Skip to main content

tv   PBS News Hour  PBS  November 19, 2019 3:00pm-4:01pm PST

3:00 pm
captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> nawaz: good evening, i'm amna nawaz. judy woodruff is away. on the newshour tonight... >> do not worry, i will be fine for telling uth. >> nawaz: ...the impeachment hearings-- day three features the first witnesses who listened to president trump's phone call at the center of the impeachment inquiry. we breakdown the day's highlights and why they matter. plus, race matters solutions. as hate crimes rise across the country, teachers velop tools necessary to stop white nationalists from recruiting their students. >> we're talking about young people whdon't yet have fully formed views and opinions about the world. and that's a big reason why white nationalists and alt-right groups are working to recruit them. >> nawaz: all that and more on
3:01 pm
tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funng for the pbsas newshoureen provided by:r >> consullular believes that wireless plans should reflect the amount of talk, text and data that you use. we offer a variety of no- contract wireless plans for people who use their phone a little, a lot, or anything in learn more, go to consumercellular.tv >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: >> this program was made possible by the corporatiad for public bsting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.
3:02 pm
>> nawaz: the third day of public impeachmentearings brings four witnesses before the u.s. house intelligence committee. for the first time, we hear testimony from individuals on the call between president trump and ukraine's leader at the center of the inquiry. again, we witness criticism of a witness as they are testifying - this time from the official white house twitter account. there is a lot to unpack. here to breakdown the highlights anwhy they matter: our lisa desjardins is at the capitol and was in the room. yamiche alcindor is at the white house. and nick schifrin is at theth table e now. lisa, i want to turneco you first,se those first witnesses we heard from today were both on that call in july between president trump and president zelensky. itprompted the whistleblower's report in the first place. let's take quick listen to wha those witness, lieutenant colonel alexander vindman andd williams o say about that
3:03 pm
call. >> i was concerned by the call. what i heard waste inappropr and i reported my concerns to mr. eisenberg. it is impro pr for theresident of the united states to demand a foreign government investigate a u.s. citizen and a political opponent. i was also clear that if ukraine pursued an investigation, i it was also clear that if ukraine pursued an investigation into the 2016 election, the bidens and brisma it would be interpreted a partisan mood. this would result in ukraine losing bipartisan support and objectn the region.strategic i want to emphasize to the committee when i reported my concerns on july 10th related to ambassador sondland and july 25th relating to the president, i did so out of a sense of duty. >> approximately how many calls fotween the president of the united states aneign leaders had you listened to? >> i wou say roughly a dozen.
3:04 pm
>> had you ever heard a callhi like >> as i testified before, i believe what i found unusual or different abis call was the president's reference to specif investigations and that struck me as different than other calls i had lstened to. >> you testified that you thought it was political in nature. why did you think that? >> i thought that the references ecific individuals and investigations such as formersi vice pnt biden and his son struck me as political in nature given that themer vice president is a political dent.ent of the pre >> nawaz: lisa, you were in the hearing room while those moments unfolded. we should also minutes eutenant colonel vindm on the national security council staff. williams isan aide to vice president pence. both of these witnesses werey calledmocrats. why? what's the case democrats are making there? >> today democrats are trying to e focus on what they seas a central piece of evidence here
3:05 pm
the phone call from president trump to president zelensky iny. ukraine in j here they have first two people we've heard from publicly who listened in on that call in real-time, and what's more, democrats' point here is both of these officials who are not politically apotted had immediate concerns. democrats have raised throughout the hearings with lieutenant colonel vindman and another witness, tim morrison, who we will talk about later, those individuals raised theire concerns up hain very quickly. they felt they were so serious. another important part of that sound you played, williams' conclusion that this was politica because it's not jus about the president asking for an investigation. it's about his motivations. and theryou have a professional staffer who herself is trying not to beic pol say that she felt when the bidens were mentioned it was potical, because it wasan opponent of the president. that democrats aring to case make for impeachment. today they were trying to connect those dots and make it real with the officials whoi
3:06 pm
heart as it happened. >> nawaz: that brings us tomi e over at the white house. yamiche, beth of those witnesses testified they had concerns about the president's behaviorha oncall. what does this mean for the white house? >> this is problematic for the white house, because beforeto y republicans and the president were making the case these were not people coming actually on the call that had concerns. today changed that. these were people who had heard president trump on on the calls with other foreign leaders and t fet the july 25th phone call between him and the president of ukraine was unusual and improper. the other thing that's oblematic is the white house has basically had the stance that no one should come before congress. instead you have these two people whourrently still work at the white house come before congress to air their grievances. the other thing note is the president has been attacking both of these individuals. he has been saying tere never trumpers. but both said they are apolitical. we are not here for one y or another. we're here out of a sense of duty. president trump is saying.
