captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening, i'm judy woodruff. on the newshour tonight... >> in a few hours the government will reopen. we have a lot to do. >> woodruff: ...after three days of a political stand-off, the senate reaches a compromise to end the government shutdown in exchange for immigration talks. then, in a tense trip to israel, vice president mike pence announces the u.s. embassy will move to jerusalem by the end of next year, speeding up original plans. plus, a look at the story behind the new film "the post." what it can tell us about a key historical event and our current political environment. >> they also altered the state of the first amendment and the history of the world. by what? by printing the truth. dear lord, if that's a dangerous

thing to do, we're in a bad place. >> woodruff: 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. >> babbel. a language app that teaches

real-life conversations in a new language, like spanish, french, german, italian, and more. babbel's 10-15 minute lessons are available as an app, or online. more information on babbel.com. >> 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.

>> woodruff: the federal government is going back to work. senate democrats and republicans came to a meeting of the minds today on ending the partial shutdown. with that, congress moved to make it happen. lisa desjardins begins our coverage. >> desjardins: hours into the workweek shutdown, just after noon, democratic leader chuck schumer came to the senate floor. >> the republican leader and i have come to an arrangement. >> desjardins: announcing democrats would vote en mass for a three-week spending deal. >> the yeas are 81, the nays are 18. motion is agreed to. >> desjardins: it passed overwhelmingly with yes votes from 33 democrats and 48 republicans. the deal is much as it was friday: to fund government through february 8, and to fund the children's health insurance program, which covers nine million children, for six years. it also and suspends some affordable care act taxes. and one key promise. senate republican leader mitch mcconnell said he would allow

senate votes on competing immigration plans, a bipartisan plan to give status to so-called dreamers-- young people brought to the country illegally. >> so long as the government remains open, it would be my intention to take up legislation in the senate that would address daca, border security and related issues. >> desjardins: the two leaders spoke on the floor, but the deal was worked out by a large group of 25 other senators who, a bipartisan group, took the issue into their own hands, including republican susan collins and democrat joe manchin. >> this has been a great experience in that every single person has been committed to getting to yes. >> every person here had their say of how we can work together and make the place work again for america. >> desjardins: but democrats recognized this is a bubble of bipartisanship after weeks of animosity. >> there's a lot of challenges

here in terms of people trusting each other. >> desjardins: republicans tried to reassure democrats. arizona's jeff flake had originally been promised an immigration vote this month, but says he believes mcconnell's pledge today. >> i think this is a pretty high-profile promise right now if he makes it on the floor to move ahead and proceed to a bill. i think democrats can hold him to that and so can we. >> desjardins: that wasn't enough for some 16 democrats who voted no, including new york senator kirsten gillibrand. she tweeted: "this bill fails to fix the moral issue we must solve. that's why i voted against it." others, including minority whip dick durbin, who voted yes, told dreamers this was their best chance at getting status. >> to all the dreamers who are watching today, don't give up. i know your lives are hanging in the balance on what we do here on capitol hill and with the white house. >> desjardins: as democrats rallied for daca recipients, republicans like mcconnell painted their stance a different

way. >> i think if we've learned anything in this process, it's that a strategy to shut down the government over the issue of illegal immigration is something the american people didn't understand and would not have understood in the future. >> desjardins: amidst all of this was one other debate, about the role, or lack of role, of president trump. democrats said he was absent. >> the great dealmaking president sat on the sidelines. >> desjardins: but whitehouse press secretary sarah sanders indicated he was merely waiting for democrats to change their minds. >> i am pleased that democrats in congress have come to their senses and are now willing to fund our great military, border patrol, first responders and insurance for vulnerable children. as i've always said, once the government is funded, my administration will work towards solving the problem of very

unfair illegal immigration. >> woodruff: and lisa joins me now from the capitol for the latest, along with our white house correspondent, yamiche alcindor. thank you both. so, lisa, on friday, most of the democrats were against this. today enough to make it pass. what changed? >> two things changed. first of all, a nuance important to democrats from leader mcconnell. last week he sawed he would not commit to bring up any immigration bill the president could not support saying that was pointless. well now leader mcconnell is saying, instead, he will allow a wide range of immigration ideas to get votes on th senate floor including a bipartisan bill and that was stoight democrats. of course they disagree over how significant. the second thing, a work week shutdown is very different than a weekend shutdown and added tremendously to the pressure on democrats today. >> woodruff: and yamiche, so if that's what they're saying at

