judy: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. on the "newshour" tonight, a political stalemate as the nation reels from more than 200,000 dead from covid, and millions more out of work. congress and t white house remain divided over providing relief. then, trusting information. how the director of national intelligence spreading russian disinformation complicates knowing what to trust. and unfinished business. how older americans are embracing a minimalist lifestyle in these trying times. >> i think with the combination of just how things are in the world right now, people are really wanting to jump into vans

and busses and just alternative housing situations. judy: all that and more on tonight's "pbs newshour." ♪ >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by -- >> when the world gets complicated, a lot goes through your mind. a dedicated advisor can tailor advice and recommendations to your life. that is fidelity wealth management. >> consumer cellular. johnson & johnson. financial services firm, raymondjames. the candida fund, committed to restoring justice and meaningful work through and vestment

interest for leaders and ideas. more at candidafund.org. carnegie corporation of new york, supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement, and the advancement of peace and security. at carnegie.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. judy: it is yet another sign that the economic pain from the

coronavirus pandemic won't be subsiding anytime soon. 837,000 americans led new claims for unemployment benefits last week. that number did inch lower from the previous week's figure -- but it remains at historically high levels. meanwhile, prospects for new federal relief are still uncertain tonight. talks between house speaker nancy pelosi and treasury secretary steven mnuchin continued this afternoon. and for the latest on where things stand, we turn to our own lisa desjardins and yamiche alcindor. lisa, to you first. where do things stand and what are the regrets asking for? lisa: hope is not gone, but it seems late today that there has been more look at the disagreement between the white house and democrats and the agreement. -- than the agreement. let's look at where democrats are and what they have on the table at this point.

democrats' latest plan is $2.2 trillion. there you can see, there is a $2.2 trillion plan for democrats. of that, or hundred $36 billion would be for state and local governments. $600 per week in additional benefits for the unemployed. got has run out technically now. 75 billion for testing. that is rental and mortgage assistance. this speaks to what americans are facing right now and the fears by many of these lawmakers trying to push for a deal that coming months, if cases rise, that things are going to get worse. judy: yamiche, what is the white house saying about what they expect from this bill? yamiche: again, hope is not gone, but it looks like it will be a tough thing. have been negotiating for weeks and months and have not been able to get together and focus

in on key things. white house, president trump has been told, especially the white house has heard from president trump and instructing mnuchin to keep coming up with his number because gop lawmakers do not want tspend more than $1 trillion. but the latest offer was $1.62 trillion. i want to walk through what that entails. at 250 billion for state and local governments. that is $186 billion less than democrats wanted to spend. $400 per week in jobless benefits. $75 billion for testing and trailing. $60 billion for rental and orchids assistance. they are not anywhere near each other, especially on the critical issue of state and local governments. judy: yamiche, how is the white house working with governments

-- democrats in congress to get this bill passed? yamiche: republican senators have been remiss to agree with anything more than $1 trillion. each time, the secretary mnuchin and losey speak, secretary mnuchin briefs majority leader mcconnell. steven mnuchin says that they have been trying for a long time and they are hoping to get something together, but good luck with that. it was seen as a little bit of mitch mcconnell saying i am not sure this is going to come together. this is critical because if they do not come together, we might see more layoffs. so many americans are struggling without jobs. the president sees this as trying to look like he did not fail, especially when he is looking at his reelection bid. judy: lisa, these talks have essentially been frozen for weeks and weeks. why the sudden movement? lisa: two reasons.

the parties have been rearing -- hearing from businesses in their district that they are worried if they do not have any more relief. and secondly, the airline industry announces furloughs, job cuts are in the tens of thousands and could be coming without congressional action. this is being taken very seriously. we are seeing leaders trying to avoid those furloughs by the airline industry. judy: we are watching other industries as well. we thank you both. ♪ >> we will return to judy and the full program after the latest headlines. a quick update to r stop -- our top story. a $2.2 trillion coronavirus relief plan, which republicans

oppose. speakeof the house nancy pelosi said tonight that she does not expect to reach agreement on covid relief this evening. a close advisor to president trump, hope hicks, has tested positive for coronavirus. hope traveled with president trump twice this week to the debated -- debate in cleveland and duluth, minnesota. information has surfaced about supreme court nominee amy coney barrett having signed a newspaper ad that called for overturning roe v. wade, the landmark supreme court abortion rights decision, saying it was, quote, an "exercise of raw judicial power" with a "barbaric legacy." president trump has said her view on "roe" is not known. the ad was not included in the documents barrett submitted to the senate judiciary committee ahead of her confirmation hearing. the trump administration is further slashing refugee admissions to the u.s.

