judy: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. on the newshou tonight. after the storms -- families and businesses begin picking up the pieces in the wake of devastating tornadoes that left scores dead, including several children. then. investigating the insurrection -- text messages from former president trump's chief of staff provide more insight into the january 6th attack on the capitol. and. casualties of war -- new details emerge about the widespread deaths and injuries caused by u.s. air strikes in afghanistan and syria. >> the fact that we've seen thousands of these strikes, and we see recurring problems, creates a questions about, ok, who really should be accountable? judy: all that and more on

tonight's pbs newshour. ♪ >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by -- >> pediatric surgeon, volunteer, topiary artist, a raymond james finaial advisor taylor's advice to help you live your life. life well planned. >> for 25 years, consumer cellular has been offering no contract plans to help people do more of what they like. our customer service team can help find the plan that fits you. >> johnson & johnson. bnsf railway. ♪ ♪

>> the john s and james l knight foundation. >> with the ongoing support of these institutions and individuals. ♪ this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you, thank you. judy: search teams, utility crews and property owners have spent another long day in the tornado wreckage that was strewn

across 5 states last weekend. the confirmed death toll remains at 88 -- most of them in western kentucky. william brangham is there, and begins our coverage again tonight. william: the power is still out in much of mayfield, kentucky. so volunteers fold the tide of clothing that has been donated to victims by candlelight. teresa rochetti-cantrell was the mayor of mayfield for many years and now works at this local charitable foundation. >> we are still wrapping our head around it. you know, you stand there -- i stood there last night where city hall was -- and i've been up there before. >> was? >> was, yeah. and i look across and thereâ™s such devastation, that you can't even picture what was there. but going forward, i can't honestly wrap my head around what the challenges are. william: elsewhere in mayfield, at the candle factory where at least 8 people died, several

factory employees told nbc news that they wanted to leave before the tornadoes arrived, but said supervisors threatened to fire them if they did. the owner of the factory, mayfield consumer products, said that was "absolutely untrue." kentucky governor andy beshear said today they'll get to the bottom of what happened. >> everybody's expected to live up to certain standards of both the law, of safety, and of being decent human beings. i hope everybody lived up to those standards. you can expect a state agency to be taking a look. william: meanwhile in illinois, osha -- the federal occupational safety and health administration -- is investigating the collapse of an amazon warehouse in edwardsville that killed six people. osha will look into whether workplace safety rules were followed. it will have six months to complete the investigation. president biden has now declared a federal disaster in that state, as well as tennessee.

back in mayfield -- >> this is the front door right here. >> where was your office? >> that corner right over there. william: local attorney chuck foster set up his law practice on this downtown corner 25 years ago. it's completely gone. he said a small army of people keep showing up, helping him clean up and sort through the wreckage. >> at one time we had 25 volunteers here moving stuff around here, cleaning stuff up. we had two or three groups come by and offer sandwiches and water. so, everybody chipped in and tried to help out. >> that's a beautiful thing. >> it is. kind of gives you a sense of pride and a sense of community, to see everybody pick up and try to help you out. people didn't even know -- i met a lot of people yesterday. for the first time. >> brand new friends. >> oh yeah. william: former mayor

rochetti-cantrell says the outpouring of love and support and donations are so appreciated, but she's worried about the deeper, long-term impacts. >> i think that's going to be huge. people who were down on their luck to start with. and then this. wrapping your head around what has happened. i think that's going to be a big deal. some of these people don't know how to do that and are incapable of doing that. william: all he paperwork, the bills, all the loans, the taxes, all that stuff. >> yeah. i predict suicides. i do. i hate to think that. there are just some people that can handle this. there are some people that just cannot mentally handle this. and i think we are going to be dealing with some of that in the coming days, months, years. william: as daunting as it may seem, the cleanup and rebuilding after this disaster may be the easy part. this deeper trauma that the former mayor is describing --

that could be a scar this tragedy will leave on this community for years to come. i'm william brangham in mayfield, kentucky. stephanie: i'm stephanie sy with newshour west, we'll return to the full program after the latest headlines. a new disaster has struck haiti. at least 60 people were killed and dozens injured late monday when a fuel truck overturned and exploded. it happened in the northern city of cap-haitien, burning cars and scorching buildings. the mayor toured the scene as daylight showed the extent of the destruction. >> i'm here to see the aftermath of last night's unfortunate event. i received many calls and sent the firefighters and police an alert so they could intervene. unfortunately many people died, we couldn't save them.

