captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. on the "newshour" tonight: no deal in sight-- americans continue to feel the financial pain as congress and the white house grapple with the likely prospect of no covid relief for months. then, suing big tech-- the u.s. justice department brings an anti-trust lawsuit against google, alleging the tech giant abused its standing to stifle competitn at the expense of consumers. and, the cost of beef-- a shift to imported meat in american groceries as a result of the pandemic causes dire repercussions in nicaragua.

>> people are dying from violent land invasions. their lands taken away for cattle ranching, cattle which then turns into beef, which comes into united states. yes, people are being killed. >> woodruff: all that and more on tonight's pbs "newshour." >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> since our beginning, our business has been people, and their financial wellbeing. that mission gives us rpose, and a way forward. today, and always.

>> 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.

>> woodruff: a deadline is passing tonight in the push for new economic stimulus before election day. but, u.s. house speaker nancy pelosi says time has not run out-- yet. we turn to congressional correspondent lisa desjardins to explain what's been happening today. as of now, we know that speaker pelosi had been sayingt that tey needed a framework as of tonight in order to get this done by the election. >> that's right. they do not have that framework in place. they still have areas of disagreement. though speaker pelosi put out a message tonight saying they believe they have gotten closer. she and the main negotiate for the president, treasury secretary mnuchin, hadnother phone call tonight. might feel like deja vu to people, what was this deadline, why did we think there was a deadline. pelosi is session risaying they

need a deal within the next few days to pass relief by election day. they're trying to push it almost as far as they can. it looks like negotiators will return tomorrow. it remains a question about senate republicans and senate majority leader mitch mcconnell, the "the washington post" reports today told his republicans he does not think there should be a deal now that he does not have faith in pelosi. all of this as americans by and large agree on what they want. let's look at graphic today. this is a poll from the "new york times" and siena college, showed 72% of voters in their survey support a $2 trillion deal. that's about the middle point between the white house and pelosi right now. and let's look at the breakdown by party. 56%, a majority of people who identify as republicans, and 91% of democrats support that deal. so, judy, americans want stimulus now, but congress has not been able to figure out a deal with the white house.

>> woodruff: so the obvious question, lisa, is why, if you have almost three-quarters of the american people saying we want you to get this done, why are they not able to get it done? >> we spoke about the politics last night. that is a major factor in the election looming, but i want to talk about something else. these are two parties that are seeing and feeling very different effects of this coronavirus. let's look at where the virus has hit the hardest. in this first graphic, you see highest unemployment in this country has been in places like hawaii, nevada, the highest economic loss by g.d.p. hawaii, nevada, michigan. highest revenue loss for the states you see california, new jersey, new york. most but not all those states are led by democrats, and largely blue states. now let's look at the opposite. where are things going the best in this crisis relatively? you look at those states, where is unemployment the loest right now? north dakota, south dakota,

nebraska, iowa, missouri, also vermont. then where is the economy doing best? utah, arizona. lowest revenue loss, carolina, west virginia, red states. so you see a disparity in which states are being hit and that disparity is reflected in the capitol with democrats pushing for more sweeping aid, republicans reluctant to go that far. >> woodruff: pretty striking when you look at it from that point of view. but, lisa, you still, in every state, even in the states where things are going generally well, you still have people who are hurting and suffering, but that hasn't made a difference? >> no, because sometimes it's industry specific. let's look at one particular type of communities, communities of color. when people were asked if they have difficulty paying for usual expenses, you see who is having

the hardes hardest time? people of color, blacks, latinos. whites, not so much. so you see a disparity on that level as well. >> woodruff: i know you are following this closely and they are still talking to one another. we'll see where it goes. lisa desjardins, thank you. so we know the intended purpose >> woodruff: the intended purpose of any covid relief package is to ease the financial hardship of workers who've lost jobs in the shutdown, and at the same time, to put more money into the hands of consumers. what happens when that relief money disappears and who most feels the pain? we turn once again to david wessel, director of the hutchi center on fiscal and monetary policy at the brookings institution. so, david, welcome back to the "newshour". tell us what the overall projections are right now about what happens to the economy overall, if we don't see a sort of relief package in the

foreseeable future. >> well, the economy was fueled by the care cares act which pasn march. the third quarter will show a big increase in growth. but without stimulus, that's going to level off and we'll level off with far fewer people working than were working before the pandemic. a couple of my colleagues at brookings estimate that with a $2 trillion package is roughly where mnuchin and pelosi are talking, we could get back on the pre-pandemic growth path by the end of 2021 or early 2022. but without any more fiscal stimulus, they estimate that it could be several years, perhaps a decade, before we return to the pre-pandemic growth path. so this is really a moment where it really matters. >> woodruff: help us understand, david, what sectors of the economy -- we heard some of this from lisa in talking

