geoff: good evening. i'm geoff bennett. amna: and i'm amna nawaz. on the newshour tonight, united states officials meet with their russian counterparts in saudi arabia to discuss the end of the war in ukraine without european or ukrainian representatives at the table. geoff: elon musk's department of government efficiency group faces fresh criticism for seeking access to sensitive taxpayer data from the irs.

amna: and amid unsubstantiated claims about water management, we examine the truth about fighting fires in southern california after last month's devastating blazes. >> our urban water systems are designed to help us put out a house fire or a couple of house fires. they're not designed to deal with the massive kinds of wildfires that swept through the los angeles area. ♪ >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by -- the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. kathy and paul anderson and camilla and george smith. >> i absolutely love my job

because i love the people i work with. everyone is trying to connect on a personal level. >> we look out for one another. would love to see our teammates thrive. >> we don't have to change how you want. you don't have to change how you talk. >> we can bring our authentic selves to work and do our best stuff. that is joy. ♪ >> the charles f kettering foundation. working to advance inclusive democracies. learn more at kettering.org. >> the john s and jame all night foundation fostering informed and engaged communities. more at kf.org. ♪ >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions.

this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. amna: welcome to the newshour. today, top russian and u.s. officials met in person for the first time since russia invaded ukraine more than 1,000 days ago. the goal they said was to chart a path towards peace. geoff: and there was more -- the u.s. and russia raised the possibility of lifting the sanctions they've aimed at each other. they also agreed to work toward restoring staffing at their embassies. but there was one glaring omission. ukrainian officials were not in the room. >> it was a face-to-face not

seen in almost three years. u.s. officials led by secretary of state marco rubio, meeting with their russian counterparts in saudi arabia to discuss an end to the war in ukraine and chart a path toward improving bilateral relations. after more than four hours behind closed doors, the u.s. delegation said it saw hints of progress. >> we could not have imagined a better result after this session. it was very solid. >> i came awaited away -- came away today convinced they are willing to engage in a serious process. >> but just as notable as the talks themselves was a particular absence. ukraine was not invited. president volodymyr zelenskyy postpone his own visit to saudi arabia, meeting today instead with turkey's president erdogan, both friendly with russia and the member of nato. zelenskyy reiterated there can be no peace deal without a seat for ukraine at the table. >> this russian-american meeting

in saudi arabia was a surprise for us. for ukraine and for our region, for europe, it is critical any negotiations to end the war are not happening behind the backs of the key parties affected by the russian aggression. >> today the u.s. dismissed any notion ukraine was being left out. >> shuttle diplomacy has happened throughout history and all over the world, we are absolutely talking about -- talking to both sides. >> for russia, today's sit-down was a chance to lay the groundwork and talk with the u.s. on a wide range of issues, not just about ukraine. >> there was a great interest which we share in resuming consultations on geopolitical problems for both the united states and the russia -- where both the united states and russia have interests and there was a great interest in removing artificial obstacles to mutually beneficial economic cooperation.

>> after the biden administration cut nearly all ties with russia when it invaded ukraine, today, steps were taken toward renewing relations and rebuilding economic ties. >> we need to have diplomatic facilities that are operating and functioning normally. >> renewed concerns, among allies who held meetings today in paris, that the u.s. administrators are to open to vladimir posted -- vladimir putin's wish list. >> we know the practical reality is there is going to be some discussion of territory and discussion of security guarantees. >> today marked only the beginning of the conversations. the administration says the talks were meant to pave the way for a meeting between trump and putin but no date is announced it. geoff: for perspective on today's meeting between the u.s. and russia, we get two views. andrea kendall-taylor is a

former senior intelligence official who focused on russia and eurasia. she's now at the center for a -- bipartisan think tank center for a new american security. and paul saunders is the executive director of the center for the national interest, a and he served in the george w. bush administration's state department. trump while speaking to reporters at mar-a-lago was asked about the message to ukrainians who might feel disappointed by not having a seat at the table, and here is what he said. >> they're upset about not having a seat? well, they've had a seat for three years, and a long time before that. this could have been settled very easily. geoff: he also falsely suggested that ukraine started this war. paul, the u.s. approach has provoked deep alarm among european allies, is that alarm warranted? should kyiv have had a seat at today's meeting? >> i do not think the ukrainian government needs to be present in every single meeting that

