captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc .>> nawaz: good eveni i'm amna nawaz. judy woodruff is away. on the "newshour" tonight, ewesident trump praises a trade deal with mexico and canada. we dig in to what it means for the american economy. then, after backlash from democrats, the white house authorizes the f.b.i. to expand its investigation into claims of sexual assault by brett kavanaugh.d plus now r this-- the author of this month's newshour/"new york times" book club pick answers your questions on how geography shapes the u.s.' role in the world. 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. >> consumer cellular understands that not everyone needs an unlimited wireless plan. our u.s.- reps can help you choose a plan based on how much you use your phone, nothing more, nothing le ss. learn more, go to consumercellular.tv >> the william and flora hewlett foundation. s r more than 50 years, advancing idd supporting institutions to promote a better world.

at www.hewlett.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: and individuals. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> nawaz: it's a deal. the united states and canada agreed to terms last night on a new free-trade agreement that also includes new mexico. this morning, the deal got a white house welcome. >> reporter: president trump celebrated in the white house rose garden-- announcing a deal

more than a year in the making. >> we have negotiated this new agreement based on the pnciple of fairness and reciprocity. >> reporter: replacing the 1994 "north american free trade agreement"-- or nafta-- has been a priority for the president. today, he declared victory after getting agreement from canada, the u.s.'s second largest trading partner. >> these measures will support many hundreds of thousands of american jobs. this is also a historic win for american manufacturers and american auto workers who have we've lost so many jobs over the years under nafta. >> reporter: the new deal is dubbed the "united states- mexico-canada-agreement" - or u.s.m.c.a. it largely keeps nafta structure covering $1.2 trillion ngllars in goods flowing a the three nations. but the agreement gives u.s. dairy farmers greater access to the tightly-restrictedanadian market. it requires at least 75% of a car to be made in north america, to qualify as tariff-free. andea, at 30% of the work

done on every car must be by workers earng $16 dollars an ur. in addition, it increases labor rights, environmental andal intellecroperty protections. >> by the way, without tariffs we wouldn't be talking about a deal. >> reporter: mr. trump pointed to his willingness to play hard ball as a key factor. he had previously threatened tariffs on autos and auto parts from canada. in august, he announced a bi- lateral deal with mexico, threatening to leave out canada entirely. then, just before a midnight deadline on sunday, the aandministratiounced canada would be part of a new trilateral deal. in ottawa, canadian prime minister justin treau praised the agreement as modernizing nafta. he acknowledged the talks were tough. renegotiating nafta has been a challenge in conversations with the presidadt and with the nistration over the past 13 months, but there is also no qut estion tw we have moved fo.crward on a u.s. that is

good news for all three of our countries. wo reporter: previously, mr. trump aimed sharpled barbs at trudeau. today, he called the prime minister "a good personho is doing a good job." he also complimented outgoing mexican president enrique pena annieto and president-eleces manuel lopez obrador. lopez obra the agreement when he takes office in december. leaders from all three countries have to sign the agreement, and each nation's legislature would have to approve it. privately, administratio officials say they are confident , ngress will ratify the deal. but publicesident trump expressed some doubt-- especially if democrats take back o or both chambers in the midterm elections.e >> ty might be willing to throw one of the great deals for people and the workers. they may be doing that for political purposes >> reporter: if the deal does win approval, many of the provisions would not take effect until 2020. >> nawaz: we'll take a closer

look at what the deal does and does not do, right after the news summary. in the day's other news: president trump said the f.b.i. should be compree, but quick as it looks into sexual assault allegations against supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. he said that includes interviewing anyone-- thin reason. some democrats have claimed the white house is limiting the scopef the probe. white house correspondent yamiche alcindor will have a full report, later in the program. amid the battle over kavanaugh's confirmation, the supreme court began a new term today, with one seat vacant. the eight sitting justices heard cases in species act and aged discrimination. they hav the case-- and having it re- argued-- once a ninth justice is seated. in indonesia the death toll from friday's earthque and tsunami has reached 844, and oicials fear it could run into the thousands. the powerful qua t drove waves 20 feet tall into the northern city of palu. john irvine of independent television news, is there.

ep>> rter: the lorry has reached the end of the road. but then so has the road. this collapse has become a sobering seafront spectacle for the residents of palu. today they turned out in force for what's left of their coast road to bear witns to the and to the destruction wrought from thospunches from land and sea. but this also kept them outdoors and away from homes either destroyed or not trusted any more. rossalyn and i are walking on what remains of her six-foot high garden wall. it was swept away by the tsunami and the house behind it obliterated. "i am heartbroken and have no tears left to cry," she told me. adding she was grateful her mother and son, the only two at home at the time, are still alive-- albeit in hospital. it was here that most of the fatalities occurred.

