PBS News Hour - Full Show - December 26, 2025 - PBS News Hour full episode

Episode Date: December 27, 2025

Friday on the News Hour, the Trump administration conducts strikes in Nigeria against alleged terrorists, who they claim were killing Christians. A federal judge blocks the detention of a British social media activist who tracks online hate and disinformation. Plus, the White House pushes to dismantle a leading climate and weather center — with serious implications for accurate forecasts. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

Good evening. I'm William Brangham. I'm the Navaz and Jeff Bennett are away. On the news hour tonight, the Trump administration conducts strikes in Nigeria against alleged terrorists they claim are killing Christians. A federal judge blocks the detention of a British social media activist who tracks online hate and disinformation. And the White House moves to dismantle one of the world's leading climate and weather research. centers. The atmosphere does not possess a voter registration card. I think it's important to remember that scientists do science, and really the only people doing the politicization are, for the most part, politicians. Welcome to the News Hour. President Trump said today that he delayed American military

strikes in northwest Nigeria until Christmas Day to deliver a message to groups he alleges are targeting Christians in that country. Meanwhile, the Nigerian government praised the attacks and said it provided the U.S. with the necessary intelligence. Nick Schifrin is here with the details, Nick. William, the area that the U.S. bombed in Nigeria is near the border of neighboring Niger in a part of Western Africa that suffered from cross-border terrorism. Northern Nigeria has suffered from violence for years. And while the president describes this is focused on protecting Christians,

the violence in Nigeria and the groups committing it are far more complex. In the Gulf of Guinea, a tomahawk missile flies to an area never before struck by the U.S. military, northwest Nigeria.

Where locals picked up debris as nearby flames kept burning. By day, the grass was scorched and police cordoned off an impact site. This missile, at least in this remote rural area, apparently killed no one. There was no loss of life and no loss of property. A U.S. military official tells PBS NewsHour a ship off Nigeria's coast fired more than a dozen Tomahawks at two ISIS training camps.

Local security analysts say the missiles hit in at least four locations, all in Nigeria's northwest Sokodo State. The area has been plagued by a group known as Lakruawa that claims affiliation with ISIS Sahel. and exploits poor local governance and access to terrorist groups that operate in Niger and Mali. Nigeria declared them a terrorist organization, but locals say they're connected to bandits and criminals who've intimidated local residents, most of whom are Muslim, preaching radicalization, kidnapping hundreds of girls, and young boys in an attempt to control and exploit the population. This is what we've always been hoping for to work with the Americans.

Today, Nigerian foreign minister Yusuf Tugar told Channel's TV that Nigeria provided the U.S. intelligence. It is a joint operation and it is not targeting any religion. But last night, President Trump wrote that the targets were, quote, ISIS terrorist scum in northwest Nigeria, who have been targeting and viciously killing primarily innocent Christians at levels not seen for many years and even centuries. And today, he told Politico, the strike was supposed to take place on Christmas Eve, but he said, nope, let's give a Christmas present.

The government doesn't help the Christians. They're not protecting them. They're not protecting their villages. Nina Shea directs the Hudson Institute's Center of Religious Freedom. She and 30 other advocates, Christian organizations and think tanks, wrote a letter in October to President Trump, saying the Nigerian government demonstrably tolerates relentless aggression uniquely against Christian farming families.

Local Christian leaders are telling us that they are trying to cleanse the land of Christians, that they are establishing the land for Islamic rule. In reality, Nigeria violence is more complex. For years, Islamist terrorists have plagued northern and northeast Nigeria. The best known as Boko Haram, they've targeted the Nigerian military and violently oppose female education. It's bombed mosques. Boko Haram also targeted Christians, as I saw in 2015, in the eastern city of Mubi.

