captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. on the newshour tonight: uncertainty abounds. ukrainians celebrate a day of national unity, as the threat of russian invasion remains, and moscow's claims of de-escalation are met with widespread skepticism. then, recalled. several members of the san francisco school board are ousted over what opponents decry as misplaced priorities during the pandemic. and, teaching history. many black students find their stories and voices constricted, amid a wave of regulations limiting how race is taught in public schools. >> black history shouldn'te just ignored or overlooked because learning about history is important, so that we can move forward instead of just

repeating old mistakes. >> woodruff: 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. >> care.com.

>> consumer cellular. >> supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the world's most pressing problems-- skollfoundation.org. >> and by the alfred p. sloan >> the lemelson foundation. committed to improving lives through invention, in the u.s. and developing countries. on the web at lemelson.org. >> supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. mo information at macfound.org >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.

>> woodruff: defiant ukrainians staged a show of national unity today, as nearly 150,000 russian troops remained poised along the countries' lengthy border. the kremlin claimed it had begun to withdraw some units, but western powers said they saw no indication troops were withdrawing. nick schifrin begins our coverage. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> schifrin: on a day the u.s. government feared would bring a new war, ukraine celebrated a new holiday. on “unity day,” ukrainians held a 600-foot long flag and rallied around the national anthem, titled “ukraine is not yet perished.” >> ( translated ): it signifies the unity of the whole country under our flag, under our anthem. it is "no" to war, "yes" to peace. >> schifrin: but ukraine is also readying for war. its air force released video today of russian-made jets training near the northern border with belarus, to target practice targeting columns of tanks.

and ukrainian tanks trained nearby. president volodymyr zelenskyy watched with his commanders, before inspecting american anti-tank weapons and addressing his troops. >> ( translated ): thank you for your skills, for protecting our country. when i look at you, i'm confident in both today and tomorrow. >> schifrin: but u.s. officials remain worried that tomorrow, or any day, could bring russian invasion. just across the belarus border, russia continued its own exercises. ( gunfire ) u.s. officials worry these troops could be used to invade western ukraine. but russia says it has no intention to invade, and released video overnight of tanks and trucks today that it said pulled back from forward positions in crimea, and returned to garrison. foreign ministry spokeswoman maria zakharova said the west fabricated a russian threat to punish moscow. >> ( translated ): they are trying to bring all weight to bear on us, having invented a russn threat and using this pretense to impose more sanctions. >> sifrin: but u.s. officials accuse russia of inventing a

withdrawal that is not actually happening. the ministry of defense said yesterday these troops were returning to their bases, but independent researchers say their bases are actually right on the ukraine border. a u.s. official called the videos “staged for deception.” secretary of state antony blinken. >> unfortunately, there's a difference between what ssia says and what it does, and what we're seeing is no meaningful pullback. on the contrary, we continue to see forces, especially forces that would be in the vanguard of any renewed aggression against ukraine, continuing to be at the border, to mass at the border. >> schifrin: that was echoed at a nato defense ministers meeting in brussels by nato secretary- general jens stoltenberg. >> what we see on the ground is no withdrawal of troops and forces, equipment. but actually, what we see is that russian troops are moving into position, and we saw the cyber attack. >> schifrin: that cyberattack yesterday took down the websites of ukraine's two largest banks, and the foreign and defense ministries.

today, ukrainian officials told reporters the source was unclear, but likely a “foreign intelligence servi.” and, with no evidence of de-escalation, the russian- created threat on ukraine's border, remains a crisis. for the pbs newshour, i'm nick schifrin. >> woodruff: and for a closer look at the ukraine crisis, we are joined by republican senator james risch, the ranking member of the foreign relations committee. senator risch, welcome back to the "newshour". we just heard secretary antony blinken saying what the russians say is different from what they do. my question to you, is that what you are seeing that the russians claim they're withdrawing when they're really not in any significant way? >> first of all, judy, it's good to be with you again. thanks for having me on. i'd put it a little more plainly than the secretary of state did. he is the secretary of state and head diplomat. the russians lie. i don't know how they can look in the camera and tell the world they have no intention of

invading and they have amassed the largest invasion force that the world has seen in decades. look, the world doesn't believe it. nobody wants war. everybody would like to see it avoided. the ukrainians, i think, are in a different position than they were when russia went into crimea. at that time, polling was actually showing the ukrainian people having a favorable view of russia at about 85%. today that's reversed. it's only about 15%. i think if they do go into ukraine, the best day they're going to have is the first day and after that it's going to turn into a resistance movement, and they've received enough arms from us and other of our allies in europe to make this a very very troublesome venture for the russians. >> woodruff: one other quick question, we heard vladimir putin say yesterday he was interested in possibly negotiating with the u.s. on important matters. do you see any sign of any