stephanie: haiti has already seen its president assassinated this year, and an earthquake that killed more than 2,200 people and destroyed thousands of homes. back in this country, the u.s. house of representatives moved to advance criminal contempt charges against former white house chief of staff mark meadows. he's refused to testifying about the assault on the u.s. capitol last january. the u.s. justice department will decide whether to prosecute meadows. we'll return to this, after the news summary. congress is also on the verge of raising the federal government's debt limit by $2.5 trillion. it passed the senate this afternoon, 50 to 49 -- with no republican support -- and went to the house of representatives. the u.s. treasury had set tomorrow as the deadline for action. as of tonight, the u.s. death toll from covid 19 has topped 800,000. 200,000 of those lives were lost after the vaccine became available a year ago.

5 million around the world have died of the virus. new data today suggests pfizer's covid vaccine is 70% effective in preventing hospitalizations from the omicron variant. findings from south africa also indicate the 2-dose vaccine is less effective at preventing omicron infections. meanwhile, the world health organization warned today that omicron is spreading faster than previous variants. >> surely we have learned by now that we underestimate this virus at our peril. even if omicron does cause less severe disease, the sheer number of cases could once again overwhelm unprepared health systems. stephanie: also today -- pfizer reported its experimental covid treatment pill works against omicron -- reducing severe symptoms in high-risk adults who become infected, by nearly 90 percent. a federal appeals court has

again rejected president biden's attempts to end a policy keeping asylum seekers in mexico. the latest ruling came monday night. a trump-era policy has required thousands of migrants to remain in mexico, until their u.s. asylum cases are resolved. there's new evidence that the arctic is getting hotter. the u.n. weather agency certified today that temperatures reached 100.4 degrees in siberia last year -- the highest ever recorded in the arctic. and, the u.s. national oceanic and atmospheric administration reported that growing ice melts are altering ecosystems. the mayor of san francisco london breed has announced plans to combat crime, including an emergency intervention plan to increase policing in the tenderloin district, which is plagued with criminal drug activity. she announced the initiatives after meeting with families affected by crime and said while the new proposals may draw criticism, the city is quote-- past the point where what we see is even remotely acceptable.

and tonight, a new nba record -- golden state warriors star guard steph curry now holds the league's career 3-point record. curry hit his 2,974th three against the new york knicks this evening, breaking the record set by ray allen in 2011. still to come on the newshour. new details on civilian casualties overseas wrought by u.s. airstrikes. political gridlock in washington hamstrings the diplomatic presence abroad. a food blogger turned social media celebrity mixes korean recipes with personal history. plus much more. >> this is "pbs newshour west" from weta studios in washington and from our bureau at the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. judy: as we reported earlier,

the u.s. house of representatives today took up a contempt of congress charge against mark meadows -- the former white house chief of staff. this comes after meadows defied a subpoena from the select committee investigating the january 6 attack on the capitol. lisa desjardins begins our coverage. lisa: on the house floor today, yet another rarity. >> just a handful of people who somehow think they are above the law. lisa: democratic congressman jamie raskin and other investigators argued for a contempt of congress charge for a second very high-profile trump advisor, mark meadows, the former chief of staff to president trump, who just two years ago was himself a house member. on january 6, as attackers smashed their way into the capitol, meadows was at the white house with trump, making him a pivotal hub of information.

now, he is a flashpoint over the push for his testimony and trump allies' insistence it is political. >> mark meadows has to testify. like 300 american citizens have patriotically unlawfully done. what makes them special? the fact that he knows a former president? i'm afraid not. >> the members of the january 6 commission have turned this body into a star chamber using the powers of congress to persecute and bankrupt their political opponents. lisa: the back-and-forth is colicated. meadows did turn over 6600 pages of emails and around 2000 text messages. notably, he also sent so-called privilege logs, enumerating hureds more documents which he claimed could not be shared because of separation of power. then he did not show up for a deposition last week. >> whatever legacy he thought he