Outside the nearby Church of the Brethren, the damage is everywhere. Inside, high above the podium, the fire set by Boko Haram almost erased the cross from the wall. When these people landed in Mubi, they will ask you, are you a Christian or a Muslim? When you say you're a Christian, they will shoot you. But that's the Northeast, far from today's target. And then there's the map. Most Nigerian Muslims live in the north. Most Christians live in the south.

And in the middle, the two groups overlap, as do tribes, farmers and herders. Who can clash violently. For decades, nomadic herders, almost all of whom are Muslim, have fought farmers, most of whom Christian over land disputes and scarce resources. The independent conflict monitor Ackled tells PBS NewsHour last year's data show a rise in Christian fatalities, mostly in central Nigeria. But the vast majority of the incidents were over land disputes, not targeting because of religion. You can see how all these things are interconnected.

So when you try to reduce it, you just say, oh, no, it's Muslims stealing Christians in Nigeria. You see how you can get it completely wrong. for more perspective on the U.S. strike against targets in Nigeria, we turned to former Ambassador Peter Fon. He was U.S. Special Envoy for the Sahel region during the First Trump Administration. He's now a distinguished fellow at the Atlantic Council and sits on the boards of a number of companies doing business in Africa. Ambassador, thanks very much. Welcome back. Good to be with you, next. To the News Hour. Explain who is being targeted here in the Northwest. This is a group called Lakarawa, connected to terrorists in the Sahel in Western Africa,

but also criminals known as bandits in Nigeria. Well, the group that was referred to in the piece, Nick, Lakarawa, is a good example, almost a classic one, of the cure being worse than the disease. They originally as self-defense groups in an area where the Nigerian government and some of the neighboring countries were unable to provide protection for local communities.

So they set up their own self-defense groups. Unfortunately, over the years, these groups, their ambitions grew, and in the case of Lakarawa, in Sokoto State, and some of the neighboring states, as well as in Mali and Niger, they've grown to establish dominion over areas of territory where the government is, right frankly, its writ doesn't run and is excluded, and they've been increasingly imposing upon the people they were, started to protect a harsh vision of Islam and a hard-line vision, and increasingly kidnapping young people to fill up their ranks.

So they've become, in effect, the disease they were there to fight. And I don't want to conflate these groups. The analysts I speak to say it's not Lakhara, it's not these bandits in the northwest who are traditionally killing Christians. We see that more in the northeast and the central area of Nigeria. That's very much where the conflicts between farmer herders, between Muslims or those motivated or agitated by extremist, integrations of Islam and Christians have occurred. So I'm not privy to, I'm a former government official, I'm not privy to any current intelligence on this. So I can't speak to why the targeting occurred in Sokado. Certainly, it's a mystery to me. There are a couple other places I would have

picked to hit extremists in Nigeria. So let's drill into that. What impact, if any, could this have this strike in northwest Nigeria on violence against Christians? As far as I'm aware of a very limited impact. What does send a signal that the U.S. is willing to act in this area. But, you know, what concerns me is the fact that all the reporting I've seen on this has emphasized,

including Nigerian Foreign Minister Tugar's statements, this was coordinated with the Nigerian government. And I agree with my friend Nina Shai. Part of the problem here is actually not all parts of the Nigerian government, but certain parts of the Nigerian government are suspect.

Well, we've also seen inability by the Nigerian government. government, as you were referencing before, to govern some of these spaces, whether the Northwest, the Northeast, or some of these farmer-herder conflicts in the Central Plains. I mean, how much of this is about, how much of the root causes is about the government not being able to have governance in these areas? It's a matter of, you know, where does something start and where something in? There's certainly an incapacity or a lack of capacity, but there's also a lack of political

will to put the resources necessary to that. And in some cases, one has to be brutally honest here, there's also certain politicians in Nigeria have their own agendas and their own political alliances with extremists. And you should get a mixture of all that. It's a very complex situation that doesn't lend itself to easy solutions. Absolutely. And so in that sense, is there anything the United States can do right now, whether with the military or not, that could actually help protect Nigerian Christians, could get at this lack of governance? Well, first, I think calling attention to it is very, very important. Calling it out has forced the Nigerian government to take stock of what it is and is not doing. So that in itself is effective.

