♪ geoff: good evening. i'm geoff bennett. amna nawaz is on assignment. on the "newshour" tonight, former president donald trump is arraigned in federal court following his indictment in the january sixth insurrection case. former attorney general bill barr gives an insider's take on the latest trump indictment. >> the abuse was conducted after the election and the abuse was conducted by trump. geoff: and, four years after a mass shooting killed nearly two dozen people in el paso, texas, two people affected by the tragedy reflect on gun violence and grief. ♪

>> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by. >> pediatric surgeon, volunteer, topiary artist, financial advisor, tailored advice to help you live your life, life well planned. ♪ >> the candida fund, committed to advancing restorative justice and meaningful work through performative leaders and ideas. more at candidafund.org. carnegie corporation of new york, supporting organizations and democratic engagement and the advancement of international peace and security at carnegie.org. and with the ongoing support of these individuals and 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. iversity.at arizona stategton, geoff: welcome to the newshour. it has become a familiar sight. for the third time this year, former president donald trump was arraigned on criminal charges. today, he was in federal court in washington, just a few blocks from the u.s. capitol, where a mob of his supporters rioted on january 6th and in the same courthouse, where hundreds of participants in that attack have also appeared as defendants. mr. trump pleaded "not guilty" to felonies relating to efforts four to overturn the 2020 election and remain in power.

among them, conspiracy to defraud the united states, obstruction of an official proceeding, and conspiracy against the right to vote. mr. trump spoke to reporteres after his court appearance. >> when you look at what's happening, this is a persecution of political opponents. this was never supposed to happen in america. this is the persecution of the person that's leading by very, very substantial numbers in the republican primary and leading biden by a lot. so if you can't beat him, you persecute them or you prosecute him. we can't let this happen in america. geoff: cameras were not allowed in the courtroom but a handful of reporters were given access. carrie johnson was among them. she's a justice correspondent for npr and joins us now from the court house. thank you for being with us. you were in the overflow room. give us a sense of how the proceedings unfolded and what

could you make out of strict trump's demeanor? carrie: we were waiting most of the day for the proceeding to start. it started a little late after 4:00 p.m. the former president entered through the back of the courtroom. he seemed somber and spent a lot of time talking with his two attorneys and seemed animated and flipping through court papers. when the magistrate judge took the bench, trump paid close attention to her, he talked about his name, age, and took an oath to tell the truth when answering questions. it was a remarkable moment when the clerk called out the case, the united states versus donald j. trump. it really steps away from the u.s. capitol, which was the scene of the crime in many ways. geoff: the magistrate judge also told trump, do not commit a crime and tamper with the jury. how did he respond? carrie: the magistrate judge basically said trump would be

released on limited conditions. one, pretty basic, do not commit a new alleged crime while on release. two, do not retaliate against anybody you think is a witness, do not talk with anyone you think may be witnesses without the presence of their lawyers. trump nodded and said he understood all of that. he basically paid close attention to the judge and followed along with what she was saying. geoff: mr. trump's attorney john lauro shared an argument in the courtroom, when he shared on the program last night,, saying that the government had years to bring the case, and the trump legal team would need more time to bring a defense. tell us how the judge reacted to it. carrie: this is going to be the heart of the matter. the judge wanted to set a next judge appearance for donald trump and the prosecutors wanted to pick the first available date. donald trump and his lawyers wanted to pick the last available date, so it will be a push and pull.

the special counsel's office would like to go to trial under the speedy trial act and they are ready to share information with donald trump and his defense lawyers relatively soon. john lauro says he is not aware of the magnitude of the evidence in the case and there could be reams of paper documents, electronic evidence, a years long investigation, anything semi-be absurd to follow the speedy trial rule. he says he would like trump to get a fair trial, not a fast one. in the magistrate said she could guarantee in the courthouse, he would get a fair trial. geoff: we have a date for the next hearing in the case, august 28, a few weeks away. that suggests that this is going to be a speedy trial. how do you read it? carrie: judge tanya chutkan, a longtime defender appointed to the bench by former president obama, is relatively no-nonsense and have. she will present -- no-nonsense and tough. she will preside next month, and

the magisterium says she would like to set a trial date at the hearing. the open question is trump already faces trial in march in new york city over alleged house payments to stormy daniels. he is for trial in may of 2024 over the mar-a-lago documents, the allegedly classified documents found that his resort. it is hard to see when and that disease schedule -- in that busy schedule they can look at the case for trial. more will be clear on what the judge says for sure. geoff: the former president is facing three trials in three separate jurisdictions and running for president again. has the trump legal team given any idea on how they plan to handle it? carrie: their strategy is to delay for as long as possible. even though he hasn't trial date set next year, i am not sure he

