. tonight on kqed newsroom, as horrifyingbbing on b.a.r.t. left a teenager dead. we'll talk to b.a.r.t.'s police chief about safety on the region ap transit former cia director joins us to discuss russia, tensions with iran, and other national security concerns. plus the week's top political developments including the latest deadline to unify families separated at the border. hello and welcome to kqed newsroom. we begin with security on the bay area's rapid transit system b.a.r.t. john lee cowell has been charged with murder in last sunday'st stabbing of 18 mia wilson and the attempted murder of her older sister.t police are sl investigating the motive behind the attack ce

which took pt the b.a.r.t. station in oakland. protesters took to the streets angry and worried that the stabbing of two young black women was racially motivated. b.a.r.t. is under fire about not sharing information that resulted in fatalities raising concern about security and transparency. joining me now is b.a.r.t.'s police chief. chiefsnice to have you here. >> thank you for having me. good morning. >> there are questionswh about her b.a.r.t. is safe. are you making any security changing in wake of the that happened? >> yes, absolutely. what we've seen over time is that our crime haactually at the same rate as last year, so our crime hasn't gone up but we three horrible incidents so we are increasing or patrols throughout the system in the stations and on tra s. >> when you say increasing patrols, what does that mean? it's my understanding your force is currently 25 officers short of what is budgeted for. so what are you doing in that regard? >> sure. we do have 25 vacancies and we are going very aggressive in

when i came here a year ago we had over 40 vacancies, and we we still to 25 b need to fill those. we've been using overtime to get our officers in the stations and on the trains to supplement the officers that are on the regularlyed sced workday. >> so prior from what you and your deputies have ysaid, had one officer for every twoo t three iost. there are 48 b.a.r.t. stations. with these changes you're putting in place nynow, how m officers do you have patrolling per station and for how long? >> well, c rse it will vary. time of day, day of week. we also look s at the hotts in the area and the calls for service. so it could be anywhere between 25 to 40 officers at any given time, but also we want to focus in thereas that are either generating more calls for service or the ones that are problematic with quality of life ridersthat are making feel unsafe. >> which areas would those be? >> our busiest stations are san francisco and the oaklandat

ns for calls for service. but we've got to make sure as a that al police departme we have adequate coverage and ttention throughout all fou counties that we serve. >> do you think these changes that you're making are enough to keep riders safe? >> well, we are definitely icontinuing ourng effort. we do need to hire more police officers to continue to increase safety. think we're on the right track. there are tips that we give to our riders to make sure that they can do somethingin to help the effort of making b.a.r.t. as safe as possible. >> what are some of tho tips? what would you advise people? >> one of the problems we do havehroughout the system are the cell phone thefts. we really encourage folks to keep their laptops and their cell phones secured when they're coming up t stations. to be aware of their surroundings, to tr to avoid sleeping while on the train. and oftentimes, youknow, there's aadage where opportunity makes the thief and we don't want to give thosep

tunities to individuals that are looking to take advantage of people. >> i think what has the mostio nal attention right now are the violent crimes, particularly sunday's stabbing. you mentioned earlier that crime s not really risen on b.a.r.t. over the past year, but did you esok at state department of justice fig over a decade, they show that violent crimes on b.a.r.t. has actually increased by nea% over the past decade. this happened at a time when such crimes fell 7% across california. what do you think accounts for this rise in violent crime on b.a.r.t.? >> well, truly the three past incidents have been categorized as homicidere really an anomaly in our system. we don't see that level of violence. but what we have seen over time have been the phone snahes which are documented as violent fcrimes. wherce or fear is used to take somebody else's cell phone. but in terms of these violent crimes that occurred definitely an anomaly. not something we have seen in the past.