Secondly, I would say that important also in this is also to be as operational security. Again, I'm not privy to current planning, but I certainly, if I were still in there, I'd be very, very hesitant at sharing and coordinating. If what the Nigerians are claiming was happening with this coordination, I'd be very suspect about that. And the Nigerian government, as we heard the foreign minister say, this violence is not about any particular religion. And in fact, the majority of victims of violence in Nigeria are Muslim. But we heard President Trump say this is about protecting Christians. So in the time we have left, about 30 seconds, do we know anything about why those two narratives are so different right now? I think it's a matter of perspective. Both Muslims and Christians are suffering

because of this violence. And where the political will is in Nigeria is the real question. Is there a political will to address the challenges to both communities and is there a double agenda on the part of certain people? Well, but again, on the political will, it seems like so far in the past, at least, the Nigerian government has struggled with that political will. Very much so, both in will and in resources. Ambassador Peter Fombe, thank you very much.

Thank you. The day's other headlines begin in California, where more than 45 million people were under flood alerts today after relentless rains added to the state's wettest holiday season in decades. In some of the hardest-hit areas, the downpours have died down enough, for the cleanup to begin. The town of Wrightwood, in the mountains northeast of Los Angeles, got nearly a foot of rain in just three days. Residents who had evacuated returned to find their homes buried in mud.

Locals say they'll need to lean on each other to get through. I thought what my son said about this all happening on Christmas was really poignant. But this community, whether it's floods or fires or now this, they really pull together and they're out helping each. other. All the way across the country, millions are bracing for a belated white Christmas. Areas north of New York City and parts of Pennsylvania could see up to a foot of snow through tomorrow. Travel disruptions are also in the forecast, with more than a thousand flights already canceled because of this winter weather. Officials in Kentucky say a 15th person has now died as a result of a recent plane crash at Louisville International Airport. In a social media post yesterday,

city's mayor said Alan Rodriguez Colina, quote, suffered severe injuries at the time of the crash and passed earlier this Christmas Day. He was one of 12 people killed on the ground when UPS Flight 2976, bound for Hawaii, crashed just moments after takeoff. Three pilots also died. In its initial report, air safety officials said they found cracks where the plane's engine was connected to its wing. Ukrainian President Volodemir Zelensky says he'll discuss security guarantees with President Trump when the two meet in Florida on Sunday. Zelensky told reporters today that a broader 20-point plan is, quote, about 90 percent ready. But he acknowledged that Ukraine and Russia have yet to reach agreement on territorial issues.

Meantime, Russia carried out a number of strikes today, including one on Ukraine's second biggest city, Harkiv. Local officials say at least two people were killed and six others injured, including a baby. In northern Israel, officials say a Palestinian man from the West Bank killed at least two Israelis there today and injured two more. Police say the suspect ran over a pedestrian in the city of Bates-Sihon and then fatally stabbed a young woman nearby. He was then shot and taken to a hospital for treatment. Authorities are describing the incident as a, quote, rolling terror attack. In response, Israel's defense minister has ordered troops to crack down on what he called terrorist infrastructure in the assailant's West Bank hometown.

On Wall Street today, stocks ended just a touch lower to wrap up the holiday shortened week. The Dow Jones Industrial Average slipped just 20 points on the day. The NASDAQ also fell by 20 points. The S&P 500 ended virtually unchanged. changed. Still to come on the NewsHour, David Brooks and Kimberly Atkins' store weigh in on the events of 2025. Leading film critics offer their choices for the best movies of the year, and we take a look at a British pantomime theater that blends holiday tradition with Muslim culture and humor. This is the PBS News Hour from the David M. Rubenstein studio at WETA in Washington, headquarters of PBS News. A federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from detaining or deporting Imran Ahmed.