will not go back to the judge and ask for additional delays. with respect to the case, the defense preferences to try the case after the election. that is important because of trump becomes the president again, he could pardon himself or direct's new attorney general to get rid of the federal cases altogether. geoff: we are so grateful to have you as our eyes and ears in the courtroom on this historic day. carrie: my pleasure. ♪ stephanie: i am stephanie sy with the latest headlines. a federal judge formally imposed the death penalty on the gunman who carried out the worst attack on jews in u.s. history. robert bowers killed eleven people at the "tree of life" synagogue in pittsburgh in 2018. he never expressed any remorse. before the sentencing today, u.s. district judge robert colville told the court that, quote, "there is nothing i could

say to him that might be meaningful." the u.s. military is said to be considering a major new move to stop iran from seizing commercial ships in the persian gulf. reports today said officials are actively considering putting armed troops on civilian vessels as tensions with tehran increase. the pentagon has already sent more warships and planes to the region. federal prosecutors announced the arrest of two navy soldiers, alleging they provided information to china. both men were stationed in southern california. charges include sharing details on wartime exercises, naval operations and critical technical material. both sailors pleaded not guilty in federal court. in niger, hundreds of people marked the country's independence from french rule in 1960, with a rally supporting last week's military coup. capital, protesters denod ow ewas that hasnaoc, coemnethe up

>> the people are coming, and we're going to demonstrate to all the ecowas countries and all those who are taking unpopular and inhumane measures against niger, which is in the process of freeing itself from the yoke of colonization. stephanie: niger elected someone who describe themselves as a hostage and warned the coup could have devastating consequences if it pursues. a man drove a car onto a crowded sidewalk and one person died at a shopping mall outside in the seoul, korea. the unidentified suspect was arrested at the scene. police called it terrorism but did not give details. south korea is hosting the "world scout jamboree" amid triple-digit heat. more than 40,000 people are attending, most of them teenage

scouts, and at least 600 have been treated for heat exhaustion in the first 2 days. dozens of military doctors and nurses have deployed to help treat patients suffering headaches, dizziness and nausea. organizers say more help is on the way. >> to prepare for more patients with heat-related illnesses, we are going to install more air conditioners for five hub clinics. there are already air conditioners in place, but we feel that we need more in this kind of heat. stephanie: texas a&m university announced a $1 million-dollar settlement today with kathleen mcelroy, a black journalism professor at the university of texas. a&m had agreed to hire her to run its journalism department, but she rejected the offer when it became known it had been significantly reduced over her support of diversity and inclusion. the school's president resigned in july over the scandal. still to come on the "newshour," rising hospitalizations point to another summer surge in covid infections. a wildfire in the mojave desert

threatens california's iconic joshua trees. and much more. ♪ >> this is the pbs newshour from weta studios in washington, and from the west at walter cronkite school of journalism in arizona. geoff: as we reported earlier, former president donald trump returned to washington today to face a federal judge on charges related to his alleged efforts to stay in power, and overturn the 2020 presidential election results. i spoke with trump's former attorney general bill barr earlier today about the historic legal case his former boss is now facing, as well as his memoir, now out in paperback. former attorney general bill barr, thank you for being with us. bill: thank you for having me. geoff: this is donald trump's third arrest in four months previously charged by the special counsel in the classified documents probe and

before that, by that manhattan grand jury for business fraud. in your mind, what sets this case apart from the previous two? bill: well, this case is more serious. first, i don't think alvin bragg's case is a legitimate case. i think that is a political head. but i think this case is the most serious of the cases, because the conduct here involves trying to subvert and prevent the progress. the execution. probably the most important process of proceeding we have in our country, which is the early peaceful transfer of power after criminal action. and what's being alleged here is that he knew that he lost the election, he knew that the claims of stolen election were false, and yet he decided he was going to try to stay in office by subverting that process, by putting out misinformation, but more important, by putting out these false panels of electors

and presenting them to congress and trying to push the vice president to make these decisions that suppress the legitimate votes. i mean, that was outrageous. and putting aside whether it's criminal or not, you know, i do not see how the republican party can nominate someone who's capable of doing something like that. geoff: in your book, you cataloged the chaos at the end of mr. trump's time in office. you had unique access to him. you were familiar with his thinking, his thought processes. did he know he was lying about election fraud? bill: i -- you know, initially, i could not tell. but he didn't appear to really care about what the answers were. and he kept on repeating the same charges even after other people sat and watched them through him and explained that there was no problem with those allegations. and he kept on repeating them. he didn't really appear to care about the facts. but i have come to believe that