about, you know, the states that are hurt more than others, but what sectors of the economy seem to be in the greatest need right now and which ones seem to be sort of coasting along? >> well, i think we know that industries that depend on personal services -- airlines, restaurants, hotels, resorts -- all those places are really suffering, and that makes this recession somewhat different than those in the past. used to be services held up well in a recession, but this time those are getting really hurt. there's also some really interesting disparities. people who are tracking this very closely say service industries that serve rich people are actually suffering more because those people are staying home not going to restaurants, where in lower-income neighborhoods where people are out and about perhaps because they have essential jobs, the businesses actually

have done somewhat better. it's interesting. >> woodruff: really, really interesting. david, what about other sectors? i mean, agriculture. we have a story coming up later tonight on the beef industry, but just in terms of manufacturing, what different kinds of manufacturing. the financial services industry, what do we see? >> actually, it's interesting. so, for instance, housing seems to be doing okay, mortgage rates are low. we've seen an increase in housing sales and new home construction. and mafacturing is depressed because the world economy is depressed. but in industries where people are able to go to work, manufacturing is doing better tha the service industries, and, of course, one place that has been hit hard and will be hit harder without aid is the state and local government sector. 13% of all americans work for state and local government. and their revenues are down because people are working less,

people are shopping less, people are driving less, people are taking the mass transit less, and although their revenues didn't get hit as hard this year as some people feared, looking ahead, it's going to get worse, and because states unlike the federal government can't borrow to cover the deficit, for the most part they have to have a balanced budget for operating budgets. without some federal aid, i think we'll see serious layoffs in the state opened local sector in months to come. >> woodruff: but in understanding why that's a tough argument sometimes to make politically, people hear the word "government" and maybe they're not so sympathetic to people who work in the government. but, i mean, remind us, these are firefighters, these are police officers, these are other folks, you know, who are essential to the functioning of our society. >> exactly. they run the prisons, in many cases they run the hospitals. local education is a huge employer. so that we will get less service

from our local government if they have to cut back,er and i don't think people really want that. they just don't see the connection yet between what's going on in washington and how it's going to affect them directly. >> woodruff: i'm asking you all this, david, because there does seem to be this disconnect. we see, we read about long lines for food banks, people, you know, who need help, who are really hurting, and then you just -- you see the paralysis in the congress, and people are asking, you know, why can't there a connection? >> well, it tells us there is a certain dysfunction in our political system where partisan politicians seem to be more worried about positions themselves on election day than doing what's needed. some republicans are worried about deficits and that's led them particularly in the senate to say that they don't want to do this. one of the things you have to

keep in mind is there's a lot of talk about this being a k-shaped economy, which means some are doing okay. people who make more than $60,000 a year, those jobs are almost completely back from the worst in spring. people who make 28,000, those jobs have not come back and many more of those jobs have evaporated. at the moment, i think some people are complacent. the cares a.c.t. provided a lot of use to the economy. it made the recession a lot less worse than it was and people are not quite seeing that. we're like wile e. coyote running off the cliff. the bottom is about to fall out unless we get more help. >> woodruff: so important to try towns what is underneath all this. david wessel, we thank you, as always, for joining us.

>> woodruff: in the day's other news: the c.d.c. issued a stronger recommendation for both passengers and employees to wear face masks on planes, trains and buses. the guidance is more specific than previous statements, and it comes as infections are surging again. all told, the u.s. has recorded 8.2 million confirmed infections and 220,000 deaths. the u.s. justice department today formally sued google for allegedly abusing its power in online search and advertisements. the lawsuit claims the search giant has effectively created a monopoly that harms competition and consumers. google called the suit "deeply flawed". we'll have a fl report, after the news summary. election day is now exactly two

weeks away, and president trump is back on the road tonight-- this time, in pennsylvania. earlier, in a tv interview, the president again warned again that a win by democrat joe biden would be a victory for the left- wing. >> the american dream, the great american dream versus being a socialist hellhole. they're gonna turn us into a socialist nation no different than venezuela and i'll tell you what it can happen. >> woodruff: on the democratic side: former vice president biden continued his preparation for thursday's final presidential debate. his running mate, senator kamala harris addressed a virtual event on early voting in wisconsin. she rejected the president's warnings and argued the democratic agenda is mainstream. >> we will invest in people who need help with healthcare and better schools and childcare. we will protect social security and medicare.