in a memo, the state department announced it intends to admit only 15,000 refugees into the country in the 2021 fiscal year that started today. that's down from 18,000 during the previous fiscal year. it's another record low in the modern refugee program. texas republican governor greg abbott issued a proclamation today limiting each of the state's counties to just one drop-off location for mail-in ballots. abbott said the move was meant to strengthen election security. but in populous counties, local officials argue that it leads to voter suppression. amazoneported more than 19,000 of its workers have tested positive for "covid-19" during the pandemic. that amounts to almost 1.5% of its workforce. it's the first time the company has shared information about the number of cases among its more than 1.3 million front-line workers across the country.

the roman catholic diocese of rockville centre, new york -- an incorporated village on long island -- has filed for bankruptcy, citing financial pressure from clergy sex abuse lawsuits. more than 200 lawsuits have been filed against the diocese since 2019, after a state law extended the statute of limitations. eu leaders have agreed tompose sanctions in belarus. they are accused of falsifying presidential election results and cracking down on peaceful protesters. president schenker, -- president lukashenko is not on the sanctions list. in russia, a war of words between the kremlin and recovering oppition leader alexei navalny. moscow accusedhe politician of working with the cia, after navalny blamed president

vladimir putman -- vladimir putin for being behind his poisoning in august. navalny threatened to sue the kremlin's spokesman over the cia claim and demanded evidence. in hong kong, police arrested at least 60 people they say violated cornavirus rules and a new national security law that bans large protests. pro-democracy activists gathered downtown in opposition to a holiday marking the founding of communist china. police then detained and searched people in the street, as those in the crowd spoke out. roger: a lot of people want to voice out their demands peacefully. but due to the severe police brutality, lots of us feel like r personal safety are under threat. the so-called "peacefulness" is an illusion. stephanie: this ar's pro-democracy protests in hong kong have paled in comparison to last year's massive, near-daily demonstrations, on account of the pandemic and the security law enacted in june. the tokyo stock exchange ground to a halt today due to a

computer problems. no foul play was expected. it was the first time the world's third largest stock exchange experienced an all-day outage since it switched to its fully-electronic system in 1999. and, former president jimmy carter celebrated his 96th birthday today -- and another year as america's longest-living president. carter has largely withdrawn from public view during the pandemic. but he remains active in politics through the carter ceer in atlanta, which -- for the first time -- is monitoring a u.s. election after declaring the country as a "backsliding democracy." still to come on the "newshour," how to ensure a peaceful election despite recent comments by the president. why russian disinformation presented by the u.s. director of intelligence raises alarms. older americans hit the road in the face of trying times. and much more. ♪

>> this is the pbs newshour from washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. judy: in many ways, americans are now wading in unchartered waters, from the pandemic to a president refusing to commit to a peaceful transition of power if he were to lose the election. but despite his rhetoric, the president has a team that is cooperating on a potential transition alongside a team from the biden campaign. to tell us a little about the process, joining us is david marchick, the director of the center for presidential transition, a non-partisan group that helps candidates prepare for the next administration. david, thank you so much for talking with us. we do not know what is going to happen in november. it was going to win this election. but give us a sense of how

massive this transition processes. david: it is a huge undertaking. thank you for having me. basically, there are 78 days between election day and january 20. when a reelected president donald trump president joe biden has to put a government together, either for a first or second term, you outline the huge problems our country faces. covid. 26 million people applying for unemployment insurance last week. there is a huge racial crisis. and preparation for a transition today is critical for what happens on january 20. judy: give us a sense of what is going on. we know that there is office space provided in washington and federal offices for the biden team to occupy. what are some things that are happening right now? david: there are three key

players. the trump white house, just preparing for a second term, but also under the law, the presidential transition act, needs to prepare for a potential loss. there are federal agencies all across the government, hundreds and hundreds of people preparing for either eventuality. under the law, these are career officials preparing for whatever happens. and the biden has -- a strong team. they are working on personnel, policy, working with the agencies, they are getting ready to stand up a government on day one should they win. judy: and what is the sense of cooperation betweenhe trump administration and the biden one? how much real interaction is there? david: there is a lot of tough rhetoric, but behind the scenes, there are hundreds of career officials working on transition planning. they are meaning -- meeting all the milestones.