people who just fled shaking buildings were stumbbout outside giving thanks they'd survivedhe quake, when suddenly they were pummeled by the three ves that rolled in. but inland there tere many lethreats as well. this is the pitubo neighborhood, and it was consumed by a patty field that the earthquake lied and moved more than a kilometer. they've laid a pduh of makeshift caoards here, but you have to walk carefully e underneath them the earth is molten. the people here didn't face a tsunami of seawater. they faced a tsumani of mud. and as you can probably make out, that mud consumes the first floor in both these houses. rescue teams don't expect to find many survivors here. neither did they expect to recover many of the bodies buried here. ois woman came to see what's

leher house. she wasn't home when disaster struck, but she says her son w f 's still missing. at one opalu's main hospitals 200 patients are spending anooother night ou. the hospital building is unsafe ansnd they don't want to ide anyway. g ey're frightened and many spent the day waittiently for a flight out of here >> nawaz: that report from john irvine of independent television news. an's paramilitary "revolutionary guard" fired six ballisti today.es into syria it was retaliation for last month's attack on an iranian litary parade-- claimed "islamic state" group. the missiles fired from western iran true of iraq and stru in southeastern syria where i.s.i.s. forces still have a esence.

state media showed the being launched. it said the strike killed and wounded some of the militants but gave no other details. back in this country, somber es in las vegas marked t first anniversary of a mass shooting that claimed 57 lives-- the deadliest in u.s. history. this morning, severahundred people gathered for a memorial at an outdoor amphitheater. the gunman had fired down on ncert goers there, from nearby hotel. meanwhile, president trump said his administration is close to lizing a ban on so-calle "bump stocks." the las vegas shooter used one. it allows a semi-automatic weapon to fire like a machine gun. california now has the nation's toughest law on net neutrality. governor jerry brown signed it on sunday. supporters argue the new statute protects against internet companies giving greater speed or access to those who pay more. the u.s. justice department swiftly filed suit to block the law, saying it goes against tefederal policy to dereguhe internet. california is also now the first lyate to mandate that publ traded companies add women to roeir boardrooms. governor brown ad that measure on sunday, as well.

t says companies based in the state must haveast one female director by the end of next year. and, on wall street today, stocks shot up on news orathe free deal but rising oil prices undercut the rally. the dow jones instrial average gained nearly 193 points to close at 26,651. the nasdaq fell nine points. and the s&p 500 added still to come on the "newshour," how today's trade deal differs from nafta; the expanding investigation into supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh; we sit down th the latest winner of the nobel prize in medicine; and much more. >> nawaz: and now back to our lead story, the new trade pact between the u.s., canada and mexico. to help us better understand what's in the deal and its

potential effects to the u.s. owonomy, we're joined by edward alden, senior fet the council on foreign relations, where he specializes in u.s. and trade.petitiveness he's also the author of "failure to adjust: how americans got left behind in the global economy." t welcome "newshour". >> great to be with you, amna. >> nawaz: obviously, the president has a priority of rewriting big trade deals. he came in with that mission. big picture, how is this new deal different from the old onei >> wels probably not radically different from the old one. the best news the it's stil in place. ricatill have the north am supply chain from u.s. and canada still in tact. ere are significant changes, like how cars are made, selng milk in canada, the deal is a little better. there are provisions to keep countries from devaluing their

currentsketo ta advantage. there are important tweaks and i think the president has some right to trump at dat heone but they're really modest ea nawaz: the president tweeted, it's a deal for all three countries and solves in many of the deficiencies of nafta and reduces trade barriers and will bring our three great nati together. on the fixing part, what do you think the deal fixed that needed fixing? >> you know whatever trump came up with is it's the greatest deal negotiated. the biggest thing that ed fixing is the stubbornly low wages in necks woe r co-. when nafta was negotiated, i have to this is going to raise mexican livingag standards, will go up and they'll bay more american goods, by and large that did not app.