3:07 pm
he also said he thought republicans did very well when it came to questioning tese witnesses, so the president is pushing back on this narrative that democrats really feel like they have in these two individuals star witnesses, people who can really tell the story from a firhand account. >> nawaz: for anyone who wasn't able to follow along with thday's proceedings, lieutenant colonel vindman began personal story in his opening statement. nick schifrin is here with me. i want to asku yo about this. it was feature nerd a ken burns documentary,vindman's family story was. let's listen to part of that documentary and hear what lieutenant vindman had to say this morning. >> e came herand then we went -- ore mother died so we went to italy. hen we came here. >> when my father was 4yea lid, he left behind his entire e ov ae honthlyr in the united states so hish te sons
3:08 pm
could have a better and safer lives. his courageous decision inspired a deep sense of gratitude in my brothers and myself and ofinstilled in us a sense duty and service. all three of us have served or arcurrently serving in the military. my little brother sits byhind me here today. our collective military service is a special part of our family's history, our story in america. i also recognize that my simple act of appearing here today, eust like the courage of my colleagues who hlso truthfully testified before this committee, would not be toleted in many plces around the world. in russia, my act of expressing concern to the chain of command in an official and private chnel would havevere personal and professional repercussions and offering public testimony involving the president would surely cost me my life. i am grateful to my my for his brave act of hope 40
3:09 pm
years ago and for the privilegem of being aican public servant, where i can live free of fear for md an my family's safety. dad, i'm siting here today in the u.s. capitol talking to our elected professionals, talking to our elected professionals. it is proof that you made e decision 40 years ago to leave the soviet union and come here to the united states of america in search of a better life fo our family. do not worry. ly be fine for telling the truth. >> nawaz: nick, it was ancr ibly compelling moment, an incredibly compelling piece of testimony. it was personal whom is lieutenant colonel vindman. what do we know about him? >> he and his brother, as we saw in that ken burns documentary, are jewish immigrants from ukraine, from the former soviet union. the father that he mentions there came to the united states with $700 in cash and nothing else. and he has seen his sons grow into members of theational security council staff. currently vindman is lieutenant lonel of foreign a officer
3:10 pm
in the army. it's basically equivalent of an army diplomat, thclosest thing the army has to diplomats. they have areaexpertise or country expertise inch vindman's case it's ukraine and russia. these people are groomed to be defense attache, groomed to serve in embassies. vindman has served i both kiev and moscow. that goes to the requirements for these foreign area officersc is language. vindman speaks both ukrainian and russian, and the military is prd to have these people. they find, the milita finds that these people are incredibln impo the language, the area expertise, and they groom th to really be stars within the military. and secretary esper, the defense secretary recently came out defend vindman. you know, there is some concern that vindman would speak out against the president. he used very specific language, very critical language of the president. secretary esper recently said fear of retaliation at all some the military really defending
3:11 pm
vindman was asked, why are youy, willing to criticize the commander-in-chiefthe mos powerful man in the world, and why did you tell your dad not to worry? his simple answer: this is america. this is a place where i cansp k out and even criticize the president. >> nawaz: it's striking for e secretary to say he will be fine for testifying in this way, which brings me to yamiche back at the white house. you have some additional reporting around. this i would love for you to share other concerns about an fallout, any repercussions for lieutenant colonel vindman fors speaking forcefully and clearly as he did today. >> reporter: sources close to litetenant colonel vindmanl me that an official from the army has called hisnd family reassured them that lieutenant colonel vindman will not face any sort oretaliation. that's important to know, because army lieutenant colonel vindman is actually essentially deployed to the white house. this is an army assignment for him.ot he'someone who came and worked for the white house as a political appointee.
3:12 pm
this iin some ways part of his service as an army officer some this is a deployment to him. when you think about that, the army is feeling under so much pressure that they want to reach out to him an say, k new york your time when you think when you're doing what's best for your country, when you're putting yourself out therend testifying publicly, we want you to know we have your back. that's incredibly important. i think it's alsomportant to note that vindman really put his sty as an immigrant, his family story as an american story at the center of his testimony toda c and there aritics of the president who say this is a president who has had real issues when icomes immigration, who is in some ways people think has challenged the very idea of america welcoming immigrants from all parts of the world, and now you have a lieutenant army colonel coming before congress and saying, this is my duty as an american to come forward and tell you that i haveoncerns with the prsident of the united states. i can't underscore enough how important that is, and also how important it is that the army wanted to make sure he knew that military service, that military
3:13 pm
agency has his back. th's incredibly important here. >> nawaz: yamiche, it's worth noting he took some tough questions from republican members of congress today. let's just play a quick exchange, show some of those questions lieutenant colonel vindman faced. i would like the ask you about them on the back end. >> lieutenant colonel vindman, i see you're wearing your dress uniform.at knowing not the uniform of the day, you normally wear a suit to the white house. i think it's a great reminder of your military service. i too come from a litary family. these are my father's air force wings. he was a pilot in world war ii five of his sons served in the military. from one military family and another, thank you aur brothers for your service. your example here, very quickly, i'm curious, when ranking member nunes referred to you as mr. vindman, you quickly corrected him and wanted to be called lieutenant colonelnd n. do you always insist on civilians on calling you by your rank. >> mr. stewart, representative stewart, i am in uniform wearing my military rank.
