captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. on the newshour tonight: the defense's turn. former president trump's team makes its case for acquitting him, saying he does not bear responsibility for provoking an assault on the capitol. then, a personal account. for the first time, senator patty murray discusses hidg from the violent mob that was inches away when rioters stormed the capitol. >> i've had a hard time talking about this because i don't want those people to ever feel that they had instilled fear in me th kept me from doing what i needed to do.

>> woodruff: plus, the future of digital freedom-- the impact of trump administration cuts to a key anti-censorship agency raise concerns about u.s. support for activists abroad. and, it's friday. david brooks and jonathan capehart consider the second trump impeachment trial, and the changing federal response to the pandemic. all that and more, on tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ ♪

moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> fidelity wealth management. >> consumer cellular. >> johnson & johnson. >> the john s. and james l. knight foundation. fostering informed and engaged communities. more at kf.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: and friends of the newshour. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for

public broadcasting. and by contributns to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> woodruff: the defense has now rested in the senate impeachment trial of former president trump. his lawyers took less than three hours, arguing his cause on factual, first amendment and constitutional grounds. congressional correspondent lisa desjardins reports. >> desjardins: with 16 hours on the clock for their turn to make their case, lawyers for former president donald trump felt his defense needed far less time. right away, they rejected the charge that mr. trump directly caused the deadly siege on the u.s. capitol last month. >> no thinking person could seriously believe that the president's january 6th speech on the ellipse was in any way an incitement to violence or

insurrection. the suggestion is patently absurd on its face. >> desjardins: it was a sharp rebuttal to presentations from democratic impeachment managers over the past two days that featured harrowing images of the chaos that day, and the words they say incited it. >> we're going to walk down to the capitol! >> take the capitol! >> take the capitol! >> desjardins: the defense team's michael van der veen dismissed democrats' approach as a partisan attempt to disparage the former president, and prevent him from runningor office again. >> to claim that the president in any way wished, desired, or encouraged lawless behavior is a preposterous and monstrous lie. >> desjardins: they sought to appeal to senators with legal arguments. they said mr. trump's remarks on january 6 represented freedom of speech, protected by the first amendment. >> if you don't fighlike hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.

this is dinary political rhetoric that is virtually indistinguishable from the language that has been used by people across the political spectrum for hundreds of years. you must reject this invitation to ignore the first amendment. it is anti-american and would set a dangerous precedent forever. >> desjardins: the attorneys said none of mr. trump's words were intended to be a call to arms, and that insurrectionists acted out of their own accord. >> the fact that the attacks were apparently premeditated-- as alleged by the house managers-- demonstrates the ludicrousness of the incitement allegation against the president. you can't incite what was already going to happen.

>> we have come to demand... >> desjardins: they accused democrats of cherry-picking mr. trump's words, and deliberately overlooking a message to supporters to march to the capitol non-violently. >> i know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. >> they know it doesn't meet the standard for incitement, so they edited it down. >> desjardins: with a video reel of their own, the defense argued the formerresident's incendiary words were no different from that of some democrats. >> please, get up in the face of some congress-people. i want to tell you, gorsuch, i want to tell you, kavanaugh: you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. >> desjardins: another reel, running nearly ten minutes, featured a montage of democrats, including many of the senators watching, using the word "fight," just as mr. trump did the day of the capitol assault.

>> this is the fight of our lives! >> every single one of you, and every one of you. that's okay! you didn't do anything wrong, it's a word people use, but please stop the hypocrisy. >> desjardins: defense lawyer david schoen spoke to democrats in the room, including senator chris coons of delaware, but they rejected the comparison: >> most of us who were quoted as having used the word, we were talking about fighting for health care, or fighting for cleaner air, or fighting for better schools-- not fighting to interrupt the certification of the presidential election. >> desjardins: the defense team also returned to a familiar attack on the constitutionality of the trial itself, arguing the senate holds no jurisdiction to try a former president. >> this would transform the solemn impeachment process into a mechanism for asserting congressional control over which private citizens are and are not

allowed to run for president. it is constitutional cancel culture. >> desjardins: the senate, sitting as the jury, already dealt with that issue through a vote. a majority of senators agreed the trial should move forward. ultimately, the trump defense rested their case in significantly less time than prosecutors took, confident their arguments had resonated and thathey had the votes to acquit from senators, who followed up with questions for both sides. >> senator warnock, has a question. >> desjardins: a conviction would reire support from at least 17 republicans, and has been unlikely from the start. a final vote could come as early as tomorrow. >> woodruff: and lisa joins us now from the capitol, along with our white house correspondent, yamiche alcindor. so, yamiche, you have been tracking the defense very closely. give us the core of the argument they made today and where they feel this trial stands.