the capitol, how is the white house looking at this? >> the white house is tasking this as a trump win. the idea is sarah sanders from the podium said this is a trump deal and he came up with this and the democrats caved. he said they essentially came to their senses. he doubled down this week when he said democrats were throwing a tantrum. so while the hill is saying this is a bipartisan deal, the reublican president is saying you can thank the republicans for having your government open. >> woodruff: we heard lisa's report, yamiche, that the president was playing a role more off to the sides. what was the president's role in all of this? >> it's really interesting. sarah sanders was asked today what do you say about the president not being as active this weekend? she said whatever he did worked. she is saying while he was making calls, there is an idea he drew a line in the sand and the line was he was not going to debate about daca while the government was shut and actually

worked. the other thing that was interesting in that briefing is she also threw her support behind this controversial ad released this weekend, an ad that says democrats would be complicit in killing undocumented immigrants if they didn't take a harder stance in immigration. while this deal was struck saying we have the exact same ideas and we want to curtail immigration in this country. >> woodruff: lisa, back to you at the capitol, where do all the fights stand, whether immigration -- we know there was language in there that had to do with children's health insurance. how close are they to reaching an agreement on all these things? >> children's health insurance is the one thing that really moves in today. the children's health insurance program will now be fund ford six years. that is a very big deal for the 9 million children affected by that. everything else, judy, we're just buying a few weeks. on immigration in particular, yamiche and i have been reporting the president held

meetings tonight with groups of senators but it was with one group of republican senators including some hard liners, and then separately met with joe manchin and the new center doug jones from arkansas, the two most conservative democrats. so right now the president is talking mostly to conservatives about immigration. we'll see how that goes. add to that, there were questions about disaster funding still waiting and, by the way, spending cuts are about to hit. both republicans and democrats want to sort of raise those spending cuts. it's hard to see if -- to know if they will get a deal on that. judy, i think in all of this, this may not be the only time we talk about possible shutdowns this year. there are many factors woven together. it's hard to say if those will help or choke debate at the capitol. >> woodruff: we're just talking about three weeks. this has been an extraordinary spectacle. we have been watching. have we learned something about how our leaders operate under these circumstances? >> we've learned president trump, while he has

these people around him that have these hardline views, he will be the one leading the ship. sander pushed back hard when they said do steve miller have veto power. she said no. she said donald trump is making the decision and it's the donald trump from the campaign. we know he has really had line stances and i should say i talked to some of the administration officials that they that you have four things they want in immigration. they want to end the immigration, visa lottery program and want $33 billion for border security, they want all that for daca. >> woodruff: so there is still a lot to be negotiated here. >> yes. >> woodruff: all right, yamiche alcindor and lisa desjardins at the capitol, thank you boavment what a crazy weekend. >> woodruff: in the day's other news, the pennsylvania supreme court threw out the state's congressional map. it ruled that districts had been so heavily gerrymandered to

benefit republicans, that it violated the state's constitution. the court gave the republican- led legislature until february 9 to come up with a replacement. this was the third day of turkey's military offensive against u.s.-backed kurdish fighters in syria. the turks say the kurds are allied with kurdish rebels inside turkey. today, allied fighters, plus turkish artillery, fired at kurdish militia in the northeastern enclave of afrin and, turkish president recep tayyip erdogan vowed to continue, despite the cost. >> ( translated ): of course, we will have martyrs and wounded in this kind of struggle and it will not be left unanswered. they are and will be paying a heavy price for this. our syrian brothers in our country will find the opportunity to return to their own homes and their own lands. >> woodruff: erdogan also said russia, syria's main ally, had agreed not to interfere with the operation. conservatives in south korea served notice today they oppose

warming relations with the north, ahead of next month's olympic games. in seoul, several hundred conservative activists burned images of north korea's leader kim jong un and its flag. that came as the north's olympic delegation visited venues for a musical performance during the games. pope francis is apologizing for demanding that victims of sexual abuse by priests show proof before they can be believed. in south america, francis had defended a chilean bishop against allegations that he covered up for a notorious pedophile priest. today, flying back to rome, francis said that he never meant to cause more pain to the victims. >> ( translated ): i apologize to them if i hurt them without realizing it, but it was a wound that i inflicted without meaning to. i know how much they suffer. and to hear that the pope told them to their face that they need to

bring a letter with proof? it's a slap in the face. and now i realize that my expression wasn't right because i did not mean it. >> woodruff: at the same time, the pope said again that the chilean bishop will stay in office unless there is actual evidence implicating him in a cover-up. the chairman, vice chair and treasurer of usa gymnastics resigned today after an outcry over sexual assaults, by a former team doctor. larry nassar is awaiting sentencing in a lansing, michigan court, where more than 100 women have detailed abuse at his hands. there's been growing criticism that usa gymnastics did not act quickly enough on complaints about nassar. on wall street today, the senate deal to end the government shutdown helped push stocks higher. the dow jones industrial average gained nearly 143 points to close at 26,214. the nasdaq rose 71 points, one percent, and the s&p 500 added 22.