diplomatic progress? >> i don't. i haven't heard of any. i think i would have if they were ongoing, but, look, judy, i don't know what there is to negotiate. what vladimir putin put on the table were absolute nonstarters for us and all 29 of our n.a.t.o. allies. he wanted to say who was going to get n.a.t.o. and who doesn't. our n.a.t.o. charter is very clear that we're open to anybody who wants to come in and we support any country that wants to come in if they meet the criteria. >> woodruff: let me ask you, snfort, about the sanctions you and other republicans have put forward to be imposed on russia. this is after weeks that you and others were negotiating a bipartisan set of sanctions. what exactly is different about the republican-only proposal? >> well, first of all, it's 91 pages long, and there were a lot of portions that were negotiated back and forth. what it really came down to is i

think it was just a good faith disagreement on how strong the sanctions should be. my bill, as you see, specifically states that there will be secondary sanctions placed on russian banks. that brings the russian economy to a hal an end, period. money doesn't change hands, doesn't move across the international borders. it would be extremely papeful and debilitating to russia. the other side had a different view. they want the primary sanctions were you simply seize assets that are here in the united states. that's a good idea, we should do that, but that doesn't bring the economy to its knees, which moscow needs to understand. if they do invade, that's what's going to happen, and those are the sanctions that are going to be put on. >> woodruff: but, senator, with the clock ticking, the question becomes is it possible that -- and the russians could be moving within days, as you yourself have said by the time

these sanctions kicked in. is it worth setting up a new set of proposals when time is of the essence? and frankly, including language that democrats say is going to be seen by some of our european allies as undermining them. >> well, there's a lot to unpack in that question, but let me just say that the sanctions, there are some sanctions that go in pre-invasion right now, in my bill. it is primarily on individuals. the sanctions against the russian banks and against the russian country and the government and the banking institutions do not go into effect until after there is an invasion. the whining going on about there's a fear that it will affect other countries negatively, there are businesses here in the united states and in europe that would be affected, but that's why it has waiver provisions in it so it can be done surgically and hurts the

people it is intended to hurt to bring down the people it's intended to bring down, but to allow those that should not be hurt to escape the sanctions. that's what waiver provisions do when they're in there. >> woodruff: two very quick questions, senator. one is we know president biden has repeatedly said that harsh, stiff penalties will be imposed on russia if they move. why isent that good enough? >> that is good enough. he will be reaching for my bill and the kind of sanction also that are in my bill, and if he wants to do what he has described with those adjectives, that's my bill. >> woodruff: last question, as you know, your democratic counterpart bob menendez, the chairman of the committee, said yesterday when he saw the republican proposal, and i'm quoting, he said it's a shame senate republicans have decided to choose partisan posturing instead of working to reach a

consensus on this. how do you answer that at a time when, again, we're seeing what could be russian movement any day now. >> yeah, well, we negotiated in good faith, i think pappas negotiated in good faith, i was. he initiated the democratic position. we were unable to agree, and i introduced what is our position. if moscow is listening and i suspect they may be, this is not a republican-democrat fight. this problem is an american problem and if there is an invasion, there will be sanctions as described by the president and described by my bill with secondary sanctions. moscow should understand at. >> woodruff: you don't think this sends a sign of disunit on the part of the americans? >> it does not. anyone who answers the way this works will listen to what we and the president says and that is

there will be debilitating sangs put on russia that will cause great difficulty for president putin at home. >> woodruff: senator jim risch, theranking member of the foreign relations committee, republican. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: in the day's other news, the c.d.c. said that it is working on new guidance for mask wearing and other covid prevention measures. that word came as infections and hospitalizations have dropped, and more states and cities are ending mandates. officials acknowledged that people are tired of masking up. >> we want to give people a break from things like mask wearing when these things are better, and then have the ability to reach for them again should things worsen. if and when we update our guidance, we will communicate that clearly, and it wl be based on the data and the science. >> woodruff: new numbers from

the c.d.c. also show the country has suffered more than one million excess deaths since the pandemic began. that is more death than would normally be expected. the vast majority were due to the virus. police in ottawa, canada began moving today to end a nearly three-week siege by truckers protesting covid rtrictions. officers in yellow vests went from rig to rig, warning drivers to leave immediately. otherwise, they risk arrest and could lose their vehicles and licenses. but, some insisted they won't go voluntarily. >> if it means that i need to go to prison, if i need to be fined, in order to allow freedom to be restored in this country-- millions of people have given far more for their freedom. and in my mind, personally, it's a small sacrifice to make. >> woodruff: it was unclear when the police might move in to

clear the trucks by force. rescuers in brazil searched for victims and survivors today, after a mudslide disaster that killed at least 78 people. the city of petropolis, north of rio de janeiro, was hit by the deluge on tuesday, after ten ches of rain. today, aerial views showed whole neighborhoods in the mountainous region buried under mud. it was unclear how many people are missing. back in this country, president biden has ordered that trump white house visitor gs be released to lawmakers probing the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol. the former president had fought to withhold those records, citing executive privilege. the logs could shed light on who met with mr. trump before and during the capitol riot. a constitutional scholar who argued in numerous u.s. supreme court cases has passed away.

