tv PBS News Hour PBS December 16, 2022 6:00pm-7:00pm PST
6:00 pm
♪ judy: good evening, i'm judy woodruff. on the newshour tonight, one-on-one. cia director bill burns discusses the ongoing war in ukraine and the intelligence challenges posed by china. >> we have no higher priority at cia than, not just taiwan, but the longer term geopolitical challenge that xi's china poses. judy: then, investigating the insurrection. ahead of the january 6 committee's final report, the secret service under scrutiny for not doing more to prevent the capitol attack. and it's friday. david brooks and jonathan capeheart weigh in on contentious congressional budget negotiations and kevin mccarthy's fight to become house speaker. all that and more on tonight's pbs newshour.
6:01 pm
♪ >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by -- >> pediatric surgeon. volunteer. topiary artist. a raymond james financial advisor tailors advice to help you live your life. life well planned. >> and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. and friends of the newshour, including -- >> the landscape has changed, and not for the last time.
6:02 pm
the rules of business are being reinvented with a more flexible workforce by embracing innovation, by looking not only at current opportunities but ahead to future ones. resilience is the ability to pivot again and again for whatever happens next. >> people who know, know bdo. quick's the john s and james all night foundation, fostering engaged communities. more at kf.org. ♪ >> and friends of the newshour. this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting, and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.
6:03 pm
>> we will return to the full program after the latest headlines. it is widely reported that the january 6 committee is ready to vote on seeking criminal charges against former president donald trump. the panel will hold its final meeting on monday. lawmakers will consider asking that the justice department pursue multiple charges. these could include insurrection, obstruction, and conspiracy to defraud the government. a federal appeals court tonight rejected efforts to maintain pandemic related restrictions on asylum-seekers. some conservative states have advocated keeping in place the expulsion policy, which is set to expire next week. it allows border agents to quickly turn away potential asylum-seekers. the states can appeal to the u.s. supreme court. a tentative labor agreement has been reached between the university of california and
6:04 pm
48,000 striking academic workers. the contract will see workers getting up to 66% raises and expanded benefits. five current and former state troopers in louisiana are now accused of brutalizing and killing a black man. the arrest of ronald greene and 2019 generated allegations of a cover-up and multiple investigations. we have a report from new orleans. some of these details are graphic. >> after a years long investigation, a moment of celebration. as the family of ronald greene learns that the five officers involved in his deadly 2019 arrest are being charged with state crimes. his mother said the indictments still fall short of justice. >> it has been over three years. a murderer and a cover-up. let's not forget.
6:05 pm
we had to really struggle just to get what we gotoday. >>'s death gave his family cause for suspicion from the start. authority said he died in a car crash at the end of a high-speed chase. the autopsy emerged last year when the associated press obtained it. in this graphic video, troopers are seen stunning the 49-year-old repeatedly, ignoring his calls for help. one trooper who faces the most serious of the charges dragged him by ankle shackles and ducked his foot into his back forcing him lay down. the video shows him face down in the dirt for more than nine minutes.
6:06 pm
the naacp president in baton rouge reacted. >> people say it is sad that it took all of this, even with a video of a black man getting beaten to death. it should have gotten here. >>'s mother is urging substantial prison time for the officers. >> they need to be held accountable. because if not, you are condoning his killing. you are ok with my son being murdered. >> a federal grand jury investigation into the incident and broader questions about obstruction of justice ongoing. >> basketball star brittney griner has left an army medical center in texas where she has been since her release from a russian prison. she posted on instagram that the last 10 months were a battle. she urged efforts to bring home other americans held in russia.
6:07 pm
she said she would resume play basketball next season. russian missiles blasted ukrainian cities today and one of the largest aerial assaults of the war. the attacks killed at least three people and forced emergency blackouts. people took refuge in subway stations used as makeshift bomb shelters. ukrainian leaders said the attacks will not make them given. japan is making a major break from its self-defense only security strategy. the new policy calls for acquiring first strike capability and cruise missiles. the prime minister said today that the existing litary cannot handle growing threats from china and north korea. >> can the current capability of defense forces deter a threat to our country? we carried out a realistic simulation.