wages -- living wages in me are lower than two decades ago. theyried torce wages up by this deal, saying the cars have to be made by high-wage workers, mexican labor standards have to be tougher to let union organize, some efforts to go after a problem that, interestinglmocrats in the labor left have been complaining about for they have been trump's audience trying to bring organized labor on board, ironic for a republican president. >> nawaz: the auto industry, does that mean higher wages mooned jobs? >> he's promising that. we'll have to s it could play out in different ys. if it does up to higher wages, it could knock up car price as bit but it will be small. we don't know if this wi bring jobs ac and lift beiges for auto

workers. >> dairy farmers, the movement of milk in canada, that will open up th market. what kind of impact is that going to have here? >> it will help h in pces like wisconsin and vermont where they complained they can't sell theiu milk ps into canada. it's pretty small. canada has a protected dairy sector, the industry is powerful. quebec is having an elecon this year, but it's a bigger opening than thade canns ever made before and the president promised to do something and we have. at the president is hailing big wins. o you think the u.s. has to give up to negotiate some of the wins? >> one of the interesting things is it didn't have to give up a lot. it made a bunch of concessions om the president's opening positions. he called for a much more dical rewriting of the auto rules. he wanted a sunsauet cl that would have to be negotiated every five years. there were a bunch ofthgs the

administration backed away from. but canada aexnd co didn't get a lot they wanted, they got the agreement survives and their access to the huge american market remains in tact. >> nawaz: this was a longti neion, got tough in terms of the public talks sometimes. what does that saybout the precedent for future deals in other countries? >> tradeegotiations have for decades been conducd in a fairly collegiate way, and countries tried to create a d n-win. the president wan create a win-lose, it would be wetter for the united states and worse forn canadad mexico. that cannot be good lonmg ter for our relations and sends a tough message to the rest of the world, particularly china, where the united states faces big trade problems and negotiations haven't started in earnest yet. >> less than 30 secnd now. is there a way to say the u.s.

enteter off with this new deal than the old one? w >> i don't think we'll kr some years. i think there is some poobility of rebuilding some sport across party lines, democrats and republicans have been so dided on this, there are things here the democrats will like, but we're at the very early stages of what i think will be a long process of shifting u.s. trade relations with the world. h nawaz: edward alden, thank you for beie. >> good to be here. >> nawaz: president trump directed the f.b.i. to expand its investigation into sexual misconduct charges against judge kavanaugh. yamiche alcindor was at the white house today for that announcement. >> let the senate decide. whatever they wanto do is okay with me. and also the f.b.i. i think the f.b.i. should do what they have to do to get to the answer.>> eporter: a frustrated president trump this morning talking about the scope of a re- opened f.i. background check into brett kavanaugh. mr. trump deferred to congress,

but said he wanted speem. >> i want o do a very comprehensive investigation. now, with that being said, i'd like it to go quickly. and the reason i'd like it to go quickly is very mple. it's so simple because it's unfair to him at this point. >> reporter: democrats had accused the white house of limiting the investigation of sexual assault and misconduct by kavanaugh in high school and college. >> we certainly want the f.b.i. to do a real investigation and we are working to make sure that that happens. >> reporter: andwhhe republican pressured the president into onproving the probe-- senator jeff flake of ar- also raised concerns today about its thoroughness. flake spe in boston, where protesters heckled him and demanded he oppose kavanaugh's nomination. >> it does no good to have an investigation that just gives us more cover, for example. we actually need to find out what we can find out. some witnesses and potential

witnesses may not want to cooperate, but for those that can, and those who we can compel to cooperate, we've got to do a r:llsome investigation. >> reporteoon after, "the new york times" reported the president has now directed the f.b.i. to interview anyone it deems necessary-- so long as the review is finished by friday. agents are now expected to question chr blasey ford, who testified thursday before the senate judiciary committee. she said when they were teenagers, kavanaugh assaulted her. yesterday, f.b.i. agents spoke with another accuser, debbie ramirez, according to reports. she alleges, at a pae y when they wudents at yale, kavanaugh exposed himself. it's still uncle whether a third woman will be questioned. julie swetnick has accused kavanaugh of drugging girls so they could be gang-raped in high school.i. the f.lso plans to question kavanaugh's high school friend marjudge. christine blasey ford says he was in the room when she was attacked. meanwhile, new questions have emerged over whether kavanaugh lied during his senate testimony

about his drinking. on sunday, chad ludington became the cond of kavanaugh's yale avassmates to say he was "a drinker" in college. he also said kavanaught at times became belligerent and aggressive when drunk.p president trs questioned today about what would happen if investigators find evidence that kavanaugh lied under oath. >> certainly, if they find something, i'm going to take that into consideration. absolutely.ha a very open mind. >> reporter: in the meantime, debate on kavanaugh's nomination resumed this aftnoon on the senate floor. we all something about judge kavanaugh's temperament and aracter that day that should disqualify him from serving on the supreme court of the united states. he was angry, he was belligerent, he was partisan, he went on e attacagainst senators questioning him. these are not qualities we look