he knew that he lost the election because something i didn't know at the time when i was telling him that was that his own campaign was telling him that, in fact, i was concerned at the time that that maybe his campaign was feeding some of this stuff to him. but on the contrary, i think everyone was telling him he lost. geoff: there are republicans who have disparaged this case as being politically motivated. how do you see it? was an indictment warranted in this january 6th related case? bill: yeah, i think it is a legitimate case. i don't understand the attacks on the department and saying it's abusive or it's weaponization for bringing this case. when someone says, you know, this is unfair, this is part you know, there's some other motive here. the first question is, okay, was the crime done? was there serious wrongdoing here? or is this a case of going after somebody really didn't do anything or a technical violation or stretching the law way beyond where it should be? no. there was very grave wrongdoing here, and i think it's reasonable to say that it falls within the obstruction of a

proceeding. that is not weaponization. that is enforcement of the law. and, you know, are there some hair on the case? is it hard to prove? are there areas where, you know, they may not be able to make the case? perhaps. are there some disadvantages for having brought the case? i think there are, but i think it's unfair to say that this was an abuse. the abuse was on after the election and the abuse was conducted by trump. geoff: but what are the disadvantages that you see in terms of bringing this case? bill: well, i think it's coming at a time where there is a profound feeling among many americans that there are two standards of justice, and i believe that that's a justified concern. and i think to come at the same time you see sort of the mishandling of the hunter biden investigation. i think it's going to be very hard to persuade people that it is not political. no, i don't think bringing this

case was political, but i think i can understand why people would think it is. given the handling of the hunter biden thing, that is one. and the other is it helps trump, you know, and i think that has to be taken into account. what are we trying to do here? if the feeling is that his conduct was dangerous and we don't want this stuff happening, i can see why people would say, okay, well, we have to prosecute this. but on the other hand, you're making it more likely that he could get back into office. geoff: what do you make of the job that the current attorney general, merrick garland, is doing? because there are democrats and republicans who, for different reasons, criticize the doj, and they say that it took too long to bring this case. and now here we are in the middle of an election, and to your point, it helps donald trump. bill: i do not know why -- i don't think it took that long. i mean, i think they were focusing on the people who who went into the capitol, these

lower-level people for a while, and i said publicly and, you know, they seem to have decided just to do that and not work their way up the chain and see what happened. i don't -- i have seen articles to say that there was some resistance to the idea of doing that from others, including the fbi, but i think it was a legitimate investigation to look at what happened on january six. i would like to know some things about, you know, what happened there. but i do think that garland -- attorney general garland should -- i think he needs to act swiftly to deal with hunter biden thing because i think it's hurting the department a great deal. and i don't think it's possible for an attorney general to distance themselves from this kind of decision and say, well, this u.s. attorney was a trump u.s. attorney, made the decision. you own the decision. the decision has to be right, in your judgment, as attorney general. so, i think -- i would advise him to pull the issue and make a decision as to whether it's going to be a felony or a

misdemeanor, make the decision, explain it, and make sure that you can assure congress that there's a vigorous investigation by the the other aspects of the case. geoff: the trump legal team, as you well know, they're floating their legal defenses. i spoke with john lauro, mr. trump's attorney, on this program last night, and he said that the january 6th related indictment is an attack on mr. trump's free speech and his right to political advocacy, even though the indictment makes clear that it's focused on mr. trump's conduct. do you think that line of defense will find its way into a courtroom? bill: oh, i am sure it will. and i also think that's a sort of a version of what the real issue is. the real issue is whether it's possible to impose liability in this case without

chilling other kinds of the judgment speech. i don't think the stuff that was -- legitimate speech. i don't think the stuff that was involved here that that is in the crosshairs of the prosecutor is stuff that he's entitled to do under the first amendment. but you don't want to have a fuzzy decision here where future campaigns are reluctant to challenge the outcome because they're afraid of what someone may think. you know, try to accuse me of this being a crime, and i think that's a legitimate concern. but i think this this indictment was carefully drawn. and they are saying that they will prove that trump knew what, that the election was not stolen. and they are focused in on deceitful actions and false fraudulent actions such as submitting false slate of electors and trying to use those to create the illusion that there was a bona fide dispute within a state that the vice president could then rule on. and that was a complete fallacy. and he doesn't have a constitutional right to do that. geoff: well, mr. lauro also said that the former president was following the advice of his lawyers to include john eastman,

that he had the advice of counsel. how solid a defense is that in your view? bill: i think that's quickly going to fall apart. first, trump basically searches around for any lawyer he can find who agrees with his predisposition. he doesn't get advice and follow it. he looks for a lawyer who will tell him what he wants to hear. and here he was saying, you know, just passing through all the lawyers, all the government lawyers, all his campaign lawyers who are telling him, no, no, no. and he finally found this professor who it's going to be interesting to say what he actually told them, because i don't think he necessarily said this is legal and it's okay. i think he said, well, you know, you might be able to make an argument there. you might make it that the courts wouldn't accept it and so forth. so we'll have to see how he casts it, but there's a big practical hurdle to him doing that, because he's going to have to get on the stand to raise that defense and subject himself to cross-examination, and