ythat's why we're v proud we took the prompt actions that we did to bring two of the three suspects into custody. >> b.a.r.t. has been, since you men those two other assaults, b.a.r.t. has been criticized for lack of in transparencyuding on those two assaults in addition to the sunday stabbing, this was on top of other lapse decoy cameras that didn't work, failing to inform the public of a takeover robbery by a mob of juveniles. how do you respondto concerns that b.a.r.t. is not open and honest with the publhe about things? >> well, first of all, i do want to address the two incidents o thaturred because i was not ere during those previous incidents. but what i can tell you on those two incidents, we have had to wait for an autopsy to determine the cause of death on one of the incidents and on the othere the person wasn't -- did not pass away until sunday. so literally it was a timing issue wherhe very next day we put out the information on all three homicides. within a very shor period of

time all that went out to the public.so believe that is transparent and you also need t to givee for the investigative process to ork through and to make sure that're providing accurate information to the public. >> fair enough. you've been on the job for only abouto year now, you're right, the other things happened before your tenure. give whathas happened and given the ongoing public concerns, are you planning any additionalhechanges in reporting out of crimes on b.a.r.t.? >> well, we're constantly looking at how we can improve that. we do have a public log that people can sign in to. we also have crime mapping.comry which is common in the policing industry which is automatically feeds from our computer-aided dispch system to the internet and anybody with internet access can take a look at that as well. >> have you had any conversations with the family of neal wilson, the young woman who died in the stabbing on sunday? >> i've had conversations wi p their spokople and i've left a message for the father and obviously they're going

through a very difficult time and -- >> what did you say? >> just expressing my condolences not only on my behalf but on beha of the men and women of the b.a.r.t. police department. it's a very tragic incident. >> there have been some protests and marches and some membersf the community who feel the attack was racially motivated. mr. cowell the suspe is white. the two women who were stabbed or black. what would you say to those who have these concerns about whether the attack was racially motivated? >> well, you know, i'm definitely sensiti to that perspective. i just want to say that up to this point we haven't found a connection to say that it was racially motivated, but it's not something that we take off the table. if information does come to light that it was racially motatated, we will get information to the district attorney's office immediately and theye can dec whether a hate crime would be appropriate to be fil r. >> justl quickly, we have about 15 seconds, what more do you need fr city, county and state officials to improve

safety on b.a.r.t., your number one wish? >> iink it's a collaborative effort. we need to work in a positive way and really support stability amongst all to make it safer. >> all right. b.a.r.t. police chief, we thanur you for yoime today. >> thank you very much. now to international affairs, on wedsday secretar of state mike pompeo faced tough questions from lawmakers on capitol hill. pompeo tried to assure lawmakers that u.s. policies toward russia had not changed. but it was unable to provide details on the private meeting that took place between president trump and russian president vladimir putin in helsinki. semeanwhile the white ho announced it would postpone a second summit with putin until ekter the midterm election. earlier this w tensions were heightened between the u.s. and iran by an exchange of threatse betmr. trump and iranian president rouhani.iv for a perspe on this and other foreign policy developments, we're joined by

leonta pan secretary panetta, always nice to have you with us. >> nice to be with you. >> the are reports that special counsel robert mueller is now looking into tweetsom president trump about attorney general jeff sessions and also former fbi direor james comey. and then separately federal investigators have asked to interview alan weisselberg, the chief financial roof for the trump organization. what is you reaction to all these developments this week? >> is think i an indication that bob mueller is reaching that point in his investigation where h is lookingretty closely at the president. with regards to issues of obstruction and probably issues of collusion as well. i think the tweets, obviously looking at the tweets, i think the purpos of that is to determine whether or not you can pull together an case based on those tweets. i think clearly looking at his

finance guy relates to tracking he money andher any of that money leads to russia. you d i wanted to also ask about this week's senate hearing where secretary of state mike pompeo said that presidt trump s taken tough actions against russia. what is your assessment of that statement? >> i thought that mike pompeo's testimony really presented a odisconnect. one hand talked about u.s. policy being againstrussia, being for nato, for ourlls. basically reflecting i think more traditional positions in terms of the united states. but at the same time, you have a president wh basically speaks against those very sions. he talks and criticizes nato. he critices our allies. when he stood up with putin, he ussians morets the than he trusts our own