for in a supreme court justice or a judge, f that matter. >> in my judgment, the pattern of behavior we've seen confirms what democrats' own public statements have told us. they are committed to delaying, obstructing and resisting this nation with everything they've got. they just want to delay this matter past the elections. >> reporter: the senate is expected to vote on kavanaugh's nomination shortly after the f.b.i. wraps up its investigation. >> nawaz: and yamiche is here with me now. >> i>> nawaz: you heard the president support judge kavanaugh but sae had abopen mind. >> the white house is standing firm with brett kavanaugh. he president gave a vigorous defense . the white house was send owl statements from brett kavanaugh's friends and foer classmates at yale. they all say brett kavanaugh did not black out unk when they knew him, they also said he

treated women very respectfully, but that, ocourse, is in direct contrast with other yale classmates of bratt kavanaugh aid he did get very drunk and was very aggre all of that is happening when the president is saying he doesn't want to look aany reacements, but we all kn there is a long list the president put out of maybe ten names of people who could possibly be other names he would minate. out there, the president has that. the other thing that's yornt isd the prt said he's surprised at how voablg brettab kavanaugh wat his drinking and the president said he himself never even drank a beer. brett kavanaugh is very different than donald trump whose older broher freddie died in his 40s from alcoholism, so there's -- so that couldpen the door. >> the white house indicated the investigation should be limited. now seems to be broadennenning the scope. eow involved is the white ho

setting parameters for what the f.b.i. is looking into? >> it's clear the white house wants it to be small and quick. all that said, president trump really has the how we are the do whatever he wants to do in terms of the f.b.i.. i have been talking to sources who say the f.b.i. was in the executive branch and theth was within his authority who say you ed to talk to these two women and that's it. toy he was clear saying deborah ramirez andr. ford is the two the f.b.i. should be focused open. outen that thatsaying the f.b.i. needs to do its work. this afternoon the f.b.i. was ven the authority by the white house to talk to anyone it deem necessary, and that means they could look at brett kavanaugh and not just sexual misconduct and other allegations but talking about little lies. some point out brett kavanaugh said he had no connections wit yale, where in fact his grandfather went to yale and was a legacy student. >> this nominati was full

speed ahead not too long ago and now mired at the very least uncertainty, maybe road blocks in the week ahead. what do we know about how the president is watching all of this unfold? >> the president is fuming andg callnators every day basically saying we control the senate, the republicans contro the senate, why in if the world can't we just push this through? and esseially the president wants to look at the republicans and say why can't you do that? doas a result, he's reallng what he's doing, watching tv, really angry about the fact this sn't gone through. but at the end of the day, the president has only certain things he can do. hehe can nominate n somebody but has to wait on theenate to do something. while the white house is saying they're standing with brett kavanah, there is the list of other people, and the president said i'm going to look at what the f.b.i. is doing and will figure out what happens next. >> yamiche alcindor, good to talk to you.nk >> t you.

>> nawaz: now a step back from the politics of this particular f.b.i. background investigation and a closer look what might be gahappening with the inveson itself, outside of the public eye. frank montoya worked in various tles during his 25 years bureau, including stints leading the f.b.i.'s seattle and honolu divisions. he joins me today from salt lake city. mr. montoya, thank yous.or being with i want to to you about the skip of what the f.b.i. could be looking into right now. ta to me a little bit about what f.b.i. investigators would be doing in an investigation like thisw. right >> well, first and foremost, they will be talking to as many k ople as they can. i thin was important that the doors were opened earlier this afternoon in terms of what and who they can pursue and inei pursuit of information and, keep in mind, this is a background investigation, not so much a criminal investigation, so it's not about proving wd ho at, it's more about finding or disproving or not finding deroingatoryrmation. so they will be talking to, amebg others,ah ramirez,

dr. ford, mark judge, some of these others that have been identified publicly as madividuals who have information. it could also extend to visit ato are former clas at yale who can talk about more th just potential sexual assaults but, you know, his drinking habits, his other kinds ofehaviors, perhaps when he had drank too much. so there are a lot of people that they can talk to, and those people can tell them about othersath they can then follow up with. >> you mentioned the word derogatory, explain the significance of that in terms of what kind of questions the f.b.i. i when they talk to these people. >> yeah, another great question, becaus again, this is about determining if this individual is suitable for the job for which he has been nominated. so they're going to look at character, they're going to look at associations, they're going to look at his reputation, loyay to the united stes, not an individual, biases or

potential biases, ability to do the job, and then, of course, financial abilities, alcohol -- potential for alcohol and druge. ab you know, when i was a brand-new agent, gosh, in januarof 1991, we learned how to do these things, and they taught us the ronym to help remember the kinds of things we were supposed to talk about is karla b fad and that was 20 or 30 years ago and i still remember it. >> we heard the president ask about whether or not though juke should be interviewed. does the f.b.i. need to talk to judge kavanaugh in order to complete this investigation?>> nother great question, whether judge kavanaugh or dr. ford, there are adll kins of publicly available testiny that can be used for potential information, but this is abou determining about whether or not there is more derogatory