3:14 pm
i just thought it w appropriate to stick with that. >> well, i assure yo mu eant to disrespected. >> i don't believe he did, butt the acks that i have had in the and twitter have eliminated the fact... either marginalizing me as a military officer. i'm just elling you that the ranking member meant to disrespect to you. >> i ieve that. >> i don't know him. i don't kno as hsays, the lieutenant colonel. i understood somebody had the misfortune of calling him mister and he corrected them. i undersnd now he wears his uniform when he goes inch i don't know vindman at all. what i do know see even he sad that the transcript was correct. >> nawaz: yamiche, that wasum president when he was asked about lieutenant colonel vindman in etcabmeeting. what did you make of the way the president and the white house >> well, the esident wasny? really trying the put some
3:15 pm
distance between himself and army colonel vindman. remember, the president has been lashing out at vindman. he's been saying he's a never trumper. he has been attackingis aracter. we saw the official white house twitter account mention concerns about his judgment. when have vindman was asked abot thathe said he had an evaluation that he is a good dfficer and good remarks. the white house t acknowledge that. the president went after him instead. republicans largely didn't go after vindman's character today, but the president has beevery consistent in the fact that he's been going after him, and i think what the predosident was g today was essentially saying, look, i understand that he might be in the army, but ali think he was nit-picking a bit there. you saw the president trying toa wafin line by saying, i don't really know him, but, in dent has been tweeting over the last couple days and weeks that he's essentially very angry at vindman and wanted to disparage his character. >> nawaz: lisa, take us back inside the hearg room now
3:16 pm
republicans spent a lot of time vindman.ing lieutenant colonel to me about their strategy in the moment. what were they working toward in >> i think republicans know that lieutenant colonel vindman feels strongly and that hee has some severe beliefs there. credibility on a ofion his levels. part of that was, talking to one republican lawmaker, this might be a staffer who just went overboard in his theory. they raised questions about how workers have seen him in the past. eutenant colonel vindman was ready for that. he brought past evaluation. but democrats have always sn vindman's testimony as the strongest. so it was important for republicans to say, wait a minute, not only is this someons credibility we'll question, but they also questioned his function in the has nevrsonally met with that he the president. vindman also countered that and said, yes, but i have prepared many documents for him. but republicans age tryinghim.
3:17 pm
to show this is not a direct link that democrats say it is. >> nawaz: lisa, there was another back and forth of publicans' questioning o lieutenant colonel vindman when it looked like they were getting toward the identity of the whistleblower and chairman schiff had to intervene and straighten thing. explain to us what happened in the moment and why it's important. >> that's exactly riht. lieutenant colonel vindman is thought by many to be a person who pirobably ed the whistleblower. this is because we know the istleblower from their own complaint was not the original call of president zelensky and trmp but instead heard about it from someone else. we know that lieutenant colonel vindman did brief others and the idea from republicans ishe say they want to know who the whistleblower is, because they t question wheth whistleblower is biased. democrats say, no, republicans just wanto ot this person for
3:18 pm
polical reasons. whatever the rationale is, republicans today were going down the road of asking lieutenant colonel vindman who is it thu spoke to about this, who did you brief. that is information democrats believe could reveal the whistleblower. vindman says he himself does not know w the whistleblower is, but he didn't say whether he had suspicions of who it could be. he did say he is following guidance of thcommittee to not talk about this as per chairman schiff's rules. that's something that republicans object to. >> nawaz: that of course was the testimony from this morning's panel. this afternoon we saw two nw witness, one was ambassador kurt volker. he had a few things to say about the bidens and also about the thrainian company that hunter widen served on board of. that is burisma. take a listen to what he had to say. >> ere isa history of corruption in ukraine. there is a history with the company of burisma thas been investigated.
3:19 pm
that is well-known. there is a separate allegation about the vice president acting propriately. his son was a board member of this company, but those things i saas completely distinct. and wh i was trying to do in working with the ukrainians was to that red a needle and -- seread a needle and if there were things they could do as part of ukraine's own polofic fighting corruption that helped clarify for our president that they are committed to that very effort. if there is a way to thread that needle, i felt it was worth the effort to try to solve that problem. as it turns out, i now understand that most he the people didn't see or didn't consider this distinction, that for them it was synonymous. >> nawaz: nick, w heard ambassador vokoun say that a fe time, threading the needle idea. what did you make of that? >> this the story of the failure of traditial diploma
3:20 pm
and the triumph democracy. burisma, the largest enemy inio ukraine, notly corrupt. after 2014 when the brits and americans proved into ukraine and trie h toelp with corruption in ukraine, the very first company the brits investigated was burisma. and there was a ukrainian investigation into burisma that got stopped. so that leaves us with burisma joe biden's son, hunter biden was on the board of burisma while the vice president was working on ukraine policy. we have heard that a lot from republicans. what ambassador volker is trying to say is that he thoughthat the ukrainians should vestigate buisma and investigate the ukrainians on burisma. what the president was trying to do is investigate burisma in order to investigate hunter biden ae biden. it is the difference between the trump administration policy of investigating corruption in ukraine and president trump's
3:21 pm
own policy when ith comes to to investigate in ukraine in terms of corruion. volker admitted today for the first time that he failed, that he id, in hind siht, he should have realized that other people weren't makinthe distinction and for other people burisma meant biden, because tho single phe failed to convince was president trump. he finally admitted that president trump did not make that distinction and he should have and he would have done policy different. of course, the story of why we're here is that that distinguishing point wa nev made for president trump and he didn't believe him. >> nawaz: fascinating revelation. that was one piece of testimony from one witness. the other was tim morrison. he was the former senior director for russia and europe on the national security cocil. let's take a listen the part of his testimony. >> on september 7th you spoke again the ambassador sondland, o told you that he had just gotten off the phone with president trump. isn't that right? >> that sounds correct, yes.