from six months before the election all the way up through election day and so far, every single one of those milestones has been hit. now we have a long way to go between now and january 20, and there is a lot of uncertainty. rhetoric is frankly unappealing. but hopefully, the rule of law will continue to prevail and people are working hard to prepare for whatever happens. judy: he said the rhetoric was unappealing. some people would say that it is remarkable that the president has on repeated occasions refused to commit to a peaceful transition. there is a group called the transition integrity project. we noticed that they have said recently tha it would take virtually a landslide based on the informatiothey are gathering for joe biden if he were to win in order for there not to be some sort of activity that they call street-level violence and political crisis. how much does that scenario

where you and the others were looking at this? david: the rhetoric is very unfortunate. the peaceful transition of power is one of the bed rocks of american democracy. since washington handed the keys to john adams, we have had a peaceful transition of power. no troops have been called. no arms have been raised. it is part of our cntry. we are a country based on the rule of law and there are institutions that have been and, that i do not believe they will be broken. i am confident that on january 20, the will of the american people, whatever happens, will be followed. judy: david, i know a lot of people are going to be reassured to know that the process is underway, even though very much behind the scenes. david marik, we thank you. david: thanks for having me. ♪

judy: now, from worries about a potential transition, to worries about the use, and possbile abuse, of intelligence and the levers of government by the trump administration. here's nick schifrin. nick: when president trump argued durg tuesday's debate he was the victim of a clint conspiracy -- >> you saw what happened today with hillary clinton, where it was a whole big con job. nick: he had new evidence released just hours before. a letter from director of national intelligence john ratcliffe declassified a russian assessment that hillary clinton planned to quote "stir up a scandal" in 2016 by tying candidate trump to russian hacking, even though ratcliffe admitted he "does not know the accuracy of this allegation." it was also cited yesterday by judiciary committee chairman and trump ally sen. lindsey graham. >> you've got a letter now from ratcliffe saying there was a, they intercepted information about an effort in july where hillary clinton approved an effort to link trump to russia, the mob.

nick: u.s. officials and former intelligence officials tell pbs newshour the fbi in 2016 considered it might be russian disinformation. it was rejected by special counsel robert mueller and the bipartisan senate intelligence committee. and ratcliffe released the letter, over the objection of career cia and nsa officials. democrats accused ratcliffe of politicizing intelligence. senate intelligence committee vice chairman mark warner released a statement, "it's very disturbing to me - thirty-five days before an election, the director of national intelligence would release unverified russian rumint [rumored intelligence]." ratcliffe said the information was not russian disinformation but "obtained" using "sensitive sources and methods." that led to criticism from house intelligence committee chairman adam schiff. >> to do that days or weeks before an election with a patently political purpose, and then reveal that this is based on very sensitive sources and

methods -- which means he has just compromised those sources and methods --it's inexcusable. nick: former senior intelligence officials accuse president trump of installing loyalists who release helpful intelligence, and withhold intelligence harmful to the president. last thursday alone, attorney general bill barr disclosed documents helpful to president trump's first national security adviser michael flynn, declassified information that cast doubt on the infamous 2016 dossier that tied trump to russia, and revealed the case of 9 discarded ballots in pennsylvania. which president trump used to doubt the election's fairness. >> they cheat. they found ballots in a wastepaper basket three days ago, and they all had the name military ballots. there were military. they all had the name trump on them. nick: in a july abc news interview, barr denied he was acting for political reasons. >> i'd like to hear some examples of people we've charged that they think were unrighteous cases to bring. and -- you know, i -- i haven't seen any specifics on that. nick: at the department of

homeland security, acting head of intelligence brian murphy came a whistleblower. he said he was pressured to suppress intelligence that would irritate the president, and alter reports to reflect the administration's policy. the department also withheld an intelligence bulletin warning of a russian scheme to disparage former vice president joe biden, to help the president's campaign. acting secretary chad wolf said it was withheld because it wasn't good enough. >> the report that you referenced was at the end of the day a very poorly written report. nick: for a deeper look at whether the trump administration is politicizing intelligence and the community that provides it, and a broader look at the state of american democracy, we turn to john mclaughlin. he served as acting director of the cia during the george w. bush administration and as the agency's deputy director. he's now at johns hopkins universi's school of advanced international studies. and larry diamond has written extensively about the decline of democracies the rise of authoritarainism. he served under the george w. bush administation, and is now a senior fellow at stanford university's hoover institution. we welcome you both back to the newshour.