>> reporter: well, former president trump's defense attorneys feel very confident that he will be acquitted, and one trump advisor told me just a few minutes ago, if they had said nothing in the senate chamber, they still feel like president trump would have been acquitted and that's because they believe there aren't just 17 republican senators not willing to go against president trump but the voters, many of whom are trump supporters. that said, the defense did put on a short presentation and focused on saying president trump was the real victim here, that he was being trgeted politically because of his power saying this was a witch hunt, saying there was constitutional cancel culture happening here, in some ways echoing the president's own words. they didn't try to lit gait the 2020 election. of course, president trump still falsely saying he won the election. a few minutes ago, an attorney for the president also would not admit he lost the election.

so that tell us what's going on there. the trump lawyers put out a very long video of democrats and reporters, media personalities talking about fighting, talking about using the same words that now of course president trump is being criticized for using, and in that chamber, in the senate chamber, there was really two sides of kind of reactions. there was the laughter from democrats who didn't take it seriously, thought it was a false equivalency, and then i sw republican senators laughing, essentially saying, yes, democrats are being hypocritical. a few minutes ago, representative stacey plaskett, house impeachment manager pointed out the video featured a lot of black women and people of color, quoting the civil rights activist fannie lou hamer saying i'm sick and tired of being sick and tired, saying this trial is about who we want to be as a country and even if president trump is acquitted it still begs the question of

whether or not we as a country want white supremacy and systemic racism to continue. >> woodruff: and yamiche, you were telling us there is a dispute between the defense team and house managers over security video that was shown this week. tell us about that. >> reporter: that's right. the trump attorneys are making the case that new video evidence that was shown during this trial, the security camera footage showing vice president pence running from the crowd, being evacuated and a number of other lawmakers running for their lives, but that was not video evidence that they had gotten ahead of the trial. they said that was the first time they ever saw it when in fact a senior democratic aide said that was not true, that david schoen was not telling the truth. they said all the evidence including the video was given to the trump defense attorneys as per trial rules. so that's a big, big argument going on with democrats essentially saying that president trump's lawyers are

not telling the truth. >> woodruff: and to you, lisa, we know that the trial is now in the question phase where senators can pose questions to each side. tell us where that stands. what's coming out of this part of the trial? >> reporter: that's ongoing as we speak. so far some two doz questions by the 100 members of the senate taking turns. they're asking very straightfoard questions, some include asking the president's defense team what exactly was the president doing, what did he know about what was happening at the capitol as it was unfolding, as he s tweeting out thing about vice president pence, did he understand that vice president pence had been evacuated, an important question from the senator from louisiana said what we know about the president is he did not care vice president pence was in danger. the defense team has taken the approach to answer all these questions to say we don't know what the president was doing because democrats have is not

investigated this case. the question from senator cassidy, they even said his premise is false and rejected the ideahat president trump knew what was going on with vice president pence. i'm curious if that will backfire, if democrats keep pounding away at that saying it is up to you to tell us what the president was doing, you had the ability to have him speak in his own defense. if not, we have to assume that he was not, in fact, trying to protect the u.s. capitol. so some really interesting questions here, and i'm particularly interested in jrt cassidy to see how he votes in the end. he's indicated he is still open possibly to a conviction, but we'll have to see how that goes. >> woodruff: lisa dejardins, yamiche alcindor, thank you both. we understand the questions are wrapping up tomorrow. tomorrow they go to closing statements and we may well get a vote on this impeachment trial.