occurs. i think that is not realistic, actually. as a practical matter and national security advisor suggested and implied, it is going to be a complicated negotiation. there are pieces that are needen governments and the ukrainian government and the russian government all in a room together with american negotiators, i don't think it would be very productive. i think it is very appropriate to meet individually with other parties. in totality, we have to meet with the ukrainians, and certainly the ukrainians have to be part of any agreement. the wars on their territory. the have to stop fighting --

start fighting for the war to end. they don't need to be in every meeting. >> andrea, how do you see it? >> the problem is through this bilateral channel between the united states and russia, the united states seems to be giving away major concessions before ukraine is made a part of the negotiation. so we have heard from senior trump administration officials that ukraine will have to concede significant parts of its territory and ukraine will not have a place in nato, the united states has already indicated it will not play a role with boots on the ground in sustaining any piece in -- peace in ukraine or that a peacekeeping force would fall under a nato umbrella. these are major concessions being given away in this bilateral format, and that has real implications for ukraine. once ukraine gets to the negotiating table, we basically have taken their knees out from under them and put them in a far weaker position. if we were going into these

discussions with russia, it should have been the case that the united states had had some coordinated position with kyiv and its european allies before going into that meeting. geoff: add so that, the u.s. approach and attitude suggests the administration already looking beyond this war. looking toward meeting president trump's long-held of boosting ties with vladimir putin, is there any concern about the u.s. robbing ukraine of its agency and decision-making of this entire process, or two, capitulating to moscow? >> i think first of all to the extent that ukraine has agency, it has it in no small part because of the american assistance that's already occurred over the last three years. so i don't think we should have any illusions about that. and for ukraine to expect the

united states and the american people to do what they have done over the last three years indefinitely i think is unrealistic. so first of all, i think we should be quite clear about that. now, i certainly agree that i think it is a mistake to look like you are making concessions before negotiation starts. i think some of the things some administration officials said may have been ill-advised and could avoided. but ultimately, the united states has a very large stake in this conflict. in the united states is a sovereign country and the leaders of the united states get to decide how long we are prepared as a country to stick with it. and certainly there are good

reasons when one thinks about all the other challenges the united states faces in the world. not to mention our rapidly diminishing stocks of the weapons that we have been providing to ukraine. there are good reasons for the united states to think long and hard about how long we want to continue what we've been doing. geoff: what about that, andrea? president trump's view could be summed up as, why not try another way? the strategy during the biden administration was aimed at assisting ukraine while preventing escalation and that led to what you could argue was a cautious and in many ways delayed military response despite the u.s. spending more than $65 billion, the war is now stalemated, why not try another way? >> i think the other way really should be from a position of strength. and to do that, the united states does have a lot of agency and a lot of opportunity to help

ukraine achieve peace, that is something president trump has said he wants to accomplish. the best path is to negotiate from a position of strength. really if president trump would come in and renew military aid and assistance to ukraine, it would go an exceptionally long way in demonstrating to president vladimir putin he cannot achieve his aims on the battlefield. that would get him into a position where he would have to enter into negotiations from a more genuine position than he currently is. that there is this other way, to try to convince putin that he can't continue and that would allow us to bring an end to the war -- i think we all agree we want to bring an end to the war but in order to have durable peace, the united states cannot make all of these major concessions. because the risk is that yes, we

could get to a cease-fire, but if we are allowing pressure to get sanctions relief and keep ukraine out of nato, to limit the size of the ukrainian military so it cannot defend itself in the future, the key issue will be, we might get peace now, but it will just enable pressure to park at the concessions and strengthen its position to attack ukraine again in the future and potentially broad in its ambitions to other parts of europe. geoff: andrea kendall-taylor and paul sanders, thank you both for sharing your perspective this evening. >> thank you. >> thank you. ♪ amna: we start the day's other headlines with the growing pressure on new york city's mayor eric adams. new york governor kathy hochul met with political leaders in manhattan today as she weighs

whether to remove him from office. four of mayor adams' top deputies resigned last night amid growing questions over his ability to govern the city. it followed a decision by the justice department to drop its corruption case against adams, on the grounds that it would allow him to focus on president trump's immigration crackdown. federal judge dale ho ordered a hearing tomorrow that will look into the justice department's decision. weather officials are warning of record cold across the central u.s., as the season's 10th and most severe polar vortex blankets the region. states in the rockies and northern plains are experiencing temperatures as low as -60 degrees in some areas, when factoring in windchill. further south, a band of states, from kansas to virginia, are facing snow storms. that comes as kentucky and other parts of appalachia are still cleaning up from recent flooding. governor andy beshear told reporters today that the death toll there has risen to 14, as officials pivot to what comes