intelligence agencies with regardso electio interference. so there's a very great disconnect here and it creates a lot of confusion not only for our allies in the orld, but also for ourselves. >> and you touch on a point i wanted to ask you isout which when he doubted his own intelligence community's conclusiat russia had interfered in the 2016 election. your former cia director. what was your reaction to that? >> very concerned when the president speaks in a way that undermines the credibility of the intelligence that's provided to the president. when he does that those that are putting their life on the li to gather that intelligence worry about whether or not their credibility is being questioned. and so it does impact on their morale approximat

morale. >> and does that undermining also continue when the president is dgng things like threaten to revoke the security clearance of former officials who had criticized how he handled the h helsinki talks? >>bsolutely. for the president revoking a security clearance not because someone has violatedurhat sy clearance and revealed classified information or engaged in some kind of behavior that abuses that particular security clearance.he the reason doing it is because he doesn't like what people are saying about himor his policies. he grain goes against of what this country is all about. this country is built on free speech, the ability to say what you think, fnd thect is to have a president who takes retebution out on th he doesn't like because of what they say. i think not only abuses his power with regardsy to secur clearances, it goes against the

fundamental free speech, a principle that is so important to our democracy. >> aullso this week president trump had an exchange of words with president rouhani. what kind of impact do ys think that having in both countries? >> we're at a difficult place now with iran. the president basically to up the agreement on nucle development by iran. it was the one agreement that all the parties agreed with restraining iran from moving forward with developing a nuclear weapon. that agreement from the united states's point of view is out the window. and so the questio now becomes how are we going to deal with iran? we've egaged now in war ofw ds. president rouhani criticizing president trump. it could lead to some kind of confrontation. on the other hand, the hope is that it might lead to some kind of negotiation. but i think we are going to see

a period of tremendous volatility ahead of us and the relationship with iran. >> in speaking with volatility and nuclear programs, this week secretary of state pompeo so acknowledged for the first time that north korea is to produce nuclear fuel. that runs counter to theis admation's claims that it was making progress on the denuclearization of north korea. how concerned are you about this revelation from secretary pompeo? >> well, i'm very concerned, because it only confirms that we have yet to receive from north korea any kind ofreal commitment, verifiable, enforceable commitment to eliminate their nuclear weapons and engage in denuclearization. the summit meeting was kind of a pr event, but when the balloons and all the confetti went away,

the reality is we have yet to see north korea take a steps with regards to eliminating their nucle capability. and so it is -- it remains i think as opposed to what the president said, it stillemns a serious nuclear threat to the united states and to the worl >> all right. secretary panetta, thank you for your time. >> thank you. ontinuing with politics and their impact on california, thursday was the deadline for the federal government to comply with ao court order reunite families separated under the trump administration's zero tolerance immigration policy. government officials say about 1,400 children were returned out of 2,500 children who were taken from their parents but the are reports of failed reunification that's raising questions about adwhether the dene had been met. meanwhile a full blown tariff ar appears to be averted for

now. it's unclear how california will benefit from $12 billion in emergency aid to help u.s. farmers affected by the new tariffs. here with me to discs with political report marissa lagos, and political senior writer carla ma carla. from a republican perspective, you just heard what secretary panetta had toouay the russia investigation and secretary pompeo's testimony. what is yr reaction to all of that? >> i think there is a distancee the secretary raises an interesting point. on the one han the administration is conducting policy toward russia in a way that's relatively consistent with previous republican administrations, arguab tougher than the previous administration with respect to sanctions in a few other areas. then yo have the rhetoric coming from the administration and particularly from the president. less so thedministration. i think secretary pompeo, secretary mattis have been very clear. john bs been very clear regarding what they believe the u.s. posture toward russia should bt the presids the one i think