walter dellinger was a duke university law professor and acting solicitor general under president clinton. in 2012, he spoke with the newshour about his brief supporting obamacare's individual mandate for health coverage. >> every justice, every advocate, every journalist-- they all have health insurance, and they wouldn't dream of doing without it. so, the idea that pushing people, through this tax incentive, to have cerage is "an incursion of liberty" seems odd. worked with the biden presidential campaign in transition to fight legal attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. walter dilling jeer was 88 years old. walter dellinger was 80 years old. in st. paul, minnesota, a second former minneapolis police officer testified today about george floyd's death in 2020. j. alexander king and two other ex-policemen face federal civil rights charges. king knelt on floyd's back while a superior officer pinned him by the neck.

king testified that he feared being fired if he spoke up. federal investigators say president trump's interior secretary, ryan zinke, used his position to push a commercial project in his hometown in montana. an internal watchdog report today says he also lied about it to an ethics official. the u.s. justice department has declined to bring criminal charges, and zinke is now running for congress. the s. trade representative reported today that china still refuses to open its markets to foreign competition. it said that washington should consider new means of fighting back. and on wall street, stocks struggled for direction. the dow jones industrial average lost 54 points to close at 34,934. the nasdaq rose 15 points. the nasdaq fell 15 points. the s&p 500 added four points. at the winter olympics in china, americans alexander hall and nick gepper captured gold and silver in slopestyle skiing.

but, the top-seeded u.s. men's hockey team lost to slovakia in the quarter-finals, and will miss out on a medal. still to come on the newshour: new details from an investigation into russia's 2016 election interference prompt flawed allegations of espionage. we answer your questions about covid-19, amid changing public health guidelines. plus, much more. >> woodruff: a school board election in san francisco is highlighting the political fallout from cov school closures, even in a city long considered politically progressive. san francisco voters yesterday overwhelmingly recalled three it's seven school board members. stephanie sy has more. >> sy: judy, this is the first recall election in san francisco

in 40 years. at the heart of this rare election was strong opposition to the amount of time san francisco's public school students were out of the classroom, doing remote learning during the pandemic. here's what one parent had to say. >> kids had only about six weeks of in-class instruction last year-- i mean, before summer break. so, that is a huge loss when it comes to kids who are coming from difficult socio-economic situations. >> sy: but the board also became the target of controversy as it prioritized equity issues, critics would say, over educational imperatives. to help us understand what's happening, i'm joined by politics editor scott shafer with kqed in san francisco. scott, thank you so ch for joining us. all three school board members that were eligible to be recalled were by more than 70% of voters. alison colins, gabriela lopez

and fawuuga moliga. was this a direct result of the length of the school closures? was that a sentiment shared by a lot of the voters? >> as we've seen around the country school districts have been grappling with how, when and how quickly to reopen and do it safely? france, we saw most citie including in many california doing that while we were still closed here in the city and that led to a lot of frustration. most people don't pay much attention to school boards, but the pandemic upended a lot of that and there was a lotf frusation from parents in terms of how thefelt about their kids learning on zoom, mental health issues, and some parents, especially world-class, world-class -- working class weren't eager to open classes. a lot felt it was or due. that was an underpinning of the recall. >> reporter: as you said, as school started reopen, parents worried about learning loss and getting kids back to normalcy

were focused on that, but the school board, i understand, decided to put things like renaming dozens of schools on its agenda. what was behind that? why did they do that? >> we should say all three of the school board members recalled yesterday ran on an equity platform. before the pandemic, they talked about changing policies in san francisco schools to help black and brown kids in particular who struggle oft in san francisco schools. and, so, in a sense, they were doing what they were elected to do, but the pandemic just totally upended those priorities. and, so, when you see, when parents saw the school board spending six, seven hours talking about renaming schools including abraham lincoln and one named after dianne feinstein, a lot of focus began to be on the school board saying what are they doing and not prioritizing and focused on opening the schools and the mayor london breed had a lot to say about that and that drew a lot of attention to these three