next. >> the kentucky national guard is transitioning from life saving missions to recovery efforts focused on debris removal, restoring access and transporting supplies to affected communities, and we're going to be positioning guard assets for the coming snowstorm. amna: at last check, more than 50 million people were under winter weather alerts, from the central plains to the coast of the carolinas, as heavy snow and wind are set to sweep through the region. in the middle east, hamas says it will release six living israeli hostages on saturday instead of three. that accounts for all living hostages set to be freed under phase one of the cease-fire deal in gaza. the surprise increase comes after israel agreed to allow mobile homes and construction machinery into gaza. hamas also agreed to return four bodies to israel on thursday. they include the remains of the

bibas family, two young boys, ariel and kfir, and their mother shiri. their father, yarden, was released alive earlier this month. meantime, the u.n. agency for palestinian refugees, or unrwa, says that israeli forces raided four of its schools in east jerusalem today and ordered them closed. at least 600 students and 30 staff were affected. back in this country, native american activist leonard peltier was released from prison today after former president joe biden commuted his life sentence. peltier was convicted of killing two fbi agents in 1975, and the agency has long opposed his commutation. the 80-year-old has always maintained his innocence, and native americans widely believe he was a political prisoner. peltier left a federal prison in florida today and is heading back to his reservation in north dakota to live under home confinement. his supporters described him as a global symbol for human rights.

>> his incarceration represented not only other political prisoners, but people who stand for in solidarity for all humankind and for humanity. amna: in a statement, peltier said, "today, i am finally free! they may have imprisoned me, but they never took my spirit!" u.s. officials say that arrests at the southern border with mexico dropped sharply last month. data out today shows that 29,000 people were arrested in january. that is down from 47,000 the previous month and it's the lowest reading since may of 2020. this downward trend began under the biden administration after arrests peaked at 250,000 back in 2023. today's figures also come after president trump issued a flurry of executive orders targeting immigration. they included a surge of troops to the border and efforts to block migrants from seeking asylum. the vatican said today that pope francis has developed pneumonia in both of his lungs. it's the latest medical

complication for the 88-year-old pontiff, who had been admitted to the hosptial on friday with bronchitis. in a statement, the vatican said, "his laboratory tests, chest x-ray, and the holy father's clinical condition continue to present a complex picture." this latest diagnosis comes as dozens of supporters gathered outside of rome's gemelli hospital to pray for his recovery. a vatican spokesman says the pope remains in good spirits and is grateful for such prayers. on wall street today, stocks ended little changed following the holiday weekend. the dow jones industrial average gained just 10 points, so virtually flat. the nasdaq added nearly 15 points, so a small gain there. the s&p 500 added about 15 points to close at a new all-time high. still to come on the newshour -- questions intensify about the authority of elon musk's department of government efficiency. the accident at toronto's

airport and a wave of layoffs at the faa highlight concerns for air safety. and former u.s. ambassador to the united nations andrew young looks back on his long career fighting for civil rights. >> this is the pbs newshour from the david m. rubinstein studio at weta in washington and from the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. amna: this evening, a federal district judge ruled against a lawsuit brought by 14 attorneys general alleging that trump violated the constitution by granting elon musk what they called unchecked power. in the ruling, judge tanya chutkin said, "the court finds that plaintiffs have not carried their burden of showing that they will suffer imminent, irreparable harm absent a temporary restraining order." for more on this, i'm joined by arizona attorney general kris mayes, one of the plaintiffs on the suit. attorney general, welcome to the

newshour. thanks for being with us. >> thanks for having me. amna: let's begin with your reaction to the ruling this evening. >> basically, the ruling that the judge made in this case essentially had a lot of great language for us, and this is just the first step in what will be a long process. she did, as you noted, denied the tro, the temporary restraining order, but the loss of moves forward. and we now have the opportunity to do what she has asked us to do, which is to provide additional evidence that elon musk and donald trump are violating the appointments clause of the united states constitution, that he is essentially running amok in the federal government and doing great harm to americans. i would just read from her order which says that plaintiffs, that