He's a British-born researcher who focuses on countering online hate and misinformation, but the Trump administration accuses him of trying to censor viewpoints that he doesn't agree with. Ahmed leads a group called the Center for Countering Digital Hate, and he is one of five European nationals, recently barred entry. to the U.S. by the State Department. Imran Ahmed is in the U.S., and he joins us now. Thank you so much for being here. As I mentioned, the U.S. government, specifically Secretary of State Marco Rubio,

accuses you of trying to censor social media companies and to pressure them into taking viewpoints that you find objectionable off their sites. Rubio called you and these other individuals foreign censors. What do you make of that accusation? Well, thank you. I mean, it's terribly confusing. The work that the center does, looking into things as diverse as the spread of online hatred against Jews, anti-Semitism, on social media platforms, which we worked on with the first Trump administration in 2020. And we've continued to work on a bipartisan basis globally, including in the United States with both the federal and state governments. And the work that we do protecting children online. looking at the spread of eating disorder and self-harm content. You know, this is, first of all, important work that needs to be done to protect the public.

But second, we're a non-profit. And we can't therefore be censoring things, which is, of course, something that the government does. I mean, you seem to be arguing that your free speech rights are being violated, which is precisely what the administration argues you are doing. Do you have a sense as to why your organization and why you in particular were targeted?

Yeah, I mean, one of the issues that we've had is that we take on, of course, some of the biggest corporations in America, companies like X, Elon Musk, Meta, and others, and chat GPTs at OpenAI. And these companies, which typically aren't able to be held accountable properly, whether that is through the courts because of the way that U.S. law is structured, that they're the only companies in America whose products really aren't subject to any liability if they cause harm to people, even when they persuade kids to take their own lives, for example.

But we think that this is another example of these companies which have tried to evade responsibility, using their big money to try and influence things in politics. And we've seen companies like X, for example, suing us before because they didn't like being held accountable. I mean, in 2023, your organization, was sued by X after you reported a rise in hate speech on that platform after Musk bought X. Musk, again, he argued that you were trying to destroy the First Amendment because you didn't like particular viewpoints that were being floated on X.

Again, that case was dismissed. I know, and there's an appeal underway. What do you make of that argument that they are making, that you are simply trying to come in and censor them? look people can say things as they wish and mr musk says a lot of things um now what the courts actually found was that his lawsuit which basically said you're not allowed to research our platform and doing so is a is a breach of the contract that you have with x when you sign up to it um they found that he was trying to impinge on our first amendment rights to research and communicate that research, which we did.

And that research went all around the world. It led to advertisers leaving his platform. It led to his trust in safety council resigning. He sued us for $10 million that it was dismissed with prejudice with a slack ruling, a costs awarded to CCDH. So that's another example of how these people simply don't like being transparent or accountable. The court, a federal judge, has temporarily stopped this deport. or expulsion on your part.

And we should say, you are a legal resident, you have a green card, you are married to an American, you are the father of an American, how comfortable are you that the U.S. justice system will continue to protect you? Look, I've lived in America for over five years now. I love America.

I love the idea of America, the idea that, you know, laws are made by people, not by kings, that we have checks and balances on every, every place of power. And I have faith in the justice system. I know that the justice system works because when the world's richest man took on my small non-profit and tried to sue us out of existence, it actually protected us and made sure

that our costs were covered. And I think in this instance, what we're seeing is America working just as it was intended to. But we have seen the Trump administration, particularly when it comes to deporting foreign nationals, move very quickly, sometimes seemingly in contradiction to judicial orders. Do you have a sense as to how close you were to being deported before this judge stepped in? Well, we haven't received any notification of any actual action by the U.S. government. The State Department put out a press release, I believe, that Mr. Musk was celebrating online

saying this is great, but there's no actual correspondence with me as a legal permanent resident of the United States. So we don't know. But that's why I assembled an extraordinary bunch of lawyers, everyone from the ACLU to Roberta Kaplan, our lead council, Chris Clark and others, to make sure that there wasn't any chance of an arbitrary detention and being spirited away hundreds or thousands of miles away from my friends, family, and my support networks. All right. That is Imran Ahmed, the Center for Countering Digital Hate. Thank you so much for being here. Thank you. The Trump administration says it plans to dismantle the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado, which is the nation's premier atmospheric science center.

