. >> tonight on kqed rone rabbit mueller long awaited testimony and -- also a maj housing contract in san biunno was rejected despite wcomplying h city regulations sparking questions about hoto get approval process. facebook nominated chief privacy officer with a million dollar fine hello, and welcome to kqed. we begin our show wi special council robert mueller's testimony to the house judicialal and intelligence committees on wednesday. he spent hours in front of the congressional committees sounding the alarm of russian interference in our ctelns and pushing back president

trump's insistence the two-year victims in the 2016 was a witch hunt but he didn't give democrats the game changing moment they were look for. it remains unclear whanther republwill do anything to combat what mueller warned was an active threat from russia. . joing me is thepositions of partners on siboth s. there were key moments in which she indicated that he bewould n

able to charge the president sitting president under the department of justice policy and president could be charged after he leaves office. for republicans, they found e modence that in their framing of it, the mueller report not producing any damming evidence against the president and it was a last, last gasp hail mary attempt for democrats to make political hey out of this. >> you agree? we did hear him say i think that was a . big momen it's. >> the witch hunt. but mostly cnot only sto the four corners of the report but we read from . it rig does anything surprise you. >> nothing surprises me going into it everyone figures robert mule he would be invited but he was very much -- he didn't want to speculate and answer iquestions. what was interesting was how he appeared visually. democrats would have likedto reau bust presidential of the facts but that was not

mueller. he was there to be an unwilling witness in a lot of ways. i think it reenforced people's impressions of the report and president and the political importance. >> what do you think? >> i don't thk it moves the needle politically. he think the interesting thing is in some way it may have made nancy pelosi a role less easy. the pressure to proceed with impeachment proceedings is lessened and it's the best thing for the democratic party for what she wants to do in terms of 2020. it take the esre off her to it comes down to her but terms of chaining opiniles and pe minds i doubt it. >> it confirms what people think. but i do think that there was m sense ately after the impeachment is off out table, it's gone, and t it does totally seem like that's the case now. we have seen a couple representatives, including one

of the 8 who flipped to republican seat in california saying they are for it. on friday, house judiciary chair nadler filed as promised he was in court saying we want more information about the report and grand jury transcripts and saying it's under consideration. is there any chance are democratstrying to slow walk it so it's closer to the election? >> i wouldhaagreeit -- the last few days seemed sort edof vindicnancy pelosi's cautious approach. it doesn't seem like we are going to get any sort of real progress towards impeachment the 2020ngs before election. but, as you noticed, this is still very much an issue not just for house democrats but for a lot of these front line first term members including in california, you mentioned mikelevin in san diego who is the third california r term democrat to back impeachment. katie hill in los angeles, and sort of the 95% of she is there she said she believe the president committed a crime and we want to see if the subpoenas

are honored before we pursue the strongest possible case. even as manse pelosi's oref to tamp down the urgent lawnp of impeachment heardrive has sort of been worn out h trings, it's clear house democrats will keep pushint >> the fyou have the democrats in the districts who did flip seats, doethat tell you anything about how democrats are thinking this politically? i think they are in the narrative that for, you know, folks in the district it's a big risk but we arseeing at least in california, more of them want to at least keep it alive the discussion aknife and california may not be representative of the other districts in the rest of the country. in california, the sentiment at least in vor of moving towards impeachment is much more favorable than find in other places. the question is, how does nancy pelosi, i mean, before, i think the big question was how does she arbitrate between the sides of the party the ones who

wantto pursue impeachment and the ones that don't. how does she look going ahead to continue to satisfy people who want that, while clearly not moving ahead with it right? so she said today, we will do i when we do it which moons they won't and the interesting question will be how s doshe satisfy the folks going forward that want impeachment. >> there was a picture with her alexandria ocasio cortez. we talk about thpolitical implications but there's lot of disturbing things about russian met meddling and theirests to influence our election and democracy. do you see any move on republicans in washington to take the warnings that mueller laid out clearly to take seriously. we have not seen legislation for example. >> i think mitch mcconnell is from they clear on this in termshof g back on democrat attempts to try to advance legislation to deal with some of the larger issues