thank you both. >> woodruff: and meantime, as we reported, the impeachment trial this week has revealed a number of new, chilling details of the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol. and today, we've learned even more. for the first time, senator patty murray from washington ste and the highest ranking female democrat in the senate, is speaking publicly about the terror she experienced that day while hiding, just inches from the violent mob who she says were looking to "kill." we spoke this morning, before the defense team presented their case. senator, i know this is very personal for you becauseou were close to where the rioters ended up being in the capitol. take us back top that day -- to that day and tell us what happened. >> well, i came to the capitol that day, as i do every day, and it was fairly loud outside. i had heard the president speak, and i was very aware that this

crowd was pretty, you know, negative. and, so, i texted my family and said, i'm on my way, i'll let you know when i get safely to the capitol. i did. i texted them. i said, i'm in my office, i'm safe. that turned out to not be true. i was there because i was going to be one of the first speakers on one to have the first challenges, and i was preparing myself in an office very close to the senate floor, when, all of a sudden, i saw -- i could see out the window the people who were protesting were no longer protesting. they were breaking through. they were angry. they were yelling. they were loud. and i still felt, well, i'm in the capitol, i'm safe, because that's what we feel. and it wasn't long before i -- i heard explosions, i heard yelling, and all of a sudden,

they were in the hallway outside my door. i was inches away along with my husband who was with me at the time, and we were really frightened. we were hearing the announcements to stay locked down. we heard loud explosions. my husband yelled at me to get down. we were lying on the floor, and all of a sudden they were in the hall, they were yelling, they were yelling that they had breached the castle, they were yelling "kill the infidels," and we heard somebody saying, "we saw them, they're in one of these rooms." and they were pounding on our door and trying to open it, and my husband sat with his foot against the door, praying that it would not brak in. i was not safe.

it was an horrific feeling, and it lasted for a long time. >> woodruff: it had to be incredibly frightening. senator, how close do you think they came to breaking down the door? >> well, what i remember most vividly is that the door -- i didn't know if the door was locked. i go in and out of it and i couldn't remember if i locked it. and i was just -- and we had to be quiet, we didn't want them to know we were in there, where we were. and i was just looking at my husband, and we were just eye contact, we could see each other's eyes, please let this door be locked. and this vision of my husband just putting his foot against the door like he might be able to hold down this incredibly loud, angry, even jubilant mob outside our door was just beyond belief, and the terror i saw in his eyes was something i have not seen, and we have been

married for almost 49 years. >> reporter: do you remember any of the things that they were saying or yelling when they were outside your office? >> absolutely. they were yelling that they had breached the castle, they breached the capitol. they were yelling freedom, freedom, freedom. they were yelling, kill the infidels. i remember somebody sayin get me the map, i need the map. it sounded like they were talking on walkie-talkies or phones. i think it was walkie-talkies, to somebody else, and getting directions. so they knew what they were looking for. and by the way, they didn't know it was me, i don't think. it could have been anyone, it could have been any member of congress. i don't think it mattered whether we were republican or democrat, woman on man, they were in there to kill the infidels, as they were saying. and, you know, that is just an overwhelming thought to me,

today, now, as i sit and listen in this trial, that what they were trying to do was to kill someone, not all of them for sure, but that was some of them, enough of them. they wanted to take over our country, take over all of us, using brute force. >> woodruff: senator, why do you think they eventually left? who do you think thank for the fact that they didn't break through, that they didn't get -- >> they wanted to. i mean, it was every intention them. you could hear it in their commands, you could hear it in their words. i was in there well over an hour under this. i was trying to text with my staff, what should we do? and i looked down and my phone was running ought of power because i had been trying to text my family. i wanted them to know all of a sudden what was going on, i was trying to text my staff, i was

trying to get help. and i crawled over to where the phone was on my desk, and the power had been cut. there were just so many moments like that that it's hard to even talk about. i'm, one point, my staff, i believed, or i heard it on a monitor, hard to remember, said put on your gas masks, and we could hear something going on throughout the capitol. i'm, like, where are the masks? i have been here forever. i haven't used mine or known where it was since nine eleven. and i didn't remember where it ws. i'm crawling across the floor, trying to find a gas mask. that kind of fear is horrible. i was in the capitol on 9/11, one of the few senators that was. i was in an office looking out across the mall towards the pentagon. we had known that the new york towers had been hit, we were talking about it, and then all of a sudden, the window i was looking out of, i could see the smoke rising from the pentagon.