they'll have to waive attorney -client privilege, and eastman would have to get on the stage -- on the stand, so -- geoff: would you ever testify? bill: well, if they call me, of course. i'm hoping i'm not called as a witness. but if i am, i will testify. geoff: why not? why are you hoping that you're not called? carrie: -- bill: i have better things to do. [laughter] geoff: well, let me ask you this, can mr. trump get a fair trial in washington, d.c., because his legal team is asking for a change of venue, or at least they say they're going to ask for a change of venue because they say that d.c. isn't politically favorable. bill: tell be honest, i feel strongly that the most important thing in any of these, whether you like the defendant when you rooting for him or not, is fairness to the individual. to be honest, i think that this may not be a fair jurisdiction for him, given the heat of political sentiment these days. so i think that motion is worthy of consideration.

i would just point out the other case, i thought the justice department sought a venue in florida rather than d.c. and then it was moved to even more favorable jurisdiction for peers. so, you know, that favors the president, president trump. i think it would be good to consider that here. geoff: it is remarkable how little visibility the american public have into what you can argue is the most important federal criminal proceeding in u.s. history. there's only a handful of reporters who are allowed into the courtroom and there are no cameras that are allowed. should an exception be made, should cameras be allowed into this proceeding so that the american public can watch it unfold? bill: no, i don't think so. i'm opposed to cameras in court. i mean, our politics and our life is becoming more and more like a reality tv program and everyone's posturing and political conversations or talking points and so forth. and i'd hate to see that start happening more and more in the courts where it's more it's performance rather than substance.

geoff: what did you see in donald trump initially that made you want to serve as his attorney general? bill: well, you know, i didn't want to serve as his attorney general. i was actually not interested at all in going into the government. i had reservations about him. i didn't support him initially. but my view was he was the duly -- newly elected president, and i felt he was being unfairly treated, and as he was being sworn in and trying to run a normal administration. and i felt that he did he was entitled to that, and i also saw some good things about him. i mean, everyone focuses nowadays on the same criticisms i have. but, you know, he was he was willing to speak plainly to take on issues that other people were afraid to talk about. and he also, i think, had the stamina to keep on going on these issues and try to keep his election promises. and i think his policies substantively were ones that i generally agreed with. i didn't like the way they were presented and the erratic nature

of the administration and so forth. but so i went in because i felt we were headed toward a constitutional crisis and i thought, i can help stabilize things, and especially at the department of justice. geoff: you were, for a time, one of the president's most influential, most ardent supporters in his administration even faced criticism for personally intervening in high profile cases. the roger stone case, the michael flynn case characterizing the mueller report before it was made fully available to the public. do you have any second thoughts about that or regrets about serving in his administration? bill: no, i don't. i would agree that, you know, maybe i was influential. but, you know, you said the most ardent supporter i support, i supported the president as a member of his cabinet, but i think more than many others, because i had heard so much about him beforehand from my new york business colleagues, that, you know, i realize his deep faults and he has very, very

deep faults. but he was the newly elected president of the united states. and i would note that people are talking about the weaponization of the department, and i have -- have said them sometimes where i bother him to engage with him is he sees how i was going after the president's enemies. who did i go after? and there was a long silence. and then they start talking about cases where i intervened to lighten their treatment. friends of the president, stone, and flynn and i and i said, well, that's because we're not going to weaponize the department. in each case, demonstrably the line prosecutors, the normal system kicked out treatment that never would have been done in any other case. they asked for a sentence 2 to 3 times higher than would normally be given. and i said no. we're going to leave it to the judge. geoff: well, there are democrats

who make that same case about hunter biden. that hunter biden is facing the kind of prosecution that he's only facing because he's the president's son. bill: i disagree because those charges relate to some of them were brought under me. so, for example, the democrats were constantly beating up the administration for not prosecuting people who lie when they get their guns or lie and try and they say, you know, you are weak on guns. you're not prosecuting people who do that. i said, ok. i made it a priority. it was one of the top priorities of department to prosecute felonies, people who lie on their gun applications. lo and behold, one of the first people to scroll into view is none other than hunter biden. and he was brandishing that gun in photographs and stuff. in my opinion, he should not be allowed to plead to a misdemeanor. he should be charged with a felony. and other people have been charged with felonies in those cases. so, you know, i hear what they're saying, but i think

they're wrong if they're thinking that this should be an automatic misdemeanor. geoff: you are clear in your book that the gop needs to move on from donald trump, and yet he is the dominant figure still far and away ahead of the pack in terms of the folks who are running to be the gop nominee in 2024. is his nomination inevitable, do you think? bill: no, i don't think so. i think the media and trump and many others are way ahead of themselves. i think he has a hardcore following of about 30 or 35% in the republican party. i think there's about 20% in the republican party who tend to support him, but they are very much attuned to his problems and are willing to shift. i think that they were shifting in droves up until alvin bragg's indictment, and then all of a suddenly snapped back. and i think that reflects that, you know, when they're asked by a pollster, they instinctively want to man the ramparts for the president, who is the former