means the states, legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected official and an entity that was not created by congress. and that is actually exactly what we are stating -- that the appointments clause has been violated. it is being violated and this is another example of a violation of the separation of powers. amna: so you are arguing it in your lawsuit, the violation of the appointments clause, saying that elon musk is wielding power he does not have, not nominated officially, you are legitimately calling that into question, what does that mean for your next steps? >> basically what it means is we now have a couple of weeks to do a lot of digging and we are going to be asking for a lot of documents, we are going to be

interviewing a lot of witnesses. we are inviting people who have been harmed by the actions of elon musk to contact my office and the office of the other ag's . and we are going to have an opportunity down the would be resent to present that evidence to this very same judge. given the language that she used in this order, we feel pretty good about this case. we have always felt pretty good about this case. for the attorneys general, democratic ag's, this is about upholding our constitution and protecting americans against these harms and making sure that we uphold the rule of law. amna: let me ask it of course about what the white house has to say which is that donald trump is a duly elected president, it is within his purview to appoint people to these positions to carry out his agenda and we should also note and the latest hiding the white house stipulated elon musk is not technically an employee of doge, the department of

government efficiency, and carolyn lovett was asked to clarify what his role and authority is on fox earlier today, here is what she had to say. >> elon musk has been tasked with overseeing doge on behalf of the president, and doge employees and folks have been on boarding at respective agencies across our federal bureaucracy as political appointees, just like any other political appointee gets on board with a new administration with the changing of hands, those individuals are helping the secretaries at all of our agencies that have been nominated and confirmed by president trump and the united states senate to cut waste, fraud and abuse at these respective agencies. amna: he heard there they are saying elon musk is not the one firing people, that he is working with presidentially nominated senate confirmed secretaries of the agency who do the firing, does that undermine your argument? >> no, because we have all of elon musk and donald trump's

previous statements, which completely contradict what the white house press secretary just said today. elon musk has bragged about firing thousands of federal workers, he has bragged about slashing and eliminating entire agencies like usaid. as has donald trump. the record is clear. it's important also to note the judge in our case had to remind the government's lawyers not to lie to her court, that is in a footnote of this decision, so i think it is important for the white house to tell the truth, obviously elon musk is acting in a way that violates the appointments clause, he is acting with great and significant authority and other evidence demonstrates that. i would add that if the

president wants to take these actions, he can do that by going to congress and working with congress in the way that our constitution sets out, but the problem is americans do not want him to do what he's doing, americans don't want the elimination of the department of education, americans don't want employees of our nuclear workforce eliminated. amna: attorney general, if i may, the majority of americans who voted did vote for donald trump and this agenda, so they might disagree with you on that. >> well, i don't really believe that the majority of americans thought that they were going to get this kind of chaos. and this kind of unconstitutional behavior. americans did not vote for a dictator and they did not vote for a coup, and that's exactly what's going on right now, when you have a president who has

repeatedly -- is repeatedly violating federal court orders and repeatedly violating the separation of powers. amna: that is arizona attorney general kris mayes joining us tonight. appreciate your time. appreciate it. >> thanks, amna. geoff: as we just heard, elon musk's department of government efficiency group is seeking access to data systems within the internal revenue service that house personal information, detailed financial information about every taxpayer, business and nonprofit in the country. according to the washington post, the irs is considering a memorandum of understanding that would give doge staff members broad access to its systems. and that is raising concern about how the sensitive information is accessed and how it might be used. for more on the risks and implications, we turn to natasha sarin, professor at yale law

school and former tax policy adviser at the treasury department. thanks for being here. i want to draw on your experience at treasury, help us understand what systems and what specific information these doge staff members could potentially access. >> we are talking about the integrated data retrieval system, the idrs, with that ■daa system is, for irs employees, it is almost like an index of tax histories. it is every single person and every single business in this country -- their history with the agency. think of all the information that must be entailed in idrs, social security numbers, personal bank account information, your tax history, how much you made and the ways in which you accrued income. although that information is available to the irs because if during filing season a taxpayer calls and asks the agency a question about a particular balance due or notice they have

received, it is easy for their representative to pull up on the system and understand exactly what they should be telling that taxpayer. but this data is incredibly safeguarded within the agency and only accessible to people who have a specific reason for needing access to it, they will interact with taxpayers and the need to be able to answer questions. i worked at the treasury department for two years, on issues related to tax credits and tax administration, and i was nowhere near this data system. i have pulled former and current treasury politicals, political appointees are never near this data the commissioner does not have access to it. it raises questions about why we are even entertaining the notion of political actors from doge having access to this type of information. geoff: what questions does this raise for you in terms of why these staffers want access to