who has sent mixed messages. so ifhis administration wants to get on the same page, it starts at the top. ultimately it's the approximate the and his rhetoric th need to be addressed. >> it is so interesting because we've seen so many breaks wi protocol in so many ways with this president but in particular th meeting one-on-one with vladimir putin only having their translators in the room, not having anybody from his cap cabinet, so it's hard to know if secretary pompeo knows what else was said. >> we saw pompeo alongside james mattis this week at, stanfo at hoover institution. he seemed uncomfortable. uestions about what exactly went on in that meeting. he frankly seems maybe out of the loop inerms of what happened. and i think the administration has problems when the press secretary answers the question about whether ambassadors could be called up by russia to answes quest they didn't seem to defend him.

those kind of issues raisehuge questions as to what exactly the olicy is on russia and how tough theye going to be. it seemed like the president blinks by cceling that meeting in november with putin. >> that's not the only point of confusion. i want to talk intercontinental ballistic missile g--alk about immigration too. the reunification of families, what's the deadline for reunifying families separated at the border, met or not? >> i think you could argue both sides and i think that's what's hang in court. the question also is what can the judge do if it's not. i think at we've seen is the administration, you know, i think we should give them credit for making a good faith effort for getting those 900 families back together but the question now is especially what about the people that did get deported. i think that's where aeot of debate is happening in the courtroom is over what parents they to, whether understood what they were agreeing to, if they signed and said we don want our children

back. clearly this is not an issue a bow t wrapped up with on thursday. i think the judge has not seemer eager and nei has the aclu quite frankly who sued to impose sanctions or tried to jail administration officials. there's really not a lot they can do. so i think the question is' now been very i think thoughtful and tried to take this sort of one issue at time, so this is going to continue to play out. >> i think that this is a very difficult issue, but i think it highlights again the challenge of immigration policyre and w we end up when there isn't a broader effort to get immigration right. i think you've seen this in the congress many times now. efforts to try and advance immigration legislation failing. you've ha p thesident on different sides of the issue. so i think that the challesge hereoing to be this issue is going to continue. until the immigration syste gets fixed, we are going to continue to see these kinds of crises develop. we saw one under the oba administration. this one comes from the trump

administration. it's because congress has not lled the void. i think the issue is the optics of this whole story, the stories of - personal stories of parents being ripped away from their kids. >> and children not recognizing their parent. >> you' every day and you've got about 473 kids now who are still notk brought b together with their parents who have been deported. there are questions about whether that canor go on months more. this is a story that is not going to go away. these headlines aren't. although i think the administration and the president himself often distracts with his twbut the fact is that there are a lot of groups, human rights groups watching this and this as we go toward november, i think this is an issuet t plays. >> and it shouldn't go away because these are real people. these children -- i just cannot even imagine as a parent what it must be like for the parents or these young kids. i think these are situations, trauma that will play out for the rest of their lives. i do thinke difference between the unacompanied minrs

d this, the trump administration rolled out oia icy and then decided later to figure out what it meant. eal you're talking about human lives it does have meaning. of course, this is part of the whole >> how do you think this immigration issue will play out at the polls come november? the republicans i would think would want to keep the focus on an economic message. you have new numbers out saying quarter economic growth topped 4%. those are pretty good numbers. so how will that all come out and wha role will immigration play as voters go to the polls? >> i think there's a two-par strategy. on the one hand when you go into a midterm election, the one ihing you need is a motivated base. you do not have a motivated base, you are not going to do well.s immigration an issue. it plays to the republican base. it's an issue republicans cre deeply about. motivating the base is one piece. the other piece is how do appeal to independent voter for

those swing districts like we have several here in california that are swing districts and i an you appeal to them i economic pitch. the strong economy is something president trump returned to today. he probably does get some credit for an economy that's growing c a significap. it's a two part strategy both of which i think ey'll eck cuxecuto hold on to the house and senate. >> we talk about how quickly things move. it's early to say what we'll be talking about in october and emearly nr. this particular slice of immigration debate doesn't stand to motivate peopl in theame way the larger ones when you talk about republicans because there are a lot of republicans very horrified by what happened and i think that does run the risk of turning off some of the more independent or moderate republican voters. we had on political breakdown a man in california with a dozen