left in the house, this is his legacy now. lisa: last night, the select committee also read some of the meadows texts out loud. >> donald trump, jr. texted, again and again, urging action by the president. we need an oval office address, he has to leave now, it has gone too far, and gotten out of hand. lisa: the committee wants to ask meadows about an email in which he wrote that on january 6, the national guard would protect pro-trump people. meadows responded last night to all of this on fox news. >> let's be clear about this, this is not about me holding me in contempt, it is not about making the capitol safer, this is about donald trump and actually going after him once again. lisa: meadows and trump are both suing the select committee over its requests.judges

have so-called ruled against trump. senate republican leader mitch mcconnell, who blocked a bipartisan commission, but has blasted trump for january 6, had notably open words. >> i do think we are all watching what is unfolding on the house side and it will be interesting to reveal all of the participants who were involved. lisa: all this as the attorney general for the district of columbia announced a lawsuit seeking civil fines for individuals and two groups, the proud boys and the oath keepers, for their roles in the capitol attack. judy: meadows' refusal to cooperate and the committee's recommendation to hold him in contempt of congress raise questions about executive privilege and about what information the committee is owed. for some answers, we turn to jonathan shaub. he is a professor at the university of kentucky college of law and a contributing editor at lawfare. he previously served in the office of legal counsel at the department of justice.

before i come to you, i want to clarify, i said the issue was taken up in the senate -- it was in the house. the house select committee, of course. let me ask you about mr. meadows. he is yet another witness who won't testify before this house select committee, but they have received documents, they have received some information. is the committee being stymied or are they making progress? >> i think they are being stymied with respect to the information that meadows has that maybe nobody else has about what was going on that day in the white house, what was president trump doing. meadows is probably one of the only sources from whom they could get that information. but they have a ton of other information. they revealed yesterday they had interviewed over 300 witnesses. they have a ton of documents,

including some from meadows himself. it seems like they will be able to piece together what happened or what was going on for the most part, but i do think there are probably certain pieces of information relating specifically to what was happening in the white house that they may not be able to get as long as meadows and others who may have that information continue to refuse to provide it. judy: when mark meadows' attorney talks about executive privilege referring to president trump, what exactly does that mean and how and where would it apply in a situation like this? >> executive privilege has a long history and it is generally the doctrine that the president has the authority to withhold information if the disclosure of that information would harm the public interest, that the president determines that. it is a power belonging to the president particularly invoked for private conversations, for national security information,

attorney-client information. so here we have a former president who is asserting it. the biden white house has said clearly there is no privilege claim here. the events of january 6 are extraordinary, the committee has a need for them, so we are not going to exert privilege. president trump has sued to contest that determination and so far he has lost in the d.c. circuit and he has a chance to appeal to the supreme court. generally, it is a presidential authority so it is hard to see why a former president would get to make a determination about what is in the public interest, as opposed to the president currently serving. judy: that is what we are trying to understand, whether this claim is going to hold up in court. >> well, so once you go to contempt, meadows will defend himself and his lawyer has already done this by saying that even if i'm incorrect about

privilege, i was operating in good faith. the committee really is no longer going to be able to get information from meadows. he is subject to criminal prosecution, but that one take place for potentially a year or several months, so it is unlikely that they will get meadows to cooperate once they have held him in contempt. i think they have basically said, we've got as much information, he has adopted the total defiance stance, so we will refer him to contempt of congress and use him as an example to other witnesses. judy: as you look at the big picture of what the select committee is trying to get, they are trying to get to the bottom of what happened, what is standing in their way mainly and what do you think is working in their favor? >> i think the fact that the department of justice moved forward with a prosecution of steve bannon shows that there are serious consequences to defying the committee's

subpoenas. if they indict mark meadows, that would be further evidence, because he was in the government. if he could be prosecuted, that will serve as an example to other government officials. i think they will probably be able to get a lot of information about the day and reconstruct what was happening going up to january 6 and on the day itself, but i do think they probably won't be able to force people who remain loyal to president trump to comply. judy: meaning that they will be able to claim executive privilege and hold out for courts to rule in their favor. >> yes, they will cite executive prilege and defend themselves in a criminal prosecution, but even if the committee decided to pursue a civil action, it takes time. the chairman has said they wanted to be completed by spring, or at the very latest the end of 2022. i can't imagine that court