this information and how they might use it? >> if you look at what the admonition has been saying, there is this purported claim about waste, fraud and abuse and wanted to make sure fraudulent payments don't leave the government. i am super sympathetic to that objective and i think it's important to do more about fraud and mistaken payments. the challenge is i genuinely cannot come up with a reason why you might want access to idrs that is related to fraud or some sense of mistaken payments. the thing i am very worried about is this is data that poses very significant data privacy risks to the american people. the irs experience is 1.4 billion cyber attacks each year. so there are real concerns about this type of data being accessed by our adversaries and being used against us. and there are also concerns about the stability of the tax system, wherein the middle of --

we are in the middle of filing season, what happens when one particular change in the irs system that cascades through and means hundreds of millions of refunds are not issued on time? ? those are the types of risks irs employees are worried about each day. any potential mishandling or misuse of this data and this ecosystem really raises those risks quite significantly. geoff: what legal protections exist for people who are concerned about the very thing that you raise? that their personal, sensitive information might be improperly asks us -- improperly accessed or used. are they entitled to monetary damages, is that rate? >> that is absolutely right, and a bipartisan way, congress passed very significant protections for taxpayers and protecting taxpayer privacy and information, that means means handling the data or making it public intentionally or unintentionally can subject you to criminal fines but also potential imprisonment and there is an actual private right of action that exists that

individuals whose data is disclosed can sue the government or so individuals and say i deserve conversation for the fact that my data is out in the world in a way that i don't want to be. geoff: you mention the legal challenges, late yesterday a coalition of unions and tax and small business groups filed suit in an effort to block doge access to the systems we have been discussing, and the plaintiffs point out the conflict of interest this affords elon musk, they write doge will also have access to records of mr. musk's business competitors held by the irs, no other business owner on the planet has access to this kind of information on his competitors, and for good reason, we heard elon musk in the oval office last week say he would be the arbiter of his own conflicts of interest, what questions does this raise for you? >> i am so concerned about how we think about the importance of the separation of any sense of political involvement from our payment system and from our tax system, another thing that is

legal in the tax system is for the executive or anyone affiliated with the executive to direct the irs to do anything, i want you to audit this type of person or not send refunds to this category of people. i really am quite concerned about what we are doing and what we are saying with respect to eroding some of those very strong safeguards that exist to make sure that the stability of the system and the proper role of politics and political influence and some of these conflict of interest are respected. geoff: are those of safeguards norms or establish laws? >> they are literally established laws, the executive cannot direct the irs to do any auditing of particular individuals, no enforcement decisions can be made by anyone who has a political affiliation in the administration. and again those rules exist for good reason. we have lived through the history of having our tax system

and more generally are law enforcement system weaponized in ways that are disruptive to the rule of law and to our democracy and i just hope we are not at such a moment again. geoff: thanks so much for sharing our insights -- your insights with us, natasha sarin. >> thanks for having me. amna: investigators are still trying to determine what caused a dramatic delta airlines crash in toronto yesterday. stunning new video shows how the plane flipped over and caught on fire at pearson airport. all 80 passengers survived. 21 people were injured, including two who remain hospitalized. air traffic controllers warned pilots of winds up to 38 miles per hour just before the plane attempted to land. it's the latest in a string of significant accidents this year, four in less than a month, including the fatal mid-air collision in washington, d.c. between a blackhawk helicopter and a jet that killed 67 people.

for more, i'm joined by david shepardson of reuters. good to see you, david, thanks for being here. let's start with the toronto crash, what do you take away from the latest information we have gotten from officials, do they have any idea about the cause? >> we know the investigators from canada have recovered the flight data recorder, the voice recorder, those are going to be read and analyze, they should give more information about what happened in those final moments, but it's clear investigators will focus on the actions of the pilot. not that they did anything wrong, but we are dealing with severe crosswinds. the one question that is certainly in the minds of experts is, was the plane flaring? that means when you land there was a little bit of a pitch up, generally you land on the ground, it appears the plane was not flaring like a normal plane would. that could have been because of the pilot trying to deal with the wins or perhaps the wind was not there at the moment of