these are the things that we will do because we understand that iwe want to build up america's economy, we have to build up working people. >> woodruff: in another development: first lady melaa trump canceled plans to travel with the president tonight, for her first public appearance since falling ill with covid-19. her office said she has a lingering cough. the u.s. and russia are closer to extending their last major nuclear arms control agreement by one year. moscow said today it will accept a mutual freeze on the numbers of nuclear warheads. that would keep the so-called "new start" agreement alive, instead of letting it expire in february. the u.s. state department welcomed the news. we'll look at this, later in the program. onall street today: stocks made up a little of monday's losses. the dow jones industrial average gained 113 points to close at 28,308.

the nasdaq rose 37 points, and, the s&p 500 added 16. and, a nasa robotic spacecraft-- "osiris-rex"-- swooped down on an asteroid 200 million miles from earth tonight. as this animation shows, the goal was to grab a sample of rocks from asteroid bennu, then quickly lift off, and return the sample to earth by 2023. a japanese spacecraft is already headed back to earth with samples from another asteroid. still to come on the "newshour": going after google-- the justice department brings a major anti- trust lawsuit against the tech giant, the u.s. and russia near an agreement to extend a major nuclear arms control agreement, concerns remain over the security of american votes as election day approaches, plus, much more.

>> woodruff: the anti-trust suit brought against google by the justice department today marks the most significant challenge to a big tech companies in this country in decades. the federal government says the the federal government says the tech giant is abusing its power to block competition. amna nawaz fills in the details and looks at the prospects ahead. >> nawaz: judy, the justice department alleges that google uses its enormous advertising profits to pay phone manufacturers to make sure that google is the default search engine on your phone. this pattern, prosecutors say, has helped google capture almost 90% of the search engine market in the u.s. 11 state attorneys general-- all republican-- joined the federal lawsuit. google, which has a market value of more than $1 trillion, says

it is not using anti-competitive practices. to unpack this, i'm joined by dipayan ghosh. he heads the digital platfms & democracy project at the harvard kennedy school. he also worked at facebook, leading their efforts to address privacy and security issues at the company. dipayan ghosh, welcome back to the "newshour". let's talk about what the justice department is alleging. they say google is so dominant it abuses the dominance and is stifling competition. here's a line from the lawsuit. they say, in some google deprives rivals to have the quality necessary monopolies by foreclosing competition from rivals, they sagoogle is harming consumers and advertisers dipayan, how strong an argument is that when it comes to an antitrust case? >> it's difficult to say now but i think the justice department does have a case here, as do many of the regulators around the world. it's not a bad thing to have a monopoly, it is a bad thing,

though, to use illegal means to gain that monopoly status and get into that market position or to maintain your position as a monopoly using illegal means, and those illegal means are anticompetitive measures, anticompetitive measures in this case and other cases could mean kind of shutting off the opportunity for would-be rivals to compete with you. and i think that the justice department does have a case here in suggesting that google has shut off that opportunity, that channel for competition for would-be rivals by engaging in these commercial agreements with phone manufacturers, with telecommunications firms to make sure that google is the preferred search engine through all these channels. >> reporter: let me ask you what about google says in response, they say our services

are free, we don't force people to use them. they said this lawsuit would do nothing to help consumers. to the contrary, it would artificially prop up lower quality search alternatives, raise phone prices and make it harder for people to get the search services that they want to use. in response to that lawsuit, tie pan, what do you make of that defense from google? >> from google's perspective, this is a totally expected line of argument that, hey, you know, we're google, we have the most innovative engineers, we were the first major search engine on the market in the sense that we became most popular through our innovation. we developed the page rank algorithm, we hired all these tremendous computer scientists to develop our product, and this has happened over a course of the past two decades, not just over the past five years, and

the maintenance of this monopoly as the justice department has suggested. to that point, google might try to point to the fact that it doesn't actually charge its consumers any monetary price and, yes, it is, i think what the justice department would say to that, and rightly so, is that, well, you do charge a price, it just doesn't come in the form of money, it comes in the form of people's data and attention, and when you have a monopoly and you collect so much of that data and attention a ata potentially exploited rate, it actually affects the rest of society culturally, pritcally and economically. >> reporter: let me ask you about the timing. a scroll through president trump's twitter feed shows he's long had google in his sights. there's reporting this was pushed through before prosecutors wanted to move forward to it and a number of