resolution of issues involving executive privilege would occur before that timeframe. judy: still a lot of questions out there about what the committee will be able to get. thank you very much. >> thanks for having me. judy: during last night's hearing, committee vice chair, representative liz cheney read text messages sent to mark meadows on january 6th from some of president trump's closest allies. the text messages showed concern and an urgent request to the president to stop the siege on the capitol. some of those allies included key fox news personalities, like sean hannity and laura ingraham, who later that day, however, suggested the crowd was not made up of trump supporters. >> mark, the president needs to tell the people in the capitol to go home, this is hurting l of us. he is destroying his legacy, laura ingraham wrote. >> earlier today the capitol was

under siege by people who can only be described as antithetical to the maga movement, now they were likely not all trump supporters and there are some reports that antifa sympathizers may have been sprinkled throughout the crowd. we will have more on that later. judy: to talk us through the role fox news plays in all of this, i'm joined by npr media correspondent david folkenflik. welcome back to the newshour. as you listen to and read about these text messages and what these fox news anchors set in the aftermath, what does it all add up to? >> it tells you the central role that fox news played throughout the trump presidency. it tells you that they don't see any distinction between advising the president and championing his reputation, is standing, his aims, and goals from their own supposedly journalistic

endeavors. they may be opinion hosts, but if you work for a news organization, you are supposed to acknowledge facts that go contrary to your rooting interest. they seem to have done none of that. and it also tells you that they know. they knew that this was a problem. they knew this was serious. they knew this represented a crisis, a violent challenge to the peaceful transfer of power that was supposed to be ceremonially certified that day. it tells you they were nonetheless willing to say something quite different to the viewers who rely on them on a daily basis. tells you they don't see their loyalty to the truth. they don't see their loyalty to their viewers' need to understand the facts as they are, but to perhaps serve their appetites in a political rooting. it is a very different journalistic mission then you and i am braced.

i don't think it is a journalistic mission at all. judy: we have known they have spoken favorably of former president trump for years, but does this take it to a different level, do you think? >> i mean, it shows you how there is no membrane separating fox news and its prime timeline about political opinion stars from president trump's closest circle of advisors. sean hannity was an advisor from the outset of the candidacy. laura ingraham, tucker carlsen, who does not appear in this particular roster of text messages has sent to mark meadows. nonetheless, it sharpens the disconnect between what we know that fox news stars no when they are purveying conspiracy theories supporting the president's most outlandish claims and amplifying, projecting, and embracing lies

that are corrosive to american'' understanding to their own civil society. that they know better. they turned to the chief of staff because he was the person best situated to try to defuse this tense and violent situation even as hours later laura ingraham and others blamed antifa, blaming somehow that there might be deep state plants of fbi informants for which there has been no credible proof in any meaningful way. what you have here is a question of fox news having that word news appended to its name, but not operating like a news outlet. yes, they are starting more than 24 hours after this was released by liz cheney to address this in their own coverage on the news side and sean hannity talked a bit about it on his radio show today, but not in a way that keeps faith with the viewers an audience to say the truth comes

first, even when it cuts against what we want to have happen. judy: why does it matter? it is certainly different from the kind of journalism we do at the newshour and the other journalistic organizations we are familiar with. but why does it matter? we know we are in an era of opinion. there is a lot of opinion out there in news coverage, news reporting. what effect do something like this have, do you think? >> fox has always played an outsized role in republican politics, increasing over the years ever since its founding in 1996 under rupert murdoch and roger ailes. right now, you have something like 3/5 of registered republicans or so claim that they believe that joe biden won the election fraudulently, which is not true. disproven in countless ways. and the reason they do that is

because an echo chamber is provided by fox news and its lesser peers and gives amplification and ballast to not only in former president trump and those around him and those who seek to ride his coattails to power and office by having them say, this is a message that will work for us, therefore we will lie about things, mislead the public, raise concerns, and deny, deflect, dismiss, or denounce claims of any involvement of people in the trump circle or people with loyalty to president trump or support for him with what happened on january 6. at the same time as they claim what happened january 6 is not meaningful and claiming it was a terrible hoax perpetrated by people in the deep state or antifa. judy: david, thank you very much. >> you bet.