and in paris, the rat population has exploded, and a new video has people demanding action. the amateur footage shows hundreds of rats wriggling in a dumpster. it was posted online by the newspaper "le parisien." officials say heavy rain, a mild winter and construction have driven the rodents out of the sewers. still to come on the newshour: i speak to the white house legislative director and a democratic senator about what's next after the shutdown. the status of president trump's proposed border wall. vice president pence's tense trip to the mid-east, and much more. >> woodruff: we return to our lead story, the compromise struck to get the government back to work, for now.

i sat down a short time ago with marc short, director of legislative affairs at the white house, to get his take on the deal. >> well, judy, we're pleased that the government is reopened. we never understood what the position was with the senate democrats to take american troops and border customs hostage over an issue that everything that's been in front of them from a continuing resolution to reauthorizing children's health insurance, there is nothing democrats opposed. there was a separate issue not on the table they were trying to interject. so we're pleased the government is reopened and we negotiate on the daca issue and immigration. >> woodruff: the daca, young people who came to the country through no fault of their own without documentation. sarah sanders said today the president is now prepared to accept a permanent solution for

them. what does that mean? does that mean citizenship. >> the president is willing to have a conversation about citizenship. in addition to that, so far in the negotiations where we've moved is democrats have said the 690,000 people who have those daca permits age 16 to 36, who have those daca work permits, that has been the discussion so far, but democrats have asked us to expand that to include others in there and something closer to the number in the full dream act. we're willing to do that. it seems the democrats are talking more about border and custom security. so we see progress. it's more confounded by why the democrats decided to shut down the government with progress going on in the negotiations. >> woodruff: if we're talking about a deal, potentially

citizenship for these daca recipients, the democrats are prepared the give money on the wall, there still is real disagreement among the other issues, the republicans call it chain migration, democrats call it family immigration, the so-called visa lottery, but are you saying the president is prepared for a deal without those other issues -- >> judy, i'm not saying that. there are four pillars we that you could about and issues the republicans and democrats had beyond that. we narrowed it to four issues of daca, border security, the chain family immigration and the visa lottery pam. we think those are very important for a couple of reasons. one, if we don't solve the problem now, what's going to happen is we get a bill that happens regarding daca and border security and will end up in the same place a few years from now because you create an incentive for more to come if they think there will be amnesty to be given to them. so we need to solve the migration issue. on the swri is a lottery front, you covered this, too, the two

terrorists attacks, one, the pipe bomber and one who ran over innocent people with a truck, one came in on chain migration and one the visa lottery. we want to tighten the security in this country. >> woodruff: we will be coming back to that in the weeks to come before the debate resumes. i want to ask you about the president's role in this because the picture that emerged over the weekend, some democrats who met with the president were part of saying this, senator lifnedz linds, that the president was there but listening to the last person he talked to, that he would agree with one senator and then be swayed by his staff members who have a more restrictionist view of immigration than he does. how much of this is the president being swayed or controlled by his staff? >> judy, the president is very engaged in this and not being controlled by his staff. the reality is i know lindsey graham has attacked stephen miller by name in person as one

of the president advisors. stephen knows about nirgs. he will be central to solution. he knows the republican's side and what the democrats want so he's advising the president appropriately. i think that's been a bad mischaracterization by some of the senators involved. they said we want to talk to you about it. they came to the white house and he was pretty hollow in the areas most concerned about. so i think they were frustrated and disappointed the president wasn't accepting it but frankly they weren't presenting it to the president over the phone in reality the way it was when they came and showed us exactly what they were doing. >> woodruff: you city have a picture of a president who was changing his position from one hour to the next or a few hours later and a president who wasn't familiar with the details. i mean, that came out in several -- from several senators who met with him. >> i think from several senators on the democrats' side judy who want to paint that portrait.

i don't think it's an active pore traivment i think the president is very engaged in the conversations and very focused on what he wants done. when the american people got to see the meeting he hosted last tuesday with 20 different members, bicamera, bipartisan, i think the american people saw how the president engablings in these conversations and where he was focused on them. >> woodruff: when senator graham said i want the president from last tuesday not the other one we have been talking to. >> we hope senator graham will be constructive in this conversation, he has been a help to us in the first of the administration. we feel what he presented over the phone to the president didn't match the details of the legislation. for instance when they talk about border security they provided the $1.6 billion the administration asked for this year but nothing beyond that. the 1.6, they put additional strings on it and said any new technology or testing can't be used. the department of homeland security is constantly testing new prototypes who are what they