in particular. >> reporter: london breed was one who supported the recall of the three members. another news flash that emerged around policy that had to do with equity is remove the merit-based admissionings to a particular school in the city that was highly selective, affected a lot of chinese-american students. this was a move and cities in new york are moving to promote diversity and equity. which group of parents in san francisco really galvanized around that issue and how much did that affect the turnout for the recall? >> well, lowell high school is an elite high school. justice stephen breyer is one of many illustrious graduates and i think a lot of parents see getting into lowell as key to giving their kids a sling shot into college and life. the school is a majority asian-american, and often when u change a policy, pople who are benefiting from the status quo don't like it. so, certainly, the

chinese-american community in particular was mobilized and energized and i should say that, at the same time, there were asian-american students who did support the changes as well as black and brown students and organizations like the naacp. so it wasn't uniform, but i think to answer your question clearly, the group most energized by this and upset was the chinese community. >> reporter: what are these disword politics in san francisco -- school board politics in san francisco tell us about education in the general pandemic maybe the national picture may be splitting democratic voters, i mean san francisco being a bastian of progressive politics? >> well, you know, i think it would be a mistake to read the results offed the election as san francisco restreeting from core values. i don't think they're saying they no longer support diversity and civil rights, but parents were saying pay attention to our kids, that should be priority. we want the schools reopen.

we're fine talking about renaming schools and changing admission policies but not now, we're in the middle of the pandemic. that's the message, do the job in front of you, then when things setting down and we're more or less back to snowstorm, perhaps we could talk about the other issues, which is important, i don't think anyone is saying they're not important. it's a matter of timing, priority, and process. >> reporter: scott shafer with kqed in san francisco following a story being watched nationally. scott, thank you so much for joining the "newshour". >> you're welcome, thank you. >> woodruff: let's look how political debate is impacting students and educators when it comes to black history. this year, it comes as schools are getting caught up in

political scrutiny. (chanting) >> reporter: this year, black history month is unfolding alongside a coordinated effort across the country to limit the teaching of race and racism. an effort that purports to prevent the instruction of "critical race theory,” or c.r.t. for short, which has evolved into a full-scale political assault. c.r.t. is a college-level legal theory says that american racism is structural, and woven into american society. c.r.t. is not taught in k-12 schools, but it's nonetheless become the latest flashpoint in the country's culture wars. more than half of all states and all led by republicans, have introduced bills banning the teaching of c.r.t. in public schools. it is political backlash from conservatives, who are casting frank conversations about race as divisive or anti-white. the newshour spoke to four

high school students about their experiences learning about black history amid the new restrictions and political pressure. >> i'm tara grey, i'm 16, and i >> my name is elya vigilant, i have 15 years old, i go to >> my name is jocelyn pritchard, i'm 17 years old and i go to >> hi, miles coppage, i'm 17 and >> i just wish that, like in terms of black history and c.r.t., that people would stop viewing it as just a right or left-- like, a political argument, instead of just acknowledging it as history. >> what i do know about it is mostly just from headlines from social media about how kids should be taught the way that we frame things in our view regarding black perspectives and how black people have been treated throughout history. >> so, it hasn't exactly been discussed in my school. the knowledge that i have about it is from kind of outside research, and learning about it in the news. and what i do know about it is that it's the study of how race and the law intersected over the

years in the united states. >> i don't feel like black history is taught enough. it's taught well and short and like, kind of sweet and, like, put together and then, like, packaged to you. i feel that needs to be more extensive and more broad, and especially explained, like, a lot more. >> i think schools in florida kind of touch over the basics of slavery, and we talk about martin luther king jr., and, you know, when you're little, you're taught, like, the "i have a dream" speech. but i feel like the way i've been taught, it's been mostly framed from kind of like a white perspective, per se. i feel like we don't get to hear enough from black voices. >> so we do have u.s. history, obviously, a lot of a lot of high schools probably learn that, and we have a few sections in there about black history and about slavery and the civil war and the civil rights movement. but besides that, there's not really, like, a black history class. like, we have a black literature class.

i would say i've really learned a lot about black history through talking to people like my father and my grandfather and doing outside research. >> i've learned that black history month is a very important month for our black nation community as to see what they've been through and what they've stopped or like, how do i say it like experience, >> i think learning about black history in school is very important because it is a part of american history and just history in general, and black history shouldn't just be ignored or overlooked because learning about history is important so that we can move forward instead of just repeating old mistakes that we can kind of understand how it still affects us today. >> i think that it's very important to learn about black history in school, because so often we learn about, you know, our founding fathers and the people who camto this country and, you know, they're usually white. >> reporter: we spoke with educators, too. ran miller is head of diversity, equity and inclusion at promise charter school in camden, new jersey, and dr. erick mackey serves as the alabama state superintendent of educion. he says he's received calls from