attorneys general wanted not to join the lawsuit. is there concern there is political motivation behind this lawsuit? >> i think we have to acknowledge that possibility exists. as you just mentioned, the timing of this is highly suspect. we're two weeks away from the biggest election in the country, of course, in the world. we are just moments from hearing about -- hearing about what's going to happen in our national, political discourse, and donald trump and the justice department may well really wish to be able to point to their -- to the possibility of their holding techs' feet to the fire, partularly given trump himself has implied big tech has engaged

in anti-conservative bias and suppression of conservative voices and especially, as you mentioned, given the states and the political -- the politicians in those states that are kind of joining the justice department in pushing this, it does seem quite politically motivated along the themes of anti-conservative bias. >> reporter: a lot of questions around that and, of course, not e first time big tech has come under scrutiny. dipayan ghosh from harvard's kennedy school joining us tonight. thank you so much for your time. >> thank you, amna. >> woodruff: the u.s. and russia say they are close to a major agreement on arms control. the world's largest nuclear powers are discussing extending the last remaining nuclear treaty, currently scheduled to expire in february, and freezing

the total number of nuclear warheads. nick schifrin reports. >> reporter: ten years ago, the u.s. and russia signed new strategic arms reduction treat are or start which caps the number of u.s. and russian warheads deployed on long range systems intercontinental ballistic missile, submarine launched ballistic missiles and heavy bombers. it includes movement notifications and onite inspections. russia agreed to a one-year extension and separately to assume a political obligation to cap the total number of nuear warheads as the u.s. requested. but russia has not publicly agreed to u.s. demands for additional verification. joining me is marshall marshall, special presidential envoy for arms control, and the lead u.s. negotiators. marshall marshall -- marshall do you have an agreement on the one year cap on nuclear warheads

and a new start extension? >> we don't have an agreement yet but, certainly, given the fact that russia moved in the direction of the united states' proposal for this cap, it looks like the two sides are getting much, much closer together and i would say we're very, very close to a deal. >> reporter: the russian statement moves closer to where you have been, but it also suggests they will not agree on additional verification, that you have said is required to enforce a new warhead cap. so what is that additional verification you're asking for and has russia agreed to it? >> well, so that's one to have the areas we're going to really need to sit down to work together to finalize. russia has said that they will not agree to additional add-on measures, but i would simply say that verification is not an add-on when it comes to arms control. it's an intrinsic part, a fundamental part of any arms control deal, always has been. so, of coue, there's going to have to be effective

verification associated with this warhead freeze, this warhead cap, and we'll work with the russians to make sure it's a mutually agreeable solution, but that is something that we're certainly looking for and intend to have. >> reporter: to verify the cap, the aspects of that as you know have to include a stockpile declaration, you have to have additional monitoring and you have to have an agreement on what the warhead is, what you're actually counting. doesn't seem like you have any of that yet, so why do you think the russians will agree to this when you have actually accused them of cheating in previous agreements? >> well, you know, we've documented numerous russian violations of nearly every arms control agreement they have with us and with the world, which is precisely why verification is going to be so important. but let me also say that verification historically has been something that the russians also have wand, and the idea of verification is actually in the materials that the russians have proposed to us.

>> reporter: we have seen previous agreements that have had verification for many is also and those have existed for decades but we're talking about verification on warheads which are much smaller. do you believe russia will allow the u.s. to inspect to the point where you can find some warheads which some experts i'm talking to say can be quite difficult to see? >> they can. and that's one of the big challenges associated with this kind of approac and we do believe and i firmly believe based on working with our experts at the department of energy and the national weapons laboratories, that a mix of technology and procedural solutions are available, probably best applied outside the production complexes to make sure that we're not producing an exesive number of warheads compared to those that come in for dismantlement. >> reporter: would you agree to extend the separate new start treat by itself?

>> the national security advisors made clear that's a nonstarter and here's why, the new start treaty constraints 92% of the entire u.s. arsenal, of our deterrent. it only covers 45% or less of the russian arsenal, and the russians are building up, in all of these capabilities, these missiles and these theater-range, short-range nuclear weapons that are focused at n.a.t.o., and, of course, the new start treaty does nothing and covers not a single chinese warhead. >> reporter: it's only two weeks from election day and vice president biden has made it clear that if he wins he would extend new start for five years without any kind of warhead cap. is that reducing your leverage? >> no, not in the least. first of all, the president, by signaling his intention to pursue this historic approach and with the russians now agreeing in principle, that now sets the floor for future arms control discussions. so the biden camp would have to re-think their entire approach, were they to take office, but