In announcing the closing, budget director Russell Vote called the center, quote, one of the largest sources of climate alarmism in the country. N-KAR, as the Center is known, was founded in 1960 and has facilitated generations of breakthroughs in climate and weather science. The announcement has drawn outcry from meteorologists and climate scientists across the country. Earlier this week, I spoke with two of them who are very familiar with the center's work. Brown University's Kim Cobb is a climate scientist and director of the Institute at Brown for Environment and Society, and Matthew Capucci is senior meteorologist at My Radar. Thank you both so much for being here.

Kim Cobb, to you first. What is Encar and why, as a climate scientist, is it so important and seemingly precious to this community? Thanks for having me, William. Encar is a really historic institution in our field. It's, of course, dates back decades now, and over that time, it has really woven itself into the fabric of both weather and climate science,

across the country and around the world. We're talking about unique, one-of-a-kind facilities like supercomputers, ticked-out airplanes, and most importantly, as staff of over 800 people who are at the top of their game in innovating in weather and climate science for public good, putting out data that is on every single climate scientist's computer

around the country, if not around the world, and a nexus of collaboration as well that is important training grounds for the next generation of leaders. And Matthew Capucci as a meteorologist, how important is Encar to your profession? I mean, Encar is really the birthplace of all the tools we use both technologically

and really the discoveries that are made at Encar are crucial to our understanding of how the atmosphere works. You know, that's where we first learned about the M.JO, the Madden-Julian oscillation, one of the biggest overturning circulations in the atmosphere that covers how so many things. For example, hurricanes behave.

It's where we first created a special process used by airplanes when they're landing to avoid wind shear, disruptive changing winds with height that could cause plane crashes. They invented a system there to prevent that. That's where dropsons were invented. Those little probes that are dropped out of the belly of airplanes in the middle of hurricanes to figure out how strong the hurricanes are. So so many different tools and discoveries have come from Encar. In addition, the modeling is incredibly important. And if we're sort of putting the brakes on that, I worry about the implications for weather forecasting. Kim Cobb, well, what more on that? Let's say Encar is broken up. What are the impacts, both for the scientific community and for Americans who benefit from its research? I think what's really important to remember is that Encar focuses on the entire continuum from weather that ranges over hours and days that's designed to, you know, aid the forecast that keep people safe and protect infrastructure and our economy. But they also go all the way out to looking decades into the future and really, understanding that most important intersection right now, how weather is responding to ongoing

climate change. It's these kinds of questions at the very forefront of our field that they're focused on right now. And these are innovations that are going to reap absolutely untold dividends through time. So by breaking these up-knits component parts, if you will, first of all, the administration is made clear that it's the climate portion of the portfolio, which they are taking squarely in aim. And, of course, that is the portion that is right now so important to invest in as we seek to understand more about the coming threats and impacts of ongoing climate change, 2025, of course, wrapping up to be tied for the second warmest year ever. And Matthew, the White House has argued that Encar and its, its undertakings and its work is

somehow contaminated with woke ideology or climate alarmism. Is there research or data that is coming out of Encard that is politicized or ideological in any way? Truth be told, no. You know, the atmosphere does not possess a voter registration card. I think it's important to remember that scientists do science. And really, the only people doing the politicization are, for the most part, politicians and the general public and the media. It worries me, though, that this fits into an overall pattern of the demonization of both