parents, mistakenly complaining that black history month programs constitute critical race theory. i started by asking him what those conversations have been like. >> we've had just a few of those calls. we certainly do not teac critical race theory in k-12 schools in alabama. it's not in our curriculum. it's not in our textbooks. it's just not there. we have had a few calls from parents, though, who thought that having a black history program might be equivalent to critical race theory. and in this state, we've done a really good job in the last two decades of really improving our curriculum, our instruction, our standards, so that we include a much broader lens of history and we're very proud of that work and, you know, we intend to move forward and not to go back to teaching of a full and cplete spectrum of history. >> reporter: and ran miller, you work in camden, new jersey, as we mentioned. it's a school district, a charter school that is comprised of mostly black and latino children, but the faculty there

is 70% white. so how do you advisehe teaching staff-- how do you advise them to approach black history month, especially in this politically charged moment? >> so we don't have some of the challenges that other districts may have with regards to parents upset about what students are being taught, based on our demographics. our faculty, they're very aware of our population, and they're very sensitive to the fact that history needs to be taught properly. generally, how i advise our administration is we talk about really using black history, particularly february as an anniversary point. so, it's not a point where we focus on touching on these topics this month, but we look at it as an anniversary to celebrate what it is that a student should be learning throughout the year. >> reporter: i want to ask you about an op-ed you wrote for the "philadelphia inquirer" recently, where you said that our current political climate of distrust and disdain for truth has seeped into the public education space. how is that manifesting?

how's that showing up for you work? >> what i meant in that particular piece is that we're getting away from the idea of education. education is really a place where students can explore in my classroom i encourage that my students explore that they explore through research that it's not about me teaching them what to think or what to say or what things are, but rather put the information out, for students to grow and for students to come to understand what's happening in our world in relation to the history that has gone for. >> reporter: dr. mackey, to mr. miller's point, teaching black history to black and latino students comes with its own issues, but we're really having this discussion, generally, because it's white parents who are raising objections and because conservative media is obsessed with this sort of critical race theory issue and conflating critical race theory with black history month. alabama, as you well know, was the site of many key events in the american civil rights movement.

it strikes me that it's not just black students, it's really white students who are done a disservice if black history is taught in a sanitized way. >> we've spent the last couple of days decades trying to make sure that all that's brought brought back into the classroom and the response has been overwhelmingly positive. positive from our state board and our legislative leadership and positive prom again, you know, black and white parents because they want to see this more inclusive, full version of history being taught. and so just a generation or two ago, we were living this history, and i think that's why our population black and white has embraced it and said, we have to teach the whole story of what's happened in america, but particularly for us in this day. >> reporter: such a great point. ran miller, as we wrap up this conversation, what do we in the media miss when we when we have these conversations about black history, racial issues, how

they're taught in the schools, how they manifest in schools, i think there's a disconnect betwn what you experienced what you both experienced as educators and the way it's reflected and projected in the press. >> so much more that we can do. there's so much that we have to do with respect to teaching history. and here's what i'll say. i think that it's important to teach accomplishments. it's important to teach all of the achievements that are done by different peoples, black people during black history month, native americans or native american history, multiple consorts. and it's important to do this throughout the year. i think where a lot of people miss the mark, not just media, but also educators, is that we focus on that and we don't make the connection between-- you know, why it is that we are where we are as a nation. >> reporter: thank you so much for your for your insights. dr. eric mackey is the alabama state superintendent of education and rand miller heads diversity, equity and inclusion for charter school district in camden, new jersey. thank you both for your time.

>> appreciate it. >> woodruff: a filing last week from the special counsel investigating the origins of the russia probe has ignited a misleading media firestorm on the right. william brangham breaks down the new information, and how it's been distorted. >> brangham: to listen to conservative media over the past five days, you'd think there was now smoking-gun evidence that hillary clinton's campaign was guilty of illegally spying on donald trump. >> the clinton campaign paid a tech firm to infiltrate the servers at trump tower, and then later infiltrate the servers at the trump white house. >> has anything like this ever happened in american history? not that we know of. >> brangham: this all stems from a court filing from special counsel john durham, who was appointed by former attorney general william barr to investigate any potential wrongdoing during the 2016 russia probe. the filing relates to a low-level case that durham has brought against michael

sussmann, a cybersecurity lawyer who'd represented the democratic party and the clinton campaign. durham alleges sussmann lied to the f.b.i. about who his client was, during a meeting where sussman shared information about possible links between russia and the trump campaign. but, in a few extra sentences, durham's filing mentions a second instance where sussman tried to raise concerns of a trump-russia connection-- this time apparently to the c.i.a.-- that information came from one of sussman's clients: technology executive rodney joffe. durham's filing noted that joffe's company, neustar, had an arrangement to provide security-related work on computer servers, including the white house's. but, according to the filing, joffee used that access to “to mine internet data to establis“" an inference” and “narrative” tying then-candidate trump to russia.”

