneva. communists in the north aim to

reunify the country while america supports ngo dinh diem's untested regime in the south. there is clearly an unknowable aspect to all this. lynn, do you come away, do you think, understanding how the united states got pulled into this despite the french being kicked out, essentially, dien bien phu. senator john f. kennedy saying the americans don't belong in a land war in asia. decisions made by eisenhower not to get involved. and yet, the united states was pulled in. did you understand why, at the end, do you think? >> it is sometimes stunning to think with all those roadmaps and signposts saying "don't do it," we still did. it seems clear that there's definitely a cold war context that's very important. and certain kind of received wisdom, conventional wisdom about that, and "we have to stop communism" and have "containment" and that whole idea.

>> woodruff: even so, the film shows that in may of 1964, president johnson himself expressed misgivings about why the u.s. was at war, and vietnam's value, in a phone call with national security advisor mcgeorge bundy: >> i just laid awake last night thinking about this thing. the more i think about it, i don't know what in the hell-- it looks like we are getting into another korea. it just worries the hell out of me. i don't see what we can ever hope to get out of there with, once we're committed. i don't think it's worth fighting for and i don't think we can get out, and it's just the biggest damn mess. >> it is, it's an awful mess. >> i just thought about ordering-- what the hell am i ordering them out there for? what the hell is vietnam worth to me? to this country? now, when you start running with communists, they may just chase you right in your own kitchen. >> yep, that's the trouble. and that's when the rest of the

other, that half of the world is going to think when this thing comes apart on us. >> now, when we talk about when did the war start, people are talking about the 50th anniversary of the vietnam war, we're not really sure why. 50th anniversary of what? the vietnam war did not start in 1967. that was a moment of great kinetic energy in the war, but it started long before that. and you could argue it really started in 1945. >> which we do in the film, when o.s.s. parachutes into northern vietnam to sort of help this ragtag insurgency that they hope will help us against the japanese. and it happens to be led by a guy named ho chi minh. so all of a sudden, all of the normal, stabilized sense of ho chi minh as the leader and the bad guy get challenged, and it's further challenged as you walk down just that path in vietnam. >> woodruff: ho chi minh, did you come away from this experience understanding better who he was and what he represented? i mean, it's striking, he was quoting jefferson, thomas jefferson at one point.

>> during his declaration of vietnamese independence, quoting thomas jefferson. there's an o.s.s. officer standing next to them. so if you begin to say, as lynn is talking about, if you understand the overlay of the cold war and how we're going to not have world war iii-- no one wants world war iii. so what we're going to do is, we're going to pick our little battles, and fight it through places like south vietnam/north vietnam struggle, that you can misread what a local leader is all about. >> the war began to seem like an "open pit," one north vietnamese remembered. the more young people were lost there, the more they sent. >> ( translated ): i saw them crying and holding each other. they carried away the body, and they wept. i witnessed such scenes, and thought americans, like us vietnamese, also have a profound

sense of humanity. they cared about each other. >> woodruff: one of the things you do so powerfully, which you're talking about here, is bringing to an american audience the vietnamese view of this, experience of this. the depth to which vietnam and the vietnamese people suffered in this war. you make them come alive, become human, the way i don't believe any other vehicle i can think of has done. >> we were able, with the really incredible talents of a vietnamese producer, to communicate to people that we want to know, which was the human story of the war. not the big propaganda narrative and the sort of conventional wisdom. but just, what was it really like for you and your family, what did you go through? >> even the vietnamese veterans, we avoided talking about the war. people sing about victory, about liberation. they're wrong. who won and who lost is not a

question. in war, no one wins or loses. there is only destruction. only those who have never fought like to argue about who won and who lost. >> woodruff: in a "big tent" way, the film invites voices from every corner, and lets viewers judge history, try to resolve some of the nation's "unfinished business" for themselves. >> we made sure there was room for everybody in this film. if you still think we should be fighting the commies there still, there's representation of that in our film. if you believe that it was wrong from the very beginning, there are people that will represent that point of view. but more importantly, all those shades of gray are able to coexist. >> woodruff: the documentary's ten episodes will air over the next two weeks.