6:08 pm
>> the lders of china pledged to boost the country's economy after pandemic losses. strict lockdown seven ended but there are growing fears of an explosion of covid cases. new protests have arrested peru after the president was told to stay in jail for 18 months. supporters took to the street overnight. they declared a state of emergency. >> it is totally unfair. i hope the peruvian peoe will rise up and defend the popular vote. we elected him. all peruvians are aware of this. >> at least 14 people have died in the ongoing unrest. others remain hospitalized. the father of a man who
6:09 pm
allegedly killed seven people during a july 4 parade in a chicago suburb is facing criminal charges. he sponsored his son's application for a gun license. starbucks workers kicked up a three day walk out today. it is the latest in a series of actions. there have been votes to unionize at 260 company run stores in the u.s.. tsa officers have found over 63,000 firearms so far this year, a new record.
6:10 pm
still to come, journalists covering elon musk have their accounts susnded. more on the week's political headlines. and members of the armed forces help break -- celebrate hanukkah. ♪ >> this is the pbs newshour from washington and from arizona ate university. >> bill burns has been a career diplomat and a pillar for years. for much of the past few years, he has worn a different hat. director of the cia. it was a change of venue and
6:11 pm
scene for him, but not of mission as he sees it. and with a world full of direct and urgent challenges, these are not quiet days at the cia. i met director burns this morning at the sprawling cia headquarters in northern virginia for a rare interview. director bill burns, thank you very much for talking with us. you've been in this job for the last two years. as you reflect on it, is this country safer, more secure, do you think, than when you took office, or not? dir. burns: i hope that's the case. and we certainly worked very hard at cia around the world to try and help keep americans safe as well. and we recognize that this is a moment of profound transformation on that international landscape. and then, you add to that the revolution in technology, which is transforming the way not just the world works, but the way the intelligence profession works as well. we see the rise of major power competition with china and with russia, and then continuing challenges of terrorism and other kinds of problems around the world, too.
6:12 pm
it's never dull. we have our hands full, but i'm deeply proud of the work that the cia is doing on all of those issues. judy: let's talk about ukraine. right now, vladimir putin is giving every indication he's not backing down. he's going to stick with this war of attrition as long as he deter him.an, that nothiilngl is he right? dir. burns: no, i think he's wrong. i think he's wrong in that bet, just as he was wrong, profoundly wrong, in the bet that he made on february 24 when he launched is war. tactically, i think what we see, at least at cia, is a reduced tempo in fighting between the two militaries as winter sets in. the russian military is badly battered right now. the ukrainian military is determined to keep up the pressure, build on their battlefield successes of the last several months. but they also need time to refit
6:13 pm
and resupply. but there's nothing at all reduced about the tempo of putin's increasingly brutal attacks against ukrainian civilians and ukrainian civilian infrastructure. judy: but the cost to the united states, weaponry, ammunition, europeans and what they're sacrificing for this war to go on. you're not concerned that he could outlast all that? dir. burns: i don't underestimate for a moment the burdens, the challenges that this war poses for ukrainians, first and foremost, but for all of us who support ukraine. but strategically, i think in many ways, putin's war has thus far been a failure forussia. the russian military has performed poorly and suffered huge losses. the russian economy has suffered long-term dama. most of the progress that the russian middle class has made over the last 30 years is being deroyed. i think russia's reputation has been badly undermined and its weaknesses he been exposed. the russian population seems increasingly uneasabout the costs of war as well.
6:14 pm
the fact that putin, when he launched at the end of september a partial mobilization, the reality was that more russians of military age fled the country than he was able to round up and send to the front. so he's got a lot of challenges as well. judy: that all may be the case, but he seems perfectly secure. i mean, all those economic hits that the russians took, the sanctions, the country's still charging along. it's still functioning. do you see any real threat to his position? dir. burns: i think there's an unease across the russian population rht now. there's unease from some more hawkish critics who see the conduct of the war as being flawed. and then you have the unease i mentioned before of, you know, lots of russians of military age, young russian men fleeing the country as well. i'm not trying to suggest that that poses an immediate threat
6:15 pm
to his grip on power. he's created a very secure and repressive authoritarian regime in his eyes. but i think you're beginning to see increasing unease russia about the war, and an accumulation of damage to the russian economy and to russians ' future, which is going to take a toll over time. judy: putin has spoken about or suggested the idea of retaliation. what are you most worried about from him, beyond ukraine? dir. burns: there's been some very dangerous nuclear saber rattling by putin and others around him have done. that was part of the conversation i had with one of my russian intelligence counterparts. judy: where do you see that gog? dir. burns: well, i think the saber rattling is meant to intimidate. we don't see any clear evidence today of plans to use tactical nuclear weapons. we've made very clear, the president has made very clear to the russians what the serious risks of that would be. i think it's also been very useful that xi jinping and prime
6:16 pm
minister modi in india have also raised their concerns about use of nuclear weapons as well. i think that's also having an impact on the russians. judy: the other thing that we've seen in the last weeks is the chairman of the joint chiefs, mark milley, general milley, is speaking about winter may be a time for negotiations between ukraine and russia. how do you see that? dir. burns: most conflicts end in negotiations, but that requires a seriousness on the part of the russians, in this instance, that i don't think we see. it's not our assessment that the russians are serious at this point about a real negotiation. judy: i want to bring china into the conversation. what's your level of concern right now about cooperation between the russians and the chinese? dir. burns: i think xi jinping and vladimir putin have formed a pretty close partnership over recent years. a few weeks before putin launched his invasion in ukraine, when they met at the winter olympics in beijing, they proclaimed a friendship without limits.