landing -- that is one key question, what happened and why did it appear the plane landed at such a high rate of speed? amna: the video is just a remarkable, people are taking notice of how it landed upside down and the fact that everyone on board survived. what should we take away from the? -- from that? >> just remarkable. you have to recognize the actions of the flight crew and flight attendants getting everyone off the plane safely. trump people that were hospitalist -- two people that were hospitalized are expected to recover. the seats are able to withstand up to 16 g of gravitational force on the plane lands, the structural requirements of the plane, when tipped over, it did not collapse on itself. between the air traffic controllers and all the parts of the system, this is a very sick system. amna: he mentioned -- you mentioned the headlines, the washington, d.c. midair crash,

the crashes in pennsylvania and alaska, their private planes colliding in arizona, as you know it is worth pointing out as of today, there have actually been 88 reported aviation accidents in 2025, just put that into context for us, is that a low number, should people be worried, what does that mean? >> i looked at ntsb data, it is lower, it was 130 or something in the first six or seven weeks of this year -- last year, two months versus the first six or seven weeks of this year. however most of those or nearly all are small planes, private planes. it's worth noting that before that collision outside of reagan national, we had gone 16 years in the u.s. without a u.s. passenger airline fatal crash. the system is very safe. that is not to say we have not had a series of very troubling near miss incidents raising questions about, is the system

overstressed? air traffic controllers and many places working 60 a week, mandatory overtime. we are 300 controllers short of the ideal staffing -- where the ideal staffing should be. the airlines, with more and more flights being added into man, the system is under some level of stress. one question is how do we ensure that as we add more demand, that the system can perform safely, despite areas where we clearly don't have enough staffing. amna: this week, we have learned the trump administration has begun firing several hundred faa employees as part of this larger cost and staff cutting effort across the government. late last night the transportation secretary sean duffy tweeted, 0 air traffic controllers and critical safety personnel were let go. you talked to a lot of these folks, is there any concern that these mass firings could impact air safety in some way?

>> the secretary is right, they did not fire any air traffic controllers. it is worth noting they did initially get those offers to quick and after some concern was raised by airlines and others, the administration clarified these safety employees -- transportation security officers and air traffic controllers, safety inspectors were not eligible for this retirement offer. some of those individuals who have been let go, these probationary employees are people who maintain ground-based radar systems for the faa, jobs that are safety related, not safety critical but there are certainly a debate, what does it mean to be safety critical? as to have some sort of safety function. it's clear that democrats and the union and others say none of those safety-related positions should be eliminated and that's going to be the topic of a lot of debate on capitol hill about, do these cuts make sense in light of all the other safety

issues facing the u.s.? amna: give me a sense of what you're hearing from folks on the inside amid all of these cuts and concerns. >> i think everybody in the aviation industry and the government is very concerned about these incidents. there is no pattern so far except, as the system -- are people under stress, are there ways to destress the system and ensure that people continue to get all the equipment, and the support they need? and are the flights properly maintained? and are they flying too many flights? amna: david shepardson of reuters, always good to see you. thank you so much. >> thank you. ♪ amna: last month's deadly wildfires in california destroyed thousands of homes, killed at least 29 people, and will likely cost hundreds of billions of dollars.

president trump has repeatedly claimed that state officials made this disaster worse by how they managed the state's complex water system. william brangham looks at those allegations and the realities of water management in the nation's most populous state. reporter: while fires were still burning in southern california and crews were trying to save lives and property, then president elect trump took aim at california's democratic governor, gavin newsom. >> it's very sad, because i've been trying to get gavin newsom to allow water to come. you'd have tremendous water up there. they send it out to the pacific. reporter: and after he took office, he kept coming back to how california officials managed their water, blaming them for making the fires worse. >> we're demanding that they turn the valve back toward los angeles. millions of gallons of water are waiting to be poured down.

reporter: but is it true that more water from northern california could have helped los angeles? >> there's no truth to that. donald trump has a strange fixation with california water policy. he talks about some imaginary valve or faucet that he or someone else could turn to increase the amount of water that flows from northern california to southern california. it is sort of an odd fixation. reporter: let's start with some context. california has one of the largest and most complex water systems in the world. it's responsible for delivering drinking water to almost 40 million people and irrigating farms that grow three quarters of the nation's fruits and nuts and vegetables. that enormous task is complicated both by an increasingly hot and dry climate, growing demands for that water, and geography. so where does the state's water come from? about a third of southern california's supply comes from the colorado river. and then there's precipitation. even though 75% of the state's