want as a fiscal barrier. so a lot of things in the details one presented. it showed the president it wasn't an honest, up-front deal. >> woodruff: we'll leave it there but certainly wanting to talk to you in the days and weeks to come on immigration an other issues. marc short, thank you very much. >> judy, thanks for having it seems to me. >> woodruff: and now for a democrat's take on the deal to end the government shutdown, we turn to senator chris van hollen of maryland. he's a member of the party's senate leadership team and he joins us now from capitol hill. welcome back to the "newshour", senator. >> great to be here, judy. >> woodruff: so we just heard marc short saying they don't know what the delay was all about. the democrats held things up basically for nothing. >> so, judy, i'm glad to hear marc short say president trump is glad to see the government open because donald trump had everything to do with shutting down the government in the first place and nothing to do over the last 34, 36 hours in getting the government up and running. he was only a destructive influence because he would say one thing to one set of folks

and the opposite to others. so the reason we were able to get the government open was because republicans and democrats in the senate came together, put together a proposal that is a step forward, where we were sure that many of our funding priorities would be addressed when it comes to things like children's health centers and, for the first time, we were promised a vote on a bipartisan docket bill, something republicans have refused to do till now. >> woodruff: that's what i want to ask you about use there are some democrats, members of your own party who are saying they still don't trust that the majority leader mcconnell will bring this up for a vote. what gives you the confidence in what he said over the weekend and today that he is going to do what he said he will do. >> first of all, judy, he said this to the american people. he didn't say this just behind closed doors. second, he made this commitment to lots and lots of republican senators who want to move forward open daca and, third, even after three weeks, we still

have a lot of leverage with respect to the budget process. we would all like to get on with the budget process, but it's an opportunity tomake sure that mitch mcconnell keeps his word on this. in the meantime our focus has to be on getting a strong bipartisan bill, 57 senators so far support the durbin-graham bill. we want to get over that number, and i'm confident we can get there. look, if mitch mcconnell decides to totally backtrack on the statement he made in public, i think there will be very severe consequences and many tools that can be used to address that issue. >> woodruff: i'm looking right now at the vote in the house of representatives and i see that 142 democrats i'm told voted against this, 45 voted for. you had, what, 18 democrats voting against it in the senate. some of them are saying they're worried what's going to happen is you will get down to the wire before february 8th, that the

republican leadership will try to rush something through and the democrats will lose an ability to shape immigration legislation. >> judy, i think there's a bipartisan majority. as i said, already 57 senators on a bill outlined by senators graham and durbin. so that's a very good starting point to go into this with and i think we will gain on -- in terms of those numbers, and that was something that we'd not been promised before. in other words, mitch mcconnell had refused to even address the issue of daca legislatively. look, there is absolutely no guarantee that, you know, if the government had remained shut down for two or three or more weeks that there be any resolution of the daca issue in the spending bill. meanwhile, we now have this opportunity, and everybody should join forces, everybody who wants to make sure that dreamers are treated fairly should join forces, get this bipartisan bill out of the senate in the coming weeks and then put a huge amount of public pressure on the house, if we can put a bill into the house, then

the country will have to be calling, you know, the phones and going to town halls and making sure the house moves forward on this. >> woodruff: senator you started out by saying the president had not been helpful in this process and there has been criticism of the president being an uncertain negotiate but we just heard mosh mosh, the white house legislative director, saying the president is willing to have a conversation about citizenship for these daca recipients. what does that mean to you? >> well, that would be great if what he just said today is something he will also say tomorrow. this goes way back to last september when president trump told both chuc chuck schumer and nancy pelosi he was willing to do a clean dreamers bill. that was many, many months ago. then we saw him in front of the cameras tell people he wanted a bill of love and would sign whatever bipartisan proposal that came before his desk. then we had the subsequent meeting at the white house where

he used repulsive, racist language and blew the whole thing up. he was totally unconstructive in the aftermath of chuc chuck schs meeting where we thought we made progress and he turned around and did nothing. but, look, the good news is we were able to get the government up and running despite the president of the united states who has only been a negative influence. if the president was in charge, the government would still be shut down right now. in fact, there were reports saying he thought it was a good thing. and he did once tweet he wanted a good government shutdown. our statement to the president is ther there are no good govert shutdowns and there are ways to resolve these issues in a biparts manner. >> woodruff: how confident are you the spirit of bipartisanship will continue for any period of time? >> well, you have to take this one issue at a time, judy, and i hope we can move forward on the key budget issues, obviously the children's health insurance program, but funding community

health centers, dealing with the opioid crisis, making sure we not have a good, strong, robust defense spending budget but invest in our kids' education. all of that we hope we can tackle. i know there is a bipartisan majority here in favor of a dreamers bill, a billow help provide security to dreamers. so let's get the vote on that. let's focus on getting that done. so is it everything all at once? no. does it build momentum? yes. >> senator chris van hollen of maryland, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: as we've been hearing, one issue that's sure to be part of immigration talks in coming weeks is the president's proposed border wall with mexico. the controversial wall, a hallmark of mr. trump's campaign, has yet to materialize. there's still no funding from congress.