6:17 pm
it turns out that there actually are some limits to that partnership, at least in terms of president xi's reluctance to supply the kind of military assistance to putin that he's asked for in the course of the war in ukraine. so, i wouldn't underestimate for a moment the commitment between the chinese and russian leaderships to that partnership. but it's been interesting to watch the chinese leadership's reaction to the war in ukraine. i don't think any foreign leader has paid more careful attention to that war and russia's poor military performance than xi jinping has, as he thinks about his own ambitions in taiwan and elsewhere. judy: do you believe there are near-term ambitions on his part to take over taiwan? and i mean this next year or so. dir. burns: i'm not sure i would measure it in terms of months or a year, but i would not underestimate for a moment, nor do any of my colleagues here at cia underestimate his ambition to control taiwan. in other words, to unify beijing
6:18 pm
and taiwan on the prc's terms.ys preference is to do that by means short of the use of force. but we know that he's also instructed his military leadership to be ready by 2027 to launch a war. and so, i think the honest answer is the further you get into this decade, the greater the risks of a military conflict. judy: what is your sense of urgency about all this? my colleague nick schifrin spoke this week with the head of the endo pacific command. he spoke about it being urgent. dir. burns: i share that sense of urgency as well. we have no higher priority at cia than, not just taiwan, but the longer term geopolitical challenge that xi's china poses. and over the course of the two years i've been director, we've established a new mission center, which is sort of the organizational building block at cia.
6:19 pm
it's the only single country mission center we have focused on china. and we've moved resources, people, priority in that direction because it's a global competition. judy: clearly, the world was watching as there were these unprecedented revolts in china, across the country about covid restrictions. those seem to have died down somewhat. but do you think they weaken xi jinping? dir. burns: no, i think he emerged from the recent party congress having consolidated power in the strongest position of any chinese leader, probably since mao. having said that, you know, his leadership is not ten feet tall. china, as we saw in the expressions of frustration in the street over zero-covid policy, as we see in the reality that china's economic growth figures are now at historic lows, we see in the reality that given this chinese leadership's priority for control and order, that sometimes comes at the expense of economic common sense
6:20 pm
as well, and that can have an impact on technological innovation and everything else over time. judy: one other question about china is their very popular social mia platform app, tiktok. your domestic counterpart, the head of the fbi, chris wray, has said it's a threat to u.s. national security. do you agree? dir. burns: i do. i mean, i think it's a genuine concern. in the sense that because the parent company of tiktok is a chinese company, the chinese government is able to insist upon extracting the private data of a lot of tiktok users in this country, and also to shape the content of what goes on to tiktok as well, to suit the interes of the chinese leadership. i think those are real challenges and a source of real concer judy: as you know, some american lawmakers want to ban tiktok. do you think that's a good idea? dir. burns: in my role -- this is where in an intellince role
6:21 pm
i'm not going to offer judgments on those kind of policy or legislative decisions. what i would underscore, though, is that it's genuinely troubling to see what the chinese government could do to manipulate tiktok. judy: and what would you recommend people tell their children or their young friends about whether to use tiktok? dir. burns: i'd be really careful. judy: you want to say anything more than that? dir. burns: no. really careful. judy: iran. these unprecedented countrywide protests that iran has seen after the death of a young woman in police custody, the morality police. is the regime now in serious jeopardy as a result of all this? dir. burns: i think what struck our analysts at cia is both the duration of those protests now almost three months on and their
6:22 pm
scope, because they seem to cut across iranian society, cut across ethnicities, socioeconomic groups. it is about a growing number of iranians who are fed up with economic decay, with corruption, with the social restrictions that especially affect uranian women -- iranian women. they are fed up with political oppression, fed up with the denial of basic human dignity. in the short term, i don't think the iranian regime perceives that immediate threat to its grip. it still has some very practiced habits of repression and brutality that it's continuing to employ. in the long term, though, i think the reality is that this is an iranian regime does not have good answers r what's on the minds of a very young population, 70% of which today is under the age of 30. judy: can those protests continue, though, given the number of arrests, the people who are dead, and now executions?