they're also going to need to be exposed to the kinds of information that we have, particularly the alarming intelligence regarding the secretive chinese nuclear buildup. >> reporter: when you began these negotiations, you mentioned china a couple of times. you demanded china sign on to a multi-lateral agreement and you also demanded a significant increase of verification before extending new start. have you failed to achieve some of your initial goals? >> no. well, first of all, we have been consistent and very clear all along that the next treaty must be trilateral, it must include the chinese. by the way, the russians have said exactly the same thing or close to the same thing. the russians have said the next treaty must be multi-lateral and, of course, they would also include the british and french in their formulation. so we have been consistent on that front. we're not talking about a treaty at that stage. what we're talking about is a political agreement that we would then, over the coming year, move to translate into that treaty, and, by that point, we will expect the chinese to be

a participant in that process. >> reporter: mark billingslea, thank you very much. >> thank yu, nick, good to be with you. >> woodruff: two weeks out from election day, and the rus around voting in certain states are still being contesd, including a split decision yesterday from the u.s. supreme court. william brangham has more on the story. >> brangham: thanks, judy. yesterday, in a 4-to-4 split, the supreme court couldn't agree whether to stop pennsylvania-- a major swing state-- from counting mail-in ballots that arrive after election day, as long as they were postmarked november third or earlier. for more on this decision, and other looming cases, i'm joined by nate persily of stanford

university law school. he is the co-founder of the healthy elections project, which tracks coronavirus-related election litigation, and he joins me now. nate, very good to have you on the "newshour". let's talk initially about this pennsylvania ruling. the democrats in pennsylvania said because of the pandemic, we want to give a three-day grace period. so if a voter mails in their ballot, we should count that as legit if it's post marked before election day even if it gets here a little bit late. republicans said no. the supreme court couldn't decide so that the democrats' position stands. what do you make of this ruling? >> well,lso quite extraordinary that we have not only a decision this close to the election but a 4-4 decision from th u.s. supreme court in a high-profile election case. so it does raise the stakes for the current controversy and confmation process over amy coney barrett. but the decision itself, as you said, leaves in place what the pennsylvania supreme court said, which is that, because of the right to vote in the

pennsylvania constitution, they thought it proper to allow late arriving absentee ballots to count for the presidential and other elections. >> so as a signal both to pennsylvania voters, they now know they have these extra couple of days, is this also to be seen as a signal to other states that are also currently fighting over extensions of deadlines and all manner of election related matters? >> what this is is a signal to the state supreme courts in other states because what's at issue was the claim that the republicans made that the pennsylvania supreme court by sort of unilateraly extending the deadline was, in a sense, behaving like the legislature, and that violated the u.s. constitution. and the supreme court said, well -- it gave a mixed signal, but four justices said that the pennsyania supreme court's decision should probably be overruled. four said we're going to let it stand and, as a result of that tierks they let it stand. so other state supreme courts,

other state courts that are considering other similar kinds of changes to the election laws in their states now have a signal from the supreme court that at least as long as there are eight justices that those decisions should stand. >> reporter: this obviously shines a brighter light on pending arrival of justice coney barrett. is it assumed she'll side with the conservative in cases like this? what do we know about her jurisprudence about voting matters? >> i don't think we know which way for sure she would side but she generally considers herself a textualist, an originalist, looking at the constitution literally. so the prosings in the constitution whether as article two sections one says each stayed shall determine as the legislature thereof shall determine. so the idea is does the state legislature have kind of special power that even a state supreme court can't possibly modify. so that is what the more

conservative justices on the court believe and perhaps she would be in their camp. >> if the election count is drawn out, does that worry you? we've heard the president say if he's not declared the winner on election night, that is de facto evidence that there is fraud in this process. do you worry about sort of drawing out this process of counting all these ballots in pennsylvania and elsewhere? >> we need to understand that no election has been completely finalized on eleion night. we ha always had millions of ballots that have been outstanding. what makes this election different is that we could have as many as 50% of the ballots that are cast being cast by mail, that could be 75 to 80 million ballots that will be cast by mail. so we may have tot wait a little bit longer, but it's better to get the result right than fast. you are right, however, that the more that we are in limbo, the more conce that people will have that, you know, some candidate may declare premature victory or there may be allegations of frauds or

misdeeds in the absentee balloting process. so in a very thin-skinned political environment in which we're living now, that's the concern there will be a lot of conflict over those absentee ballots if it goes into overtime. >> reporter: so talk to the voters who are out there. millions have already voted. many are sitting on mail-in ballots wondering if they should do that or go in person. what would you council them to do to guarantee the safety that their vote gets counted? >> vote as soon as you can. i think that's the message everybody should be sending now which is don't wait till election day if you're going to vote in person. if you can vote in person early, please do so. if you vote by mail, make sure you send it in immediately so that you are not victim to, say, difficulties of the postal service delivering your ballot. also in some states you can track your ballot, so there's ballot tracking software that states have made available to see whether your vote has been

