geoff: good evening. amna: all the news hour tonight -- pres. trump: you don't have the cards right now. with us, you start having cards. amna: ukrainian president

zelenskyy spars with president trump in the oval office, a stark display over u.s. efforts to negotiate an end to the war that russia started. geoff: the trump administration/is more federal jobs, including weather forecasters, as judges put a halt to some of the mass firings, but not all. amna: and david brooks and jonathan capehart give their analysis on another turbulent week in the nation's capital. ♪ >> major funding for the pbs news hour has been provided by friends of the news hour. the cohort foundation.

>> cunard is a proud supporter of public television. on a voyage with cunard, the world awaits. a world of flavor, diverse destinations, and immersive experiences. a world of leisure and british style. all with white stars service. >> john s. and james l. knight foundation. fostering an form gauged communities. more at -- informed and engaged communities. more at kf.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. and friends of the news hour.

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: an extraordinary seen in the oval office today, as president donald trump made a public break with ukrainian president volodymyr zelensky. geoff: the two presidents, as well as vice president vance, argued for nearly five minutes with the cameras rolling, a spectacle that could have profound effects on ukraine and the u.s. relationship with europe. here's nick schifrin. nick: in the oval office today, an unprecedented, unmitigated train wreck. >> the path to peace and the path to prosperity is maybe -- mainly engaging in diplomacy.

>> can i ask you? >> ok. nick: what follows is the majority of the war of words, over a country at war, beginning with ukrainian president volodymyr zelensky doubting any diplomacy with russian president vladimir putin. >> he broke the ceasefire. he killed our people and he didn't exchange prisoners. we signed the exchange of prisoners. but he didn't do it. what kind of diplomacy, j.d., you are speaking about? vice pres. vance: i'm talking about the kind of diplomacy that's going to end the destruction of your country. mr. president, with respect, i think it's disrespectful for you to come into the oval office to try to litigate this in front of the american media. right now, you guys are going around and forcing conscripts to the front lines because you have manpower problems. you should be thanking the president for trying to bring an end to this conflict. pres. zelenskyy: have you ever been to ukraine? did you see what problems we have?

vice pres. vance: i have been to -- i have actually, i've actually watched and seen the stories and i know what happens is you bring people, you bring them on a propaganda tour, mr. president. do you disagree that you've has problems with bringing people into your military? and do you think that is respectful to come to the oval office of the united states of america and attack the administration that is trying to trying to prevent the destruction of your country? pres. zelenskyy: a lot of questions, let's start from the beginning. vance: sure. pres. zelenskyy: first of all, during the war, everybody has problems, even you. but you have nice ocean and don't feel now, but you will feel it in the future. pres. trump: you don't know that. don't tell us what we're going to feel. we're trying to solve a problem. don't tell us what we're going to feel. zelenskyy: i'm not telling you, i'm asking. trump: youre in no position to dictate that. you're in no position to dictate what we're going to feel. you've allowed yourself to be in a very bad position that happens to be right. you're not in a good position. you don't you don't have the

cards right now. with us, you start have cards. >> i'm not playing cards. pres. trump: you're playing cards. you're gambling with the lives of millions of people. you're gambling with world war iii. and what you're doing is very this disrespectful to the country, this country that's back far more than a lot of people said they should have. vice pres. vance: have you said thank you once, this entire meeting, have you said thank you? you campaigned for the opposition in october. offer some words of appreciation for the united states of america and the president who's trying to save your country. mr. zelenskyy: you think if you are speaking loudly about the war -- pres. trump: he's not speaking loudly. your country is in big trouble. we gave you military equipment. if you didn't have our military equipment, if you didn't have our military equipment, this war

would have been over in two weeks. pres. zelenskyy: in three daysi heard it from putin, in three days. pres. trump: maybe less. it's going to be a very hard thing to do business like this. you don't have a cards. your people are dying, you're running low on soldiers. your people are very brave, but either you're going to make a deal or, we're out. nick: and that is exactly what president trump did. after the meeting, he wrote on truth social, "i have determined that president zelenskyy is not ready for peace if america is involved. he disrespected the united states of america in its cherished oval office. he can come back when he is ready for peace." zelensky and the ukrainian delegation left without the economic deal that he came here to sign. moscow responded with glee. former russian president and deputy chair of the security council dmitry medvedev tweeted,