officers raced in and told us to get out of there as fast as we could, and later we learned that, but for some very brave people in a plane over pennsylvania, we would have been hit. that's the only other time in my whole time here that i ever felt i was not safe in the capitol, until january 6. and what happened on 9 9/11 is e urgency, the compassion, the sense of responsibility that members across the aisle worked with to go after terrorism is not here today, and to me that's really sad. and i feel less safe now because there is not a bipartisan action on the part of ngress to say this is wrong. i've had a hard time talking about this because i don't want those people to ever feel that they had instilled fear in me that kept me from doing what i needed to do, and, today when i

see some members of congress wanting to dismiss this or wanting to say "put it in the pa" or move on, they're being instilled by fear and that the what's motivating them. we cannot allow that to be what runs our country. we have to be a country that runs by strength, not by fear, and, you know, i don't want to talk about this because i don't want to show my fear, but you show your fear, you show your fear is overcome by strength, by speaking out and speaking against what happened in the capitol. that's what i want for my country, that's what i want for my grandkids. i want a country that uses words and voices, that speaks out against this kind of brute force, that does not allow it to be what runs our democracy. >> woodruff: and, senator, when you say your colleagues who

vote not to convict, who say they don't think the president should be held responsible by conviction, what are you saying to them? >> i would say directly to them, do not let fear be what makes us do the right thing in the country, for the future of our country and our democracy, whether fear of that brute power or it's fear of a constituency that's loud or the fear of a president who is loud. speak up for our democracy now, or you may lose it forever. >> woodruff: and, senator, why are you speaking about this today? >> because i realize, as i listened yesterday to the house managers and they talked about the senators being 58 steps away, that i was inches away, and i heard and saw what many of them didn't hear until the last

few days, and i realized that it's important for me to tell people what happened to me and so many others. and i know the staff that was there, the capitol police, so many people lived through what i did, whose voices have not yet been heard. we need to speak up fo them. >> woodruff: senator, soon after january the 6th, you, by name, singled out senator ted cruz, senator josh hawley for their role in this. how do you view their role? do you think they bear responsibility, some responsibility for what happened, and whether you do or not, how do you see working with them as colleagues in the senate going forward? >> well, i view anyone who knew this crowd's motive and cited them and did not condemn them

should be held accountable, and i felt that the actions of ted cruz and josh hawley, in particular, did that. i don't know, it's going to be really hard. i work across the aisle all the time. i work with republican colleagues, i respect a lot, but i can't respect someone who tries to undermine our democracy by brute force. >> woodruff: and you believe they were part of inciting this insurrection? >> it was clear to me through the words they used, through the actions they used, through the incitement that they used, that they knew what this crowd was capable of and they didn't do anything to stop them. >> woodruff: do you think they should stay in the senate? should the senate take action against them? >> well, i think the senate is doing an inquiry into that, and i will respectfully wait for that inquiry to occur and follow the advice of the senators who follow through on that. >>oodruff: senator patty murray, i know everyone feels

for what you went through and i thank you for talking with us today and theiring your story. >> thank you, judy. >> woodruff: in the day's other news, the c.d.c. offered new guidance on re-opening schools during the pandemic. it found strong evidence that in-person classes can safely resume with protective measures. it also said that vaccinating teachers is not a prerequisite, but they should be given priority. this evening, president biden urged states to follow the c.d.c.'s guidance. the world health organization appealed for vigilance today, as new covid infections drop worldwide. they are down for the fourth week in a row. in geneva, the agency's head said that it is still vital to stay alert.

>> complacency is as dangerous as the virus itself. now is not the time for any country to relax measures, or for any individual to let down their guard. every life that is lost now is all the more tragic, as vaccines are beginning to be rolled out. >> woodruff: the u.s. death toll reached 480,000 today, even as daily increases in infections and deaths have declined. the united states will begin letting some 25,000 asylum seekers enter the country from mexico while their cases proceed. the biden administration announced the change from president trump's policy today. it takes effect next friday, involving three border crossings and a few hundred people a day. in myanmar, the general leading the new junta urged the public today to "join hands" with the

military, to achieve democracy. instead, thousands of protesters confronted police in pro-democracy demonstrations. they were the largest since the military coup nearly two weeks ago. the president of the tokyo olympic organizing committee has resigned. yoshiro mori had complained that women "talk too much" in meetings. mori itially refused to go, but he gave way today, under pressure from the public and from olympic sponsors. >> ( translated ): my inappropriate remarks caused turmoil. i'm sincerely sorry for causing troubles to many, including organizing committees and everyone involved in this. as it has been already reported, i will resign today. i have no intention to demean women. >> woodruff: the tokyo games are due to open in july, amid public opposition and the ongoing pandemic. back in this country, a white house press aide was

suspended for a week without pay for threatening a journalist. deputy press secretary t.j. ducklo reportedly confronted a female staffer at "politico" in sexist, profane terms. she had written about ducklo's relationship with another reporter who covered the biden campaign and transition. and on wall street, a modest advance put the three major indexes at record closes again. the dow jones industrial average gained 27 points to close at 31,458. the nasdaq rose 69 points, and the s&p 500 added 18 points. still to come on the newshour: cuts to an anti-censorship agency raise concerns about u.s. support for activists abroad. david brooks and jonathan capehart analyze the still- underway impeachment trial. and, we remember several more of the many remarkable lives lost to covid-19.