john, let me start with you, what is your reaction to the letter that the director of national intelligence john ratcliffe released earlier this week? john: i have to say with regret that it strikes me as a very blatant example of politicizing intelligence for political purposes. i cannot think of another reason why the director would release declassified information at this time when in fact it has already been reviewed by the senate intelligence committee, republican chair and set aside as not worth very much. it serves nothing but a political purpose to serve the president, which is at the end of the day something a senior intelligence leader is not supposed to do in a democracy, particularly hours. nick: i just reported that the

agency rejected the release of this letter over concerns of revealing sources and methods after all. this is a russian assessment that the u.s. had to learn about that assessment. is that a concern that you share, the revealing of sources and methods? john: absolutely. i do not know with precise sources. -- source is. in the russian case, it is almost always sensitive. there is another danger here that is equally important i think. if you give hostile intelligee and invitation -- an invitation to deceive you in the future, when the mark of an authoritarian society is turning to information that will be pleasing to their political bosses, once the hostile intelligence service sees that that exists, they will feed you

information. that is another danger and signaling that you are this politically attuned when you are not supposed to be. this is the only part of the apparatus that is supposed to be mandated as completely nonpolitical in its view of the world. nick: just heard him use the word authoritarianism. talk about what you see in the letter sent by john ratcliffe, as well as the behavior by president trump and the allegations we just talked about with the politicization. larry: i think the most disturbing aspect of this is it is part of a long pattern dating back to the 2016 presidential election campaign. certainly, to the early days in president trump's presidency, of trying to demonize opponents, demonize the media as fake news

and enemies of the people and it's from analyze all agencies of the government to serve the personal, political purposes, and the personal glorification of the president of the united states, demanding loyalty from the fbi director james comey, trashing the current, highly respected, and fiercely nonpartisan director of the fbi as somehow not loyal to the president and not on top of the real national security facing the country. and i have to underscore, firing in the space of a few weeks of april and may, five different inspectors general of different departments and pieces of the government. the defense department, health and human services, transportation and the state department because they were pursuing investigations that

might have somehow embarrassed or questioned the behavior of the trumpet ministers and. -- trump administration. this is a pattern of misusing the executive power and transgressing the checks and balances in our government in order to defend and enlarged the political interest of the president of the united states. nick: if there was an official defending themselves and the president has said this, that those inspectors general who they've -- who he fired were not up to the job and the intelligence officials who have been fired were not up to the job. larry: i guess james mattis was not up to the job, master was not up to the job, general kelly was not up to the job, it seems that no one who does not slavishly submit to the personal political interests of donald trump and his infallibility is up to the job. nick: john, let me turn back to

you. how did the people in the intelligence community continue to be in touch with the way that the presiden and the administration are dealing with intelligence? john: i think we can have confidence that they are working professionals and they are doing their jobs as they's -- as they are supposed to. speaking truth to power as they should be. but they have to be discouraged when they see particularly the top leader of the intelligence community, john ratcliffe, actually doing something that to most people in the intelligence world would be transparently political. given that there mandate and that it is stressed and all of their training and professional ethics that this is not what they do. it seems to be true also in the case of dhs, the department of homeland security. i do not know all the details of the se and i am always is a tent to condemn people without knowing everything, but just on the surface, brian murphy was

told as alleged to not pass information to the white house on things like the interference of the russians or the whites of premises's groups. that is a -- white supremacist groups. that is something that you learn in the intelligence business. nick: how does that affect american democracy? judy: it is undermining -- john: it is undermining the rules and norms of our constitutional system. we have a very old constitution. it is not very specific about a lot of angst. it is not really adequate in a lot of ways in the age that we are in. but it has survived over 200 years because every previous president has respected informal norms of conduct of respect for

checks and balances and rule of law, and minimal standards of since he -- decency and respect for the crucial institutions of the rule of law, oversight, and the intelligence community in the national security apparatus and the military that need to be nonpolitical if our democracy is going to work well. the one president who most egregiously violated those before, richard nixon, of course was forced to resign. i think what we are seeing now is a more serious threat to the norms of our democracy, certainly in more sustained -- a more sustained one, than even what we saw in the waterte era with richard nixon. nick: thank you very much. judyjohn: thank you, nick. larry: thank you, nick.