science and academia. The idea that we're trying to shut down science that produces results we don't like, it's a very worrisome trend, and we've seen this other times in history, and it never really ended well. And I'm just very concerned about the tone that's being taken simply because one political party or even one political person doesn't like the fact that we're learning about the atmosphere. I mean, Kim, as Matthew was saying, we know that President Trump has called climate change a hoax. He believes it's nothing that we need to focus on. He has directed so much of the administration to move away from climate research,

from renewable energy, doubling down on fossil fuels. I'm just curious as to what, are you worried similarly about the future of climate research if we continue to chip away at these foundational projects? Well, obviously, as Matthew said, we turn our backs on science to great risk and peril. And I think most Americans get it right now in the headlines every year

are these horrific climate-fueled disasters that have taken such a toll on communities and our national economy to the tune of billions of dollars per year. So this is not a controversial subject in that regard. People do want the best available science information to protect themselves, and that's exactly what Encar and its scientists are focused on.

And I think the Trump administration is just not understanding how long an investment has been made to get us to this point and the many dividends that we've already reaped and that once you break something like this, it's really going to be hard to put it back together again. That's my concern.

Matthew, the OMB director in his announcement said they'll do a systematic review of the work that Encar does, and critical whether information and research will just get sent somewhere else or done in another location. How confident are you that a breakup of Encar could still keep some of the critical elements intact? I think so many times this administration has historically put the cart before the horse. And what I mean by that is it seems like just a year ago, they were cutting a huge chunk of national weather service forecasters. And then after they were laid off, the government realized, oh, wait, we kind of need them

and brought them back. This seems like another really short-sighted decision made by the administration without realizing or fully researching the potential implications of what could happen. And I also just sort of think this strikes the wrong tone for just about everybody. Weather and climate affect everybody. And realistically, you're much more likely to be hit by a tornado or hurricane in a red state. And so I'm surprised by sort of Trump and his administration doing something that could potentially have negative impacts on his own core audience and following. All right.

That is Matthew Capucci and Kim Cobb. Thank you both so much for being here. We really appreciate it. President Trump's return to the White House has seen several significant changes from his first term, turning this into a consequential year for the presidency and for the country. So to reflect on it all, we turn now to the analysis of Brooks and Atkins store. That's David Brooks of the New York Times and Kimberly Atkins' store

of the Boston Globe. Jonathan Capehart is away. Welcome to you both. Thank you for being here. David, one of the biggest questions at the starting of this year is what Trump 2.0 was going to look like compared to the first version.

And we have now seen a year of it an incredibly aggressive flexing of executive authority. When you look back on this year, what really stands out to you? Yeah, I tell two stories. The first is that since 1945, the American establishment, if you want to put it that way,

has built a series of institutions, things like the Western Alliance, NATO, the Department of Justice, USAID, and all of those things have been hollowed out over the last year. And so we've seen a great decline in state capacity. You have to worry about if we're a nation in decline because China is investing in science,

they're investing in technologies, they're kicking our butts. And so you tell the decline, this has been a tragedy been a tragedy, an error of historic proportions. The other story is that since 1945, the American establishment has lost touch with American workers. And they've passed trade and immigration policies that workers didn't like.

They've, frankly, in the cultural institutions, the media, the universities. They've kicked working class and conservative voices out. And so a lot of people feel I'm invisible to these people. And then, and ergo, we get Trump. And so we get Trump. And so I think both those stories, are true. And so as much as we lament the horror of what's happened over last year,

it's much more horrible than I anticipated. For people like me, we have to ask stuff, what do we do to bring this about? And I think both those stories are true. What do you think? Yeah, two things really jumped out at me, and one is the erosion of the rule of law, and I see the trumpification of the Department of Justice, for example, as a key role in that right alongside the White House. He came in pardoning the January 6th rioters, everyone who participated in that horrific day. But at the same time, weaponizing the Department of Justice to go after his political enemies. I mean, just today, when he was posting on Truth Social about the Epstein files, he's directing people just to look at the