>> woodruff: today, a small, u.s. government-funded organization, the open technology fund, received money that was frozen last year. referred to as o.t.f., it advocates for internet freedom-- the kind of freedom that was cut off last week by the myanmar military, and restricted by governments including china-- which banned the bbc yesterday-- and iran. nick schifrin reports on how the battle over o.t.f.'s funding was a symbol of trump administration turmoil and how this small group wages a global war.

>> schifrin: in the 21st century war between activists and authoritarians, protestors try to avoid beatings, torture, and even death, with the digital shields of dmitri vitaliev. >> enable or empower these activists who were doing what i believe was important work. >> schifrin: vitaliev's work and mission? protect belarussian activists from government surveillance, and help them defeat internet censorship. >> schifrin: vitaliev's activism? born from his father's bvery. vitali vitaliev was a journalist forced to defect from russia after he criticized the government. they left in 1989, the year the berlin wall fell.

eastern europe coursed with a fever for freedom-- encouraged for decades by u.s. federal broadcaster, voice of america. >> "the courier," a ship without guns, goes into battle with the greatest weapon of all: truth. >> schifrin: v.o.a. promoted american ideals, by presenting objective news. >> citizens around the world are being tortured, imprisoned, and even killed for their online speech. >> schifrin: today, v.o.a.'s digital descendent is the open technology fund, that promotes american ideals by maintaining internet freedom. its budget, only $20 million; its staff only 11. but o.t.f. funded the technology that became signal, and signal's technology now powers facebook messenger, skype, and whatsapp, for more than two billion people. o.t.f. technology is on two- thirds of the world's phones. o.t.f. also funds vitaliev.

>> schifrin: but then, arrived, michael pack. >> i want to clear out the problems in the agency, both the mismanagement and the bias. >> schifrin: last year, pack became c.e.o. of the u.s. agency for global media, which oversees federal broadcasters including v.o.a., and funds agencies including o.t.f. he targeted the very government employees he led, pushed on by president trump. >> if you heard what's coming out of the voice of america, it's disgusting. >> schifrin: pack fired senior aides, editors, and entire boards of trustees. he kicked foreign journalists out of the country, and investigated journalists for being critical of president trump. he withheld o.t.f.'s congressionally-mandated budget, leaving his own soldiers on the battlefield, temporari defenseless. >> from one day to the next, we have to stop your funding. >> it's truly not clear to me what his motivations are, or who these actions benefit, other

than authoritarian regimes and enemies of internet freedom and freedom of expression around the world. >> sifrin: laura cunningham is the c.e.o. of the open technology fund. pack tried to fire her and the entire o.t.f. board, and the tried to effectively destroy o.t.f. by barring it from federal funding. >> removing support for o.t.f. and removing support for those technologies-- we are putting people who have risked their lives at even greater risk of being attacked and silenced by authoritarian regimes. >> schifrin: people like nima fatemi. >> i have had to distance myself from my family quite a bit to increase their safety. >> schifrin: fatemi is an iranian-born activist. the iranian government considers his work such a threat, it's not safe for him to tell his family back in iran what he does. his software, kandoo, is o.t.f.-funded, and protects iranian demonstrators. he watched during the 2009 green

revolution... and last year's protests, as iran shut down the internet and persecuted protestors for their digital communications. in 2012, blogger sattar beheshti criticized the regime. the cyber police unit arrested him. he died in custody. >> i think, like, secure communication is-- is the step zero of any change in-- in any society. >> schifrin: but he too, was cut off when pack cut off o.t.f.'s funding. >> schifrin: pack argues o.t.f. was mismanaged, and revitalized an alternate internet freedom organization. but his real motivation, according to a dozen interviews conducted by pbs newshour, might behis group: ♪ ♪ ♪ the falun gong opposes the chinese communist party. to circumvent beijing's great firewall, it funded technology called ultrasurf. it was backed by an unusual consortium of pack and trump