joffe has not been charged with any crime. all of this has now been spun by conservative media, and former president trump himself, to say sussman and joffe were clinton operatives who were paid to illegally hack into and spy on the trump campaign and trump white house. former president trump wrote,“ in a stronger period of time in our country, this crime would have been punishable by death.” in a column this week, pulitzer prize-winning journalist charlie savage of the "new york times" wrote that "the entire narrative appeared to be mostly wrong or old news," and its conclusions "based on a misleading presentation of the facts, or outright misinformation." charlie savage joins me now. i wonder if you could help us understand just initially how we got to this point, how durham's investigation has morphed into this sort of explosive story in conservative media. >> so back in the trump administration, right after robert mueller, the russian special counsel, finished his report, donald trump shifted,

tried to shift the narrative to or escalated his attempt to shift the narrative to the idea that he was actually a victim of a deep state conspiracy. and his attorney general, bill barr, as you mentioned, appointed john durham, then a u.s. attorney, to be what became another special counsel, a special counsel to investigate the investigation. and the whole idea and expectation then was he was going to prove trump's narrative that there were high level officials in the f.b.i. and the c.i.a. who had essentially framed him for collusion. but we're almost three years in now, and he has yet to bring any charges against the high level officials. he has developed two cases, and against outsiders, and one of them is this sussman case, both of these are merely false statement cases. they're not charging a conspiracy. but mr. durham has used court filings and indictments and so forth, related to these cases to t out large amounts of

information that are not directly related to the charges. and this information is imbued with insinuations that there is some kind of vast anti-trump conspiracy. he just hasn't been able to prove it yet or charge it. it all goes back to hillary clinton, is the implication. >> hillary clinton hired people who hacked into trump's home and office computers. >> brangham: despite right-wing media claiming an illegal infiltration of computer servers, remember, durham's filing notes that joffe's firm, neustar, had an arrangement with the government to help maintain and monitor servers. in 2015, after a russian malware attack, and the 2016 russian hack of the d.n.c., joffe and other researchers used neustar's data and other data to monitor cyber threats. it was that monitoring, looking for suspicious russian activity, that included the white house, the clinton campaign, and the trump campaign.

>> she was spying on donald trump, the president, and i think the only conclusion can be this was an effort to overthrow the president of the united states of america. >> the most important and easiest to understand fact of all of this is that the whole narrative is that “they were spying on the trump white house. they were spying on the trump white house!” and this data all came from 2016. this was obama white house data. that fact alone makes the whole thing ridiculous. but there is no accusation in the filing that the clinton campaign paid this technology company that was-- had a role helping to run the white house server. in fact, the money flow, if anywhere, went the other direction. >> brangham: the way that this is being portrayed in conservative media, that this is blockbuster, brand-new information that durham has finally, after years of investigation, revealed-- is that true?

>> this was one of the problems that we at the new york times, for example, had on friday night when this filing came out is, that we had reported the essence of this back in october. but it was being presented as new in the right-wing media ecosystem. and then combined with that was their leaping to the conclusion, which mr. durham did not say, but maybe insinuated, that this was trump white house data. >> brangham: given the way that this thing has sort of morphed into a completely sort of mutant story, do you think that-- that mainstream press ought to be covering this? i mean, do you feel like that we are doing something beneficial here by trying to explain this? or are we only adding fuel to the fire? >> there's been this repeated cycle of huge alarmism stoked within right-wing, you know, pro-trump outlets that i don't really consider doing the same kind of journalism that i'm doing-- sending out the message with the blaring outrage, grievance-stroking headlines

that “now it's been proven, they were spying on president trump”" and every time you look at it, you knowthere's less there th meets the eye. buif you don't cover it, then that allows the sort of trump world and his allies to say, "aha!" you know, "the media, they're in on it. they're covering it up. it's a conspiracy. they just won't tell the truth!" >> brangham: all right, charlie savage of the "new york times," thank you so much for helping us try to wade through all of this. i appreciate your time. >> my pleasure. >> woodruff: the average number of daily new covid cases in the u.s. from omicron has finally dropped below the peak of the delta wave. but the country is still averaging more than 145,000 new cases and 2,400 deaths per day. this has left people with many questions about balancing risk and safety. john yang is here to get some answers.