the effectiveness of eight prototypes is still being evaluated. from pbs station kpbs in san diego, jean guerrero examines whether the wall will ever be >> build that wall! >> reporter: president trump promised to build a wall. here on this dirt patch of land in southeastern san diego are the main products of those promises: eight prototypes of various colors and materials. each towers about 30 feet high, three times the height of the existing border fence just south of them. it's been three months since they were unveiled, with the acting deputy commissioner for u.s. customs and border protection, ron vitiello, lauding their scale. >> my biggest impression is how big they are. >> reporter: the prototypes cost

taxpayers $20 million. it's unclear if the prototypes will ever be used, because there's still no money for mr. trump's wall. one of them is jill hoslan. the border wall is absolutely against the core foundational values of the united states. the core foundational values of the united states have been built upon immigration, upon welcoming refugees, upon creating a society that's very diverse. >> reporter: but some continue to await >> reporter: but some continue to await the wall with hopeful anticipation. one of those people is bob maupin, a retired mechanic whose property touches the border in southeastern san diego county. >> if we get a wall like they built in israel, i probably won't have to wear a bullet- proof vest along the border anymore.

>> reporter: he patrols his property for trespassers from mexico. >> hell yeah, i'm a vigilante, if you use the word before hollywood got a hold of it. because originally a vigilante, or vigilantes, were people who were enforcing the law because of the lack of law enforcement. >> reporter: along the southern edge of his property, he built a chain-link fence that runs parallel to the government's border fence. he says the government fence is pretty useless because it's so easy to climb, standing only 10 feet tall here, with corrugations that can be used as steps. his fence is crowned with barbed wire. still, it often gets cut by smugglers. maupin has patched it with bundles of chain-link and metal slabs. >> over the years, my wife and i have spent probably $20,000 in fence repair in property repair, because of these people. >> reporter: now, maupin feels he must use himself as a barrier against illegal immigration. >> it is my duty to protect the country from people invading it.

>> reporter: further east, in the arizona desert, another man searches for people who get lost illegally crossing the border, and tries to save them. here, it's nature that stops people from coming through. hundreds die each year from the extreme temperatures. often, ely ortiz recovers their bodies, with the help of a group named aguilas del desierto: eagles of the desert. ortiz says the existing wall is to blame for the deaths, because it has pushed migrants into the desert. >> the wall is a method of discrimination. it's a way of saying, you're inferior to me and here i am marking my territory, the united states, with its policies, how many lives has it claimed? >> reporter: he says a longer wall will mean more deaths. ortiz started the rescue group after finding the body of his own brother, rigoberto, in the arizona desert. rigoberto died trying to cross the border illegally in 2009.

>> ( translated ): i lost all illusions, ambition for having things. i stopped having desires to be somebody. i wanted to dedicate my life to helping people who suffer this. >> reporter: on this search, ortiz and his group come across a stack of letters and other things that appear to have belonged to someone who died. a large stain of grease on the desert floor indicates that a corpse was recently removed. >> i love you so much francisco, my love. >> reporter: the letters appear to be from the man's girlfriend or wife. >> there shouldn't be a wall. we're all human. >> reporter: back in san diego, border patrol agent joshua wilson says the wall makes it easier for agents to do their jobs. >> no barrier is a be-all, end- all that's going to prevent all illegal activity. however, what it does is it allows us time to interdict an attempt to enter the country illegally. it acts as a speed bump. >> eporter: he says there are areas of the border that the

wall doesn't address at all, such as the ocean. >> we've had people try to swim across, surf across, scuba dive, jet ski. there's no end to the creativity of people trying to come here illegally. >> reporter: maritime apprehensions skyrocketed after the first wall was built. smugglers also started digging tunnels under the fence and using drones. government statistics show most drug trafficking occurs through ports of entry. experts on both sides of the political spectrum agree that even if president trump's wall is built, smugglers won't stop finding new strategies for getting people into the u.s. for the pbs newshour, i'm jean guerrero in san diego.