♪ judy: this week, a number of major companies, including disney and american airlines, announced new layoffs. with big parts of the economy still hurting from the coronavirus, many are having to scale back, but some older americans were already living a minimalist lifestyle on the road. our economics correspondent paul solman has their story. it's part of our "making sense" series: "unfinished business." a note -- portions of this story were shot before the pandemic. >> this whole industry is exploding right now. >> i think with the combination of how things are right now, people are really wanting to jump into vans and busses and just alternative housing situations. >> these days the #vanlife business is booming. vroman's hired eight new workers, but still can't keep up. >> at last count, i think i had

something like 180 estimates to write, probably another 400 emails to return. and yesterday alone, we received 37 phone calls. i feel like i hopped on to a rocket ship and i have just been doing everything i can to hold on! >> the last half year of lost jobs has spurred a desire to escape cheap mobile living enables it. but lots of folks, many older, were on the road before the vanlife hashtag, inspired by this 65-year-old. >> wouldn't you like to be out here and see and live like this? >> when divorce left him unable to meet the rent in anchorage, alaska. >> i knew i could live comfortably in a van on 1400 a month because no house payment, no utility payments. i had solar. it worked really well. i enjoyed it. that was the amazing thing. >> enjoyed it so much in fact

that he created a website. and then a youtube channel to teach others to downsize and thrive on wheels. >> finding heat in your van is a really important issue for a lot of us. everything you need to stay clean is right here. the topic of today is poop. >> wells' videos, viewed over 80 million times, preach the simple life, especially appealing right now to those ages 55-70, some the million of whom have been shoved out of the workforce. >> 25% of americans don't have a penny saved towards retirement. so in 10 years, 5, 10, 20 years that 25% are going to be living on social security. and social security won't be enough for them to live on. >> every winter in quartzsite arizona wells' devotees convene at the "rtr" -- the "rubber tramp rendezvous," for seminars and community. >> i feel like a disciple. [laughter] >> you are moses and i am the

disciple. you're spreading the word. >> wells, a self-described introvert, is their celebrity guru. >> there's a lot of us here who are on social security, they're living on their social security. and their social security is anywhere from 600 to 1000 month. and so you can see they couldn't rent a home on that. but when they move into the van -- >> so, the topic of one rtr huddle: earning on the web. >> if you're not monetizing it, you're not making money through your website or social media then you're kinda missing out. >> inspired by wells' success, most people here seemed to have a youtube channel of their own. >> and where can we find you? >> youtube, instagram and facebook. >> i curl up, i stretch out this

target, kroger's, chico's, all -- >> she now lives on the road, hawks inspirational cards online, has posted hundreds of videos to her youtube channel. up to nearly 30,000 subscribers. >> more people are feeling stuck right now and taking a plan. >> how's your youtube channel doing in terms of income? >> it has exploded over the last couple months. i was averaging sick hundred dollars a month and i'm over two grand for this month. >> steve turtle gives his youtube followers the down and dirty on "workamping." working seasonal jobs while camping, that is.