judy: in the aftermath of last friday's deadly tornado outbreak, federal emergency officials say they are bracing for more severe and more frequent weather disasters. as john yang reports, that is raising questions about whether there is a link between climate change and tornadoes. john: judy, while scientists are confident that global warming is driving an increase in some natural disasters, in the case of tornadoes, they say it is a bit trickier. victor gensini is an associate professor of geographic and atmospheric sciences at northern illinois university. thanks so much for being with us. so many superlatives being used to describe this tornado outbreak friday night. help us put this into perspective. how major of an event was this? >> it is very likely to be

historic. the national weather service is still surveying the longest tornado that started north of little rock, crossed into the boot heel of missouri, and northwest tennessee, and finally into kentucky where it did its most prolific damage. we think the tomato has a path length somewhere near 250 miles. that would put it in first place is the most historic tornado path length in history, only to surpass the infamous tri-state tornado of march 8, 1985. john: to put that into perspective, a tornado track is generally, a long one could be 50 miles. tornadoes generally lose their energy pretty quickly. >> most tornadoes are under five miles. it is pretty hard to get a tornado 50 miles, let alone one that was on the ground for 200 miles. as i was watching this tornado unfold, i had a pit in my stomach watching radar.

i knew exactly what was happening at the surface and it was a matter of time before we sell some of those devastating pictures. john: help us understand, what do we know and what do we not know about the link between climate change and tornadoes? >> right now, the link is still muddy. studies have shown a mean increase in overall severe weather in the future, but also an increase in the variability. i think the best analogy right now is honestly major league baseball during the steroids era. we could not say for certain if a homerun was due to steroids, but when you look at the batting averages and the number of home runs over the season, it becomes pretty clear steroids was having an impact during the season. i think the same thing can be said about tornadoes. we are just not sure right now is something like friday evening was the direct result of climate change. john: why don't we know yet? >> it is mostly due to the small-scale. tornadoes are at a very small

scale relative to things like hurricanes or wildfires or drought. that link when you start to go down really small to the storm scale versus the large clite scale system makes these types of questions very hard to unpack from a scientific perspective. john: when you talk about looking backward, what changes have we seen in tornadoes in recent years? >> great question, really the only thing we can hang our hat on is a pretty significant downward trend in the great planes of the united states. you think of texas, oklahoma, kansas, your colloquial tornado alley. there has been a significant increase in the midsouth like kentucky, missouri, tennessee, mississippi, alabama. some of these areas that have been hit hard recently. i think that is a really important thing.

we have a lot more assets, a lot more people east of the mississippi river due to the increased population density. john: any idea what that suggests why that might be, that shift? >> we think it is partly due to climate change and partly due to natural variability. to what percentage of that shift is being caused by climate change, these are questions that are really good and that research groups like us are still trying to unpack. john: what are the implications for the future from your research on what you are learning from your research? >> i think there are two things. we want to understand what the future holds for these extreme events, like those of friday evening. on the flipside, we want to understand the changing footprint of society. both of those go hand-in-hand in understanding the future of tornado disasters like what we witnessed last week. looking ahead even here tomorrow, it looks like another significant veer whether --

severe weather event possible. it only takes one event to make your day a very bad day and i think there will be a lot of questions about what happened at that amazon awareness and that candle factory. john: thank you very much. >> thanks, john. ♪ judy: the u.s. military has been facing questions this week over how it conducts airstrikes, and whether it is doing enough to prevent killing civilians, and to report those casualties when it does. nick schifrin explains. nick: the last known airstrike of 20 years of war conducted before u.s. troops left afghanistan did not kill its intended isis target. instead, a drone missile killed 10 civilians, including 7 children. yesterday the pentagon said it

will change procedures, but would not discipline any troops for the strike in kabul. >> what we saw here was a breakdown in process and execution and procedural -- not the result of negligence, not the result of misconduct, not the result of poor leadership. there was not a strong enough case to be made for personal accountability. nick: secretary of defense lloyd austin endorsed that move based on a recommendation from two groups--the commanders of central command, whose responsibilities include afghanistan and syria, and special operations command, whose personnel ordered many of those airstrikes. in the last few weeks i have asked both commanders whether these incidents expose structural issues, including in how service members call in air strikes. both said no. are they too quick to call and airstrikes? >> categorically no. there is structure in place with

commanders that take it by a step-by-step process. you are looking at where the potential -- what the potential strike is. you are talking about what type of effects you are trying to achieve, what types of munitions you are going to use. >> we've gone to elaborate lengths to prevent civilian casualties. i cannot tell you in every case that we have been able to achieve that goal. i can tell you that when we know about it, when we have an opportunity to to learn that civilian casualties may have occurred, may have occurred, we do investigate it. nick: your response does not sound like you think that there is some kind of systemic problem, whether it's a climate or whether it's special operators calling in airstrikes? >> combat and particularly close infantry combat as occurs in a lot of these things, is an inherently messy, imprecise, bloody business. and we would like for it to be aniseptic, we would like for it to be perfect. it often is just not going to reach those standards of excellence. nick: there was another incident on december 3, when a drone over syria targeted an al qaeda commander. the military says it killed him, but acknowledges it also killed civilians.