the insolent pig finally got a proper slap down in the oval office, and @realdonaldtrump is right, the kiev regime is gambling with wwiii. for weeks, european leaders have been trying to prevent a us-ukraine break. this week they thought they made progress, with trump suggesting yesterday ukraine could gain back occupied territory. pres. trump: we're going to see if we can get it back, or get a lot of it back for ukraine, if that's possible. nick: but what a difference a day makes. pres. trump: you are not acting thankful. that's not a nice thing. nick: today, europe rallied to zelensky's defense. european commission president ursula von der leyen wrote, "your dignity honors the bravery of the ukrainian people." the european union's top diplomat kaja kallas wrote, "today, it became clear that the free world needs a new leader. it's up to us, europeans, to take this challenge." and french president emmanuel macron -- >> we have to thank all those who have helped and respect all those who, from the beginning, have done the fighting, because they're fighting for their

dignity, their independence, for their children, and for the security of europe. sen. graham: what did i think? complete utter disaster. nick: but back at the white house, trump and ukraine ally south carolina republican lindsey graham said diplomacy with zelensky was all but dead. sen. graham: i talked to zelinsky this morning, don't take the bait. what i saw in the oval office was disrespectful. and i don't know if we can ever do business with zelensky again. nick: in the last hour, president trump repeated that message, saying zelinsky wanted to come back to the white house tonight, but the president was leaving for mar-a-lago. lks, zelinsky would have tostart say "i want to make peace, i don't want to fight a war any longer." that is not something he has been willing to say right now and it is not clear how are if support for ukraine continues. geoff: beyond public comments,

about how they view all this? nick: officials told me this feels like a fundamental transatlantic break. all of that came to zelinsky's defense tonight, and today's meeting came after pete hegseth traveled to europe in the past few weeks and made it clear it was not the trump administration's priority to defend europe. the incoming german chancellor is saying they need independence from the u.s., and a senior official tells me tonight that over the next week, europe will draw up its own security guarantees for ukraine and send more equipment to ukraine directly. officials have said this in the past but seem to mean it more than ever, but we know that nothing can replace u.s. military support for ukraine. geoff: nick schifrin at the white house for us. thank you. amna: as we reported, some of the president's fervent allies stood behind his actions in the oval office. but ukraine supporters within the republican party have expressed concerns about how the

meeting played out. joining me now to discuss is republican congressman mike lawler, a member of the house foreign affairs committee. congressman, welcome back to the news hour. you said in a statement after that white house meeting that it was a missed opportunity for both countries. what you mean by that? rep. lawler: this was an inflection point today and an opportunity for greater economic cooperation between the united states and ukraine, and ultimately with that would have come greater security cooperation because you would have had u.s. investments on the ground moving forward. you would have had u.s. personnel there and ultimately, obviously, i think once a cease-fire agreement reached, it would have been extremely difficult for vladimir putin to go back on that. we can still salvage this, and it needs to be salvaged because obviously, failure here would be

catastrophic for europe and the free world. if vladimir putin is successful and doesn't fact ultimately seize control of ukraine, that would have devastating consequence for years to come, but especially for eastern europe. from my vantage point, this was a missed opportunity. diplomacy is tough. sometimes there is going to be tension and disagreement, and the sausage making is ugly. it was unfortunate that it spilled out into public view as they work through some of the disagreements. amna: for it to play out so publicly and on live television, we know everyone, including the russians, birdwatching, and many of them are very happy, expressing pleasure after that incident. what message did they receive from that meeting today? rep. lawler: because a deal was

not reached. a deal between the united states and ukraine is most certainly not in russia's best interest. so the only winner here today was vladimir putin and russia because a deal did not come to be, which is also why i believe it is critically important for president zelenskyy and president trump to get back together and work towards finalizing an agreement, because when this conflict does come to an end, and it will at some point, when it comes to an end, ukraine is going to need significant u.s. and european investment to rebuild, and this agreement starts to put that framework together. that obviously is vital to ensuring their structural sovereignty moving forward. amna: you seem to be saying we are further away from a deal now than we were before that meeting, and i also should point out that president trump repeated this false claim in the meeting -- he said other places

the amount of aid given to ukraine by the u.s. we heard him repeat russian propaganda that ukraine started the war. are we concerned that his views are being based on disinformation, and if so, how does that get you back to a deal? rep. lawler: look, i have been very clear that vladimir putin invaded ukraine. this was an unprovoked war of aggression by putin, who has -- amna: yes, that's not what president trump has been saying, correct? rep. lawler: respectfully, who has can amended -- who has committed numerous war crimes throughout. what president trump is seeking to do is reach a cease-fire and bring this conflict to an end. i think it is very clear that the longer this conflict continues, the more precarious place that ukraine is in. getting putin to the table is no small task, and obviously, given