3:22 pm
>> what did ambassador sondland tell you that president trump said to him? >> if i recall this conversati correctly, this was where ambassador sondland related that there was no quid pro quo, but president zelensky had to make the statement and he had to wan to do it. >> by that point did you understand that the statement related to the biden 2016 investigation? >> i think i did, yes. >> and that was essentially a condition for the security assistance to be released? t> i understood that that's wha ambassador sondland believed. >> after speaking with president trump? >> that's what he represented. >> nawaz: lisa, what did you make of that exchange? >> that was a very important exchange. you'll hear democrats talk about that a lot, andheyou'lar a lot about it tomorrow when mr. sondland testifies. what's happening hetim morrison is recalling a nversation that ambassador sondland testified he did not recall. and it's an important
3:23 pm
coersation, sondland passi on that there is a connection between the security assistance anonthe investigafter he spoke to the president. and ndland in his testimony said he didn't recall that connection. he jushas stressed the president said no quid pro quo. that's important testimony from mr. morrison. it has been a day of ups and downs for both sides, and i think we're going to get more of that tomorrow. >> nawaz:miche, lisa just mentioned we're going to hear from ambassador sondland .omorrow. look ahead for what do we expect in day four of the public impeachment proceedings? 2 european ambassador, ambassador son -- sdland, is going to be a star witness for both sides. both sides don't know what they might get out of him an how he high help their case, but both of them desperately want the ask him questions because he was in direct contact with president trump mulpltimes. the white house producer has been telling me as well meredith
3:24 pm
lee, this is all about democrat wanting to ovethe 2016 election results and ally wanting to get president trump out of office. but ambassador sondlanis someone who is ean ally of th president. he donated more than $1 million to president trump's political campaign. he was appointed ambassador to the european union. so we really havwatch closely about how ambassador sondland answers some of theseab questiont what president trump directly told him to say, because by his own admission, he said he told ukrainian official look, we need to get this investigation into the bidens started on the other in u to get that $391million in military aid. tomorrow will be one of the most portant possibly the most important day, because this is someone who can speak to what president trump was telling him to do and how he was telling him the make the se the ukrainians. >> nawaz: another by disiz day on capitol hil thank you, yamiche alcindor, lisa desjardins, and nick schifrin, who is here with me.
3:25 pm
>> woodruff: the judiciary committee is ultimately responsible for deciding if impeachment charges will be brought against the president and we turn now to two members of that committee. first up, republican congressman mike johnson of louisiana. congressman, thank you so much for being with me today. i wanted to ask you, over three days of testimony, has anything that you have heard or anything you have seen in any of the transcripts that haeen released proved the needle for you on the decision to bringot charges or? >> it hasn't yet. i can tell you at there is a high degree of frustration amongst members of the huse judiciary committee. as you mention, we're the committee that has the appropriate jurisdiction over that jurisdictioproceeding, but effectively taken away from us se otherded to the committees. to this date, even though i am the ranking member of theub constitutioncommittee and serve on the house judiciary, i
3:26 pm
review all of the evidencety to that's been gathered and the secret hearings in the basement and everytng we have heard so much about. what we have seen publicly and the transcripts that have been i think now what we're having is an endless debate about individual's opinions who didn't speak directly with the president,ho have involved a lot of hearsay and who are talking about a transcript that every single american has the option to read for themselves. no one has said the transcript and to date i just haven't seen anything that rises to the level of impeachable conduct. >> nawaz: congressman, we will plbe hearing from some pewho had direct contact and conversations with the presidenh as inquiry moves on, but i want to ask you about testimony today from ambassador kurt volker. he is a witness called by your republican colleagues on the committee. he defended vice president biden. he said he did not believe up was coin his dealings with ukraine. what did you make of this testimony? >> well, i dn't hear all of it because some of us are still trying to work on capitol hie ll whey're doing all the rest of this. we had other things going on today. hoheard a sna a summary of
3:27 pm