around campaign election security. but i think you are right. one of the truly notable f momentm the hearing in which it was not something that was fully expected was when robert mueller said i see this is -- unequivocal signalhat we have a problem here. >> yeah. >> and so wawhether ington acts on that, i think i wouldn't put money on it, but to hear a law enforce man official at that level sort of so clearly state that emocracy isfacing real parel was a take away. >> remarkable we vet seen any bipartisan effort to deal with something you would think everyboy would agree is not a great thing. on politics next week we will see the second round ocof detic presidential debates. do you expect this report that the impeachment proceedings russia meddling will be part of the coersation at all? >> i think it will be part of the conversation. but i think it's going to

small part. think by in large the candidateswould love to be coab ttinue to define differences between one another. we will have a interesting matchup when you have elizabeth warren and bernie sanders on the stey same debate stage that will pride clarity on the progressive side and we have sort of kamala hear apes joe biden 2. the opportunity for them maybe to talk about more issues from the 1970s. i don't know. but it's interesting to see w the twdebates in terms of tenor and tone. >> we have sn for colin kamala harris these are the opportunities she needs. she got a bump when she attacked joe biden. but ned a littlebit. what are you watching for in terms of her and that duo. n >> i tthat the fact that kamala hair apes jobide harris and joe biden have the repeat clash that's ing to be one most interesting dynamics of the debates. i am curious to see if kamala

harris will comment joe biden ggressively. i am curious e if joe biden seems like he has a plan. what was striking in the first debate was not just kamala harris' commanding performance in the moment that stuck voters' minds when she confronted joe biden. but have you seen him caught off guard. something that is given the push back he was facing for comments about past work with segregationist sena questions about his long political record, yeah. it seems likeg someththat his advisers didn't prepare him adequately for. so i am curious to see not only if he seems better equipped to deal with what kamala harris throws at him but if he is ready to go on the offensive. you've seen it in the last week pushing back kamala harris and cory booker. i am curious to see in an effort to she the front- runner status, he is not just

defensive but gog out. on the final minute i. mean, one of the things we did see joe den do is roll out a criminal justice plan as cory booker gell be on the sand he pushed back on that. do you think that was a potent issue. i feel like for harris, biden and booker, there's benefits but potential drawbacks to bringing up criminal justice. >> yeah. i mean there's a couple s obvio drawbacks one being it risksappearing they ar debating issues americans may not believe is front and center to what they will make the decision in the campaign based on. in other words, they ar talking about the economy, right. the danger of that. but you have the anr of potentially looking like they are talking about authority that happened in the sense of the trump administration democrats work together to do criminal justice reform. so you risk that as well. so, we will have to see but my guess is that they will touch on other issues and there will me flash point. but the pressure is on biden no question about it. >>e will leave it there.

thank you guys both. >> thanks. >> thank you. . earlier this month in sa bruno a mills park development project slated to pvide over 00 units of units was reject by san bruno city council with a single no vote. san francisccle reported that there were concerns over the building size and increased traffic. though the developer claims city guidelinewere followed and request from residents were incorporated. sales project is a when san bruno is adding jobs with little housing to match. about ne new home for every 19 jobs between 1and 2015. joining me now to discuss that and more are founder of political city susan pirch and heathnk knight. tfor coming in. so i want to start with sa some of the fight we have been seeing around the state and bay area. this was a proposed 425 unit development in an area of the city that was rened for

transit oriented development. and the developer said he responded to community concerns over 3-year periodli spent $3 m on the development process and did a lot of things. i mean, susan, as somebody who works on the issues a lot, why do you think opposition remains? >> well, one i can say watching the hearings that went on until almost 3 in the morning it was a very painful process for everybody who is a part of that. and think the reason the issuecontinues is because communities still seem like they are too often lyexcluded eaenough to be getting input into the project or when they are asked to ss measures like measure in in san bruno, the rmeasure doesnlly disclose how big or how tall or how dense the projects will be. so there's issues that get l a smaamount of affordable really affordable housing for projects that are asbig as this project.