6:23 pm
dir. burns: i think they can. and that's been a remarkable indication of both that frustration that i mentioned before and also the genuine courage of people out in the streets. this has gone on for just about three months now and it can continue for some time. judy: now, of course, we see iran's involvement with the russians in ukraine using the drones. how worried are you about that relationship now? [10. -- about the relationship now? dir. burns: quite worried. historically, there's a lot of mistrust between russians and iranians, but they need each other right now. and what's beginning to emerge is at least the beginnings of a full-fledged defense partnership between russia and iran, with the iranians supplying drones to the russians, which are killing ukrainian civilians as we speak today. and the russians beginning to look at ways in which technologically or technically
6:24 pm
they can support the iranians, which poses real threats to iran's own neighborhood, to many of our friends and partners in iran's neighborhood as well. judy: where do you see that going, that lethal closeness or lethal relationship? dir. burns: i think it's already having an impact on the battlefield in ukraine. costing the lives of a lot of innocent ukrainians. and i think can have an even more dangerous impact on the middle east as well if it continues. it's something that we take very seriously. judy: just a question about north korea. there was another test today of a solid-state engine missile. the u.s. has no lies on the ground in the country, is that right -- has no eyes on the ground in that country, is that right? [laughter] no answer. where is that headed? where do you see that regime
6:25 pm
going? and do you see any evidence that the u.s. can head off the worst kind of attack that the north koreans may be capable of? dir. burns: i think what we have seen over the last year, just as you said, judy, is quite troubling. more than 50 launches of north korean missiles of various ranges. and clearly preparations for what would be the seventh nuclear test by the north korean regime as well. judy: i want to ask about your role in the administration. president biden has asked you to undertake a number of trips abroad. you were just telling me you travel a lot because you want to stay in touch with cia people around the world. but the president is giving you what looks to be diplomatic responsibilities. why do you think he's doing that? dir. burns: occasionally, i'm asked to do things in afghanistan last year, you know, with regard to russia, ukraine, which takes advantage of some of my previous experience over three and a half decades as a as -- as a career diplomat as well. and i'm always glad to do that.
6:26 pm
but it's always in support of policymakers. it's not a substitute for that. and i do travel a good bit overseas. and it's also about taking care of our people because we ask a lot of our people and our families at cia, especially since 9/11. they've been doing some very hard jobs in some very hard places around the world. so my most profound obligation as a leader is to take care of them so they can conduct our mission as an ency as effectively as they do. judy: last question. does the division, pitical division across this country right now, which is pretty clear , in any way affect the work that you do? dir. burns: it can be a challenge, to be honest, in the sense that we are an a- political organization. our job is to provide the best intelligence that we can collect and analyze to the president, to policymakers, to discuss that with our oversight committees in the congress as well. and to do that without any policy agenda, any whiff of politics.