allies. o.t.f.'s predecessor declined to provide funding, and ultrasurf refused to submit to o.t.f. vetting. but in november, pack signed a contract to fund ultrasurf with up to $2 million. and a few days later, gave an on-camera interview to the falun gong-backed "epoch times." >> michael pack, such a pleasure to have you on american thought leaders. >> thank you for having me on. >> schifrin: but pack's era at u.s.a.g.m. is ending ignominiously. last month, in the space of three weeks, whistleblowers accused pack of propaganda, d.c.'s attorney general accused him of illegally funneling money, and then he resigned under pressure from the biden transition team. but the wounds he inflicted will take time to heal. >> we are seeing the chinese government and the russian government flooding markets with to monitor and co-opt the public and civil society. so, this is not just about

removing critical tools. it's also about strengthening the hand of our adversaries. >> schifrin: those adversaries are watching, trying to censor and control. campaiers urge the u.s. to continue the fight for internet freedom, so activists and not authoritarians, can hold the future in their hands. for the pbs newshour, i'm nick schifrin. >> woodruff: and at the end of another busy week in washington, from the senate's second impeachment trial of donald trump, to the biden administration's covid response, we turn now to the analysis of brooks and capehart. that is "new york times" columnist david brooks, and jonathan capehart, columnist for the "washington post." so good to see both of you this friday as always. let's start by talking about the thing that's consumed so much of our week, david, and that is the impeachment trial. looks as if it's almost over.

we've heard from the prosecution, the house, the managers, the defense. i guess the questn period is finished now. what do you make of it? >> well, last week on the program i was sort of pooh-poohing it. my head was very much in the covid relief bill and i was thinking let's get the impeachment done as fast as we can so we can work on what we need to work on. then i was struck how moved i was, how freshly i was angered, how much i learned, how much it grabbed the nation's attention. if all the impeachment did was bring us the patty murray interview it would have been worth it. so many moments where the reality of what our country is facing and faced very closely was brought to life, and any occasion to really lay out the internal threats to this country is a good thing. so i was gripped and i think the country was gripped.

>> woodruff: jonathan, what did you make of the last four days? >> well, unlike david, i long said that this senate impeachment trial had to happen, it needed to happen, if only to send a signal that you cannot incite an insurrection of the u.s. capitol and not face any kind of consequences. the very first day, when they were arguing over whether the trial itself was constitutional and the house impeachment managers played that, i believe it was an 11 or 13-minute video that took us back to that at a, to january 6th -- back to that day to january 6. i remember watching it live january 6 and being angry and hurt and sad about what was happening to my country. watching it again, i started to cry because, like david, i was taken back to that day, and to see it all put together over 13 minutes, some of the video being

footage i had never seen before and, really, the one piece was seeing -- we'd all seen the video of the police officer screaming in agony as he was being crushed in the doorway. what made me cry was seeing what was happening that made him scream, and i think i agree with david, the nation needed to see this. i think the nation eeds to see donald trump convicted, but, at a bare minimum, from this day, this week forward, donald trump's name can never be written about or said without anyone thinking about the horror that happened at the u.s. capitol on january 6th. >> woodruff: david, do you think the managers, the house managers made the link, that they proved their case, that the president incited this riot? >> i think they did. you know, i think they erred in

being prosecutorial and they did cherry pick in their video are. i think the republican defense was reasonably effective in showing how they picked parts to have the trump january 6 speech in where he said send people to the capitol but didn't show the part where he said do it peacefully. i think they ripped us, but it wasn't about january 6. if it was only a speech or january 6, it would not have been incitement, but as they said compellingly and persuasively, it was months and in some ways years. it was months of the stop the steal campaign that riled people up, brought them to washington, that sent people off in a direction that was clearly violent, so i do think they compellingly made the case. will republicans vote their way, enough of them? no, probably not. it would not shock me, though, i would say there's a 10% chance mitch mcconnell votes to convict. it would not completely if we had some unexpected conviction

votes. >> woodruff: jonathan, do you think the managers made their case? let's talk about the defense. they essentially just rejected the entire case. >> yes, i think the house impeachment managers, they made their case. they used all the time -- or not all the time, but six or so hours to methodically spell out, make the case, argue the case, intricately, videos, tweets, what have you, we all watched it. what i found disappointing is that donald trump's defense didn't even bother to go literally toe to toe with the house impeachment managers to spend the time it would take to argue an effective case. i wouldn't agree with their