or so people on the ground for thhi democrats and i what you hear from them is of course they're going to talk about that but they want to talk aboutth hecare. they want to talk about other issues that resonate. each district is differen a. >> this i issue that can play in those races. they have talked about prosing immigration reform measures, but they're being upended by conservative republica in washington who want verify and other issues. tis is a fightt's going to go on all the way and could affect the house races. >> i want to also talk about tariffs with you. the u.s. and the european union have now agreed to hold off on anyfs further tari and work on eliminating others. californ farmers alread starting to see some effects from other tariffs. >> that's right. kevin mccary, thehouse majority leader is really sort of in the focus here because he's right there in the central valley where you'reab talking t farmers that produce

almonds,citrus, that go to the european union, china and mexiur. those are big trading partners. they're not going to get any big piece of that $12 billion aid which by the way is not popular with a lot of republicans. ey're calling gold plate it is welfare for some of these farmers. this is going to be the issue here is how much do farmers not only here in i california but other places where trump and the republicans are going to ed the support come november. >> if we think about ways that the rublicans could step on their own economic message, it seems to me the imposition of tariffs would probably be the worst thing they could do. you talk about things that could slow the economy as w look toward the end of 2018 and 2019, the end of tariffs could be significant especially as we gt towae end of the year and any positive benefit from the tariffs has washed away. and we begin to see us come off

the sug high frothe tax cuts, how does that affect the economy going forward. these are big issues politically. >> for the time being, the tariffs seem to be part of a pattern that keeps emerging.t presidenmp says or does something outrageous and walks back from i the tariffs, nato, punummit. do you see this constant cycle ostatement, etraction, then undermining the retraction as part of a larger strategy? >> this goes to his major profile is a great deal maker. and yet yas said, he throws things out and retracts. some of the trump pe are saying now on this tariffs issue, well -- >> we got what we wanted, right? >> right. so it really depen on what perspective you're coming from. you're absolutely right, this is part of the narrative of trump and yet we've seen this sort of walk back every time. > i think this goes to the question that we've been debating which is trump's base versus the larger republican party and whator matters

i think you're right. there's some dog whistling there in the sense that you say something outrageous, but maybe your base loves it. then you walk it back to acquiesce to republicans in congress and other voters, but the questioness what d that mean at the polls and how many g,ople did you turn off with that initial th with that initial message who were maybe more swing voters? ys remains to be seen. >> i asked you g about wildfires. big problem in california right now. there are multiple wildfires. yosemite had to be shut down. firefighters have died. peopl were evacuated in redding. now state lawmakers are weighing the tough question of who should foot the bill for res caused by equipmentng beng to pg & e. >> the governor came out with a proposal that seeks to change the cifornia law that allows utilities to be held responsible for damage their equipment caused even if they weren't negligent. if they followed all the rules but they still caused a fire. it's a big sticking point.

the utilities have been lobbyi heavily in the capital and the court of public opinion. they don't li this proposal. folk on the other side like homeowners and insurers hate it. maybe it's a sweet-spot. they have until the end of august to wrap itup. >> all right. thank you all. >> thank you. that will do it fors. as always, you find more of our coverage at kqed.org/newsroom. thank you for joining

nomy roars and so does the trade war. president trump claims his policies are responsible for an uptick in economic growth. and hisriticsonder, is it sustainable. i'm robert costa. we talk, tra taxes, and have the latest on mr. trump's former lawyer, michael cohen, tonight on "washington week." president trump: i amhrilled to announce that the united states economy grew at the amazingat of 4.1%. we're on track to hit the growth annual average rate in over 13 years. robert: president trump touts a surging economy that grew during the secot quart the strongest pace in nearly four years. he also took a victory lap over his recent trade discussions with the european union.

president trump: as the tra