>> it's 15%. >> anit's standard sometimes they want to go to 18 person. developers say they need to house market rates howing for this to pencil out. doesatthis track you've seen in san francisco around the development sites. >> yeah. there's sites from seems like any neighborhosan francisco wants to add anything. positive housing development ti and sher and there's a push back and they are frustrated it's hard to getgh anything threcause of the regulation that allows one angry neighbor to slow down projects. >> how would you respond to that? do you think there is anything to do in the cases to convinc opponents you can live in the area single family homes and we do . need housi i mean, i think that's something most everyone can agree on. absolutely. i think everybody agrees we pe need ally affordable housing. not so much agreement we maneed ket rate housing. but many people, you rknow,

a man who voted no is viewed as someone standing up for the wishes. community and saying yes to a lot of things that many of us want to preserve in our communities. but he was saying yes tonot making traffic worse and a part of that is this project included a 40,000 square foot grocery store, even though there are manyinrocery stores the area. and that grocery store was anticir ted to aft56% of the additional traffic. that would be coming into the project. so that didn't make sense and he was standing up for community concerns p that. >> that's interesting. i understand they d in was in response to the community. but without getting to taevery , heather, traffic is always an issue. i mean, the character of neighborhoods is something you hear on the west side of san francisco uite a bit. i don't know there's a way to add the amount of orhousing cala says it needs without the issues changing the

neighborhoods. is that fair? >> right. believe california is 3.5 million housing units short what have it would tae to actuallyhouse everybody here and expect to come here because of new jobs being created all the time. and half of the shtage of the country. si obviously, you have to accept more ho into the neighborhoods including single family residential neighborhoods existing. and new developments and it's big numbers it seems like. >> can we get into that a little bit. in san francisco, there's a push to create more of a city wide, that would veffect body. we have seen a lot in san francisco and there's lot of building in one pick -- a couple particular neighborhoods where there's a perception it was more accessible to e ha more high rise more dense howing. how are neighbors in say the west side of san francisco responding to that, and is ff there anyt by the elected officials to try to bridge some of the gaps we are talking about? >> yeah. i read there's a new proposal

in the nonprofit to cure 11 had you had been new units all over the cityp they want 10units in each district. we have 11 districts and they wa0 new ones in each which is not that big and not that many coared to how ny people live in san francisco. but they are expecting a push back. and they are calling on neighbors who are opened to the new developments to stand up d gn a pledge and say i am cool with morepeople people coming into my neighborhood because they want the voicess is to be . >> susan, do you think in some cas, the pi north is killing the projects. because we do hear you know i think people who are opposed so theseetimes have a bigger incentive to come out. . >> well, i think what we have is power on the side of the development which is notto reaching ouwhat is going on within the communities. and what we need is more of the understanding of what's causing the problems. so even the number how many housing units we need i understand that's based on the projections of how many ajobs thee going to be in the

area. so maybe that's a basic element that we need to look at again as to how many jobs do we want coming into th communitie and should we be making some thjustments about jobs, so the jobs concentrated within the same igh value areas are getting disbursed more broadly. . >> heather, one way at the problem with the affordability of housing has become visible in the bay areais around howelessness. saw the count come out. pretty staggering numbers. tell us what we know about how we are doing with the problem. >> the numbers came out in the past couple months, and ve been shocking up and down the state. every county in california saw dramatic increases in the number of homele people counseled. this happens every other january on one night count homeless people in every county is required. for jeers san francisco held steady. this ishe first time we w a jump and it was 30% in two years.

st astounding. city hall was shocked because they have been saying so much money and putting in so mu effort on the subject and we went backwards. so, it was pretty devastating. >> susan, yougroup worked to elect candidates that -- i mean me people say are antigrowth or you say slow growth and we have seen the beef around trying to have the state ce in and force cities to do more. are you worried at all by continuing to elect the folks that you can spur more what you don't like to be in sacramento. >> i am not worried about that at all. in fact, i think we need more of that. we need more of the local coming ou voices strongly because the local level community has done a great deal of work following state required housing elements within the general plans and they have got a lot of plans in those areas. they are showing ways to covelet housing problem. too often the narrative is cities are to blame because