6:27 pm
you know, over the years, i've worked for six administrations of both parties, and never seen myself as a very partisan person. and so, we work very hard at cia to play things down the middle as well and to be as honest and straightforward as we can. i've seen too many instances over the course of my 40 years now almost in government where we get ourselves in trouble as an agency and as a country of we forget those basic truths that we need to provide the best possible intelligence we can without a hint of partisanship or a policy agenda. judy: cia director bill burns, we thank you very much. appreciate your talking with us. dir. burns: thanks, judy. it's great to be with you. ♪
6:28 pm
judy: twitter is facing intense criticism after a series of moves by billionaire and owner elon musk. the united nations spoke out against the company today, calling its new suspension of some news reporters' twitter accounts disturbing and setting a "dangerous precedent." amna nawaz has more. amna: that's right. twitter suspended the accounts of at least eight journalists yesterday from the washington post, cnn, the new york times, and others, with limited explanations. each of those accounts had posted about elon musk or his policy changes on content moderations. some posted links to an account banned this week that tracked musk's jets through public data. the self-described “free speech absolutist” is now facing backlash. for more on all this, i'm joined by tech journalist kara swisher. she's the host of the "on with kara swisher" and "pivot" podcasts, and has been covering elon musk for more than two decades. kara, welcome. few people have known and
6:29 pm
covered elon musk as long as you have. as you are watching all this unfold, as you saw those suspensions unfold last night, what are you thinking? what is going on here? kara: it is the latest it has been going on since he bought it, one crazy thing after the next, and this is just the latest. things he said he wouldn't do that he is doing, such as creating a moderation council and making decisions on his own, or tweeting misinformation when he said he wouldn't, or releasing twitter files that are probably incomplete. this is just the latest and he is trying to create a sense of crisis and drama around the company so people will be talking about him. he likes attention. i don't know if you have noticed. amna: [laughter] this is the same man who reinstated band accounts, arguing it is about free speech. is any of this about free speech? kara: no, it is about the winds of the richest man in the world and what he feels like doing on any given day. he bought it for too much money,
6:30 pm
and he will break it if you wants to. that seems to be what he is doing. this is not somebody who thinks deeply about big issues like free speech and things like that. it is a lot of parroted nonsense he uses as an excuse to do what he is doing. he is mad at a jet guy who published public information. he then took it out on journalists who wrote about that controversy, and that is where we are. it is not that complex. it is someone who has lacks impulse control. amna: at the same time, we know there are real-world consequences to what we have seen unfold. researchers from the center of countering digital hate, the anti-defamation league, they have tracked a surge in anti-semitism, anti-black rhetoric on twitter. how concerned are you about these real-world consequences? kara: i am not that worried because it is not a big platform. that is one of the proms with twitter. it has never been a very good business and it is not very big.
6:31 pm
celebrities have long since abandoned this because of the toxicity of it and it doesn't help them that muc i think that is where the problem is, it can set the tone for discussions. if i walked outside in san francisco right now, very few people would know what this guy is up to, except in broad terms, that he is the pt barnum of the internet age. i am worried about it and i think it is dangerous when things are allowed to be toxic on a platform, but at the same time it is not a very big platform. amna: at the same time, journalists do use it and some rely on it. it can be a powerful tool. we saw the vp of the european commission saying these suspensions she thought violated the e.u.'s digital services and media freedom acts. tweeted "there are red lines" and "sanctions soon." what about here in the u.s.? do you tnk twitter needs to be regulated? kara: no, i don't. i ink that is going to be a real problem because of first amendment issues. twitter can do whatever it
6:32 pm
wants, unfortunately, and it happens to be owned by someone irresponsible about running it. i think there are different rules in europe, but here in this country, it would be different for anybody to regulate it. one of the things they could regulate is about location data. they have been talking about forcing you to give your location data, or any other data, and that is of privacy concerns. but in terms of allowing people who to kick off and not to kickoff, this is a tech platform ned by a billionaire and he can do what he wants whether you like it or not. you either leave, get your stuff off of there, or you stay and put up with it. amna: what do you know about what is happening in this company? you had a fascinating interview with the former head of the trust and safety council. he left on his own accord but the council was recently dissolved by musk in the last few days. are there people around elon
6:33 pm
musk to tell him what he needs to hear and not just what he wants to hear? kara: no. he has a bunch of enablers and suck ups. i don't know if i can say that on tv, but that is what they are. some people have stayed. they have various reasons, whether visas or personal issues that they have to stay and be paid, or they need health care. but all i am hearing from inside is chaos. whatever he feels on any given day, they have to jump. that is where it is. he may have some method to this madness, but i don't think so. i think it is whatever he fes like. the issue is, this is a company that could have used really good management and cleaned it up and made it something a little more successful financially. we will see if he can do it. i don't see it happening. amna: i foresee more headlines ahead. this is cara swisher. thanks for your time. kara: thanks a lot. ♪