case, but at least i would expect them to spend as much time as possible to argue the case to rebut the democrats and to do so in a serious way. you cannot do that in the two and a half hours that they use so argue in defense of donald trump. that's all they use. they had 16 hours, and only used a fraction of it. earlier, when i was talking to alex, our producer about this, i said, you know, donald trump was not well served, and you know where i stand on what i think should happen to him, but i don't think he was well served. he could have -- his team could have done a better job with the really flimsy defense that they had. >> woodruff: david, do you think the defense took the managers' case seriously? >> well, you go to trial with the evidence you've got, so i don't know if they had 16 hours of material.

first, in their defense, they think we shouldn't be having this because you can only throw out a president who's already sitting, so if that's going to be the core of their case, which really it is, then what's the point of arguing the rest of the case. but i don't think they have much. the video -- i thought they did an above average job of correcting the cherry picking, as i say. i don't think more could have been said. so i have trouble blaming them. there's just not a lot of evidence on their side. >> woodruff: and, jonathan, i mean, because it did come across as if they just dismissed it, and it was -- that it wasn't -- that it was as if the defense didn't even want to acknowledge that the managers' case was a case. >> well, and i hear you on that point because, yeah, maybe that was it -- they didn't take it seriously. but the one thing that did come through loud and clear to me and

that is perhaps maybe they didn't take the case seriously because their client doesn't take the case seriously. some of the language that was used by the attorneys took me back to some presidential rallies. we heard the phrase witch hunt within the first two to five minutes, a constitutional cancel culture, a lot of buzz words and things that you could hear coming out of donald trump's mouth, and, so, i started paying attention to donald trump's lawyers in the way that i used to pay attention to his officials and other people who were close to him because they -- when those officials were in the briefing room or press conferences, they were never really talking to us the american people, they were never really talking to the journalists in the room, they were talking to a then president of the united states who was watching television, watching them, critiquing them, and who

was prepared to rip into them if they did not say words and phrases that he wanted to hear come across the television, and that's what we saw today over two and a half hours at least in the defense team's trying to rebut the case of the house impeachment managers, and the same thing was happening during the q&a period as well. >> woodruff: and, david, what is donald trump's hold on the party, his supporters coming out of this trial? do you think it changes as a result? >> in my view, the party going into this episode was 50/50. 50 was they were primarily just republicans and 50 was primarily trumpers. as the weeks have gone by and this whole episode especially after january 6, republican party i.d. is plummeting, people are deregistering from the

party. the party approval rating has dropped to about 38%, which is now i think about 12 points lower than where the democrats are, and, so, it's clearly having an effect, and you saw nikki haley, the former u.n. ambassador, came out today with politico interview very strongly criticizing donald trump and saying he will not be part of the 2024 picture. she is no dummy, and i think she sees that he will not be the figure he was. he's not going to go away, clearly, but part of the party that's the trump part is going to be a shrinking part of the party. the question is does it have veto pow over everybody else, and that may remain the case, but it's clearly a shrinking part of the party and the party itself is shrinking. >> woodruff: and to the extent that's going on, jonathan, how much does that help or does it help joe biden, who's trying to gelt his administration underway, trying to get his arms around this vaccine distribution

crisis and everything else? >> i think, unfortunately, the nikki haley wing of the republican party doesn't seem to be sitting anywhere on capitol in any kind of numbers that would make it possible for those senators who are sitting as the jury to narrowly her lead. i think -- to follow her lead. i think it's important to see what senator mitch mcconnell does, as david said earlier. i do think, when it comes to president biden, what's been interesting this week, is seeing while at one side of pennsylvania -- of the capitol, in the senate they're doing the trial, but over in the house, the committees are doing the work of marking up president biden's $1.9 trillion covid relief bill and getting it ready to -- for debate and for passage and to head over to the senate, that's why they were working on the reconciliation process, to get that in place.

i think, you know, president biden has been about work. he is doing the work. he's been very good about not coming anywhere close to commenting at all substantively about what's happening with the sete impeachment trial. i think it is the right thing to do because, in the end, the american people want to know what are you doing to make sure that the eviction moratorium doesn't expire and that unemployment insurance doesn't expire? and if he were to be out there commenting politically about what's happening at the senate impeachment trial and ignoring the serious crisis facing the american people, he would face hell from the voters, and he would deserve it. but that's not what's happening. >> woodruff: and david, a little less than a minute, but how do you think joe biden is doing so far with regard to vaccines and everything else he's working on?