rain and snow falls north of the state capital, sacramento, 80% of the demand comes from areas further south, in cities like san francisco and los angeles and the vast farmlands of the san joaquin valley. when rain and snow fall in the north, whatever doesn't evaporate can seep into the ground to be pumped, or travel through a massive network of dams, reservoirs, canals and aqueducts across the state. and how that water is alloted, and to whom, has been a source of friction in california for decades. >> it will be used by thousands of farmers who will use the fields of grain crops. >> the dispute is who will use what water -- how much water for what purposes. we fight between cities and farms and we fight over how much

water belongs to the ecosystems. reporter: but president trump's accusations have driven renewed attention to this issue. during the blazes, firefighters reported that hydrants had low pressure or ran completely dry. despite the president's claims that water being held up north was to blame, experts say supply wasn't the issue -- in fact, most key reservoirs serving los angeles county had more water were actually fuller than normal. the problem was infrastructure. >> our urban water systems are designed to help us put out a house fire or a couple of house fires. they're not designed to deal with a mass of kinds of -- with the massive kinds of wildfires that swept through the los angeles area. if you have a glass of water and one straw, you can drink that water and there's no real problem. but when you have a thousand straws in that same glass of water, the glass gets drained immediately. and no matter how fast you try to refill it, you can't refill it. and that's what happened here. reporter: trump also kept coming back to something else. that the fires were made worse by california's protection of an endangered fish known as the delta smelt. again, analysts say there's no connection.

>> as far as we can tell, there's no relationship between the fires in southern california and leaving some water in the rivers for delta smelt and other endangered fish. the reservoirs in southern california are full and there's not a limitation on water supply there. reporter: even so, on january 24th, trump signed an executive order to override state policies and maximize water delivery. days later, the u.s. army corps of engineers, which controls some water systems in the state, released over two billion gallons of water from two dams in the san joaquin valley. the president posted a photo saying, "beautiful water flow that i just opened in california. i only wish they listened to me six years ago, there would have been no fire." >> there's no ability physically to move the water in those reservoirs to the los angeles area. there are mountains in between. there's no aqueduct, no pipelines, no systems of water transfer. the loss of that water from

those reservoirs, some of it evaporated -- some of it may have gone back into groundwater, but it certainly never reached los angeles. the water that was dumped belonged to farmers in southern california and now will not be available to those farmers who are going to need that water in e hot, dry season that' coming. reporter: now, we should note, we spoke to a farmer in the region who said, while it'd be better to have that water later in the year, the release was relatively small and won't have a huge impact. and in the long term, many farmers would be supportive of the president's push to increase flow there. -- increase water flow there. but, again, that had no bearing on the fires or the devastating toll they took on southern california. for the pbs newshour, i'm william brangham. ♪ geoff: now a conversation with ambassador andrew young, a pivotal figure in the civil rights movement, former u.s. ambassador to the united

nations, and a two-term mayor of atlanta. the country last saw him as he delivered a heartfelt homily at the funeral of former president jimmy carter last month. i spoke with ambassador young in atlanta last week to get his insights on the current political moment and his reflections on his extraordinary life of service. few lives have so quickly traced the ark of the civil rights movement as that of ambassador andrew young. activist, diplomat, mayor and statesmen, his journey has both shaped and been shaped by the fight for equality. your life is a chronicle of civil rights progress in this country. what does this current moment feel like to you? mr. young: you know, i don't know. but the first thing that popped into my mind was the spiritual, lord, i don't feel no ways tired. we've come too far from where we started from, and nobody ever told us that the way would be

easy. but i don't believe he brought us this far to leave us. and i'm not worried. i'm not anxious. it's just another struggle. my parents taught me to deal with the slights and oppression. my father's mantra was, "don't get mad, get smart." he said, if you lose your temper in a fight, you lose the fight, and that your mind is the most powerful thing you have. geoff: your father's advice to get smart, what does getting smart look like today? mr. young: well, never let your adversary define the problem. because the things that president trump considers problems are considered -- problems i consider blessings. geoff: like what? mr. young: well, i always have

thought that my christianity says this is my father's world and that the hunger and starvation of god's children anywhere is a responsibility that i should assume, if i can. nationalism went out in the 1900's. in fact, that's probably what the second world war was about, to say that we can't make it as a single nation on this planet -- can make it as a single nation on this planet and that we've got to learn to live together as brothers and sisters or we will perish together as fools. geoff: andrew young got his start in the civil rights movement in the 1950s as a pastor. he joined the southern christian leadership conference, becoming a key lieutenant to dr. martin luther king jr. often responding to the many letters dr. king received from politicians, activists, and supporters seeking guidance. young says he and dr. king ultimately bonded over their shared experiences and values. mr. young: we had this similar