>> i'm gonna show you how i clean toilets. >> that's how you clean a south carolina toilet right there! >> turtle's been hamming it up for over two years. >> youtube rewards you for //people watching your videos and the commercial. >> welcome, welcome, welcome. >> some people are living on $5 to $600 a month. if you are creative and how you are cooking. i am planning on becoming the anthony bourdain of van life. >> you can wash her hair -- >> but how many itinerants can support themselves on youtube earnings, like bob wells? >> for mosteople it is not realistic. >> i was somewhere around $150 a month.

and then in march, it sort of fell apart. there was just not a lot going on. >> turtle stopped live streaming when covid hit. he's back at it, but hasn't reached youtube's pay threshold. >> i don't think i'm going to try to survive off of youtube. >> but if you like bob wells, manage to go viral. >> you make 75 grand a year from youtube? more than 75,000 i take it. >> what do you do with the money? >> i give it away. what do i need money for? i live in a van. >> wells has started a nonprofit to provide homes on wheels for folks in need to lend a helping hand. >> i have been devastated in life. in 2011, i have two sons and one of my sons took his life. that is the only reaction

possible. there is nothing like it. it is just, how do you express it? every morning, you wake up and say "how can i be alive on a , planet on which he's not here?" and so the adequate answer is i have something to give. >> he gives. his followers received. carol meeks' youtube channel has grown since we met in the winter. >> just under 4400 subscribers. and i actually think that's been impacted because of covid, because so many people are looking for entertainment and engagement and they're doing it online. >> in january she was forming frieships with fellow nomads in the flesh. since the pandemic, virtual bonds. >> i have met so many people online and so many other people who have channels who are in this type of lifestyle, so i feel like i have that community. >> meeks, like so many older americans, seems to have found a

new tribe, on the road, online. for the pbs newshour, this is paul solman. ♪ judy: former secretary of state james baker's distinguished career and service to every republican president from gerald ford to george w. bush has elevated him to elder statesman status. hilife, career, and legacy are examined in a new book, "the man who ran washington" written by two veteran washington journalists susan glasser and peter baker. and they join me now. welcome to both of you. peter baker, we know you as the white house correspondent for the new york times. susan, we know you as a writer for the new yorker. in real life, you are married to each other. susan, tell us, how did you decide to write a book about

somebody who has not been -- held public office in almost 30 years? susan: i think jim baker is a unique figure of the last half-century. he is someone that combines the portfolio of karl rove and henry kissinger. he ran five presidential campaigns, was also the secretary of state when the cold war ended. and i see for peter and i, it was really an opportunity to write a big book about washington from the end of watergate, the end of the cold war, and how different it is from today and the gridlock and dysfunction very different from a time when baker was famous for getting things done. judy: peter, i think of the phrase born with a silver spoon in his mouth. jim baker came from a prominent wealthy family in houston, texas, a successful lawyer. he made the jump to government and politics, found out he was very good at it. what was the secret? what was his secret? why was he so good at it?

peter: there was an opening for people who wanted to make deals and jim baker was somebody who did that. i can't imagine i'm allowing a cauvin relief bill that we've -- covid relief bill that we've been seeing now languishing for months, going past so long, if he were here at this moment, we're like his moment. there would have been a deal by now because i think that he felt like he understood what the person on the other side of the table needed in order to get to a place where he would get what he wanted. he had to give something to the other side. today, zero sum politics compromise is seen as a dirty word. but jim baker sat down with the democrats and redid the social security system, sat down with democrats and read to the tax code, sat down the democrats, ended the contra war, basilly sat down, of course, with the soviets at the end of the cold war in a peaceful way and reunified germany. so basically, i think that baker was a part of an era and a class of of practitioners who understood that negotiation was about getting something done, not about scoring political points.

judy: and susan developed that a little i mean, here he he's described as the most successful secretary of state in generations. what was it? give us an example of what he did or how he did it that will help us understand what made it work. right now is the 30th anniversary, actually just this weekend of the reunification of germany. and i think going back and looking at that episode for the book, you realize how in hindsight it may seem like, of course, it was all going to rk out, but it was a shock when the berlin wall fell in november of 1989. nobody had a plan. nobody had a roadmap. and jim baker really was the one who not only came up with the plan and the framework under which you would bring in all those constituents from world war two who still were very skeptical, by the way, he had to convince the british and the french about german reunificatioafter having fought two world wars, not to mention the soviets, not to

mention working with the germans so that they felt that their fate was not being once again determined by outside forces. so this was an incredible piece of diplomacy. judy: and peter, it clearly, jim baker, known as somebody who was all about getting things done. what about the washington of today though? you write that he's very philosophically different from president trump. i've seen you quotg him as saying he he used the word crazy or nuts when he described president trump. and yet he told you he's voting for president trump. how does he square that? what -- what does he say about the washington of today versus the washington he worked in? per: well, he's very disenchanted with the way washington works that even preceded trump. he's very, very turned off by this kind of real -- this kind of leadership. no, trump is a disruptor.