they are not building enough housing. but actually it goes back to knowing cities don't build housing. ey allow for -- a number of housing units us about the developers have to pull the building permits and then the builders have to build ewing the permits. so, in my opinion they arbe ng unfairly blamed for that. and in sacramento, they are taking a very simplistic look at the problewe should curtail their powers. and what we benefit everybody is if there was a much more -- h wisdom that's gone into solving the probl . >> slightly different sentiment. >> what do you think needs to happen and would you welcome state intervention in the communities? >> i think that because we have seen so many communities not rise to t occasion yes state involvement is necessary including san perhaps. i think that may not just be worried about what the

neighborhoods look like now and how long we sit in traffic but hiink about where children will live and granddren will live and the problem will get worse and worse and it can't wait. >> you agree? >> i think that's a great example what how much they are sitting in track and to go forward with the project wouldn't would have made that u s worst immediately. maybe we need more solutions coming from the dutraffic ry. >> more transit. >> yeah. >> we will have to leave this here. susan and heather, thank you both. >>thank you. on dnesday states agreed to pay $5 pillion in the settlement with the federal trade commission over the tech giant's role in the analytical scandal. joe simon said they rsceived us about the ability to control their personal information. part of the eftc agre requires facebook institute an

independent privacy committee diwhile understa fall certification will subject them to individual, civil pend criminaalty. on the same day facebook record $16 billion in revenue for the second quarter. a 28% increase from the same period a . year a joining me is san francisco bureau chief jeremy owens from market watch. thanks for being here. having me. or >> so let's back up and t talk abthe scandal which seems kind of far away at this point. what was that all about? and with why did that cause so much outrage. >> basically, the data that was involved in the scapeddal was taken through a quiz app and involved a lot of data that facebook doesn't allow thesapps to take anymore but that was then given and sold to a polital consultant team called cambridge analytical that used it for brexit and trump's election to target users. now, that -- facebthk claims t they changed the rules and

doesn't allow the data to takee and ask the data to be destroyed and was told it was, rig. but at this point, facebook faced so many issues that they realizeed thawas a problematic thing and it's going to accept he the fine and walk. >> and there'sa new committee. and there's you know mark zuckerburg could be held personal responsible financially if they. >> criminally, yes. >> you think it will change things? should users feel better? >> i don't know. if you look at a lot of problems we have in this country, the answer is usually blue ribbon panel or commission. how much better does that make you feel? this is a board committee that's going to look at it. there's an independent person from facebook looking at privacy reporting that board committee and zuckerburg will get informed about what they thound for quarter and will sign off on it. it's just more red tape that they have to go through. so, that makes you feel better,

sure. i know if it makes me feel better. i hope the $5 billion and the chance of criminal charges against mark zuckerburg willin make them twice about everything they do at the company. >> but i nmthere's $17 billion in revenue and 2 1/2 billionin profits. billion off is 3 they had more than 5 or 6 billion in profit. >> do we need to force them to change or send a messagto other companies? what's the goal. >> reporter: to scare other companies to let isthem know happens and it shows they are going to step up and so, facebook says for cypriin 2012 and says if you do it begin we are going bigger this is going bigger. >> seems like a drop in the bucket. >> reporter: there's a money don't get me wrong but with when you look at it from facebook it's quarter worth of profit for the annual profit

right. it's just not going to have that much of a lo lasting effect. right? but, facebook willic to do well as long as advertisers miare g there. and facebook offers something that nobles has and that's llions of users. and really in depth data on the useers to targthem. no. nobles can say that so advertisers are not going to go anywhere else. >> well, speaking ohave been hearing a lot about the trust inquiries from federal government. not just facebook but other big tech giants. one is doj that will look at this. what are the trend looking at. we have to wait and see. . > they are look at bitech and they called out social

media this had language that could incle apple right. so this is separate from what we believe to be four individual antitrust investigations into those four ompanies. apple facebook and amazon and alphabet.

robert: house democrats at a crossroads. and rublicans face pressure on election security. i'm robert costa. welcome to "washington week." democrats debate impeachment. following robert mueller's testimony before congress. >> we did not reach a determination as tother the president committed a crime. robert: speaker pelosi pledges to move forward with investigations and their battles in the courts. >> it's based on the facts. the factsawand the that's what matters. not politics. not partisanship. just patriotism. robert: the president wants to move on. president trump: this whole thing has been three years of embarrassment and waste of time r ourountry. robert: but forgn interference remains a pressing