background. both parents had been to college. he was a privileged kid from atlanta. and i was in some ways a privileged kid from new orleans -- we both just happened to be black. and he liked the way i would answer his letters. but he never asked me to write a speech. he asked me to do some research on a speech he had to give, but for one, he didn't read speeches and he didn't need anybody to write them for him. and the ones that he wrote for himself were not his greatest speeches. geoff: wow. his greatest speeches were -- mr. young: were the ones that got written up after he preached them. somebody recorded them and transcribed them, but he didn't speak from paper at all. geoff: that was his process? he would preach. and whatever came to mind, he would say and it would be

recorded and and transcribed? mr. young: pretty much. geoff: wow. mr. young: he did some writing. he wrote his books. but that was the way we did it in the black church. and then when i went to the small church, a tiny church in south georgia, that's the first thing they said, well, we know you've been up north and the white folks up there have the same bible we have, but we don't want you to come down here reading nothing from that bible. if it comes from your heart and they said, we don't like no paper in the pulpit, he said, if you bring paper in the pulpit and start reading to people, he said, you're not going to have a church in three weeks. geoff: wow. no paper in the pulpit. what was dr. king like? mr. young: he was a lot of fun, for one thing. he had a great sense of humor. and you have to remember that he never he never made it to 40, that he was a very young man.

he had a big, healthy laugh, liked to tell jokes. he had the same kind of education that you have. and his favorite -- i was his favorite, well, football, because he loved to kick me around any of them. i made a mistake or said something. he said, now, if you had gone to morehouse instead of howard, you'd know better than that. geoff: it was dr. king who steered young toward a career in public service. when we spoke years ago, you told me about the last conversation you had with dr. king right before he went to memphis. and he was trying to find ways to bring the energy of the civil rights movement and transferring that energy, that vitality into politics. tell me about that. mr. young: well, it was just before he went to memphis and we -- and he'd been preaching in new york and the harry belafonte dropped by and john conyers from michigan and tom bradley.

i mean, they were a collection of political leaders, and they were talking about, where does the movement go from here? and the general agreement was that we shouldn't have to have a thousand people march to get a seat at the table, that if we want to change the books in our schools, if we want to improve the opportunities, we should have representatives that we elect. and everybody agreed. and that's why i ended up running for congress, not because i wanted to, but because nobody else wanted to. geoff: he ran and won. in 1972, young was elected georgia's first black congressman since reconstruction. his ambitions reached beyond washington. in 1977, president jimmy carter appointed him as the u.s. ambassador to the united nations, making him the first

african american to hold that role. returning to georgia years later, he continued to shape history. as mayor of atlanta in the 1980's, he helped transform the city into a global hub, laying the groundwork for the 1996 olympics. he championed economic development, ensuring that civil rights progress translated into real opportunities. these days, his nonprofit foundation is the outlet for his civil rights and humanitarian work. looking back on your life of service, all that you've accomplished, what do you want your legacy to be? how do you want folks to remember you? mr. young: first thing i've thought of is, you tried to feed the hungry. because that's what we've been doing. i mean, we called it minimum wage and we called it equal opportunity employment, and we called it affirmative action. but it was really just trying to get all of god's children to have enough to eat, really

structuring a society that is fair and gives everybody an equal opportunity to be the best that they can be. ♪ amna: and remember, there's a lot more online, including conversations with oil workers in oklahoma about what they are expecting from president donald trump's oil and gas policies. that's at pbs.org/newshour. geoff: and join us again here tomorrow night, when judy woodruff speaks to robert putnam about the possibility of a more unified nation. and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm geoff bennett. amna: and i'm amna nawaz. on behalf of the entire newshour team, thank you for joining us. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by -- >> qnod is a proud supporter of public television.

on a voyage with qnod, a world awaits, a world of labor, -- of flavor, diverse destinations and immersive experiences. a world of leisure and british style. all with qnod's white star service. >> carnegie corporation of new york, working to reduce political polarization through philanthropic support for education, democracy and peace. more information at carnegie.org. and with the ongoing support of these institutions. this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting, and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.

♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> you're watching pbs.

hello, everyone. welcome to amanpour & co. here's what is coming up. >> they can discuss everything they want but not about ukraine without us. >> the u.s. and russia kicked off ukraine peace talks with neither ukraine nor europe at