>> woodruff: vice president mike pence was in jerusalem today, where he addressed the israeli parliament and met with prime minister benjamin netanyahu. john yang has more on the tensions sparked on the trip. >> yang: judy, i'm now joined by brian bennett, white house correspondent for the "los angeles times," who is in jerusalem with the vice president. brian, thanks for joining us. in his speech before the israeli parliament, the vice president said the embassy would be moving to jerusalem sooner than people expected. what effect is this having on the trump administration's goal of jump starting the peace talks? >> it won't help the peace talks. it's another irritant for the palestinians and another reason for them not to want to come to the table. the state department had been soft pedaling the announcement to recognize jerusalem as the capital of israel by saying the embassy will take years to be moved because there is planning and funding that has to be worked out. that didn't stand well with president trump and

vice president behind the scenes was advocate foreleg a faster time line and they got it. mike pence announced today that they were going to move the embassy to jerusalem before the end of 2019, and it's going to -- they're doubling down on their support for israel and the hard liners in ills, and it's not going to bring the palestinians to the negotiating table anytime soon. >> as a matter of fact, there was no meeting with the palestinians today and there was also a protest in the cay kanes. >> the president and vice president came to jerusalem and didn't meet with any palestinians. the palestinians wouldn't meet with them. when he gave the speech at kanesit, there were arab-israeli members to have the body that stood up, protested the speech and were roughly escorted out of the body. president trump says he wants to geto the biggest deal, which is solving the israeli-palestinian

conflict, and right now it looks like they are very far away from that and getting farther away. another thing that they've done recently is decide to cut aid to palestinian refugees, and the u.s. contribution to palestinian refugees. that's another issue that didn't sit well with the palestinians or the arab allies in the region. >> and he met with one of the strong arab allies of the united states yesterday, king abdullah in jordan, and this also came up in those talks, sintd it? >> vice president pence was in jordan and met with king abdullah in jordan who has been a strong ally of the united states and king abdullah had strong things to say to mike pence and the president, he wasn't willing to recognize jerusalem at the capital of israel and for years he had been telling the white house on trips to washington that this was a

bad idea, he had concerns about it and he said it wasn't going to help the peace process and felt moves like this have a direct impact on the stability inside jordan, where there's a lot of palestinian refugees. >> yang: also yesterday, the vice president was at a u.s. military base in jordan, spoke to the troops. i want to play a little sound byte from that speech. >> despite bipartisan support for a budget resolution, a minority in the senate has decided to play politics with military pay, but you deserve better. you and your families shouldn't have to worry for one minute about whether you're going to get paid as you serve in the uniform to have the united states. so know this, your president, your vice president and the american people are not going to put up with it. >> yang: brian, back here at home this raised a few eyebrows. people were taken aback by really sort of a partisan line if a speech on a u.s. military base in a foreign country. did the vice president, the

people traveling with the vice president have any response or reaction to that? >> it's definitely unusual for a signature vice president to stand in front of troops at a meet and greet and make political attacks and go after the opposition party in the way that pence did, and i asked the vice president myself about that, when we were asking him questions on that base, and he said that he felt very strongly that he was concerned about the troops who were on the front lines serving and had this cloud of uncertainty over their heads about whether their paycheck would come through in the next pay cycle and health it was important to raise that issue here. there is a tradition in the american presidency of leading domestic politics at the -- leaving nestic politics at the water's edge when you go outside and represent the country. critics have argued that pence has pushed that limit on this trip by bringing up the

shutdown -- government shutdown repeatedly. >> yang: brian bennett of the "los angeles times" from gorms. brian, thank you for joining us. >> happy to be with you, jon. >> woodruff: saturday marked one year of the trump presidency. the shutdown punctuated an administration consistently facing controversy, often sparked by the president. a perfect time for politics monday to shed light on the road ahead, with amy walter of the "cook political report," and stu rothenberg. he's editor of "inside elections" and a contributor to "roll call." so happy monday, "politics monday" to both of you. i started to say shutdown monday but it looks like it's coming to an end. all right,eth lasted over the weekend. clear, political. we know there are substantive winners here. the country comes out of this better because they resolved it,

but politically, winners, losers -- >> i think it's hard to say this is going to have much of an impact. i doubt we'll come back in november when we're sitting here on election night and saying you know what turned the tied tide in the election? it was the three-day shutdown, that turned the tide of the entire election year. but i think it has really turned the focus and going to be a substantive focus for 2018 which is this daca issue which is certainly not going to go away, even if they agreed to have a vote, i think the contours of what hat looks like are far from certain and that is going to have a bigger, longer-term implication. i think the democrats are also learning the hard way. republicans had to learn the hard way when they were in the minority. when you're in the minority you have very little leverage. your base wants you to do a lot and you feel like you need to show you're fighting against the other party but at the end of the day you have very little leverage. >> woodruff: you see winners, losers enduring here? >> i think this shutdown will have the same impact that the