>> yang: judy, today virginia's governor signed into law a measure requiring public schools to make masks optional starting next month. it's the latest state to ease indoor mask policies. and with the c.d.c. reevaluating its guidance, some are asking whether covid precautions are being rolled back too soon. to address that and more, we are joined ain by katelyn jetelina. she is an epidemiologist at the university of texas health science center's school of public health in dallas and she writes the "your local epidemiologist" newsletter. katelyn, thank you so much for being with us again. this goes right to our first question, this issue of mask policies goes right to our first question from a viewer, nancy e. from plainfield, illinois asked quite simply, why is unmasking safe now when transmission is still high? >> this is such a good question. the truth is, you know, this

landscape is changing throughout this pandemic. more and more people are getting vaccinated, and vaccines are the best tool we have right now. but they aren't perfect, and, so, i would actually agree with nancy that i think that transmission in the community is really high right now. in some places, it's higher than the delta wave still, and we really need to slow down and wait until transmission is controllable in a community before we take offer our masks. >> reporter: is the best advice or guidance local advice? i mean, today, for instance, at the white house briefing, dr. walensky, rochelle walensky of the c.d.c., talked about conditions at local hospitals being something that they need to consider when making local recommendations. >> yeah, i mean, that's certainly the direction that we've gone in, in the united

states, is this local response. i certainly think, though, the local jurisdictions need guidance. we need to know what those metrics are so we can guide populations on when it is safe to take off masks. that guidance has not been defined. i hear rumbles that it may be defined next week, but people need to know now, and we really need to standardize this across the nation so the message is clear and people know what to do. >> reporter: we've got a multi-part question from niles holland of omaha, nebraska. could we see a variant more contagious with a higher morbidity rate than the ones currently out there or is omicron the watermark to have the pandemic and if so are we done with the waves of infections? >> these are amazing questions. in general, we don't know what

the next virus is -- next mutation is going to look like. contrary to popular belief that this virus doesn't necessarily mutate to become less dangerous. the mutations are random. the only thing the virus cares about right now is surviving. so we only know that the next big mutation, if we get another wave, will mean that that variant is more transmissible. it could be more severe, it couldn't be more severe, we don't know. it's a crap shoot. and, so, that's why it's really important that we prepare and we are ready. we prepare for the worst and really hope for the best. >> reporter: kelly reiff from glen rose question says what do we know about helping people with long covid, specifically the smell and taste disorders we

know last several months. >> we know long covid is real. an estimate of between ten and 30% of adults that get infected will have long covid. what that means is we're having clinics open across the nation and across the world to try and understand how to treat it. there is really new evidence coming out in the past week showing that predictors of who may be more susceptible to long covid and who may not be. the more clues we can get from the science, the better, because then we can treat those patients maybe with antibody infusions, maybe with some antivirals or other medications. >> reporter: do we know whether severity of the initial infection is an indicator of whether or not someone's going to have long covid? >> so not necessarily. you know, some people that have even asymptomatic disease will end up getting long covid a

month or two later. and, so, we really think that genetics plays a role in here and even maybe some hormones. but, again, we're still trying to identify who gets long covid and why so we can better treat them. >> reporter: molly smith of boston has a question that i think is on the mind of many parents of young children. when will a vaccine be available for children under age five? >> yeah, i am a mom of two under five as well, and i have been waiting desperately for this vaccine. unfortunately, it looks like, you know, we'll be getting data in, in about april, so maybe may, maybe early summer we could see this vaccine. what's really imortant with this clinical trial is that, one, the vaccine is safe for our kids, but, two, the dosa is much lower than for five to eleven-year-olds, and we really need to make sure that dosage is

effective because, if it's not, then we need to figure out another plan, and no one ha seen that data yet except a few select at pfizer and f.d.a. so we're all really looking forward to seeing that data so we can assure that these vaccines are effective for our little ones. >> reporr: epidemiologist katelyn jetelina, so informative as always. thank you so much. >> thanks for having me. >> woodruff: how do we remember our heroes, our nation's greatest victories? a provocative recent book examines the story of what's become known as “the greatest generation” and its impact on america's wars every since. jeffrey brown has the story for our arts and culture series, "canvas." >> brown: americans have their greatest generations, right? >> absolutely.