a family posted this video of the strike as it hit, and told us in an interview, they were innocent victims. >> my sons head was rogan. my wife's leg was broken. all of us were injured in full of blood. we went from happiness to devastation. >> we don't have anything to do with the people in power and had we known that was a motorcade in front of us for someone that was in a powerful position we wouldn't have driven behind it. nick: to discuss these incidents and the larger questions of civilian casualties, i'm joined by larry lewis. he is the state department senior advisor on civilian protection and is the research director for the center of naval analyses cma. what is your reaction to the military not holding anyone accountable for the drone strike in kabul? >> it is not surprising.

we often see a lack of accountability in discipline for the strikes, but in my mind, there is a different question. not only holding individuals accountable for those involved in that strike, but the fact that we have seen thousands of these strikes and we see recurring problems, that creates a question about, who really should be accountable? not necessarily the trigger pullers, but the senior leaders that have overseen these processes that have the systemic problem's. >> you published an essay in which you wrote that the couple drone strike was not an isolated mistake, but part of a systemic pattern and you call it negligence. why? >> negligence is defined as a lack of care. that is exactly what we see. analyzing thousands of strikes, literally thousands, i have seen the same pattern over and over again. nick: and yet you have heard the

military say again and again that they do care and you just heard the central command commander in the special operations commander say that there are structures in place and they have gone to elaborate lengths to prevent civilian casualties, such that there are no systemic issues causing these incidents. you disagree. >> i do disagree. what is the data saying? the u.s. military has processes in place, they have an infrastructure in place. the problem is that infrastructure has flaws. there are a number of implicit assumptions and a number of systemic problems thateaken the care that they give. nick: in all of those studies you have done, are there specific examples that are particularly indicative? >> a prominent airstrike in afghanistan in 2010 where there

were special forces on the ground and they knew there were enemy combatant forces out there , so they kind of looked out with their drone and found the nearest thing along that line of bearing. it was three vehicles. they follow the three vehicles. they struck it with airpower and it was three civilian vehicles and dozens were killed. nick: do you believe there are lessons the military have identified, but not learned? >> absolutely. the military seems to have amnesia because we have identified a number of these problems before, but then they don't stick. in the drone strike, there were a number of different things. there were civilians right outside of the frame. what you need to do is step back and say, have things changed right before i make this engagement decision? nick: do you think this is a question of leadership? >> absolutely.

what we have seen over and over again is when senior leaders are very clear about protecting civilians being part of their mission and something they are watching and prioritizing, we see improvement. when there is not that clear message from the top, then we see basically what we have been seeing the last few years. nick: i want to ask about a new york times report, that during the height of the war against isis, someone circumvented rules. you have worked with the special operators for years. do you believe that during the height of the work on isis they circumvented the rules? >> i have been following that unit for quite a while and i have seen quite different behavior over the years. there are times where the care was not as great and i would include syria in that part. i've also seen times where they took great care.

the difference was they had command emphasis that said this is important and when that emphasis was there, they did a fabulous job. nick: what practical steps do you urge the military to take? >> it has to start with leadership. there is no leadership on this issue. in addition to that, there are no resources. if we are going to fix this problem, we are not going to have amnesia. we have to devote resources and we have to have leaders that are committed to actually solving these problems. nick: thank you very much. judy: nearly one year into office, the biden administration

is still lacking ambassadors in key parts of the world, including india and pakistan. the senate foreign relations committee considered candidates for those two posts today, marking a step forward and what has been a painstakingly slow process to fill u.s. embassies. more on what this means for u.s. diplomacy. amna: of the 80 ambassadorial nominees president biden has put forward, the senate has confirmed just 12. the secretary of state blamed a slow senate confirmation process. >> as of last week, only 16% of our ambassadors have been confirmed. at this point in the last three administrations, the number was between 70% and 90%. amna: for more, i'm joined by the former u.s. ambassador to bulgaria and now president of the american foreign service association. welcome to the newshour. to fill these ambassador posts, two things have to happen.