president, and they feel is embattled. for the president, who is the -- embattled. but i think that that's going to change over time. and i think if the republicans are able to get the number of candidates down and it becomes more like a two or three man race, i think there's a good chance of having another nominee, and that is what i hope and i think it's essential for the future of the republican party. geoff: you said in a previous interview that there could be or there will be more shoes to drop in the special counsel investigation. what do you think those might be? bill: well, i do not think -- i think it would be more evidence. and perhaps, as we saw in the document case in mar-a-lago, maybe another additional charge. geoff: evidence like what? bill: well, i think evidence of his knowledge, evidence of statements he's made or other things that would be appropriate of what his state of mind was and whether he understood that he lost the election. i think there could be a lot more evidence on that.

i think they have evidence on a number of fronts, and i don't think the department is going to throw all of its evidence and in its first filing. geoff: were you questioned by jack smith? bill: i am just not getting into any discussions i have with the government. geoff: do you believe that that you that it's your duty to speak to him if he were to call? bill: of course. if he asked me to talk to him, i word. i would talk to the special counsel. geoff: would republicans ever turn away from donald trump if he were to be convicted? >> i think a lot of republicans would. i think over time when they see some of the facts here that are characteristic of his behavior, that they will. but i think, unfortunately, a lot of republicans are, you know, seem to be tolerant of behavior that i don't think is appropriate for the chief executive. you know, one of the things, you know, he has a lot of people who follow him stubbornly. and one of the interesting things is the people who actually have worked with him have seen him, seen them behind

the scenes. not many of them are supporting him. geoff: i spoke with, as i mentioned, mr. trump's attorney last night, and i asked, is there any universe in which donald trump would accept a plea deal? and he said no. should donald trump accept the plea deal as a potential threat of prison time is that great? bill: i don't -- i mean, i wouldn't push him to accept a plea deal, and i don't think he will. i actually think this stuff about prison time is light at the end of the day. even if he's convicted, even if he's convicted of both crimes, i don't think he will serve a day in prison geoff: as a former president, is it appropriate? bill: i think he'll have a felony record, but i think i think any president, republican or democrat, in any department of justice, would basically cut some kind of deal so we don't have the spectacle of a former president in prison. i don't think that's going to happen now. the president is out there, of course, saying he's at risk of 500 years in prison or something

like that because he's raising money. geoff: if donald trump is reelected, what would a second term mean for this country and what would a second term trump doj look like? i mean, the legal advisers who had his ear at the end of his term, the majority of the many of them are now unindicted coconspirators in this indictment. bill: yeah, i think many of the people who he might otherwise turn to won't have law licenses during the second term. so it'll be interesting to see how his staffs in the department of justice. i found in the in his first term that the only way to really talk sense into him was to say, this is going to hurt you and it's going to hurt your reelection chances and so forth, who then would pay attention. so i am concerned that in a second term, he will be off the hook. there will be no way of controlling him, and he also surround himself with yes, yes, man. geoff: former attorney general bill barr. his memoir, now out in paperback is " damn thing after one another: memoirs of an attorney general." for people who haven't read the

book, the title, can you quickly explain where that came from? bill: so it's a story that attorneys general tell because when when reagan appointed william french smith, william french smith went to talk to one of his predecessors ed leavey, who was an academician. he had been dean of the law school at chicago, smoked a pipe or a -- pipe, wore a tree jacket. and he said, you know, ed, you know, tell me about this job of attorney general. and he was expecting to hear this, you know, elevated lecture about separation of powers. and i believe he put on his pipe and said, "one damn thing after another." so that's what attorneys general has told each other since then, that that's the job and that's the basis of the title. geoff: bill barr, thanks for coming in. bill: two i. good to see you. -- thank you. good to see you. yep. ♪ geoff: four years ago today gunman entered a walmart in el , a paso, texas, fatally shooting 23 people and wounding 22 others.

the shooter targeted hispanic shoppers in one of the deadliest such attacks in u.s. history. last month, he was sentenced in federal court to 90 consecutive life sentences, as grief-stricken family members read emotional statements in court. we hear reflections now from two people intimately connected to the tragedy of that day. >> my name is adria gonzalez, and i live right now in georgia, and i am a walmart shooting survivor. >> my name is gilberto luis anchondo. everybody calls me tito. and i lost my brother, andre anchondo and his wife, jordan anchondo in the el paso walmart shooting. >> once we heard the gunshots going on, the first thing that happened to me was, how many were there this summer how many shooters or what was really going on? so i left my mother in the meat section, and i went to the front and that's when i saw everything.