what he said. and, look, his opinion, his personal opinion about joe bide is not really relevant to what's going on here today. i mean, that is interesting, but it doesn't have much to do with impeaching the president of the united state the thing thncerns us is that this was a predetermined political outcome. i think everybody cn look at that and acknowledge it. there was a vote back in cember of 2017 where 58 house democrats went on record to sayy anted to begin impeaching the president. they changed the narrative many times since then until now. now we're talking aba fen call with zelensky. but there have been dferent reason, different narratives, different their ree. they're all trying to get to the same end, and this is to get rid of donald trump. this should bery serious thing to the american people. that's why the founders hadt impeachmsted as something that would be an exceedingly rare event. i think what they're doing now f strating the american people. i think you're beginning to hear that across this lan >> nawaz: let me ask you about
3:28 pm
something we did hear. alexander vindman today, you and your republican colleagues sent a letter to chairman nadler yesterday expressing concerns about his credibility and it seems like a good poftion o republicans questioning of him t.day actually focused on tha why spend so much time attacking the credibility of lieutenant colonel vindman? >> i don w't knot the idea, the theory was the investment oe n, that but i think credibility of witnesses are important. what republicans are frustrated about is the lop-sided nature of all of these hearings. we're not able to call all the witnesses we want. we're not, as has been said so many time, allowed proper cross-examination. witnesses have been instructed by chairman schiff not to answer certain questions. and that's problematic for us. so there's a lot of members are venting their frustration. they're trying to make sure the rule of law is complied with her. and i think that process and that procedure is really, really important. it's important to know where atn s is coming from, what their background is and all of
3:29 pm
that. i am personally fine with thcre ibility of this witness. that is not my chief concern. my concern is that he's talking about these notions and ideas and he never spoke with the esident himself. to date the only person who has sondland, who had a direct conversation with the president, and he said he asked the president expressly, what do yo want fraine? he said, i want nothing, i want no quidrouo. i want them to do the right thing. that's clear to me. that's w the president has much confidence in the transcript. >> nawaz: we'll hear from ambassadorondland tomorrow. you spoke about potential witnesses. i would like to ask you about the president who has said heul strongly consider providing written answers to impeachment ind stigator wou recommend that he do that? >> look, i'm not his counsel. i used to be a lawyer, but i'mym not e. i'm just a member of the house judiciary committee. look, the president is anxious i ink to share the truth. he has been in his view doing that over and over. he released a transcript. he didn't have to do that. and he says it'sur acce as
3:30 pm
does everyone else. so if he wants to elaborate upon t'that, i mean, thahis choice. i've spoken with him about it myself in recent days and he shares that openly with oths because he's really tired of the wavthis has all deeloped. i don't blame him. >> nawaz: what many have testified to so fars that the president sought help from a foreign nation to investigate a domestic political rival. does any part of that concern you? l k, the context is important. the real facts are still coming out.ex we don't knoctly how that went down. but if the president was seeking to root out corruption and it was an effort to have ukraine, who was listed on evryone's list as one of the most corrupt nations to get down to the bottom of this, tone sure tat u.s. taxpayer dollars not misspent overseas, i think that's a comable thing. i think he has a fiduciary obligation t -- as a commander-in-chief to do nothing less than that. i think thas why a lot of thean amereople applaud it.
3:31 pm
>> nawaz: congressman mike johnson, republican from louisiana, thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. preciate it. >> nawaz: and now we get a view from the other side of the aisle and the majority on cie juy committee. representative pramila jayapal, a democrat from the state of. washingt congresswoman, well back to the newshour. thank you for making the time today. several witness have used words "improper" or "inapproprie" with regard to the president's behavior on that july 25th call. there is a difference between those words andimpchable. have you seen anything so far that rises to the level of anof impeachablnse? >> i think what really stuns me is that my republican colleagues would ink that a president's actions bribing a foreign governnt to inerfere in our election by digging up dirt on a political rival and withholdinged they congress appropriated, that's taxpayer money, by the way, that congress
3:32 pm
appropriated to ukraine, i just can't belie that my republican colleagues are arguing that that is not a high crime and misdemeanor. bribery is clearly laid out, but it is disturbing to me to see the lengths to which the republicans are standing up forh president and putting partyov country. that is really difficult for me to understand as somebody that swore an oath t uphold ad defend the constitution, as did my republican colleagues. i am -- i think it's a sad day that they can lifen to all this testimony, which providesid corroborating ce over and over and over again from peopler who were tly on that call with president trump, that's over and over evidence thatain, shows that the president has betrayed national security and violated our constitution. >> nawaz: congresswoman, you idntioned the word "bribery." speaker pelosi slast week, "the devastating testimony corroborated evidence ofribery uncovered in the inquiry.