information out there. talking to him about that is not kingg to get them there, tal to folks like dr. ford or debra debra -- deborah ramirez or julie swetnick, that's where the rubber meets the road in this investigation now. the other thing i would add, if somebody has information and hasn't been spoken to, yet, they are by all means free to call the b.i. or go to he local field office and provide that information. anything and everything about this matter will be considered ind reported. >> you can imthere must be people who knew him in some capacity or another from school, s professional life, that may be doing exactly what you suggested, reaching out to their cal f.b.i. office. does the f.b.i. have an obligation to try to spk to every one of these people to try to see this through? >> this is a big chalnge in this particular investigation because they are on a time crunch. they have seven days, so they are limited in terms of what they can do. they have the resources to, do

t there's been a lot of talk about this is theeventh background investigation kavanaugh's faced. the fact of the tter is, most of these investigations, when they are conducted, they're based on information tt the capt. for the job -- the candidate for the job providesto he information. when we learn about derogatory information, it's usually from a recobs check or soody who heard we were talking to somebody at an individual, and den they come forward provide that information because, typically, when an individual fills out their s.f.86, they're not going to list references who will talk badly about them. >> you mentioned previous investigation, and this comes up ain and again, begs the question of how did none of th information come up in any of those previous probes? >> as i mentioned, wn folks fill out their s.f.86, they are listing who they want us to talk to. when something like this comes up, usually is in te manner in which these allegations did

arise. it's typically not after so much time has transpired. but i would also point out thatv in theast majority of our investigations, whether they are -- our background investigations, whether they are for, you know, an agent -- ae prospectent who wants to join the organization or a federal judge, that theyon't usually have this kind of profile, at a ren't broadcasting to the entire nation, the whole world for that matter.is so in espect, i mean, we're talking about a seat on the supreme court of the united states. it's not surprising something ke this would come out, even as long after it did. i think it'sctually good that it did come out because if we're going to put this individual on oe supreme court, we need know that they have the kind of character, the kind of background that supports that position. you know, there's also the question of temperament in terms of how they reacted to the kinds of criticisms that we have seenn yo, we expect our judges

to be objective, to be able to be above the fray, so to speak. thisthis, in tend, as difficults it has been, it's also healthy for our system. >> nawaz: frank montoya, if you for your time. >> thank you. >> nawaz: it is nobel prize week, and today the nobel committee announced its 2018 award in medicine. jim allison, an american research scientist, and tasuku honjo, who's japanese, helped create a revolutionary cancer treatment that continues to sa lives. nick schifrin has that story. >> reporter: for years, cancer treatment was dominated by four techniques: surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and hormone treatments. overe is now a fifth category because researchercame a fundamental challenge. in the past they couldn'tcr t the body's own immune

system to fight cancer, but today they can. i and ththanks to the research of jim allison, today's nobel prize winner, and chairman of immunology at the university of texas m.d. anderson cancer center, who joins me now from new york. thank you so much. congratulations on the award. how do you feel and how did you find out? >> i feel stunned, actually. this is something i suppose every scientist must drm of and, you know, it's happened, i'm still absorbing it. the way i found out about it is mtually this morning, my son call, he was watching television. somehow the committee didn't have my cenll numberd didn't know how to contact me, and, so, you know, i got the message from my son, who was watching and called and said, hey, dad you won the nobel prize. what a great way to get the

message, anyway. >> you effectively learned how to manipulate the immune system to go after cancer cells in then only by turninhe gas, so to speak, of the immune sirnlings but turning off the immune system's brakes. how does that work? >> well, i have been studying t cells r 30 years now, just trying to learn -- >> basically the immuyneem's soldiers, so to speak? >> yeah, the soldiers. yo fstart with aew, have to build an army, then they go out and take care of whatever problem it is, virus, infe or, in this case, cancer. it's a very tightly-controlled process. yow, we learned that the antigen receptor, kind of like the switch in the car that has to be flipped, but that's not enough. another molecule, cd28, we found

in the '80s. a third molecule serves as the brakes because once you start the process,ou have to stop it to keep the immune system from hurting normal cells. we have the idea if we disable the brakes temporarily, we could let the t cells go until they had time to eliminate the entire tumor. >> and that reference, elimination, because you're using the immune system, this s not only about suppressing cancer, you're actually ri these patients, right? >> yes. well, i use thatut iously. in the case of melanoma, about 22% of people, in a study of thousands of patients, for whom there's ten years follow-up, about 22% of patients with latee st melanoma for which the prognosis -- the survival was about eleven months after iagnosis when we started this work, about 22%ain, after a