6:34 pm
judy: the house panel investigating the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol is preparing to release its final report next week. questions remain over how much the committee will focus on the federal law enforcement agencies and their response to the insurrection, and if they could have done anything to prevent it. laura barron lopez reports. >> we are going to walk down to the capitol. laura: the fbi and secret service were warned. when hundreds of strummed capital on january 6, 2020 one, capital and dc police were underprepared and under siege. as the house's select committee prepare start issue its final report, questions remain about the threats of violence that went overlooked and communication breakdowns of a nation's top law enforcement. senior officials from the fbi, secret service, and other top
6:35 pm
intelligence agencies never testified publicly before the committee across its nine hearings. >> on this report received onto summer 26, the secret service field office relayed a tip that have been received by the fbi. laura: former fbi agent tracy walder says nothing was a mistake. >> in the final report, what i would really like to see is accountability. i think that is the bottom line. whether it is the secret service or the fbi or local police for not taking some of these threats seriously. and they either need to have new training in place in terms of how to understand some of these threats, or we need to look at creating a federal domestic. terrorism statute speaking before a senate committee laura:, christopher wray defended the actions but admitted the outcome was impermissible. >> i do not consider what happened on january 6 to be an acceptable result, and that is why we are looking so hard at how the process can be improved. laura: the committee's report is expected to heavily focus on former presidentonald trump's
6:36 pm
efforts to overturn the 2020 election. >> we will never concede. laura: and potentially refer criminal charges to the justice department. >> president trump summoned a violent mob and direct them illegally to march on the united states capitol. laura: a forr secret service agent said if bad decisions were made, people should be replaced. >> you should see this information was passed to this person of this rank, then what did that person do with that information? we need to see names and ranks. laura: committee members blasted secret service for missing text messages from the attack, including from members of the former president security detail. secret service said the texts were erased as part of a device replacement program. the deleti of those messages, the committee warns, could have violated federal record-keeping law. >> the secret service had advance information more than 10 days beforehand regarding the proud boys' planning of january
6:37 pm
6. we know now that the proud boys and others did lead the assault on our capitol building. laura: still, the secret service were prominently featured in the testimony. cassidy hutchinson testified the president wanted agents to remove security measures at the rally. >> i overheard the president say something to the effect of i don't care they have weapons, they are not here to hurt me. let my people in. laura: ultimately, they agreed an independent commission like the one established after 9/11 would have achieved more oversight. >> what happened on 1/6 was, for the most part, one of the most violent incidences since 9/11 on american soil. with 9/11, we did call members
6:38 pm
of the c to testify. we did call folks that were higher up in the administration levels in these organizations. but for some reason, we are very hesitant to do that now. laura: lawmakers initially proposed creating a commission to investigate the causes of the january 6 the tack, but republicans blocked that plan. now house republicans have vowed revenge on democrats when they take controlled month. some have called for pardoning. >> there are some defendants begging to go because of the d.c. jail. it is awful. laura: they argued that designations for far-right extremist groups, like the proud boys and oath keepers, is necessary. >>hen we correctly label them as domestic terrorists, which is what their actions are, that puts them into a different box.
6:39 pm
it takes away from them their ability to create this rallying cry around the word patriot. laura: she and others fear answers and accountability for the nation'top law enforcement agenciess may never come. >> the reality is it is unfortunately going to take another attack for something to be done because that is what is going to continue to happen if there is no accountability. laura: the select committee is set to release its findings on monday. for the pbs newshour, i'm laura baran lopez. judy: late today, an fbi spokesperson said the agency had provided private briefings and interviews to the select house committee, and the secret service said they provided "unwavering cooperation" to all oversight efforts, adding that the committee determines what to make public. for live coverage of the january 6 committee's public meeting on monday, join us beginning at 1:00 p.m. eastern right here on pbs and online. ♪
6:40 pm
judy: the january 6 committee prepares to vote on recommending criminal charges against the former president. congress tries to avoid a government shutdown, and the front-runner to be the next speaker of the house still does not have a clear path to the gavel. with all that's swirling in washington, we go to the analysis of brooks and capehart. that's new york times columnist david brooks and jonathan capehart, associate editor for the washington post. hello to both of you on this friday night. so much to pack into the next 12 minutes. jonathan, i am going to you first. we just talked about the january 6 committee on monday, the wide reports tonight they are going to recommend criminal referrals to the justice department against former president trump.