received. and then if there are mistakes in your ballot, if you live in one of the other states that gives you an opportunity to correct those mistakes, make sure to avail yourself of that. but the keyhing is to read the instructions on the ballot and mail it in early. >> reporter: nateersily, stanford university law school. we look to talking to you >> thank you very much. >> woodruff: as covid-19 slowed american meat production wholesalers and grocery stores have increasingly turned to foreign suppliers of beef, this reliance on beef imports is

a warning to viewers, this story contains some upsetting images of violence. nate halveson of reveal from the center of investigative reporting is our guide. >> that classic americ meal, >> reporter: that classic american meal, the hamburger, is increasingly arriving on ships. imports of frozen beef are up nearly 20% since the coronavirus pandemic began slowing u.s. meat production. and one country has led that surge of imported beef. nicaragua, that small central american country, has become the third largest supplier of frozen beef to the united states. its imports have reaed an all time high during the pandemic, doubling in just four years, according to u.s. import records i reviewed. but how this little country-- the size of mississippi-- exports all that beef, comes with a cost. >> the supply chain of beef from

nicaragua is anything but clean. >> reporter: anuradha mittal runs a nonprofit, the oakland institute, that investigates land thefts around the world. in a socially distanced interview, she described how she went to nicaragua after hearing that cattle ranchers are stealing land from indigenous communities. when you got there, what did you find? >> the indigenous populations are not just losing their lands. they're losing their livelihoods. they're losing their lives. >> reporter: in january, a group of armed cattle ranchers attacked an indigenous community in nicaragua, burning homes, and killing four men. an indigenous leader shared these cellphone images, that capture the destruction, and the funerals, in their community. >> people are dying from violent land invasions. their lands taken away for cattle ranching, cattle which then turns into beef, which comes into united ates. yes, people are being killed. >> reporter: the indigenous communities own these lands, under a landmark international

court ruling 19 years ago. yet, a recent united nations report reveals that despite the law, indigenous people are increasingly losing their lands, and their lives, to cattle ranchers. >> so this violence is escalating. >> reporr: lottie cunningham is a leader in the indiginous community. i asked her about the cattle invasions. >> that is going to cause us ethnocide. and as indigenous people, we are going to disappear. >> reporter: as beef exports have increased to the u.s., so have attacks on these small indigenous communities, resulting in whole villages, being decimated, and abandoned. >> in this year, we had more than 10 people in less than seven months murdered already. the settlers them shot with a gun. one girl of 14 years. >> reporter: why would sebody do that to her? >> to create fear. >> reporter: is it safe for you? >> no, it is not safe for me.

i have suffered death threats, i have suffered intimidation, harassment. but i have to continue this battle because my people is suffering. >> reporter: the nicaraguan government is legally obligated to protect the indigenous people fromand invasions. but cunningham and others say that instead, president daniel ortega's government is cutting ribbons for new slaughterhouses, which buy cattle raised on the stolen lands, and sell the beef, to their biggest customer, the united states. the nicaraguan ambassador, who i spoke to multiple times on the phone, declined to sit down for an interview, or address the deadly attacks by cattle ranchers. but senator mike rounds, who has been looking into imported beef, told me in a socially distanced interview, that most americans, don't even realize they're eating nicaraguan beef. >> american consumers don't have any inkling as to where their beef comes from today. >> reporter: that's because u.s.

beef importers are no longer required to disclose where their meat comes from, after a change in u.s. regulations four years ago. >> that's right. the chances are very good that it can contain product from other countries and that all it happened was it was brought here to the united states. and if they slice it up here, they can put a product of the united states sticker on it. >> reporter: senator rounds wants all beef to carry country of origin labeling again, and in october introduced the u.s. beef integrity act. >> if it comes from a country where you believe that there are human rights violations, if it comes from a country where you don't trust that theuality is being assured, then i think the consumer should have the ability to say, "wait a minute, i don't want to buy that." >> reporter: dozens of companies import beefrom nicaragua, thomas foods is one of the largest, importing beef from some of the same slaughterhouses that lottie cunningham said are buying cattle from the rancher attacking her community. thomas foods sells its imported grass fed and organic beef nationwide, to wal-mart, safeway, target, even, yale university.