>> brown: but, elizabeth samet argues, our mythologizing of the world war ii "greatest generation" may, in the end, have harmed us. >> i still see the backward glance at world war ii preventing us from having a clear sense of what we can accomplish today, in, let's ce it, in many ways a very different world from the world of 1945. >> brown: samet's book is titl“" looking for the good war: american amnesia and the violent pursuit of happiness.” this is not, she makes clear, an argument against america's involvement in world war ii, or the just cause in fighting it. rather, she challenges a romanticized, partial view of that era that has influenced our actions since. >> the myth always seems to win out in popular imagination, and it bleeds from popular culture into political rhetoric as well, and into the vocabulary

with which we describe all the wars that have followed. >> brown: and that's why it matters. >> that why it matters, yes. it matters because every time we go to war, we somehow seem to expect a similar result. and we seem to have an endless capacity for surprise when it doesn't work out that way. >> i think stephens is really getting at similar themes. >> brown: samet explores all this from an unusual perch: she's a professor of english at the united states military academy at west point. for the record, her views here are her own. for a 2007 newshour profile, i'd watched her teach a class there on the literature of war to cadets preparing to fight in iraq and afghanistan. she's also the daughter of a world war ii veteran, who died in 2020. he'd served as a staff sergeant in what was then called the army air corps. he didn't speak much of it in later years, but he did enjoy watching war movies with her.

>> i think he liked watching them with me because that was how we spent some time together. he was reluctant to talk about his own war experiences. he would always say to me, when i asked him for a story, "who the hell rembers? it was 100 years ago!" and that was our... >> brown: all in the past. >> all in the past. and that was our ritual. >> brown: she shows how movies in the immediate post-war period, film noir such as “the strange love omartha ivers”-- >> you're so sick, you don't even know the difference between right or wrong anymore. >> you've killed. it says so in your records. >> i've never murdered. >> brown: --often portrayed disaffected, traumatized veterans. and she cites research, and books like studs terkel's 1984 oral history, that offer a nuanced view of soldiers' motives for fighting and sometimes conflicted, even oppositional attitudes on the homefront. by contrast, our prevailing view of the war has been largely shaped by movies like “saving private ryan” and best-selling

books by journalist tom brokaw and historian stephen ambrose, all from the late '90s, and, in samet's view, with an oversimplified view of personal and national purpose. do you not buy the “greatest generation” idea, or even the whole concept of the "good war"? >> wel as my own father was a member of this generation, of course i would-- the loving daughter in me would like to believe that his was the greatest generation. but i just don't think that's a provable claim. and i'm not sure what it might mean. people joined that war for a variety of reasons, the way they join any war, and despite the fact that they made great sacrifices, and heroic sacrifices, many of them, the sense in which they all joined because they were "righteous liberators motivated by ideology" is a false one, according to many studies. >> states like these and their

terrorist allies constitute an axis of evil, aiming to threaten the peace of the world. >> brown: why does this matter? because, she says, political leaders and public sentiment have continued to apply this framing in very different conflicts, as in iraq and afghanistan. >> these were generations of men and women who proved once again that the united states of america is and will remain the greatest force for freedom the world has ever known. >> i think it deeply, deeply burned into the national psyche, and it tapped into longer- standing myths of american exceptionalism, so that the figure of the g.i. as a righteous liberator, which is of course extremely flattering-- why would we not want to belve that? --became something that we would just assume would happen. and the rhetoric that we inherited from that war has shaped all other wars we've fought ever since. and of course those have not yielded victories, and those were not ultimately causes of liberation. >> brown: a deeper understanding

of the past, she says, is also important because of the strong influence of popular culture and political discourse on those she teaches at west point. do you find yourself personally in sort of a contradictory place sometimes? you are surrounded by a kind of ethos of nobility of warfare and purpose. and yet, here you are writing about a kind of purpose gone awry, or a lack of understanding of what war is. >> absolutely. but i think it is necessary work. i think that anything that distorts our sense of what wars can accomplish needs to be recognized for what it is, because i think too highly of the people i know who have signed to do this kind of work, to be casual and careless about how we send them into harm's way. >> brown: so this began for you personally with your father, but it ultimately comes-- it's still personal because of the work you do.

>> i think it is, yes. very much so. >> brown: all right, elizabeth samet, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: provocative. we thank you. and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. join us online, and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you, please stay safe, and we'll see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> for 25 years, consumer cellular's goal has been to provide wireless service that helps people communicate and connect. we offer a variety of no-contract plans, and our u.s.-based customer service team can help find one that fits you. to learn more, visit www.consumercellular.tv. >> fidelity wealth management. >> care.com. >> bnsf railway. >> the ford foundation. working with visionaries on the frontlines of social change worldwide.

>> and 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. 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. >> the signs coming from moscow about a willingness to continue to engage in diplomatic efforts, that gives some reason for cautious optimism. >> nato allies and russia say the door to diplomacy remains open a crack. first we get the mood in moscow with dmitri trenin, director of the carnegie center there. then living in russia's shadow, i'm joined by finland's former foreign minister who sat across the table from putin. and following the money, investigative journalist catherine belton on the influence of russian oligarchs in western capitals. also ahead -- >> ukraine has not qualified for nato. they're notlose t