Democrats that are in these files and not the Republicans, because everything but what the Democrats are tagging is a hoax. And that he has an attorney general now and an FBI director that are willing to go along with that as an attorney. This is not how I learned in law school that the rule of law is supposed to be implemented. Another thing I think you see a great throughline, whether it's its immigration policies or the decimation of the federal government

with the purging of workers to the attacks on universities is a through line of race. It is this idea that people within the country who are black or Latino or also Muslim, the Islamophobic, aspect of it or immigrants, it's only those that are deemed the ones that are a danger to the country. We will open our arms to white South Africans, but at the same time, the denigration

of other countries as third world is less than as hellholes and worse. You see this real idea that there is a white Christian nationalism that has taken over the federal government in a way that I never thought I'd see in my lifetime. I mean, as you're both describing what we've been seeing unfolding, this is a, none of this should come as a surprise. I mean, this is what candidate Trump promised on so many different levels. I will be your retribution. I will, I want my Roy Cohn in the Department of Justice. I will deport, I mean, those signs at the rallies.

To this question you were asking before, David, about how what we ought to look at as far as whether we got ourselves here, how do you answer that question? The surprise, or how we got ourselves? Yeah. I mean, my simple answer is that we live in a country where people with high school degrees die 10 years sooner than people with college degrees, where people with high school degrees are five times more likely to die of ovipoahed, where people of high school degrees are much less likely to get married, much more likely to have kids out of wedlock. People with high school degrees are 2.4 times more likely to say they have no friends.

People with high school degrees are less likely to go to parks. And so we have created an inherited meritocratic system, an inherited caste system. And if you tell success of generations that your kids are not going to have an equal shot because your kids by eighth grade have fallen five grades level below, the educated class, well, if you tell them your kids are going to have no shot, they're going to flip the table. And that's why it's always important to see this phenomenon as a global phenomenon. It's not just Donald Trump. It's Nigel Farage in Britain.

It's the right in France. It's the AFD in Germany. It's in Poland. South and Central America. South and Central American. This is a global phenomenon. It is a phenomenon of the information age. That information age records people with money, with education with money.

And it creates this class system. And just as in the 1880s and 1890s we screwed up responding to industrialization, we have over the last 20 or 30 years not adequately responded to the shifts that the information age has brought about us. And so I look at this as a moment of rupture and repair. That it's ugly to live through. I hate what Donald Trump is doing. Every time America or any country, or us personally,

think of your own personal life, life moves forward through a process of rupture and repair. Something falls apart, something terrible happens. But you are strong enough as a nation to ask yourself honest questions, what part of this problem am I responsible for? And when you do that, then repair begins to happen. And America's been through this so many times,

1830s, 1890s, 1860s, 1960s. I'm confident that America will go through this horrible period of rupture. And something will come out the other end if we're creative enough to adjust. I mean, Kimberly, who do you see as the repairers that David is yearning for? Well, I think that it's going to be many of the same repairs

that we saw, those periods that you talked about. We didn't just come through the rupture on our own. We came through with a sustained plan of how to get ourselves out of it. After the Civil War, there was reconstruction. That was meant to heal some of the wounds and bring up the formerly enslaved African Americans to a place where they can participate fully in society.

And what did we get? We got a vicious blowback to it with Jim Crow, a rejection of it, this idea that politically people thought it was better to say, hey, these are people taking something that belongs to you rather than saying, hey, let's look for a way to bring up everyone and to protect everyone's rights. That's exactly what Donald Trump is doing.