single dose, are alive ten years later. >> jim allison, i want to talk about one of those patients. take me back to 2006. you get a call from a colleague about one with ofis patients who had advanced melanoma and was being treated with drugs based on your research. tell me about sharonon fe. >> yes, sharon, i found out subsequent, she was 2 just finished school, engaged to be married, you know, when she was tired and, you know, had some exhaustion. she went to see a doctor, and she had met metastatic melanoma, 31 tombers in her lungs d a small brain metastasis and some on her skin a, you know, she had failed everything. and she was in really bad shape. so a clinical colleague put her on this trial, and her tums completely went away. and when she came in and was

told she was tumor free, dr. wolchok said the guy who invented this was here, do you want to meet him? so she did. judd called me and said, come down, i want you me somebody. anyway, i went down to outpatient care e d walked in om and, you know, we started hugging and crying. before then, it had always been numbers to me. she was the first patient that i met,nd we became, you know, friends and, you know, several years later shesent me a photo of her first baby, and few years after that her second baby. and she's now ab yout rs out from the treatment and has a lovely family. wetill stay itouch. she actually came to my 70th 70th birthday party. >> tell us about your mother, how you first got into this. >> my mother passeaway when i was about ten of lymphoma and

was treated with radation, and i was with her when she passed away, and she had two brothers, my uncles, two of themwh died i was very young, one of melanoma, thother of lung wantser, and -- cancer, and the one with lung cancer was treated with chemotherapy and i got to see the ravaging effects of chemotherapy up close. i had in the back of my head the immune system had possibility of selectively ing tumor cells with th hope of not causing any adverse tents. re are serious side effects to this, there have been, it's very expensive. are you going to continue work on this th rrapy andearch? >> absolutely, there are serious side effects in some patients not in all but some, but they're pically manageable. the ago rough the algorithm has been developed where

physicians vex persons and can be minimized in the majority of patients. we now kw this drug works against many types of cancer and p.d.1 works against many types of cancer not just melanoma but long lunge cancer, hodgkin's, kidney, bladder, neck, the list goes on and on. oe're trying to understand why it workstimes and doesn't, n order to design combinations ugs both immunotherapy drugs and more conventional ones which can be put together in a way that makes sense to maximize, you know, the therapeutic effect and try to increase the number of patients that benefit from this new type of therapy. >> jim allison, bel priz winner, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> nawaz: we turn now to the ellitics of the midterm

tions. brett kavanaugh's confirmation o raises questiohow this affects voters. lisa desjardins has more. >> desjardins: democratic enthusiasm has been a theme this election season and we're seeing that take hold in fundraisingmp numbers and gn ads. but is a supreme court seat a o action for republicans for analysis we're joined by our apolitics monday duo, tam keith of npr and amy walter of "the coopolitical report." we get mixed up. can we just take a collective deep breath on behalf of my person blood pressure and perhaps the nation's psyche before we start talking about judge kavanaugh and can we start on this topic bo king at thequ nipiac poll. there are interesting par --

paradoxes for america. many americans believe christine blasey ford and others believe judge kavanaugh. america is conteflhere. what does polling like that do when we're about to go to an election, what do it tell us about voters? >> i think what we learned from this hearing is americans areas polarized on this issue as they are about pretty much any other issue put in front of them. ether you're a democrat or republican, your decision on how you feel about this is driven as much by your partisanship as anything else. a poll i saw over the wekend by the folks at huffington st-and ugov found men who supported donald trump overwhelmingly said they could identify with what brett kavanaugh was going through. who voted for hillary clinton overwhelmingly said they identified with christine blasey ford. but i think fundamentally this iestion about who igoing to help or hurt in the th

midterm elections, democrats, republicans, is this about the enthusiasm advantage? we have to remember a couple of first, in 2016, we know that the supreme court was a big issue for republican voters, and the thinking ong a lot of republicans was this is how donald trump won. skeptical republican voters held their nose, thet y didley like trump but wanted the supreme court. this year, all the polling i'v seen thus far since the hearings took place at this moment, we're seeing increased democratic enusiasm, higher than republicans on the issue of the supreme court, how important the issue is for their vote. finally, when all is said and done, the issue that drives this election is still going to be donald trump how you feel about donald trump is going to be much more important in determining your vote than how yo about this hearing. >> tam, you heard democrats are raising more and more questions about did brett kavanaugh lie last week and they're raisingab