acre is about -- baker is about bringing people together, about solving problems. he did tell us that he thought that trump was crazy and nuts. those are words he used and he did. he thought he might vote for joe biden and then a couple of months later said, no, don't say that. judy: as we're sitting here talking about this, this is a very different time. washington is defined by gridlock. do you think, jim -- but do you think anybody, jim baker or anybody else could get something done in this environment? susan: there are no adults left in the room. donald trump kick them all out. but this predates donald trump. and i think that the political incentives have changed to make things, don, and the permanent campaign, it's easier to make war, to mobilize your own side, to come out and fight and vote and be permanently angry at the other side. so a lot of the pressures now go

against the kind of big deals. but i will say this, you know, individuals matter very much. back in 1981, ronald reagan appointed sandra day o'connor to be the first woman on this -- on the supreme court. it was jim baker who really pushed him to do that. there were plenty of people around ronald reagan who wanted a more conservative figure. they were violently against jim baker, actually physically blocked them from having a meeting with ronald reagan. so, you know, his instincts mattered and made a difference as well. and i think, obviously, sandra day o'connor's appointment was one of reagan's major accomplishments. so, you know, yes, jim baker might have made a difference. he -- he certainly did when it was his turn in the barrel. judy: i'm wondering, you know, we're hearing again from president trump that he doesn't he may not agree to a peaceful transfer of power if he's not reelected. i just wonder what a jim baker would say about that. peter: well, you know, i think he would be distressed by that. remember he worked for two

presidents who did peacefully, you know, surrender power to rivals who beat them in elections. jerry ford andeorge h.w. bush is a fundamental tenet of american democracy. and people like baker and his generation respected that fact. i think basically everybody of both parties have respected that up until now. and it's hard to imagine that we are in this position now where that's even on the table. i think he would find that very distressing, that baker was about order he was about , institutions use, about norms, about standards, and about that, you know, the way government should operate, not just a constant battle for power. judy: and, susan, he was involved, integrally involved in 2000 election recount. george w. bush at that moment asked him to come on board and help him lead his team as he contested the election. it does make it make you wonder what jim baker is thinking about, what's going on right now. susan: well, what he is a canny, canny tactician. when it was clear that florida was too close to call and there

was going to be this -- baker got on the plane, ended up in florida. democrats sa they knew it was over as soon as bar got there, that he was such a formidable opponent. but remember, both bush and al gore were prepared to accept the results of the process. they were not trying to undermine the system, but quite the opposite. and in the end, it was the u.s. supreme court that made that decision. judy: susan glasser, peter we thank you so much. the book is the man who ran washington the life and times of james a. baker the third. thank -- thank you very much. it is such a great book. peter: thank you, judy. really appreciate it. judy: there's been much discussion and analysis of tuesday's debate, mostly focused on the presiden's behavior.

we take a deeper look now to ask: does the lack of real debate and civil discourse speak to something larger in american society? jeffrey brown talks with two distinguished political scientists for our ongoing arts and culture coverage, canvas. thanks, judy. i am joined by danielle allen, widely-published author on democracy from ancient greece to today, and director of the safra center for ethics at harvard university. and pete peterson, who writes and speaks on public engagement, and is dean of the pepperdine university school of public policy. welcome to both of you. danielle, we have watched the president shatter yet another one. you have studied and watched debates through history. the language of debates. what did you see the other night? danielle: thanks so much for having me.

i saw someone who has no interest in rules. the president was -- absolutely insisted on using force to power through the rules and make the debate unproductive. jeffrey: pete, what was your take? pete: he did not really prepare for this debate as he felt like he did usually a press conferences, which obviously were very combative in the way that he them. he stepped into a debate that was meant to be an exchange of ideas and attempted to dominate. jeffrey: i want to broaden and out to the rules of our society, to put it into context. i want to read a quote to you from one report about the debate. for many, a hallmark of thriving american democracy, the presidential debate was instead transformed into an emblem of

micro see's deterioration. the question i wanted to ask you -- an emblem of democracy's interior ration. how much does public language matter? danielle: democracy depends on language. it is the instrument of self-government. the quality of our language matters immensely. one of the issues is truth. to think that a conversation, the practice of taking turns and so forth, once upon a time that was something that was proper immensely in the educational system. it has really fallen away. jeffrey: what do you see in the culture of the way that we talk to each other or do not talk to each other today? pete: i think in many ways that we see a broader political culture that really does not stand for disagreement and debate or persuasion. all of these skills we have known since our founding.