the last three years and the lack of communication with the united states and many of our allies, getting him to the table is paramount if you are going to get an actual cease-fire and get a long-term agreement. i think that is president trump subjective as he works to bring this conflict to an end, while supporting ukraine economically and having an agreement that frankly is in both of our nation's interests. this is not easy in terms of both the diplomatic effort but also, obviously, ending a conflict in which you are dealing with vladimir putin, who has proven himself to be a vile dictator and thug for decades. there is a lot of work ahead, and i think it is imperative that we get president zelenskyy

back to the table with president trump and finalize this agreement. amna: republican congressman mike lawler, member of the house foreign affairs committee. appreciate your time. rep. lawler: thank you. geoff: let's turn now to one of the country's leading historians on eastern europe and the former soviet union, who has written widely on ukraine, russia, and this war. timothy snyder is the richard c. levin professor of history at yale university. thank you for being with us. from your perspective, for one who has written exclusively on ukraine, what did you see in that spectacle in the oval office earlier today? prof. snyder: you see that the president of trouble controlling political reality once he gets beyond the united states. the premise was we are working towards a peace arrangement between russia and ukraine, but

thus far, we have done is make concessions to russia. that is all we have done. the second thing we have done now is brought the ukrainian president to the white house and tried to humiliate him. we have created a situation where we have favored the aggressor and weakened that offender. you cannot really get to peace -- weakened the defender. you cannot really get to peace like that. there is a lot of wisdom to what representative lawler just said, but in order to have the right people at the table, you have to have the right balance of strength, and encouraging the aggressor and attacking the country trying to defend itself is not going to get you there. geoff: after the meeting, the white house put out a press release saying president trump and jd vance are standing up for americans. to hear white house officials tell it, they got what they wanted out of this meeting. from their view, it was a projection of strength, and

trump and vance castigating zelenskyy is what it looks like to stand up for american interests. i know you have a different view. how do you see it? prof. snyder: i think you setting a pretty low bar for yourself if you think that yelling across the room at your guest is a show of strength regardless of whether it is in the oval office were not. and i think you said it low bar for yourself internationally if you think that doing things that please countries that wish to destroy you is a show of strength, which is what just happened. strategically, but the united states is doing is trading a set of western alliances -- what the united states is doing is trading a set of western alliances with the alliance with russia. they steal cover technology and hack into our infrastructure. the russian economy is smaller than canada's, but we are nevertheless going to trade 80 is an with reliable partners that are 15, 17 times bigger than russia as an economy for an

alliance with russia. there is no way that that is a show of strength in any other than, perhaps, some distant psychological way that i am afraid i cannot understand. geoff: let's talk more about that, because we saw european leaders decide today with ukraine in tweets and written statements. nick schifrin reports that european leaders are coming up with security guarantees. what are the real-world implications for the u.s. if europe no longer sees us as a reliable partner? prof. snyder: i think there is a mode here which is important to understand. in domestic politics, trump has gone a long way by bullying people and by bluffing, and when it comes to our allies, that only works negatively. they just draw the conclusion that we cannot be trusted, and when it comes to our enemies, like russia and china, countries with which we are in a rivalry, it does not work at all. it has no effect on them because they are not afraid of trump. they have no reason to be afraid

of trump until he can marshal some kind of policy instrument, which he does not do with respect to them. we have created a world in four or five weeks in which the level of american incomparably lower s not until late 2024, and it is hard to imagine how we can that level of strength back up, because it is very easy to break relationships, but it is very hard to build them back up again, and it is very easy to fantasize about some kind of wonderful relationship with a country like russia, but it is very hard to imagine how that relationship could benefit the united states as a whole. geoff: let's talk about what might come next. after the beating, president trump post on social media that zelenskyy can come back when he is ready for peace. the president, when he was leaving for florida, told reporters, i want anybody who is going to make peace. is it possible that cooler harrods -- cooler heads could prevail and that trump and zelenskyy could a wide that an agreement, or is the damage done here? -- could arrive at an agreement,

or is the damage done here? prof. snyder: i would disagree with representative lawler about many things, but there was something important about what he said. the only way you can get to peace is to have the ukrainians at the table, because they are the country that is being attacked. you have to create a situation in which the ukrainians believe that russia might stop killing them. that can be done. american power could be applied. european power could be applied. we can change the structure of the situation so that russia could not just pretend, as they have done numerous times already, as president zelenskyy rightly said to the white house to jd vance, who i am afraid is not know his history, we could do that, and it could be the right thing to do, and it is of course not unimaginable. but i am afraid what it requires is that the leadership of our country, of the united states, get away from these very protectable psychological vulnerabilities where we can get