on its website, it claims to track production, "every step of the way, literally from the farm to the table." but in nicaragua, that's not true. like other importers of nicaraguan beef, it buys from the slaughterhouses, not directly from the farmers, and has no way of ensuring where in nicaragua that beef comes from. well i'm here at thomas foods. the c.e.o., michael forrest, has not returned my phone calls or my emails, but i thought i'd give him one last try to see if we can sit down and hear about nicaraguan imports. yeah. michael, it's nate halverson with "reveal" and the pbs "newshour" giving you a call back. michael forest never called back. but i talked to company security guards, who helped tracked down a different executive. >> i'm john caidy. i'm the chief financial officer. >> reporter: i explained to john cassidy what i had read in public reports, the murder and violence, and how the nicaraguan slaughterhouses were sourcing beef from these stolen lands. >> if we were to find out that there was something that you just explained going on that would definitely impact our purchasing decision. >> reporter: who within your

company's job is it to make sure that that's not happening in the beef industry. >> i think that falls to all of us as executives. >> reporter: so if, if thomas foods knew that, that within nicaragua, the beef was being sourced from these regions where the indigenous people, the brown people, the black people are being murderednd their land taken from them, you guys would stop buying from nicaragua? >> i believe we would. yes. so we're not, you know, we're not out to exploit anyone. >> reporter: thomas foods emailed me a statement a few days later, saying they will continue to import from nicaragua, because their partners have "an agreement that commits to zero agricultural activity in protected areas." i asked for a copy of that agement, but thomas foods declined, saying they would have no further comment. >> if they're saying that there is actually actions being taken, they are lying. >> reporter: camilo de castro belli, a veteran nicaraguan journalist, said the indigenous communities and the cattle companies did discuss an agreement, but it fell apart. >> there is no agreement. the cattle industry has been basically worried about their

bottom line and they haven't taken any concrete action. >> reporter: de castro recently filmed these cattle being raised on the same indigenous lands that thomas foods said that agreement was supposed to protect. de castro said u.s. retailers need to take a closer look at their supply chains. >> they are being complicit with a system that is hurting people, which is killing people. >> reporter: i reached out to wal-mart, safeway and target. safeway's parent company said they bought beef from thomas foods this year because of the meat shortages. wal-mart declined to comment. and target denied selling beef from nicaragua, but when i sent details about thomas food's import records, the retailer declined further comment. i asked lottie cunningham what she would have americans do about nicaraguan beef. >> please don't buy it. that's the way-- that's the way they could contribute with us.

>> reporter: but american consumers can't make that choice, until they know where their beefomes from. and so for now, the cattle ranches in nicaragua are expanding, and the killings continue. for pbs "newshour," and "reveal," i'm nate halverson. >> woodruff: four of america's first five presidents were born and raised within a 60-mile radius in the state of virginia. those men-- george washington, thomas jefferson, james madison, and james monroe-- and their at times complicated relationship are the focus of lynne cheney's new book "the virginia dynasty". i spoke recently to the former second lady and she started by explaining why she chose to profile these men. was interested in how he's

in a relationship with the other three virginians helped shape his ideas, he helped shape theirs and, in the course of the early republic revolution, these men did amazing things. they, of course, established a republic. they proclaimed independence. they doubled the size of the nation. they made america a continental nation. so these are stories i think we'rei ignoring now and i hope i can help bring them back to the out, they grew up in a 60-mile radius of this in the state of virginia. >> exactly. it's quite an astonishing thing to see that much greatness emerge from a small backwater, which is essentially what virginia was in the eyes of the world. >> wdruff: you make them come to life by writing about not only their great talen what

they accomplished,ut also writing about their weaknesses and the disagreements that they had. how, despite all that, did they get done what they got done? >> you know, it's interesting that by being together, of course, they sharpened one another's wits. they brought others. they brought one another to higher and higher ideas. but their quarrels were also very productive. and i think that's a way of sharpening wits too. one of their quarrels, the quarrels of between three of them and washington, led to a complete break with washington, which i think people don't often realize. washington died a pretty lonely man, admired by millions, but with few friends. but out of that break came political parties. the idea that a loyal opposition was a good thing, that presidents shouldn't reign unhindered after their elected. >> woodruff: and it's there's so much interesting here to explore.