questiont his drinking pants. we're seeing witnesses who support what he says, witnesses who are saying no, he was thi kind of drinker or not. is this a change in democratic strategy both on this confirmation and politically? >> there has been a shiftn what pele are focusing on. eth not clear whether this is a strategic shift north, but certainly -- shift ornot, but there is more focus about whether he is truthful in his testimony and the area whereer is question is when it comes to his drinking. brett kavanaugh, on a number of occasions was suppressed on drinking in college and either evasive if is answers -- in his answers, sort of downplayed i at times or pushed back on a couple of senators atimes asking them how much they drank. so president trump was asked about that today in the white house press briefing, and president trump sort of incorrectly said, well, brett kavanaugh in his tes he had a drinking problem when gh was younger, which is not

what kavanhad said, but -- >> reflecting the amount of time that came up. >> yes, because it came up frequently. the white house realizes this isen an issue. they are pushing back. they are insisting kavanaugh basically admitted to everything expt blacking out, and they're also now pushing out statements whom witnesses from college say, no, no, no, i was his roommate and that other roommate who sa something elses wrong. >> amy, who does it help in e midterms, if brett kavanaugh gets on the supreme court, mitcd mcconnell what's going to happen this week, did that help republicans in the midterms?? >> again, it's conventionalom wihey are so fired up about this, not simply because of the importance they put on the supreme court, bt thaws they had to unify together to fight off what hay s as a smear campaign by democrats. but then we hear from ocrats and some republicans who say, while it may help republicansin

red states especially in senate seats, it's really going to hurt epublican candidates in se swing suburban areas where women are already breaking decidedly against republicans, against the presidt, including independent women. those are really the key voters here that strategists are a looking this point to determine where the house goes, and i don't they're going to turn to the side of republicans on this issue. >> aerther factor maybe in we the house goes is the money, and we saw political report today, they did an analysis and said the democrats have raised inething like $35 milli august alone for the democratic candidates.n does that mere votes for democrats? does this mean they're puttingre money? what does it mean? >> it means there are a loft mocrats with checkooks who are interested in a lot of races all over the country. there are also democratic candidates had these incredibly viral ads they've put out that have gone viral on social meia,

generated support. ple --, you hear peo because i cover politics, people ask, what do you think of this ra ikentucky? i'm, like, wait, what's going on here? (lau there is a huge amount of interest and there is a huge amount of ehusiasm. you see that in the money, you see that in the number of people who showed up fr a bet o'rourke rally in texas. you see republicans also e a lot of energy and they do just not as much as the democrats at this time. >> i'm talking to consultants on both sides, many of who have been doing tha long time, and they've never seen this amount of ney, more important they've never seen an incumbent orpa incumbeny get outspent the way democrats are outspending republicans in these congressional races. it's a mindmboggling nuber. and this is why, when we talk about why is the house in plath, house is in play because the

amount of enthusiasm that democrats have is translating in all these different ways. it turned into, one, enthusiasm for democratic voters, candidates who said i'm going to run for office, including a bunch who haund never r for office before, and the money, what it's do is taking a playing field that was really narrow and strucrally challenging for democrats because there were only 25, 30 seats in play and expandethat universe to, now, we have a universeight now of about 60 republican seats that are in danger. >> an amazing number! that's real enthusiasm can't handle any more races, okay? just want to let you i want to ask what i think would be a fun question, i think the universe has been dominated by a handful of stories. what political stories are we not talking about thatould be, tam? >> one, a temporary budget pass,

spending measure, and there wasn't a massive fight, just the president signed it, no drama, which is wild.a also, this iall thing, but in the month of september, there was only one tell televised white house press briefing. daily press briefing happened only one day in september. >> amy. i do think this money is absothtely doing going to be sty of the 2018 campaign. the question for democrats is can they replicate this when n itlonger just simply about ousting donald trump or his party in the midterm election. >> and they may have one candidate for 2020. >> that's rig. nk you vry much, amy walter of ook political report," tamera keith, thank you both. >> naz: finally tonight, jeffrey brown has the latest installment in our now read this

book gro. >> brown: it's the roahetrip intopast about settling a continent and creating a nation and to the future of amrica's role in the world. "earning the rockies" has been our september book, and it's stirred quite a biof discussion and debate among readers.ka author roberan is here to answer some of the questions you sent in. welcome and thanks for participating. >> it's a great pleasure for me to be here, jeff.: >> brood. i want to go right to the first question because it helps set uy whu are after. >> okay. why did you choose to frame your argument in terms of the form of memoir of a road trip? >> memoir, policy -- i've never done a book likeut my fatr who inspired me to travel because he spent theli '30s tra in 43 of the lower 48 states. the second chapter is about great forgotten american writer