shutdown in 2013 had which is zilch when it comes to the midterms. judy, i think we know that the president will be active over the next ten months, make plenty of controversies, whether it's daca or the wall or questions about infrastructure or north korea. there's going to be a lot of things happening. so i think, when we look back, this will be a hiccup, an asterisk. >> woodruff: amy, you're already pointing out what we're going to talk about, immigration. we know it is going to be a factor in these races this year but you are saying the contours aren't clear. we really don't know how this helping young immigrants issue is going to play out or not? >> i don't think either side really knows what it's willing to compromise on, what it's willing to sacrifice, what it's willing to say yes to. we know what some of the challenges are within the republican conference. you've already seen the white house and lindsey graham kind of spar with each other today over what kind of bill that the white

house wants versus what senator lindsey graham wants to see. we know that, in 2013, enough republicans worked with democrats to support a comprehensive immigration bill in the senate, but we also know that the house republicans are much more conservative. they're never going to go along with something that could get enough democratic votes in the senate. and then for the democrats, there's a lot of focus just simply on the daca plan, but we've already seen that they moved a little bit on whether they would fund a border wall. remember earlier in 2017, it's no money for a wall. now they're saying we'll give you a little bit of a wall. but what else are they willing to compromise on to be willing to say we're going to protect this group? >> woodruff: we heard from the white house affairs director the president is willing to talk about citizenship for these young dreamers. the midterm elections, there are a lot of polls, several in the last week or so, asking people

whether they'd rather see democrats or republicans take control of the congress. the abc "the washington post" has a 12% spread, nbc 39. "wall street journal" just 6 point spread, but still abadvantage for the democrats. what do we read into this at this point? >> this is a generic ballot question that tries to get a sons on which direction the public is going in a part sein way. leaving out the names of the members of congress, forgetting about your congressional district, who's in congress, just who do you want to see active, republicans or democrats. so we see the democrats with the significant damage but the devil is in the difference in this case. it's not unusual the president's party runs at a disadvantage in midterm elections, but the difference is in the nbc wall street the margin is 6 and the abc-post-is 12. if it's 12 points, it's likely

the democrats will take the house of representatives. if it's 6, we would have to look more district by district and i think the democrats might fall short at plus 6. i think the direction of the electorate now and we'll see how that changes in the next ten months and whether people increasingly look to the democrats as a way of stopping the president or sending a message of dissatisfaction to the president or not. >> and once you get under these numbers to ask people how enthusiastic are you about voting? are you really interested not in just casting whether you're going to vote d or r or actually showing up at the polls, and what you're seeing at the abc "the washington post" poll said people who said they were likely to vote even a bigger advantage for republicans -- for democrats, i'm sorry, people who said that they were extremely enthusiastic about voting, basically i will walk over glass if that's what i have to do to vote, democrats with a 15-point

advantage. even in the cnn poll that had a small democratic advantage like that nebrask -- nbc "wall street journal" poll, thews yam for voting, democrats went from a 5 to a 15 point advantage. we've seen this in the '17 elections. >> in the virginia governor's race, yeah. the only caveat, events between now and november will add to enthusiasm in one party or another or subtract from it. >> woodruff: the polls will give us ideas and do b done throughout the year. >> you have to look at a number of collections and then the elections. you will get a sense of where the psych is going. >> woodruff: we have ten months to figure it out. thank you both very much. stu rothenberg, amy walter, "politics monday." >> thank you. you're welcome.

>> woodruff: finally tonight, president trump's approach to and battles with many in the news media have been a consistent feature of the first year of his presidency. similar tensions resonate in a new movie about how a former president battled the press. that fight was over the publication of the pentagon papers, secret documents about the war in vietnam. a milestone case for press freedom and the first amendment. it all started with the "new york times," but the fight was soon joined by the washington post. jeffrey brown has a look behind the movie and the events of that era. >> brown: june, 1971. >> o you have the papers? >> not yet. >> brown: but he soon would. the "papers" were the pentagon papers, a classified history of the vietnam war created by the defense department. in the film, "the post," "washington post" editor ben bradlee, played by tom hanks, and publisher katherine graham,

meryl streep, must obtain the papers and then decide whether to defy a court order and publish them. the all-star project, directed by steven spielberg, takes on big and consequential history, and issues of press freedom and national security that resonate to today. but liz hannah, the screenwriter, later joined by josh singer, says her focus was on a smaller, individual story, about katherine graham, the high-society woman thrust into leadership of her family-owned paper, finding her way in a male-dominated world. >> this is the first fortune 500 c.e.o. who is a woman, and she had been told her whole life that she wasn't good enough. and then she was put in this position where she had to make this choice and she had to find her voice. and there is something very universal about that. there's something about that, to me, that is very relatable. i've spent many times in a room where i'm the only woman, or i'm the odd man out.