>> he's doing well, though i would say the people i speak to don't seem to know what they're talking about are a little more nervous these days about getting enough vaccines in the arms in time. i think the distribution problems are really haunting a lot of people. i think their supply is lower. i they're worried about the variations, obviously, but i think that has them the most worried is the public's unwillingness to take the vaccine, in some surveys 25 to 33% of americans say they will never take the vaccine and that never gets us to herd immunity. so the administration is doing as best they can, but there needs to be more information about the safety to have the vaccine. teachers can go back to school tomorrow and be safe with the right precautions but teachers are understandably worried, and their unions and their leaders and, frankly, the administration is not informing them of what we know scientifical to be true.

>> woodruff: a lot of worry about that. you're right, the vaccine is we have it but we don't have enough of it and we don't have it in enough arms and, as yu say, a lot of people still not willing to take it. david brooks, jonathan capehart, both of you stay safe. thank you very much. >> thank you, judy, you, too. >> woodruff: now, as we do every friday, we take a moment to share the stories of five extraordinary individuals who have fallen victim to covid-19 in this country. ♪ ♪ ♪ brandon mccray found a niche in music as a young boy, his brother said. he played the guitar, violin and bass, but was best known for his skills a gospel saxophonist. he taught music and recorded an album in the 1990s.

brandon was a devoted christian, his brother said, and played at many church events, including funerals, adding that the music had a way of encouraging families in their time of need. brandon was 52 years old. lorintha umtuch was an ambitis, driven woman, her daughter told us. she went back to school in her 40s and received a degree in political science. lorintha spent more than two decades as a tribal court judge on reservations around the west coast. she was the first woman from the yakama nation to serve as mayor of toppenish, a city in washington state. the 73-year-old was an active member of the baha'i faith and was passionate about teaching it to children, her daughter said. 78-year-old shabbir hamdani

loved to interact with people, his son told us, and that's exactly what he did for about 40 years as a cab driver. a native of india, he moved to england, then to the u.s., landing in the dals area in the 1980s. he was adventurous, gregarious and outgoing, his son said. for the last few years, shabbir was volunteering at the information booth at the dallas airport, where his son said he enjoyed answering travelers' questions. abel and aida busque came to the united states from the philippines in the 1970s and settled in detroit. they were pioneers and worked incredibly hard, their son told us-- abel in financial services, and aida as an ob/gyn nurse. their children often saw them as a single, complementary entity: abel was stricter and sometimes stern, aida was soft and giving, their son said. both 73 years old, the busques

died about a week apart, just months before their 50th wedding anniversary. it was a kind of "beautiful poetry," their son told us. "like they couldn't bear to be apart from each other." and we thank all the family members who shared these stories with us. our hearts go out to you, as they do to everyone who's lost a loved one in this pandemic. and a news update before we go: the senate unanimously voted has now to present capitol police officer eugene goodman with the congressional gold medal for his valor on january 6th. before the trial wrapped up for the evening, the full senate stood to recognize him with a standing ovation. and that is the newshour for now. watch our gavel-to-gavel coverage of the second impeachment trial of former

president trump starting again tomorrow. check your local station, and you can also find it online on our website and social channels. tune in to "washington week" here on pbs. jonathan karl of abc news is guest hosting this evening. i'm judy woodruff for all of us at the "pbs newshour" " i'm judy woodruff. for all of us at the pbs newshour, have a great weekend. thank you, and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> fidelity wealth management. >> consumer cellular. >> johnson & johnson. >> bnsf railway. >> the william and flora hewlett foundation. for more than 50 years, advancing ideas and supporting institutions to promote a better world. at www.hewlett.org.

>> supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the world's most pressing problems-- skollfoundation.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and friends of the newshour. >> ts program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs statn from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

hello, everyone, and welcome to "amanpour & company." here's what's coming up. a test of biden's foreign policy extricating the united states from the catastrophic saudi war inyemen. discussion with yemen's nobel peace prize winner and author robert worth. then -- a picture is worth a thousand words. impeachment managers bring startling new evidence to trump's senate trial. also ahead -- >> we're hungry, right? >> starving. >> a new series. actor stanley tucci's grand tour of italy. and -- >> this is exactly the kin of thing that