>> sreenivasan: the premiere is this sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern, 7:00 p.m. central, on your pbs station. >> sreenivasan: karen walrond is a former engineer, an attorney, photographer and writer. three weeks ago, hurricane harvey destroyed her home in houston. she and her family are now living with a friend, figuring out what to do next. tonight, waldron shares her humble opinion on the best way to help storm victims-- in fact, anyone-- who is facing a crisis. >> at first, it wasn't that much-- a couple of inches or so. but by the time it was over, we had almost three feet of water sitting in our home. my husband and i evacuated our daughter to the safety of a friend's house early on. that's her in the pink raincoat. but when it became apparent that we couldn't save our home, we realized that we needed to get

back to our daughter-- fast. unfortunately, by that time, most streets had flooded, so that meant wading through chest- deep water, for about a mile. but as we started on our way, a young woman approached us, and told us to wait. there were three guys with a boat shuttling people to safety. so we waited. and while we waited, we witnessed people who were using their gifts and their skills to address specific needs, in service of others. that young girl? she lived in a second-story apartment nearby, and after watching cars continuing to drive into the dangerous floodwaters, she put on a raincoat, walked out into the storm and for two days waved cars away from the deep water. the three young men who showed up to help us had taken their bass boat out of storage to open their own ferry service to help. a restaurant owner who showed up to check on his café? instead of returning to the security of his home, opened his restaurant to the volunteers, giving them free coffee and water and a place to warm up. each of these people took a

moment to consider what they had to offer, and then, without hesitation, simply helped-- but they helped with specificity. it's human nature to ask, "how lp?" when someone is in a difficult situation-- it's admittedly something i've said countless times in the past. but the truth is that when people offered, i was in crisis, and couldn't even begin to think about what i might need, far less consider what they might have to give. more powerful have been the offers from people who have been specific, like the friend with impeccable organizational skills, who offered to be a single point of contact between us and friends who wanted to donate clothing and tools to help deal with the damage to our house, or chef friends who have offered us hot meals at the end of long days of mucking out our house. they've taught me that specific is more meaningful than general, every time. people face crisis all the time. heartbreak, grief or loss; this is a fact of life. so i'd challenge us all, when we're struck by the need to help a friend going through a

difficult time, that instead of asking "how can i help," let's mine our own gifts, talents and skills that we've been entrusted with, and instead, declare, "i can help you, and here's how." >> sreenivasan: on the newshour online right now: if summer is the season for thrilling beach reads, autumn offers the chance to delve deeply into some thought-provoking books on politics, race and culture. we share 13 recommendations to put on your fall reading list. that's on our website, www.pbs.org/newshour. tune in later tonight for "washington week" with robert costa. and also tune in tomorrow for pbs newshour weekend. and we'll be back, right here, on monday. that's the newshour for tonight. i'm hari sreenivasan. have a great weekend. thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by:

>> bnsf railway. >> supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the world's most pressing problems-- skollfoundation.org. >> the william and flora hewlett foundation, helping people build immeasurably better lives. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and friends of the newshour. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc

captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org >> you're watching pbs.

hello and welcome to "kqed newsroom." i'm thuy vu. on our show today, uc berkeley was once again a flash point in the fight over free speech when a conservative radio host spoke on campus. and we talk to the co-directors of the national pbs series "the vietnam war," ken burns and lynn mill vic. plus a performance that tackles american history with drag queen flamboyance. we'll get a sneak peek from artist taylor mac. but first we look at the week's big political developments from d.c. to sacramento. president trump does a seeming about-face on daca, dangling a potential deal with democrats to protect hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants against deportation. meanwhile, senator bernie sanders unveiled a plan for single payer health care, which has gained