and that's the story i think that we need now, the story of people finding their voices. >> brown: the real katherine graham told her own story, including taking over the paper after her husband's suicide, in a memoir that would win the pulitzer prize in 1998, and spoke of it in interview on the newshour. >> i didn't really transform myself. working transformed me, and i went to work thinking that my role would develop as it did. i went to work because i found that i owned the controlling shares of the company, and i thought, "well, if this is so, i need to learn what it is that's at stake here, and what the issues are, because maybe someday i will have to make some sort of decision that i have to be intelligent about, so i'd better know. >> brown: the film is set as the "washington post" company is about to go public, so the stakes for graham were especially high. we see the cozy relations she had with key political figures, including defense secretary robert mcnamara, played by bruce

greenwood-- the very person who'd commissioned the pentagon papers, and then pushed to have them kept from public view. >> if you publish-- nixon is a son of a ( bleep ). he hates you, he hates ben, and you will not get a second chance, kay. the richard nixon i know will master the full power of the presidency, and if there's a way to destroy your paper, by god, he'll find it. >> brown: the pentagon papers were originally leaked to "new york times" reporter neil sheehan by daniel ellsberg, a former defense department analyst who came to believe the government was lying about the progress of the war. ellsberg spoke in a 2010 documentary on the pbs program "p.o.v." >> i've often said that i feel very regretful that i had not put out those documents when i could have in 1964, 65, i think, that a war really might have been avoided. >> brown: "times" reporters spent three months studying the papers.

james goodale, then-lead counsel for the "times," told me the high stakes were understood. >> the news people were very concerned that they had fake documents, they didn't know who ellsberg was. and they didn't care who he was, because they wanted to make their own determination whether the documents they had were authentic. if they were not authentic, it would be very hard for the "new york times" to recover from that blow. >> brown: on june 13, 1971, the "times" began publishing stories, until the nixon administration, claiming a violation of the espionage act, secured a court injunction against the paper-- a first in american history. the movie version focuses on the "washington post's" efforts to play catch-up: its success at getting hold of the papers, and the decision to publish while the "times" was silenced. in a landmark first amendment decision, the supreme court ruled in favor of the two newspapers.

tom hanks told me recently how the story resonated for him-- then and now. >> the truth was so volatile, so toxic at that time, that no one wanted to talk about it. ben bradlee and kay graham, for about a week, not only altered the state of their newspaper empire, but they also altered the state of the first amendment and the history of the world. by what? by what? by printing the truth. dear lord, if that's a dangerous thing to do, we're in a bad place. >> brown: in fact, in the midst of another period of media and white house contention, director steven spielberg decided to rush the film into production. he spoke at a recent forum. >> there were a lot of fires being lit, and of course the evening news was lighting most of the fires. but we really felt we could get into the national conversation and make this movie as quickly as possible and make it as well

as we possibly could. >> brown: the film has received mostly glowing reviews and, though losing out at the recent golden globes, is expected to compete for oscar and other awards. one criticism: its focus on the "post," when the rival "new york times" deserves the credit. former "times" legal counsel james goodale calls it, "a good film, bad history." >> although a producer has artistic license, i think it should be limited in a situation such as this, so the public comes away with an understanding of what the true facts are in this case. and i think that if you're doing a movie now when trump is picking on the press for fake news, you want to be authentic. you don't want to be in any way fake. >> brown: the film's co-writer, liz hannah, believes it does give the "times" its due. >> the work that neil sheehan did with dan ellsberg and with his team at the "times," and we wouldn't have the pentagon papers if it weren't for them.

and that is a story in and of itself. but the story that i wanted to tell was a story of kay graham, and then the story of how kay graham and ben bradlee became the superhero team that we know them as. and this was really the beginning of this team. this is the team that led to watergate. >> brown: indeed, the pentagon papers story was followed just a year later by the watergate break-in that would lead to the downfall of president nixon-- not to mention another famous film about the "washington post." for the pbs newshour, i'm jeffrey brown in washington. >> woodruff: on the newshour online right now, supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg was asked about her experience with sexual harassment during a q&a at the sundance film festival

this weekend. you can watch her answer and hear her thoughts about the "me too" movement on our web site, pbs.org/newshour. and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. join us online and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> babbel. a language app that teaches real-life conversations in a new language, like spanish, french, german, italian, and more. babbel's 10-15 minute lessons are available as an app, or online. more information on babbel.com. >> and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century. >> supported by the john d. and

catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org elyse: this week on history detectives,

what role did this clock play in keeping 19th-century america running on time? gwendolyn: what can this 200-year-old document reveal about the first american-born woman to lead a religious movement? that's amazing! tukufu: and in an encore presentation, does this letter reveal a top secret army program to turn man's best friend into a weapon of war? elvis costello: ♪ watchin' the detectives ♪ i get so angry when the teardrops start ♪ ♪ but he can't be wounded 'cause he's got no heart ♪ ♪ watchin' the detectives ♪ it's just like watchin' the detectives ♪