the president has to nominate people, the senate has to confirm them. where is the backup? >> both of those problems are really real. the biggest backup is that we have blanket holds in the senate, that means that almost all of the nominees have been blocked from being considered on the floor of the senate. this has never happened before to anyone's knowledge. the administration has been slow to nominate candidates, so we still have about one third of the jobs without nominees. but that together and we have an astonishing number of vacant ambassadorial posts around the world. amna: let's start with the administration. why have they been so slow? >> it is a good question and we have been asking that question. part of it may be holding back nominees because they already have such a backlog in the senate that they don't want to add to it. i can't speak for the

administration, but we think they should nominate every candidate they have to get them on the table so that the world knows we are serious about getting ambassadors to our embassies around the world. amna: is a more extreme or intense vetting process any part of this? former mayor eric garcetti is facing tough questions about concerns over conflict of interest and one of his top aides facing allegations of sexual harassment by a los angeles police department officer. is it harder today to find good nominees to put forward? >> i think the vetting process has gotten more complicated. i can't comment on individual nominees, but i would say that for people who have been confirmed before the hope is that they could be confirmed more quickly the second, third, fourth time. in reality, it is like starting from scratch every time. amna: what worries you about a lot of these posts not being

filled? >> we need ambassadors in the field to have them representing our country, representing the president. when an ambassador is confirmed by the president -- senate, that person goes out with the support of the president and the senate. that is powerful and has a lot of strength for everybody who is involved in the process. if you are a foreign government, you know this person represents two branches of government. there's also a lot of diplomacy to do in the world. we are really tying both our hands behind our back. amna: let me ask you about some of those blocks and holds on the nominations from the senate. there is a notable one from senator marco rubio. at the forefront of a lot of the republican pushback are two

senators, josh hawley and ted cruz. josh hawley's concerns are that he wants to see secretary blinken resign after the afghanistan withdrawal. and ted cruz wants to see sanctions against a natural gas pipeline between russia and germany. they are not objecting to the qualifications of the nominees. i wonder how usual that is in the process. >> that is actually the strongest argument for moving forward is obviously senators have policy concerns, that is the whole reason the senate has the right of advice and consent on nominees. individual holds have always been part of the process. it is this concept of saying nobody is going to be confirmed, that we will not send anyone out, were -- or there are a few people who have been confirmed, but as secretary blinken said the numbers are unprecedentedly low. our argument is not with any

specific concerns and we don't get into policy issues, we just think that america needs strong diplomacy and representation overseas and to do that, we can'to fill our ambassadors ship's. no other country does this. the days when america could simply assume that whatever peculiarities that we have in our process would be understood and accepted by the rest of the world, i think those days are past. we need to get our game up and get ambassadors up to the field as soon as we can. judy: that is the former ambassador to bulgaria and president of the american foreign service association. thanks for making the time to be with us. >> pleasure to be here. judy: during this holiday season as people spend more time in the kitchen, we look at a twist in

cuisine that has taken social media by storm. jeffrey brown exploits -- explores the magic behind the korean vegan. taught me how to tie my shoeso- and swing while standing up, who taught me this recipe i'm making right now. >> it is not youtypical cooking tutorial. the korean vegan does offer up exquisite dishes. but her popular specialty, storytime videos that have attracted nearly 4 million followers on social media. >> i thought it was a great vehicle to share a little bit of insight in what i hope is a very palatable way, if you will, about the immigrant story in the united states. i think it is a beautiful story.