bernard devoto who traveled all ove country, wrote all about the settling of the we but though he was ast, continentalist, he believed in america's international destiny in world war ii, and putting deo to together with my father made me want to ke my ow road trip. >> brown: so you did. so i did and the next twapo rs were about traveling literally from new england to san diego, anthd what i doere is reflect on everything i've seen along the way and try to understand whate itans for america's role in the world. brown: through geography. through geography. in other words, it's a geographical landscape meditation followed by a geopolitical analysis, which you never see anyere else, beause it's, like, two separateul sures, two separate audiences. so i think it was jarring to people, but it was the only way i could do it, because i belreve n policy emanates from a

country's dmemmic contion. and the country's destiny. right, and that could only be shown through a road trip which emphasizes geography. >> so i said it stirr up a lot of discussion and debate. i want to go to the next >> i struggled with your support of the principle of manes destiny. my question is aren't there other ways to achieve greatness, or is greatness really the goal we should be trying to achieve? >> there were a number of inquestions along those. i want to read one other one that game in from gary. would the u.s. have made a much better impact on the world if it had not decimated north americans -- nate americans and their culture. ouere's a constant tension refer to. >> right, because as i y at the beginning of the book, american history is morally unresolvable and it' unresolvable because the conquest of the westenned the

decimation of the native americans let to a middlelass machine society across the whole temperate zone of north america with all of its remoourcese navigatable inland waterwaysth the rest of the world otmbined, masses of petroleum, , r cagspaciatynd, , america was o save the world in two world wars and the cold war that followed. did one thing make the other -- justify the other thing? no. that's why it's morally unresolvable. >> brown: that's what a lot of people struggle. >> with i struggle wmyself. >> brown: and i see readers struggle with it. >> yes. >> brown: i want to go to the next question representingin another sto have the discussion here. let's take a look. >> you write about going about city, states and rural areas and cities that have not adjusted to the global economy. do you have any thoughts about how to bridge this growing divide? >> it was stunning what i saw.

outside of the two coasts, tside of the university towns and college towns, and outside of the few, a smattering of state capitals, which are doing very well, much of america are towns of 20,000, 30,000 people with shelled-out store fronts, nobody on the main street, people having lost all hope. the this book was written and researched before the last election, before the campaign even began foransaw tha heartlad which was economically and socially devastated. >> and how does that play into what folows? >> and all i could think about is how to bridge the divide as we n't go backward, we can only go forward, because the only futuris glol. you know, you have to get more of these places hoked into the global economy. like i'm traveling along the ohio river, and i see one devastated town after another.

but then i get to mar yeta -- mariettaaohio, which is college town, highly rated and part of thelob world. i'm there suddenly, then i leave again. >> brown: okay, one more question. >> mr. kaplan, you say in ere book, ans, i find more and more each day, as i travel, do not want to know theet ils about foreign policy. is this disconnect with foreign policy replicated around the world? >> brown: we should say you travel all over, written about many otherarts of the world -- >> yeah, i've reported from 100 countries. you only see it replicated in large massive countries, continental size like the united states, where there is so mh going on interlly th ouide world seems almosto disappear, in a way. but in many -- you know, europe is mainly small coutries, and even the biggest countries are inll by our standards, but

europe, africa, and the middle east, people are much more connected to world events, i find, than in the united states. it's almost as if you knowte ectually that every place in the u.s. -- the oklahoma panhandle has agriculture tieie with cin china, everywhere -- you know all this utellectually, but when y actually see it and drive across it, the continent is so big and variegated that the rest of the world seems abstract, almost.>> rown: all right, we'll leave it there. i want to thank everyone who ueote in questions. we'll contwith more of those questions online, which you can find on our faceboo page and "newshour" web site. for now, robert kaplan, thank you very much. >> my easure. >> bown: and our book club pick for october, a very fferent look at american lands, especially in the west. "american wolf" by nate blakeslee tells the story of what came to be known as the most famous wolf in the world in

yellow yellowstone national park and the people and politics around it. we hope you will read it. i'm anma nawaz. join us on-line and again here tomorrow evening.al foof us at the pbs newshour, thank you and see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has bn provided by: >> bnsf railway. >> financial services firm raymond james. >> and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. cupporting science, technology, and improved econo 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 groce at wgbh .wgbh.org >> you're watching pbs.

well low everyone and t welcome "amanpour & company." here's what's coming >>hi. ife-edge drama playing out behind the scenes until the very last minute. in a back room depe. or court nominee brett kavanaugh has been approved in committee amid a call n fbi investigation. i speak to the democratic congresswomanarolyn maloney. she was moved to tears during christine blasey ford's testimony. and to legal affairs analyst david kaplan whoseew book warms the supreme court has become too power. plus, the oscar-winning actor anthony hopkins, from nnibal the cannibal to king lear.