go head-on and provoked by one another or the russians or whatever it might be into doing things that do not make sense for us, let alone for the world as a whole. we saw that today, and a lot of psychological vulnerability, a lot of people not able to maintain any kind of poise. we saw people representing their momentary impulses where their feelings of strength rather than interests of the united states of america. it is easy to criticize other countries, other people, but we are going to have to have a much better game if we are going to do the sorts of things you are talking about, like bringing about peace. geoff: the final question about president zelenskyy's role and responsibility in all of this, because lindsey graham said that he spoke to someone ski this morning, told him don't take the break, donald trump is in a mood to do a deal. president zelenskyy is a wartime leader who did not take kindly to being lectured and lied to in the oval office, but what responsibility does he have to make sure future meetings do not go off the rails?

donald trump is a known quantity. it is known to many people what angers and animates him. prof. snyder: a deal that results in the president and publicly humiliated cannot be in the interest not only of the president, but of the country. of course president zelenskyy should be open to a peace process led by the united states, but if we are leaving it by openly humiliating him -- leading it by openly humiliating him, that is a bad sign which a wise leader cannot fail to recognize. geoff: timothy snyder, our thanks to you for joining us this evening. we appreciate it. ♪ amna: we start the day's other headlines in the middle east, where the first phase of the fragile ceasefire deal between israel and hamas is set to expire tomorrow. an israeli delegation returned from cairo today, with gaps reportedly remaining in negotiations. egyptian security sources are

cited as saying that israel is pushing to extend the first phase of the deal. hamas said today it's ready to move on to the second stage, which would entail negotiating a permanent end to the war. meantime, in israel -- ♪ mourners gathered at a stadium for the memorial ceremony of hostage tsachi idan, whose remains were returned this week along with three others. and in gaza, palestinians prepared for the islamic holy month of ramadan, even as their homes and communities lie in ruins. back in this country, a jury in illinois found a 73-year-old landlord guilty of murder and hate crimes today for killing a palestinian-american boy and seriously injuring his mother. the mother testified that joseph czuba attacked her with a knife in 2023, before stabbing her

six-year-old son wadee alfayoumi to death in another room. authorities say czuba attacked them because of they are muslim, and as a response to the israel-hamas war. he had pleaded not guilty. pope francis suffered an isolated breathing crisis this afternoon. the vatican said a bronchial spasm led to an "episode of vomiting with inhalation and sudden worsening of the respiratory condition." the scare required the use of supplmental oxygen. doctors at gemelli hospital in rome say the pope responded well, and remained conscious throughout. today's setback came after two relatively upbeat days for the 88-year-old pontiff. the vatican has already made alternative plans for ash wednesday next week to account for the pope's condition. a so-called economic blackout called for today has been getting plenty of attention online, but its impact is still unclear. >> we spend money and make people rich without us realizing we're doing it. amna: an activist group called

the people's union called on americans not to spend any money for 24 hours. they say it's a way to protest the influence of billionaires, big corporations, and both major political parties. one atlanta resident said she's taking part because she's tired of corporate greed. >> i've locked my cards up already. i'm not spending any money at all. i feel like our voices aren't being heard, but they're still receiving our money. they won't stop. they won't actually listen to us until we stop giving them our money. amna: but experts say the blackout is relatively uncoordinated compared to other such protests, and it's unclear whether it will have much impact on the companies it targets. the group plans and other broad economic blackout on march 28. the internet calling service skype is shutting down. owner microsoft is directing users to the company's teams service instead.

skype launched in 2003 and quickly became a go-to for audio and video calls worldwide. when microsoft bought skype in 2011, it had roughly 170 million users each month. but the rise of smartphones, and competition from apps like whatsapp and zoom, have cut into skype's market share. skype will officially go out of service on may 5. on wall street today, stocks closed out the month on an upbeat note. the dow jones industrial average jumped about 600 points on the day. the nasdaq added roughly 300 points. the s&p 500 also ended firmly in positive territory. and, for space lovers and amateurs alike, tonight is the best chance to get a glimpse of what's known as a planetary parade. it's a rare event where seven planets all share the night sky, many of them visible to the naked eye. mars, jupiter, uranus, venus, neptune, mercury, and saturn will align in an arc to the south, before mercury and saturn drop too low on the horizon. the phenomenon won't happen again for at least a decade. for the best viewing experience,

you'll want to find a place with a clear sky, and minimal light pollution. two of the planets, uranus and neptune, won't be visible without binoculars or a telescope. still to come on the newshour, the national weather service faces drastic cuts from the trump administration. david brooks and jonathan capehart weigh in on the week's political headlines. and oscar nominee fernanda torres on her role in the brazilian film "i'm still here." >> this is the pbs news hour. from the david m. rubenstein studio from weta in washington, and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. geoff: the trump administration continues to hollow out the federal workforce. more cuts are in the forecast, despite courts largely siding with fired employees so far. let's bring in our lisa desjardins.