3:33 pm
" is it a bribery charge with which you plan the move forward? >> we don't know what the charges will be. as you know, i'm on the judiciary committee. anr role now is to waiget the reports from the different committees. we will have due process. we will have the president's counsel. we'll be able to testify if he wants to do so.th an we will look at all of that on the judiciary committee going forward with impeachment articles and we will then look at what those articles will be. i will just tell you that the thing that is most damning is the testimony from the earliest witness, the first witness to testify to the american people, and that was dond trump, who he himself said, this is what i did. i withheld aid. i went and asked for an investigation, a public investigation from a veryil frcountry. let's not forget the situation that ukraine is in, and whates this actually o our leadership role in the world when you have the most powerful
3:34 pm
untry essentially saying, i'm not going to give you e aid you need much less theeeting at the white house unless you agree to investigate my political rival. that should be untenable for every democrat and every republican. >> nawaz: congresswoman, let me ask you about something else. the house wh investigating her or not president trump lied to special counsel robert mueller during the russia investigation. could what is uncovered in that probe eventually become part of the impeachment proceedings, as well? >> everything is on the table is knat i would say to that. we are, yoow, trying to make sure we get all the facts that need. at the same time, we understand that speed isf the essence. we are going to take the things that are most unfntolding in fro of us. now, there is evidence that was presented to us by robert mueller. in fact, i questioned robert mueller directly on the charges within the mueller report of wiess intimidation and winess tampering. let's not forget that these things that we're seeinin raine are part of a pattern,
3:35 pm
continual pattern of the presidenacting in a certain way, certainly witness intimidationuclying, obson of congress, obstruction of justice, these are all patterns of this presidt. >> nawaz: by broadening that and saying everything is on the table do, you worry it plays into an accusation tha is a witch hunt, you'll do whatever you can to bring a charge eventually? >> no, when i say "everything ib on the," i'm saying we haven'edprejudgny outcomes here. what is important is the facts and the truth. that's what these witnesses have beenbout. we are waiting in judiciary to get the information from the committees. we wrl have due pocess, but i have to tell you thatnd the -- i will say i think the ultimate article, should there be any, b winarrow and targeted because we understand this is about the constitution. one thing and one thing only. it's n about whether we like the president's policies. it's in the about whether we agree with him or disagreewith him. it is about the constitution. and whether he has betrayed the constitution. and so that's what we will be
3:36 pm
focusing on. >> nawaz: congresswoman, you have pro. missed dve point. you lso said that time is of the essence. you have two more days of pubhec ings this week, five more witnesses. then what? what is the time line moving forward? when do you hope thesewi proceeding be wrapped up? >> well, i think the time line is as it unfolt'. i know tnot a very satisfactory answer, but i do committee want to be sure that we are getting the full information from the intan committefrom the other committees of jurisdiction some we will wait for them to wrap it i will say that there's nothing -- what is so compelling about these witnesses is how credibly credible they are. i mean, a decorated purple heart lieutenant colonel that you know, dedicated career servants who have testified. they are adding color an they are corroborating the story. but i will say that the facts are still the facets. and ty have not really changed substantially except for the
3:37 pm
corroboration. so i think there will be a point at which. >> adam schiff says, i think we've got we need and it tells the complete story and now we'll send this over the judiciary. >> nawaz: congresswom pramila jayapal, a democrat from washington, thank you very much for your time. >> thank you. >> nawaz: our live impeachment hntearing coverage ues tomorrow and thursday starting at 9:00 a.m. eastern, 8:00 central. check your local listings and find us streaming online, on our facebook, twitter and yotube pages. >> nawaz: in the day's oer news, the u.s. house of representatives approved a prevent a governmetdown ono friday. it would keep federal agenciesh running throcember 20th, buying more time to work out a final spending package. the senate is on track to pass it, and president trump had indicated will sign it.
3:38 pm
in hong kong, a handful of protesters remained holed up at a university today, besieged by police. overnight, some tried to escape down ropes. others walked out wearing mas and emergency blankets. hours later, some wrote ane s.o.s. on ound in a plea for help. police have already arrested more than 1,000 people since the siege began on sunday. there's word that more than 100 protesters in i bran han killed in a crackdown. amnesty international says it based the number on "credible reports" after mass protests over gasoline prices. today, state tv showed empty w streeth burned-out mosques and vandalized bank machines.ac an internet ut remained in force, but a united nations' spokesman called for tehran to explain itself. >> it would be veruseful to have a better, clearer picture but it is clearly very significant, very alarming situation and widespread across untry. we would encourage states to
3:39 pm
maintain the flow of information; if there's false information they can rebut it, but let's see the information. >> nawaz: so far, the iranian government has not given any public accounting of the death toll. teousands of lebanese prot converged in central beirutin today, preventg parliament from meeting. they blocked roads chased s.u.v.'s trying to bring one lawmaker to gornment buildings. scuffles broke out with riot police, who tried to disperse the crowds. protesters were outraged that legislators intended to meet without discussing demands for reforms. in afghanistan, the taliban today freed two western hostages who had been held since 2016. american kevin king, and australian timothy weeks were university in kabul when they were kidnapped. their release came after the afghan government released three top taliban commanders. more than 100 fires burned across australia's east coast
3:40 pm
today, engulfing the city of sydn in smoke. the heavy haze prompted health warnings for some five million people. air qualitwas 10 times the hazardous level, caused by the smoke in place.ons that held >> we've got this real mix of converging winds today. and you can see the smoke pact into the sydney basin, for example, today. that's because we've got quite a northerly influencing down the coast of new south wales and across the inland. >> nawaz: strong winds and drought conditions have stoked wildfires across eastern australia this month, destroying more than 300 homes. back in this country, several thousand public school teachs in indiana surrounded the state capitol building. the educators, all in red, demanded hike in pay and an end to using student test scores to evaluate teachers and schools. the scale of the protests forcey nealf of indiana's school districts to close for the day. two jail guards in new yk have
3:41 pm
pleaded "not guilty" ton falsifying pricords in the death of jeffrey epstein. he hanged himself in his city jail cell last august, awaiting trial on s trafficking charges. the guards entered their pleas after a grand jury indictment alleged they failed to check on epstein r nearly eight hours. instead, it says, they were shopping online and sleeping. president trump insisted today that his unscheduled health exam on saturday was "routine," and not prompted by specific concerns. he had the exam at walter reed national military medical center. at his cabinet meeting today, he dismissed suggtions that he might be hiding a health problem. >> i went, did a very routine-- just a piece of it, the rest of it takes place in nuary-- did a very routine physical, visited the family, visited a couple of groups but visited the family of a young soldier who s very badly injured who was in the operating room.pi i toured the hl for a little while. i was out of there very quickly and got back home and i gethe
3:42 pm
greeted withews that we understand that you had a heart attack.az >> nlate monday, mr. trump's personal physician issued his own statement that thcheck-up was routine. new york state is the latestue state tohe nation's biggest e-cigarette maker, juul labs. aythe legal action filed t alleges juul engaged in deceptive marketing and deliberately targeted teenagers. california filed a similar suit yesterday, and north carolina took that step last may. and, on wall street today, the market posted mixed results. the dow jones industrial averag2 lostoints to close at 27,934. the nasdaq rose 20 points, andwa the s&p 50down just under two points.