i think it is one that hopefully can be celebrated. >> her stories tell of her grandmother's harrowing escape from what would soon become north korea. >> my mom made it very clear that she was embarrassed about certain aspects of her culture. >> the end of her own experience growing up in america, where families culture and food were not always accepted. we joined her for shopping at a manhattan korean grocery chain. she is not a trained chef. she is an attorney working full-time until very recently for a high-powered chicago firm. but her life cnged when she met and married anthony, who convinced her to go vegan in 2016. she decided to adapt the food she had grown up with. social media, instagraand then tiktok, became her way to reach people with her new passion. >> i didn't see how social media could be used to bring people together and that is the point

of the korean vegan. bringing people together, bringing families together, bringing colleagues together, over some really delicious food. >> now, she has collected her stories and recipes into her first cook book, the korean vegan. all plant-based. even she was uncertain in the beginning. >> i was very skeptical. can you even be vegan and korean at the same time? >> it is a real question. >> if i can't eat korean food and be plant-based at the same time, than it is not a choice. the question i set out to answer when i started cooking more was is there a way to adjust the ingredients, the recipes so they still taste like the food i grew up eating, but don't have any animal products in it? that is really have it all started. i'm chopping up some carrots right now to add to our dish. >> we got a demonstration and

taste of what it became. >> rice cake is right here. this is kind of a reference to, which means fried. korean pepper powder. we have the main sauce that you are going to use for this particular sauce. we have a lot of vegetables, some zucchini. we also have aromatics, some onions and garlic. >> then things came together quickly. >> i have made you able which has the rice, every korean meal starts with rice, and then we have some braised potatoes, we have tofu pancake, and we have the star -- you helped me prepare. >> of course. >> expertly helped me prepare. [laughter] that is why it is going to taste so good. >> we did a good job.

>> we did an excellent job. it turned out perfect. >> in the family history, there is more. like many immigrant families, they did not speak much of the past and only as an adult did she learn some of what her parents had experienced as children in the aftermath of the korean war. as when her mother one day explained that her favorite food is baked sweet potato, because it had sustained her as a refugee living in south korea. >> i was like, i've literally never heard you say the word refugee in my life, what do you mean you were one? she said, i was born in north korea. what? >> what is the larger story you are telling us through these videos? >> i really wanted to honor my parents through the stories. that is my heart's passion. sharing the stories of my mom and dad and making them feel like their stories matter. these are stories that i think are so beautiful, but i also

think they are stories that show everyone, no matter what color you are, how old you are, what your background is, or what your food looks or smells like, that there are some things that we all share in common. the harder it becomes for lawmakers to explore the underlying cause of hate crimes. >> she is ready to mix it up. >> i still feel that some people look at me, they look at my food, they look at my hair color, they look at the shape of my eyes and say foreigner, she is not american. i've been told so many times, go back home to where you came from, well, that is chicago, illinois. [laughter] there is that sort of thing i still have to contend with. on the other side of that is this mainstream acceptance -- everybody is talking about squid game -- i love that, i love that people are opening their hearts

in their minds and their pallets to things that might be outside of the normal experience. what i'm trying to convey is i'm american, these are the foods that ie, i spoke korean growing up, i spoke english when i started going to school, this is very everyday life in a korean american household and while it may seem a little different, it is still just as american as anything else. >> you are saying this is an american food. >> for me, this is. i made this food and this is what we ate in america. >> in chicago, illinois. >> in chicago, illinois. >> and now with a korean vegan twist. judy: and i'm hungry after looking at all that great food. on the newshour online, we check back in with sandra lindsay, the new york nurse who one year ago today became the first american to receive the covid vaccine outside of clinical trials.

you can hear what she says about our progress against the virus and the omicron variant on our website, pbs.org/newshour. that is the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. join us online and tomorrow evening. for all of us, thank you, please stay safe, and we will see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by -- ♪ >> consumer cellular. johnson & johnson. financial services firm raymond james. bnsf railway. carnegie corporation of new york. supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement, and the advancement of international peace and security. carnegie.org. the target foundation, committed to advancing racial equity and

creating the change required to shift systems and accelere equitable economic opportunity. 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. >> this is "pbs newshour west" from weta studios in washington and from our bureau at the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.] >> you are watching pbs.

-hola, tucson, i am back. as if i could possibly stay away from the best 23 miles of mexican food. my last trip here was a whirlwind culinary tour of tacos, hot dogs, chimichangas, and giant burritos. but i've come back to break bread with a new friend known to bread enthusiasts as one of the best bakers in america, known to friends as don. -oh, i love this. -isn't it fun? -these fresh-baked experiences, well... -and it's like...mmm. -[ chuckles ] -heaven. -and i need to know everything about the secrets to don's success. so, using tucson as my gateway, i'm heading south across la frontera to sonora, mexico, where miles and miles of wheat fields blanket lush valleys, the source of don's treasured grains.