let's start with the latest mass firings, including the national weather service. lisa: we have seen more firings in the past four days. that includes national weather service forecasters that work as a part of noaa. some 1200 new firings in the past few days. that includes forecasters. i also have confirmed the irs, at least a thousand to 5000 firings have been happening across the last week. the current total -- i've looked at every mass firing in the last couple of weeks -- i have 30,000 plus people fired by the trump -- geoff: 30,000 people? lisa: that is correct, what is known. it does not include 7000 at the social security administration who we have heard from them that they intend to fire those people. it is not even in that total. this is just the beginning. this is part of elon musk and president trump seeing government needs to be downsized, be more efficient.

what they are doing here is instead haphazardly talk -- targeting wide groups of workers without clear reviews. it is leading to protests. this was sent to me by a fire worker in west virginia, where they had a protest today. there you go. [crowd chanting] you hear "vote them out." on into that crowd, trump supporters who have been fired. one person there told me they were denied unemployment after being fired from treasury because they were fired supposedly for because in those emails, even though they had high-performance records. geoff: can't elon musk's doge group is trying to find ways to terminate new workers. tell me about that. lisa: we have learned of two today. there will be another email asking federal workers, what did you do last week? this is a memorandum that went out to the department of defense, saying on monday workers will get any mail saying

that within 48 hours, they must respond next week about what they did this week. there was mass confusion the last time this happened. it is not clear if this email will lead to firings for people who do not return it, but that is happening next week. the other thing, the department of education, an agency president trump has said he wants to shut down, they sent out an actual buyout offer today offering employees $25,000, up to that amount, to leave their jobs. they warned if they do not, there will be mass firings soon. also, if you read the pride -- read the fine print, they say that if you take this offer, you cannot work for the federal government for five years. one worker who would otherwise consider it said it looked sketchy them, and they are trying to take it in. geoff: where does this stand with the courts? lisa: there are dozens of lawsuits, but i want to focus on one opinion we heard last night from a judge in california. he gave an opinion that said

these mass firings of these probationary workers is not lawful. however, he is not blocking it yet. but when you talk to employment lawyers, they say this is a significant development. >> it's really the first time we've seen a court very clearly say that opm is just acting outside of -- there's no authority in the universe that gives opm to be directing agencies to fire employees. and i think that determination is critical. geoff: lastly, i know you have been speaking with federal workers who have lost their jobs this past week. have they told you? lisa: for workers, they have been feeling a lot of things, but the number one thing is they are seeing this as bringing down a system of merit-based experts across government who really just want to do their job and help america and around the

world. when i spoke to aid workers yesterday taking their work out of the office, they were collecting things from the headquarters, and of emotion there. the scene i witnessed yesterday, some of them very emotional, some of them angry. saw a lot of hugs, as you see there. others were more matter-of-fact about this and what they think the united states is losing. i talked to this couple who was getting ready to get married. they both lost their jobs and say this is a loss for them and the country. >> a lot of people are going to respond to your questions about are very wide scale policy things. they're going to talk about doge and limits of power and all of that. but at the end of the day, there are people in that building that are, you know, crying, and very good people trying to do the right thing, that were punished for it. and like, that's that's what's really hard about it today. lisa: workers i have been talking to her kind of tough,

not whiny people, but one said they are feeling harassed and hunted. geoff: lisa desjardins, thank you for your reporting. ♪ amna: as lisa mentioned, hundreds of staff have been laid off at noaa -- the national oceanic and atmospheric administration. that includes employees of the national weather service that's behind forecasts and severe weather alerts across the country. it also provides crucial data for scientists and meteorologists. to help understand the potential impact, we're joined now by science correspondent miles o'brien. miles, it is always great to see you. the national weather service is one of those things we are muska for granted, and there are other weather services out there, so why is this so important? miles: it is easy to take for granted, but it is truly the backbone of all weather forecasting in this country. it is freely available to all -- airlines, first responders, farmers, fishermen all depend on