a body laying down with blood. people screaming. and i saw him for some seconds as he was holding the gun. i took off my cap and just started yelling in spanish and english, vamanos, vamanos, let's go, it is this way because that was our walmart. >> my dad got nervous because he knew that my brother was going to be in that area. i started just calling and he did not answer. it turns into a dream. you start hearing things and you know your mind's trying to process it. one of my brother's friends, his dad was one of the police officers at the at the scene and i said please man just tell me like is my brother alive or dead ? and he was like, i just want you to know tito, he's like, your

brother is a hero. he tried, you know, he tried to stop the guy. he protected his family and i just want you to know that your brother is a hero. so that's when i kind of realized, you know, things were not looking good. >> before, i did say that i do forgive him, but now that time passes and i have a baby now, it really angers me sometimes that there has not been any justice yet for us. nothing has changed. there's a saying in mexico, an eye for an eye, teeth by teeth. ojo por ojo, diente por diente. the reason that i want the death penalty is because these type of people are like virus. it is not about feelings. it is about justice because what i saw that morning, bodies with blood, him with the weapon. i even heard from his mouth "f" the mexicans. he didn't care. >> a lot of people get upset because i'm against the death

penalty. because i think that's just too easy. that is an easy out. i think it's worse punishment sitting with your thoughts, knowing that you got arrested in jail and you have no freedoms left, i think that's the worst punishment a human being can get. i was able to look that guy in the in his eyes and you know, forgive him and let him know that his actions will not affect the rest of my life. my brother was a very loyal type of person. he was a great, funny individual. he was about to be a great father. the next year, following the shooting, my father dies as well. it is very depressing at times. i am not going to lie. it does get very depressing, but at the same time, it's it's something that has helped change my life to become a little bit more responsible and, you know, mature. >> i'm very happy that i'm not in el paso anymore. mentally, it was not helping me to be in el paso. it hurt me to the point where i would drive and i would see that walmart. it was too much for me.

i personally changed who i trust now, how i go to stores or restaurants. before i go, i check where the exit doors are. if i parked somewhere, i look at the license plates. i look who comes out of the car. my wife considered that i should go and take some courses of how to shoot a gun, and now i carry a weapon with me. i don't like carrying guns. it's not in me. but with what's going on now that i have a baby with me, now that i have my child, now it's not only my protection but it's my baby's protection now. >> my nephew is doing really, really amazing. he reminds me a lot of my brother. he was at my moms house. he was staring at a photo of his father and he was crying, and she said, what's wrong, what's going on?

he said, miss my dad. so, it is strange to see -- sorry. it is strange to see -- you know, you see them as children and you think they are not as intelligent as a full-grown adult, but that is completely wrong. we need to show, you know, my nephew and my daughter love so that they don't grow up and, you know, thinking that this world is just, you know, full of fear and danger. >> i'm still looking for some closure, but it's getting better. what moves me is my family, what moves me is -- just to wake up in the morning and take my coffee. just simple things in life. that is what makes me happy, just waking up and seeing my daughter's eyes and seeing that she is ok. that is my closure, knowing that she is ok. ♪

geoff: signs point to a covid-19 summer surge once again for the fourth consecutive year. overall, infections remain much lower compared to the past, but cases began increasing last month. john yang looks at the growing concerns. john after months of decline, : numbers from the centers for disease control and prevention show reported cases and hospitalizations are on the rise slowly, to be sure, but still rising. for the week ending in july 22, covid-19 hospital admissions were up by 12% from the week before, and emergency department visits up by 17%. while the cdc says covid deaths are the lowest they've been since the government started keeping track, between 300 and 400 americans are still dying each week. katelyn jetelina is an epidemiologist at the university of texas. she writes a popular substack column, your local epidemiologist.

when you hear those numbers, what they tell you? what does this bike tell you? >> it tells me, here we are yet again. we find ourselves in the middle of this summer wave of covid-19. i don't think this should be surprising because we have seen a summer wave the past three years, particularly in the south. due to a combination of three things. one, the virus continues to mutate about two times faster than the flu. two, people are moving inside because of the heat and three , this susceptibility pool is growing. our protection is waning over time. i will say, though, that there's two pieces of good news, though. one is that like you, said john, although metrics are increasing their starting from very low absolute levels, which is certainly helpful for a hospital systems. and then, two, some signs today actually indicated that acceleration is slowing down. so

we need the starting to crp care soon. john: should people be concerned or are there particular types of people who should be concerned? >> i think it depends on how you define concerned. i mean, this is definitely causing disruptions and family vacations, which is not fun. it's also not fun to take care of a sick toddler or getting sick yourself for a week, but those most at risk right now for severe disease remain to be -- remain to be older people and immunocompromised. particularly those that haven't had their spring booster or haven't been infected and more than six months -- in more than six months. john: the white house is eliminating the job of covid coordinator, the cdc no longer tracking positive tests. a lot of state health officials no longer tracking that has this created a sense that well, it's all over? >> well, you know, the cdc is