6:41 pm
serious charges. what is your reaction? what do you make of it? david: my initial reaction is, good. we have to understand that these criminal referrals, they go to the justice department. the justice department doesn't have to do anything with them. they might very well just be symbolic, but i do think it is important for the american people to see at lst some branch of the government taking proactive action to hold the former president accountable for what he did, for his actions on january 6. there was contention over the summer whether the committee would even go this route, would even go this far. to see them take this action, or they will take this action on monday, it is a terrific sign. judy: not surprised, but what does this say to you? david: they have been walking up to this. the whole extent of the hearings was about obstruction, insurrection, conspiracy to defraud, and of thosor
6:42 pm
possibly three of the charges they will recommend. this was the logical conclusion. will it lead the to press charges? i don't know, but i wouldn't count on it. i think the justice department works by their own logic. they are very different from the legislative branch and they will do what they do. i don't think it will be a huge push either way. but it is having a political effect. i was struck by a usa today poll where they asked republicans, do you want donald trump? by a two to one margin, they want trump by a to the one margin, they want trumpism, but not trump. a lot of that is fallout from the midterms. a lot of the january 6 stuff is having an effect after a long time on republican voters. judy: is it a blow to the committee if john just it -- if justice does not go ahead and charges based on these referrals? jonathan: i don't think it will be a blow to the committee, but if the justice department does
6:43 pm
not take action with all of the evidence that the committee has presented to the american people, not to mention the evidence that the justice department on its own possibly collected in its various investigations into what happened on january 6, that would be more disappointing. the committee served its purpose. it investigated, it interviewed more than 1000 witnesses, it put on compelling hearings for the american people in ways that the american people could listen, digest, understand, and learn about how close their government came to teetering at the instigation of the former president. i think whether the justice department moves on those referrals or not, i think the committee s been a success. it was very important what they did, not just for educating the american people, but for history's sake. judy: how much do you think it
6:44 pm
matters whether justice goes ahead, as a statement about the significance of this committee? david: i don't think it reflects the significance of the committee, but i think it will change the country if we have a criminal case against a former president. that will be a massive effect. and i think on what the committee revealed to us, the one big take away is that there really was a trump structure behind what happened on january 6. i think walking in he instigated, he gave the inflammatory speeches, then a lot of people marched. but there was more to it than that. to me, that is the nexus of what looks to me like a nonlawyer like criminal activity. judy: david touched on a pole this week about the former president, and i want to tie that to the poll that the newshour did collaborating with npr, asking people not only about president biden's approval, which is up a little
6:45 pm
bit at 43%, but in each party, democrats were asked about whether they think joe biden should be the nominee in 2024. republicans were asked the same question about former president trump. biden, 35% of democrats think he should be the nominee. for trump, 45%. what does that tell us? jonathan: on the republican side, it tells us that even though trump's standing within the party seems to be waning, it is not waning as much as a lot of people think. the fact that 45% of republicans would like for him to be the nominee says he is still very strong and that democrats should not underestimate him, that he says he's running, he made an announcement. we have not seen a lot of him on the campaign trail.
6:46 pm
maybe he is saving the energy for 2023. but we will see if ron desantis jumps into the race, whether governor abbott of texas, whether he jumps into the race, governor sununu in new hampshire jumps into the race. then we will see how much staying power donald trump has. as for president biden, the fact that 35% of democrats want him to run for reelection doesn't tell me a whole lot because democrats have been wringing their hands about president biden since the man took the oath of office, and i would like for all of them to chill out. he is just two years into the first term. let the man do his job. and when he does his job, as we have seen over this last year alone, the dude gets stuff done. stop the handwringing, let him do his job, and let him decide whether he wants to run for reelection, which i think he will. judy: what do you think? david: i am with jonathan.