these forecasts. they also issue crucial warnings for hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, even tsunamis. there are many services out there that at bells and whistles to this raw data, but they would be lost without the national weather service. a senior meteorologist for one of those private services, my radar, says -- >> anytime your phone buzzes with a watch, a warning, a tornado warning, a flash flood warning, that comes from the national weather service. people sitting there watching the radar nonstop and producing forecasts as well. it's estimated that the weather service cost taxpayers about $1.3 billion, $1.4 billion, but gives a 50 plus fold return on investment given how much of the economy is tied to weather forecasts. >> there are already cuts in expertise being made. there are people posting about weather balloons that are not

going up. how important is that? miles: the weather balloon story seems inconsequential, but it is an important part of the world for the weather, where cold air and warm air combine. satellites are limiting because of the cloud cover. balloons provide data which satellites can't. they do temperature, humidity, and pressure as they rise up. everything there feeds the forecast for the rest of north america. here is more. >> imagine going to bed not knowing if a tornado is coming your direction, but you're relying on these warnings that come from the national weather service. now imagine that office is short staffed, they might not have enough people watching enough things all at once, and suddenly warning quality is degraded, that has real-life implications that could, of course, in some cases, be very dire. amna: these firings are all parts of the government's efforts to cut bloat. is there bloat to cut at the national weather service? miles: sure, the national weather service has 120 two forecast offices, 13 regional

centers, nine national centers. they are all looking at the weather. there is a lot of duplication in well of that, but this is something that cries out for more of a scalpel than a sledgehammer in this case. particularly in this case, the probationary workers, in some cases, these are workers who have a lot of experience and are transitioning to a new job in a probationary mode, but also importantly, young people, which are the lifeblood of these organizations, obviously are the probationary workers. as you look toward weather forecasting systems that require fewer people using artificial intelligence and other technology, it is precisely these young people that you want to have working for you. amna: science correspondent miles o'brien. it's always great to see you. thank you so much. miles: you're welcome, amna. ♪ amna: from visits with heads of

states, to further restrictions on the press corps, we now turn to the analysis of brooks and capehart, thats "new york times" columnist david brooks and jonathan capehart, associate editor for "the washington post." you are watching the meeting at the white house between trump and zelenskyy. i want to play a little bit for you. after the beating, he sat down with fox news and bret baier, and he asked him if still in ski thought if the -- if zielinz --f zelenskyy thought it serve either side. this is what he had to say. >> i cannot change our ukrainian attitude to russia, and i do not want it to kill us. it is clear that americans are the best of our friends, europeans are the best of our friends, and 210, with russia,

they are enemies, and it does not mean that we don't want peace, we just want to recognize the reality. amna: jonathan, what did you think of watching this unfold, and what do you make of the way zielinski is talking about it. jonathan: i thought the low point for american on the world stage was the trump, putin -- trump-putin press conference in helsinki, when the president of the united states sided with the president of russia against his own national intelligence apparatus. but we saw in the oval office was travesty, horrendous, despicable -- there are not any words to describe what we watched, where we saw a vice president who has never been to ukraine lecture a wartime president who clearly was summoned to the white house to humiliate him on the world stage

either on behalf of or for the benefit of vladimir putin in russia. i give president zelenskyy major points for standing up for himself, for standing up to his nation, or standing up to his people -- for his nation, or standing up for his people. he is fighting for america's backing, which i'm sorry, it should not even be in doubt, given the stakes involved in who he is trying to protect his people from. amna: david, going from that meeting in 2018 this meeting today, what do you think of it? david: i will stick with today. i was nauseated. all my life, i've had a certain idea about america, that we are a flawed country, but finally a force for good in the world. we defeated the soviet union, defeated fascism, and we make mistakes -- iraq, vietnam, but they are usually mistakes out of

stupidity, naivete, and arrogance. they are not because we are ill intentioned. when i have seen over the last six weeks is the united states behaving viley to our friends in canada and mexico, to her friends in europe, and today was the bottom of the vile. donald trump believes in one thing. he agrees with vladimir putin that they are birds of a feather, and he and vladimir putin together are trying to create a world that is safe for gangsters, were ruthless people can thrive. he saw the product of that effort today in the oval office, and i was thinking, am i feeling grief? am i feeling shocked? am i in a hallucination? i just think shame. it is a moral injury to see the country you love behaving this way. amna: you heard progress and lawyer who would not criticize the president necessarily, but he's a ukraine supporters saying

they are further away from a deal. i also heard nick schifrin earlier, his european sources are saying fundamental transatlantic break now. is this a realignment, jonathan? is the u.s. now closer to pressure than its european allies? david: yes -- jonathan: yes. the fact that the europeans are already looking at it as a break, i think they have to do that. they cannot defend on the united states -- depend on the united states. after what happened to zielinski in the oval office, what happens to the baltic states, to estonia , if russia rolls over the border? what happens to poland? what happens if any of the nato countries are attacked by russia after what we just saw? they cannot depend on the united states anymore after more than seven decades. i am sure the europeans are probably even more in shock than we are at this table, and i am glad you used the word