the importance of deliberation and persuasion in settling disagreements. and coming to important issues has always been a part of the american system of government and what we have seen over the last few years has been exemplified over the debate stage. it was not just what happened in one particular debate. it demonstrated a broken political culture. jeffrey: danielle, it is a big question, but what caused it? what led to what when we see the other night? danielle: i think there are a number of causes. one is serious disinvestment in civic education in the country. currently, we spend about $54 per year on stem education, but only five cents per year on civic education. federal spending. that is an indication of our priorities. they have significant lee --

significantly rejected. civic courses were once -- that quantity has retracted. there is less opportunity for young people to practe these skills. that is one important element. we also do have to point to the economic system and we have made the transition in the last gate and a half from being -- last decade and a half from being a reading culture to being an oral culture. argument works differently and in oral culture and we have not built up healthy norms for argument in a truly oral, sound biting culture. jeffrey: i think you are both referring to the political tribalism which pervades so much of our political culture. pete: i agree. i would say one of the initiatives that we have here is exploring the issue of loneliness. something that we see now across disciplines, whether it is

economics or social psychology, increasing senses of loneliness, even before the social distancing that we have been forced go through here over the last six months. and it has been our view that the increasing loneliness and his connection from one another and from civic institutions, from churches to civil societies, has forced people to find their identity almost explicitly, if not completely, in politics. once we find our -- our identity completely in politics, that exacerbates these tribal tendencies that we see. we do not see these beating forces of identity -- mediating forces of identity that we always had access to an america from our church of faith organization to broader civil society, and with the withering of those connections, we as human beings lose that connection. we see a lot of emphasis being put on our political identities now.

jeffrey: danielle, do you see places where there is civil discourse going on? danile: one of my favorite examples is a program in kentucky called civic lex. they are using tools and technology to rebuild investigative journalism, filling a news desert. we have news deserts these days. they are also rebuilding spaces for people to come together and process that news about politics in the community. there is an important rule about these spaces. for every officeholder who is in the conversation, there will not be more than seven members of the general public. you are there to have conversations with real people at a scale that promotes connectedness that pete was referring to. jeffrey: pete, a last word from you. do you see spaces where there is real dialogue? pete: i am a great fan of what

used to be known as better angels. they use the concepts of marriage therapy to bring conversations from the left and right to not only better understand each other but to talk through very polarizing policy issues and to focus on things that are at the more local level, which is so important and in so many ways is disconnecting us from federal issues, to think about what is going on where we can find issues of agreement. jeffrey: some positive news at the end of our discussion. thank you both very much. danielle: thanks. pete: thank you. judy: so important for all of us to hear. and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. join us, online, and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you, please stay safe and see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs

newshour has been provided by -- >> architect. beekeeper. mentor. a raymondjames financial advisor taylor's advice to help you live your life. life well planned. >> consumer cellular. johnson & johnson. bnsf railway. the ford foundation, working with visionaries on the frontlines lines of social change worldwide. ♪ >> the alfred p sloan foundation, driven by the promise of great ideas. ♪ >> and with the ongog support of these institutions --

and friends of the newshour. this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs news station from viewers like you. thank you. ♪ this is pbs newshour west from w eta studios in washington and from our walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. ♪ >>

-i'm standing g here on a 535-million-year-old monolith.

it's called chimney rock. you can see, on a cleaday, 75 miles that way to charlotte, north carolina, and right down there along the hickory nut rge leads you to asheville, that cultured and eclectic north carolina hub. "100 days, drinks, dishes and destinations" is brought to you by... -with amawaterways, guests can climb, pedal, and journey beyond the beaten path while cruising on storied rivers across europe. you can find out more at amawaterways.com. -when i picture my dad, josh, i remember his hands -- strong. they were worn, stained. that was years of hard work as a lumberjack. his commitment, work ethic, values, that's what really inspired me to create josh cellars.