still tracking some metrics and i do agree that we are in a very different place in compared to, 2023 for example, 2020. i understand the mindset for man. -- mindset for, thank goodness that is done, but we do the public disservice by rolling over saying let's move on because the truth is the virus does not care. covid is obviously still here. it is going to be with us. it's gonna cause disruptions, and it's going to cause a lot of people to lose their lives, and we can prevent this. and we prevent that by removing the gaps for a lot of room for improvement. for example, one in four nursing home residents get paxlovid during covid 19 infection and this is absolutely unacceptable. so we still have a lot of work to do, and public health cannot do it without engaging the public. john: talk about that there's still work to be done. you say that protection is waning. uh, is this sort of lack of concern or feeling that it's over, contributing to the low rate of people getting boosters?

when the last booster came out, only 17% of us got a booster shot. >> yeah, i'm very nervous about booster rates specifically going into fall and specifically among those over 65. last fall, you percent of those over 65 got a covid 19 vaccine. and if we compare this to the flu, so a 5% of the same -- 75% of the same population got a flu vaccine, and that's a disappointing difference, given covid 19 more severe than the flu for this population. for this fall, i think we still have a lot of unanswered questions, though, like we know we're getting an updated vaccine formula, but we still don't know who is eligible yet. the cdc is gonna decide that in the next month, um so to be determined to use eligible this fall, but i hope everyone who is gets a vaccine. john: i want to ask you quickly because there's so many so much concern among people out there about specific advice and tips you might have.

i'm just going to name a topic and get a quick answer. masks? >> yes, you should wear wearing masks and crowded areas, especially during a surge. john: but what about at home and when you're walking on the street? >> so, certainly at home it works. if you want to reduce household transmission. i wouldn't wear a mask when walking your dog. just be distance to other people. john: home testing? >> at home antigen and tests are incredibly valuable tool. keep in mind, though, that there's a lot of false positives and the beginning of symptoms. so be sure to retest if you get a negative within 48 hours. john: and if you get a positive, how long should you isolate? >> the cdc says it is five days, but a lot of people are still infectious, which means please wear. if you leave isolation at five days, the best practice is to

test again. whenever you get a negative on the antigen test, you're not contagious anymore and you're good to go. john: thank you very much. geoff: firefighters are working to control the massive blaze known as the "york fire" that has swept through the california desert and into nevada. a brief but heavy downpour tuesday helped containment efforts, which were at about 35% as of this morning. but a wildfire of this scale did not used to be common in the mojave desert landscape, known for its unique vegetation and animal species. stephanie sy explores what has already been lost, and why experts say it's unlikely it will grow back. stephanie: in this part of california's mojave desert near the nevada border, smoky skies are not the view they are used to. >> there is a haze. you cannot see ahead. i mean you cannot see the mountain. stephanie: and while crews are making progress on containing the fire, a major concern among officials and ecologists is the

lasting damage to the fragile desert ecosystem, including the region's trademark joshua trees. jacob margolis is a science reporter at l.a.-ist. they are focused on climate change and natural disasters. he says fires of this scale in the mojave region used to be rare. >> everywhere in california sees fire at some but if we're point. talking about fire return intervals, like how often these areas historically saw fire, you know, some of these ecosystems might not see a substantial fire that could maybe clear stuff out -- you know -- some estimates are a couple hundred years. stephanie: the mojave desert is known for its unique vegetation and wildlife, says kelly fuhrmann, acting superintendent of the mojave national preserve. >> it is a very special place in a lot of ways. being a desert ecosystem, the vegetation assemblages are quite diverse, although in a sort of a subtle way, not a large array of trees, for example, it's desert scrub and grasses and such like that. and then also a large variety of wildlife that that inhabit ecosystems there too, such as

the desert tortoise, which is a very unique species out here that we protect. stephanie: there are an estimated 10,000 threatened desert tortoises in the region. as well as the iconic joshua trees, which experts worry may not spring back after such an intense wildfire. >> when you have a plant that is not fire adapted, that's getting hit by fire, you know, maybe previously every few hundred years, say the seeds had time to we establish, these joshua trees grow three centimeters or something like that a year. it takes a long time for them to grow to, like ten meters in size. >> the long term impacts of those fires on those ecosystems and the preserve are of great concern to us because the recovery can take decades, if not centuries in some respects, depending on the ecosystem. stephanie: experts also say climate change has helped make conditions ripe for the blaze. not just hotter summers, but