"gangster," because when president trump into it with president zelenskyy, you don't have any cards, without us, you have no deal, that was gangster rule there. between him and the vice president, it also felt like watching a wrestling match, where vance jumps in the ring and taps the president and they gang up on a man who is literally fighting for the survival of his country. amna: david, is there a way to get any kind of deal on track, a way to repair what was broken today? david: i think so. trump is transactional. he will bash people, hate people, and then do a deal. we have seen that in the past. i just wonder where his values are. he clearly has a thing for vladimir putin -- we have seen that for eight years -- and he is not going to lean on putin. he is going to side with putin, as timothy snyder said. that is his belief system. and jd vance has a value system,

which is a belief in performance art. what he did was not the act of someone who is a diplomat, someone who is a statesman, someone who has a hint of response ability to edge on his president, to just try to do a mano a mano who is 10 -- i can say man who is 10 times the man he is, frankly. -- against a man who is 10 times the man he is, friendly. but it is in america's interest for vladimir putin to not take over ukraine. surely everybody sees that. i think there is a deal. amna: president trump coming to a close said this was going to be a great television, sort of acknowledging that this has unfolded on live television for the entire world to see, and for better or worse, this is a president who understands the power of the media and how to harness it and leverage it. i know we have talked about some of the changes before. his continued attacks on the press, blocking ap access from some white house coverage.

we signed take control of the press pool that covers the president full-time, make sure everyone else knows what is happening with the president. peter baker, a longtime russia correspondent, said it reminded him of the kremlin press bolt takeover. i want to get your take some where that attack on the press stands and whether we are in more sinister territory? jonathan: i think we are, because you have to look at what is happening with ap. in light of his lawsuits against cbs, against abc, threatening the licenses of other broadcast entities, this is all part of a pattern of roughing up those who are either insufficiently loyal or people who have wronged him. he looks at the press as an entity that has wronged him. when i would say is that it is sort of inside baseball that ap

is not allowed in the pool so they can't get into all those places. it says to me that the white house press corps, which actually does hard work, is going to have to work a little harder reporting on administration that already leaks like a sieve. david: donald trump does everything he can to restore things that would restrain his power. that is the inspector generals, the jagged officers, the leadership of the military he does not like, and the press is a potential restraint on his power. he is trying to dismantle the idea of the press. if i can bash the press a little, or at least the owner of jonathan's newspaper, we are helping. jeff bezos, when he says we are not going to happen up -- we are going to have an opinion section in "the washington post" does not have dissent, that is not journalism. i have heard, why would you publish something you disagree with? they don't get it, some people. that is what democracy is. your loyalty to democracy is

higher than your loyalty to one ideology. the fact that we have a major newspaper that does not publish dissent, that can't be. amna: david brooks, jonathan capehart. thank you for being here. we appreciate you. jonathan: thanks, amna. ♪ geoff: the brazilian film "i'm still here" will be vying this weekend for oscars for best international film and best picture. and its star, fernanda torres, already the winner in the best actress category at the golden globes, is also competing for an oscar. senior arts correspondent jeffrey brown talks with torres for our arts and culture series, canvas. >> [speaking another language] jeffrey: in the drama "i'm still

here", we meet the large and loving paiva family, living what appears to be a blissful domestic life near the beach in rio de janeiro. but this is 1970's brazil, under a military dictatorship, and their world is about to be upended by the arrest and disappearance of husband and father rubens, a former congressman. >> [speaking portuguese] >> [speaking portuguese] jeffrey: fernanda torres plays eunice, his wife and mother of their five children. >> i think the essence of this film is endurance. they tried to erase this family, to say that they never existed. and this woman with five children, she endured in time. so i'd like to think that literature and cinema were able not only to preserve memory, but to make this family forever remembered. and this is quite a thing for art.