part of it, of course, is the contradictions. and you write about this. they own slaves, and yet they believed in equality. they believed in liberty. and i was reading at one point, you said virginia back in 1790 had a population of 516,000 freed people, but it had another 300,000 enslaved people. how were they able to both justify what they were doing, what they believed in, and then what they were doing in being slave owners? >> well, they lived in contradiction and they were fully aware of that. they believe that slavery, that holding slaves was immoral. jefferson called it a sin against god. but they could never find a way to achieve the complete emancipation, the justice required. at the same time, they also lived in this place where a new nation was being created.

and they lived in a time when the enlightenment made clear that people could improve their lot and they could approve improve the lots of others. jefferson, madison, monroe, washington were all committed to the idea of building a nation on the basis of enlightenment, ideas, liberty, justice, freedom. these were the ideas they used to build, even though in their own lives they contradicted that by holding people in bondage. one point i want to make is that the ideals that they envisaged and the ideals on which the country was based, have been praised by some pretty interesting people who saw them as mighty weapons against slavery. you know, abraham lincoln, who really didn't have much truck with jefferson, praised him for putting the idea of freedom at

the center of the declaration because he said freedom will keep us from ever falling backward into a non free state. these ideas were very powerful. the most powerful weapons against slavery one can imagine. >> woodruff: finally, lynne cheney, the growing number of questions out there on the part of many americans about when we're going to know the results of the election. for a number of reasons, the presidential election this year, you and your husband, vice president dick cheney, lived through the 2000 election, the vote recount settled by the supreme urt. what is your what words do you have for americans today who are wondering whether the results are going to be accepted, whether either side might challenge the result? what would you say? >> well, it's not the first time that the electoral process has frightened americans.

nor the first time that they fought about it. i immediately think of the election of 1800, which was tied between aaron burr andhomas jefferson. and before it was settled, there was talk of the people arming themselves in maryland and pennsylvania. we came through that i am sure will come through this, but we should always be vigilant to, to guard our liberty and, and our republic. >> woodruff: and so, to americans, you're saying because of what you saw in 2000 and earlier. >> well, the country has come through. that doesn't mean it will always come through, but it does mean that we should be maybe a little less panic stricken than we are, though. i don't mean to suggest at all that we shouldn't be vigilant. it's kind of a mixed message, judy, not a simple one. >> not a simple one for su. lynne cheney, thank you so much. the book is the virginia dynasty for presidents and the creation of the american nation. thank you. >> thank you, judy. thank you.

a pleasure. >> woodruff: and later tonight on pbs, the premiere of "froline's" "whose vote counts." teaming up with "u.s.a. today" and columbianvestigations, "new yorker" writer jelani cobb reports on allegations of voter disenfranchisement and how the pandemic could impact turnout in the fall election. that's whose vote counts, later tonight. >> woodruff: before we go, we wanted to let you know about a very important conversation online tonight. hosted by amna nawaz "teens, covid and coping," our student reporting labs teamed up with well beings a public media reporting initiative to explore how the pandemic, quarantine and remote learning,re affecting adolescent mental health. here's a preview. >> i mean i've always struggled with my mental health, but it's been more prominent than ever. having to combine the negative

thoughts that clutter this space with the stress from classes is just the perfect mix for a disaster if i am being honest. >> i feel like i'm trapped within my own mind. no one can hear me. i feel like no one knows who i am. i don't like this feeling. >> freshman year is something that's always given me anxiety so not having a social life honestly isn't that horrible for a more introverted person such as myself. >> school and my home life is basically one and the same. i really miss when school would just end, and boom, you could come back home and chillax. >> while i'm trying to stay optimistic, i'm still anxious about what will happen next. i plan to go to school a few days a week for a hybrid learning situation, but things change so fast that i honestly don't know what will happen. >> you never really realized how long a day is until you go back to school again, and you are wearing a face mask, and you can barely talk to anyone and it's just you and your brain.

it's pretty rough. >> i struggle with anxiety and depression. and i do suffer with mental health issues. someone listening and having that love, support and encouragement to just help me along the way right now is appreciated. and i think that's what i want or sort of need right now. >> woodruff: tune in and join the conversaon, 8:00 p.m. eastern tonight. visit wellbeings.org and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. join us online and ain 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: >> when the rld gets complicated, a lot goes through your mind. with fidelity wealth management, a dedicated advisor can tailor advice and recommendations to

your life. that's fidelity wealth management. >> fidelity wealth management. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. hello, everyone.

welcome to amanpour & company. here's what's coming you. out of control as europe and the united states are in the grip of a vicious second wave. we look back at what the trump administration did with one of america's most important officials. then, thousands march for freedom in france as they commemorate a slain teacher. echoes of the charlie hebdo massacre. and i speak about tolerance and how to fight extremism. >> there's no