6:47 pm
democratic voters can be a pain in the rear end. he has passed a lot of legislation, masterfully orchestrated an effort against russia. she has more or less won the midterms. what more do you want? so he is older than some people, but he has had a successful presidency as far as i can tell. this is not just about joe biden, this is something in the dna of the democratic party i have never reallunderstood, why they can't be loyal to a guy who is their guy. judy: we heard it from both of you, chill. and why can't you calm down? let's talk about congress. jonathan, today they voted to keep the government funded for another entire week. what are you looking to see happen? do you think this will get fixed before the end of the year or not? jonathan: i don't know. that is one of two dramas on capitol hill leading to the end of this year. they have to come up with an omnibus bill, a big package that they can pass that will fund the government through the fiscal year, through the end of
6:48 pm
september. the house comes back on the 21st. the goal is for the senate to vote on this omnibus package on the 22nd, then the house vote on it on the 23rd, which is the deadline. we are used to these tight rope walks at the end of the year with congress pushing up against deadlines, but i think what makes this even more treacherous than previous tight rope walks is the new congress that comes in has a republican majority that doesn't even know who it speaker is going to be and is filled with a lot of people who aren't interested in governing. they are interested in tearing things down. it would behoove this current congress to get it done so it is off the table for the next congress. judy: what do the next few weeks look like to you? david: scintillating. [laughter] i don't think the government will shut down. we went through that period in
6:49 pm
1995 where there were serious shutdowns. i think both parties concluded it hurts them both and the country hates it when the government shuts down. i think they will model through. the bad part is we are muddling. a lot of people are stressing over this ai thing that looks like the biggest event of the year. it shows how much society is changing so quickly. and we seem to have a government that cannot adapt to that. we have a government that is essentially run by pots dependents. we take whatever we were spending on last year, and we just do it again. you don't see a lot of adaptation. you see these emergency spending bills that have no sense of priorities, which every
6:50 pm
organization would have. it is the constituencies getting e money or more of the money, but without any sort of mind behind it. it is government by cludge . if that is a word. judy: we just made it a word. do you want to weigh in? david said essentially congress is not doing anything right now. they are clearly passing some legislation. it is not that they have done nothing, but they are having real trouble with these spending decisions. jonathan: right, they are, also because there's a lot of pressure coming from the house on the senate to not do anything on the omnibus bill. i want to go back to something on the npr poll that illuminates what david is talking about. the number one issue voters said was important to them was inflation. number two was threats to democracy. yet the incoming congress, the incoming republican majority, has made it clear their number one prioritys investigations and also impeachments.
6:51 pm
there is a disconnect between what the american people want to congress to focus on and what the incoming majority says it is going to focus on. as long as there is that disconnect, congress will keep muddling through, as david says, in the eyes of the people. judy: connect that to the fact that kevin mccarthy is not finding a very easy path to the speakership ofhe house. david: it is a fractious party, but it is more than that. whatever you think of kevin mccarthy, he probably won't be the greatest speaker on earth. i think he probably will be the speaker. he campaigns for other republicans. he is part of the team and politics is a team sport, so that means you give and get. you look at the people opposing him on the republican side. they raised almost no money for their party, they did no
6:52 pm
campaigning, so they are not members of a team. they are not team players. there is a rise of almost nihilism in the party of people who will not be team players. if you are not willing to serve the institution, not willing to serve your party, you are undermining your party in a big way. judy: on this very uplifting note, we are going to thank both of you. david brooks, jonathan capehart, thank you. ♪ judy: over the past few years, the newshour has asked one of the defense department's units, called the defense visual information distribution service, to film a holiday song with service personnel from around the world. this year, they have produced a hanukkah song to mark the beginning of the holiday, which starts this sunday. >> ? oh hanukkah, oh hanukkah >> ? let's have a party ? >> ? gather around the table, we will give you a treat ?
6:53 pm
>> ? and while we ? >> ? are dancing ? >> ? the candles are burning warm for each night they will shut us with light to remind us of this long ago one for each night it will shed us with light to remind us of days long ago ? >> ? oh hanukkah, hanukkah, come light the menorah >> ? come to a party, we will all dance the hora ? >> ? we will give you a treat >> ? dreidel's to play with and latkes to eat ? >> ? and while we are playing the candles are burning low ? >> ? one for each night, they shed sweet light to remind us of days long ago ? >> ? one for each night, they will shed a sweet light, to remind us of days long ago ? ? judy: great voices, and how special to hear from these
6:54 pm
servicemembers around the world. for discussion of the growing rift within the gop over government funding, tune into "washington week" tonight on pbs. and on tomorrow's pbs news weekend, a look at the crisis afflicting the cryptocurrency market, and ideas for how to regulate it. with that, that is the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. 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 -- ♪
6:55 pm
>> moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. ♪ >> and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. and friends of the newshour. including kathy and paul anderson. and camilla and george smith. the walton family foundation, working for solutions to protect water during climate change so people and nature can thrive together. the william and flora hewitt foundation. for more than 50 years, advancing ideas and supporting institutions to promote a better world, at hewlett.org. ♪ >> and friends of the newshour.
6:56 pm
7:00 pm
tonight on kqed newsroom, a major scientific breakthrough holds hope for a cleaner and safer planet. >> simply put, this is one of the most impressive scientific feats of the 21st century. we speak with oakland mayor libby schaaf about her time in office and what she has accomplished. plus, we take a look back at our eventful year as 2023 draws near. comi t
106 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
KQED (PBS) Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service The Chin Grimes TV News ArchiveUploaded by TV Archive on