wetter winters like california experienced this year. >> the many landscapes in california already, as we are in a mediterranean kind of climate here, but it is supposed to become more extreme as time goes on, as the climate does continue to change. so what we might see and what we do see are a lot of rain, is a lot of rain growth rates, then the drying out of those grasses or plants and then they don't you know, they get crispy quite quickly and so they're ready to burn. stephanie: the york fire started on private land, and while there have no reported human casualties, it's too soon to know how many tortoises or trees may have been lost. high winds have created extremely challenging conditions for firefighters, but even more challenging may be the path to recovery for this precious desert ecosystem. for the pbs newshour, i'm stephanie sy. ♪ geoff: an obscure bit of

colonial history, dating back to a summer night, mid-18th century led to a new england town celebrating france -- frogs in sculpture, poetry and song to this day. david wright of rhode island pbs weekly takes this "leap of whimsy" as part of our arts and culture series canvas. david: whether you arriving waned him, connecticut, from the north, south -- wyndham, connecticut, from the north, south, east, or west, the first things to greet you is a large green face. >> they've got a lot of character too, don't you think? david: they do! four big bullfrogs as solid as anvils planted there on the willamantic bridge, like a concrete lilypad right in the middle of town.

so i'm sure i'm not the first person to ask this, but what's with all the frogs? [laughter] >> so, welcome to wyndham. uh, that is a very popular question. a lot of people who arrive here say, what's the deal with the frogs? david: at the pharmacy and library on main street, the hospital, local radio station, and the town's only real rival in frog mania may be calaveras county california, home of the jumping frog jubilee, celebrating mark twain's famous 1865 short story. but the association with amphibians predates that by more than century. >> uh, summertime, um, is right in the middle of the french and indian war. so, uh, people were a bit on edge. david: so they heard a noise. >> they heard a noise, and it was about a hundred yards into the woods off the road. david: susan herrick is a her patella just -- herpetologist,

a.k.a., frog biologist, who was born and raised here. >> and so men are getting up out of their houses and arming themselves and against what they thought was an invasion of either, either natives or somebody else during this rough period of time. uh, and everybody was apparently afraid for their lives is what the writing is, -- david: because of the noise. >> because of the noise. david: herrick believes the terrible sound that so spooked the locals in 1754 was the result of a colonial climate disaster. >> it's reported that it was, there was a drought here at that time in, in 1754, between late june and early july. apparently it was pretty dry, and i think the pond edge shrunk a little too much. and they gave up trying to hold territories and did what we call may acquisition strategy switching. so instead of defending territories, they did what's called a lekk, which is where all the males just sort of gather together and display themselves, sort of like a singles bar, if you will. david: so instead of singing a froggy love song, they were kind of having a communal primal scream.

>> having amash pit. exactly. david: in her research at the university of connecticut, she's spent more than 3-thousand hours recording bullfrogs in the wild. >> this is what one or two frogs sounds like, and this is what the song would sound like. david: she has built a recreation of what that 1754 frog pond may have sounded like with all of the bullfrogs bleating at once. >> this is what i think it could potentially have sounded like on the battlefield. [laughter] so to speak. david: sounds like a big swarm of angry bees. nevertheless, when word got around that this little town had panicked, taking up arms against a bunch of frogs? the story had legs! >> the story had legs. the story had legs.

david: the great wyndham frog fight became an american batrachomachia, the stuff of epic comic poems, at least three. before the u.s. had a national currency, the bank notes issued by the wyndham bank featured a frog standing on top of another frog. in 1905, the local opera house even mounted an operetta, a musical, "the frogs of wyndham" which has enjoyed several local revivals. to this day, the local brewery has an annual hop-fest! so you've embraced the frog, uh, which was originally a sort of a joke at wyndham's expense. >> a joke at wyndham's expense, but we're pretty good at laughing at ourselves. yep. david: there bridge itself is an example of that good humor. built 20 years ago by the state of connecticut, the locals insisted it pay tribute to their heritage. >> apparently, it was pretty embarrassing for the colonists but nowadays we look back and we laugh and think, you know, the equivalent of online ribbing.

get it? ribbing? david: so forever these frogs will troll the town of wyndham. >> forever. david: for the pbs newshour, i'm david wright in windham, connecticut. geoff: and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm geoff bennett. thanks for spending part of your evening with us. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions and friends of the newshour. >> for 25 years, consumer cellular heads off wireless plans to help people do more of what they like. how are u.s.-based customer service team can help serve you, to learn more, visit online. >> the ford foundation, working with visionaries

worldwide. and with the ongoing support of these institutions. and friends of the newshour. ♪ >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. ♪ >> this is pbs newshour west, from weta studios in washington, and from our bureau at the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. ♪

introducing a technological achievement so advanced... it rivals the moon landing. wow! ok. rude.

that's one small step for man. one giant leap for mankind. ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ -today on "cook's country," i'm making carne guisada, and toni is going to explore the origins of the dish. adam's testing oven mitts, and christie's making green chili chicken enchiladas. it's all right here on "cook's country."