jeffrey: the film, directed by brazilian walter salles, is based on the real-life paiva family, whose story was told in a memoir by only son marcelo in 2015. long after the end of military rule in 1985, and after the family learned officially what they already knew in reality, that rubens had been tortured and murdered by the military authorities. his body was never recovered. >> [speaking portuguese] jeffrey: in the film, we see torres' character, detained herself for days, fearing and fighting that reality, intent on finding her husband and keeping her family together. >> i think eunice was a woman raised to be the perfect wife of the 1950's, and her utopian life

is over in a tragic way. and it's a woman that after such a tragedy, in a very difficult time, she becomes herself. jeffrey: what's really striking in watching you is that so much of the emotion of this character has to be internal. how do you think about showing the emotion but holding it back? fernanda: i never thought it could be so powerful, you see, because normally as an actor, you want to show how well you can feel, how well you cry, how well you scream. but suddenly you had this character that everything was about self-control because she had five children and she could not panic. she could not have, like the oscar scene where you cry and you scream, and i never thought it could be so powerful. eunice teaches me a lot about acting. jeffrey: torres says she learned

in part by studying the real eunice paiva, watching her in interviews throughout her life before she died in 2018. but torres also had a another example close by. her mother, fernanda montenegro, is a legendary figure in brazilian theater and film, the first and come up over her daughter, only -- the first and -- before her daughter -- only brazilian to receive an oscar nomination for acting, for her performance in the 1998 film, "central station", also directed by walter salles. and her mother, now 95, appears in "i'm still here" playing her daughter's character in the last years of her life. so what is the most important lesson about acting you learned from your mother? fernanda: many years ago she told me that you cannot play a tragic character and start to cry in the first bad news, she

told me. when you do a tragic character, you have to swallow and endure, swallow and endure. and i remember that vividly when i had to do eunice paiva. i said, that's the key! jeffrey: when it was released in brazil in november, far right groups there called for a boycott of the film, but it's become a major hit, raising questions about the country's historic amnesia and the film's continuing resonance. just this month, former president jair bolsonaro was charged with plotting a coup to overthrow his loss in the 2022 election. what is your sense of how much or how little brazilians have grappled with this painful past? fernanda: you know, it lasted so long and it ended with an economical crisis, and also with an arrangement that we all would forget what happened. in brazil, it was called the amnesty.

so brazil never dealt with the crimes that happened during the dictatorship, and we thought it was all over. but then, now, when the film was being released, we just discovered that there was a real attempt of a coup d'etat, military coup de time in brazil. jeffrey: the director, walter salles, said that films like "i'm still here" can serve as instruments against forgetting. fernanda: because it has happened with this film and with this book, and suddenly this film in brazil became a phenomenon of people from all kinds of beliefs. they all started to go to the movie theater and talk about the dictatorship and talk about this is not right, to kill a family like this. as it's the story of the family, everybody can relate to that. if you are young, to the young children, if you were a mother, to my character, if you are a

father, to rubens paiva's character, so something very special happened with this movie. jeffrey: it's got to be very fulfilling for you personally. it can't happen very often in the life of an actor. fernanda: no, this is a very special moment. i know, i don't know, in brazil when with the oscars and the fact that my mother was nominated and now me and in a way, we are like we were put in the place that brazil normally dedicates to the soccer team. jeffrey: you're bigger than soccer in brazil right now? that's big. fernanda: that's big. it cannot be bigger. but we are facing difficulties. so all the passion was put now in this movie and in this character and in this family. it's very touching. jeffrey: fernanda torres and the film "i'm still here" compete for oscars this sunday night.

for the pbs newshour, i'm jeffrey brown. geoff: for more coverage of all the oscar-nominated movies, as well as the actors and directors who made them, check out our website at pbs.org/newsho ur. and this week on pbs news weekly, we look at the lasting impact of the california wildfires that devastated entire communities in the los angeles region last month. and that is the newshour. i'm geoff bennett. amna: and i'm amna nawaz. on behalf of the entire newshour team, thank you for joining us. >> major funding has been made possible by the walton family foundation. working for solutions to protect water during climate change so people and nature can thrive together. the william and flora hewlett foundation. for more than 50 years, advancing ideas and institutions

to promote a better world. >> it really matters when you have an opportunity to give back. >> being part of something that is bigger than myself brings me happiness. >> being able to integrate your professional career with some of these other things that are important to you is critical. >> this is our community too, and we want to participate and get back to it. >> people want these opportunities to make an impact and difference. ♪ >> and with the ongoing support of these individuals and 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. ♪ >>

hello, everyone, and welcome to "amanpour and company." here's what's coming up. it's the british prime minister's turn in the oval office, trying to shore up his country's celebrated special relationship and convince president trump not to give up on ukraine. the former