3:43 pm
>> nawaz: last week the f.b.i. reported that hate crime violence in the country at a 16-year high. in 2018, there were more than 4,500 such crimes, assaults that were motivated in part or ine wh racial, ethnic or religious bias as well as discrimination against gender and sexual orientation. the u.s. commission on civil rights also reported that the highest percentage of all reported hate incidents since the 2016 election we elementary and secondary schools. newshour special correspondent chtlayne hunter-gault looks how this problem has played out in northst oregon and how teachers are learning to intervene earlier. it's part of our educa coverage, "making the grade" and the latest in our "race matters" series looking at solutions to racism. a warning: this story containsso images that viewers may find offensive. reporter: at schools just like south ridge high near portland, oregon, educators say white nationalists are making
3:44 pm
inroads, but also infiltrating nationwide from online. they're copting otherwise- nocent images like the okay sign.artoon frogs, and incorporating them widely into dcist images and videos, they're showing up alongside moreamiliar hate symbols in unlikely places: a swastika made out of red solo cups at a high schooy in california. apparent nazi salutes in a prom photo in wisconsin. the okay sign, which some use as a hand sign for white power,fl hed in high school yearbooks at schools near chicago, forcing costly repnts. tristan madron say youngenior people are sucked in with dark humor. >> people treat it almost in a joking manner.
3:45 pm
>> reporter: like? >> like i don't know, black people are ruining the country. stuff like that. i've seen new iterations of the n-word. like, ¡haha, this is a funny joke. what if we drag someone by a car across the street? >> reporter: online forums can often pull students in deeper. one student who didn't want be identified told us at a friend even communicated with the christchurch, new zealand, shooter before the murder of 51 people, thinking it was all a joke. >> then he heard about it, and he was like ¡wait, that was real?" >> repter: at southridge itself, students recently spray- painted the football field with swastikas. school officials investigated but never found the culprits, and some students were left feeling uneasy. >> i'm jewish and i'm also black, so seeing that kind of
3:46 pm
stuff and knowing that i go to school with these people who don't like a part of me scares me. dg reporter: that's patrick griffin, a southsocial studies teacher who started looking for ways to fight back when offensive stereotypes made their way into his own classroom. he soon found a toolkit online called "confronting white nationalism in schools," written in part by lindsay schubiner of the nonprofit western st center. there have been over 5,000 educators around the world.rom schubiner, thank you so much for joining us, and i want to start with you, patrick.u can ll me what was it that initially set off an alarm belly for you wh heard things that were frightening or threatening?
3:47 pm
>> for me i guess it comes in all of these instaf violence housed in the ideology of white nationalism. i see it affecting my kids. and they're talking abtht it. some o are scared about it. and some of them are scared about talking about it. >> reporter: like what for example? >> so we might be havingon conversaabout nationalism in my class. and so we'd be having these conversations and these conversations were happening thin the current political climate, and so inherently we'd start talking about current events and start talking about the most recent presidential election and whatnot. and i'd have some students whose faces would fall and whose eyes would disengage. meanwhile on the other hand i've got other students who are feeling safe to engage with the conversation in a healthy way. i've also had students who are feeling fe to engage in the conversation in some unhealthy ways becausehey were really
3:48 pm
happy about the growing movements of taking america back to a very white place. and so i put the word out, hey, does anybody have any resources that i could use, and that's ho me across the toolkit. >> reporter: well lindsay, thise is wou come in, there does seem to be by all accounts a rise in white supremacist speech. how is it you came to deal with that, and whatid you come up with? >> we also know that white nationalist and alt-right movements are intentionally recruiting young people. the editor of the daily stormer, a neo-nazi website, has written that he designs his website to recruit children as young as 11 years old. we're talking about yog people who don't yet have fully ford views and opinions about the world. and that's a big reason why white nationalists and alt-right
3:49 pm
groups are working to recruit them >> reporter: so you've come up with this kit, a kit that you've used in your classes. what does this kit do? >> this toolkit provides some context and some guidance around the issue of white nationalist and alt-right recruitment of young people. and it also provides a number of scenarios, possible things that might happen in a school community. >> reporter: it also contains definitions and a roadmap to teachers, administrators and community members strip the secrecy from white nationalism. so how have you used the toolkit?th >> i like usintoolkit in my classrooms with my lesson plans, whether it be talng about definitions or scenarios. the ,olkit has been useful in heck, conversations in the hallways with students as they're coming up to malk about, hey mr. griffin, what do you think about this or that memer whatnot, whatever's
3:50 pm
current in their life. we're also using the toolkit to create advisory lesson plans that the entire school body, student body will be using. >> one thing the toolkit tries to do is empower students that v they do havece, but it's not their responsibility to take this on. there are adults in the community, and it's our job to take this on. >> reporter: and do your students, the students that you're talking with, do theype understandcially those who are embracing these white nationalist tropes, how do you deal with them and prevent them from moving into the direction of violence? if a kid is going throu that, then you've got to make them feel known, valued, loved, part of the community, because so much of this is this isolationism that they're experiencing. then you got to make them feel known while also educating some of their ignorance about the greater context of it. >> reporter: reaching the students in your classroom
3:51 pm
doesn't address what they're getting at home, so how do youde with that? >> for people who are already i deepolved in white nationalism, this toolkit is not for them.we but it alsope will help create communities that nge openly talbout issues of white nationalism, w supremacy, racial justice and reinforcing values that include everyone, and that that kind of >> reporter: to both of you, how hopeful are you that the kind of extremism that this toolkit isss trying to addran be contained or even defeated? are you hopeful at all? or is it just moving too fast? >> my, i have a lot of reasons to not be hopeful i guess. that said, i have a lot ofre ons to be hopeful too. and it is that these kids are willing to engage in these conversations in a nuanced manner that i don't think some as willing to engans have been
3:52 pm
gd so if you just keep doing it, eventually y an entire new generation in charge, and i suppose there's a lot of hope there. >> reporter: it's hope for the hope. >> sometimes that's all you get. griffin and lindsabiner,ck thank you so much for joining us, and i wish you all the best as you c the future. issues in >> thank you. >> thank you. >> nawaz: detroit is known for the rhythms of motown and the hum of automobile plants. one non profit is adding a new sound to the urban landscape - the buzzing of bees. spenial correspondent mary e geist reports. >> reporter: detroit is buzzing thanks to timothy paule jackson and nicole lindsey. jackson and lindsey are the founders of detroit hives, anp fit organization that is transforming detroit's vacant spaces.
3:53 pm
>> i saw an announcement where the city of detroit is looking for nonprofits and residents to take back some of these vacant lots. >> reporter: they consideredve seral options, including a peacock farm and an urban campsite. but a health issue lead timothy to discover the medicinalf propertiesney, and that sparked his curiosity about beekeeping. >> nicole began to seey interest. and she made a very simple suggestion. e said, "how about transform a vacant lot into a bee farm?" >> when you thinabout bees they definitely don't go hand in hand with the urban environment. 00>> reporter: detroit's 7 vacant lots can be problematic for humans, but they're a paradise for beere where there wence homes, factories and buildings, there are now community gardens, urban farms, and flowering plants; the perfect place for bees to gather the pollen they ed to make honey. >> when we think about developing our areas or our communities we don't inclu nature. but since detroit has so manys,
3:54 pm
vacant lnd it seems like it's becoming this rural urban type of city. we can incorporate ne type things in our city and they can actually thrive. ks reporter: lindsey and j are working to revitalize 45 vacant lots in the next five years and expand to 200 hives, making the land beneficial to troit's inner city residents by increasing food security. >> a lot of times in our communities, we don't have access to fresh organic food. whenever you have hives near a community garden you are t guaranteedo see an increase in your yield. at's why we partner with community gardens to help increase food security. >> reporter: lindsey and jackson are also dedicated to using bees to teach conrvation and sustainability to young children. >> it gives us the opportunity to now teach our youth about nature. and actually telling them "hey, you should actually grow gardens in your yard, and tell your parents not to spray chemicals so we can see more of this thriving."
3:55 pm
>> i believe we measur impact by education. to be able to give back is what it's all about. keeping detroit buzzing about its future. for the pbs newshour, i'm mary ,llen geist in detro michigan. >> nawaz: and that's the newshour for tonight.i'm amna n. join us online and again here tomorrow for special pbs-only live coverage of the impeachment hearings with perhaps one of the most significant witnesses yet:o the u.s. ambasto the e.u., gordon sondland. tune in starting at 9:00 a.m. eastern. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newsho has been provided by: working with visionaries on the frontlines of social change
3:56 pm
worldwide. c negie corporation of new york. supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement, and the advancement of international peace and security. at carnegie.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and individuals. >> this program was made possle by the corporation fo public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, c captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
3:57 pm
3:58 pm
3:59 pm
4:00 pm
♪ ello and welcome to "amanpour & co." here's what's coming up. venice has flooded three times in one week, a first as the global climate crisis supercharges extreme weather tensity i speak to the worldoo ambassador and to scientist kathari hayhoe. >> it's actually carbon negative means it sucks more out of thes athere than it takes to eate. >> and how to change the economy and not the climate. a footwear success story for all time. allbirds -fnder joey zwillinger on his all sustainable sneaker company. plus -- >> it'sellectual diversity
4:01 pm
that