He could be talking to the people that you talk about being left behind. But instead, he's saying that these immigrants or these black folks or these other people are taking something that belongs to you. And that's what's giving people the idea that this is unfair. But one thing that I think this can't happen without institutions allowing it. And I think this year we saw the biggest institution, the Supreme Court, basically allowing Trump before the actions that he has taken, has even been deemed to be constitutional or legal in the short term allowing them to go in front. place. On the shadow docket, all these emergency orders. Exactly. And so by the time,

the legality or the constitutionality is the side, very little has been so far, the damage is already done. And as, you know, USAID is already gone. The education department's right next to it. You're seeing people who have been deported to countries that they don't have family they've never been to before. How do you make them whole? That's too late. So the fact that the Supreme Court, as the unelected independent branch of our government, basically been more often than not a rubber stamp for him is a real problem. We need our institutions to step up. I mean, earlier this spring, David, you remember, you called for, arguing that all of these

little protests, pushbacks that are happening against the Trump administration, were insufficient for what you're diagnosing. And you called for a civic, a collective civic action. I don't think I'm breaking any news to you that I don't think that that has happened. Yeah, I mean, I was reading all these lefty revolutionaries, and I'm like, yeah, yeah, let's go get them. I think it has not happened. It has not happened because people are intimidated, because they fear their organization will lose money. But one of the reasons it's not happened, if you look at around the world where it has happened,

where people rose up against authoritarianism, they had strong civic structures. Like, say, in the Philippines, in the 1980s, when they rose up, Ferdinand Marcus was elected, but then he tried to steal power. And so what happened was the students rose, the transportation workers arose, the business community arose, the Catholic Church rose. It happened with the institutions of civil society through them. And our institutions of civil society may be too weak. And so every institution, whether it's university or a business or a law firm, faces a collective action problem. If I stick my head up, I'm going to get shot down.

And without strong civic institutions where people can move as one, it's super hard for rare individuals to stand up. And I'm afraid that's part of what's happened. The second thing that's happened is there has been such a decay of moral norms that it's hard for any institution to say, no, we are going to stand up for this. You are not going to talk about Rob Ryan or the way you did. You're not going to use the racial language that is omnipresent now. And it's hard to articulate when the corrosion is not only in our laws, but in our minds, in our language.

That's a hard thing to challenge, but I'm hopeful in the long term it'll happen. In the 1890s, we had a civic renaissance. We had the creation of the Boys and Girls Clubs. We had the creation of the NACP, the unions, the Sierra Club, all these civic organizations were created by a group of people who said, we can't go on this way. And once you had the civic institutions, then in around 1900, you had the progressive movement. You get a cultural shift, you get a civic renaissance, and then political reform. We're still waiting for the civic renaissance.

waiting for the civic renaissance. I mean, in just the last 30 seconds we have, Kimberly. The Democrats have been one of these institutions that seemingly have been kind of feckless in pushing back. They have a midterm coming up. Do you think what we've seen in the recent elections will be echoed? You have hoped that they'll be there?

I hope so. I mean, I think that it is imperative that they do. We are seeing an election that is going to be, we always say it's the most consequential coming up. I'm afraid of the voter information gathering that the federal government is doing trying to consolidate voter lists and be in charge of who gets purged from them. I see that the obstacles are already being put up for a free and fair election. Democrats have to say clearly that this is not acceptable and put forwarded agenda that Americans can get behind. Kimberly Atkins store, David Brooks, so nice to see you both. Thank you very much.

Thank you. The holidays are a great time to catch up on the year's best films, whether streaming at home or heading to a movie theater. Jeffrey Brown recently sat down with two film critics who shared their top picks of the year. It's part of our arts and culture series, Canvas. It's that time of the year when we spotlight some of 2025's best movies, from big blockbusters to a few hidden gems that you might have missed.

For that, I'm joined by Linda Holmes, host of NPR's Pop Culture Happy Hour, and Mike Sargent, host of the podcast, Brown and Black, and co-president of the Black Film Critics Circle. And it's nice to see both of you again. Thanks for joining us. Let's start with some of the bigger movies of the year. Linda, you want to start? Yeah.

To me, the movie of the year, in a few ways, is Sinners, which is from Ryan Coogler. It's about twin brothers, played by Michael B. George. who end up having to battle some vampires. The vampires is different. Maybe the worst kind. The soul gets stuck in the body. Not only do I think it's a really, really good movie,

but it's also a really good story of a movie. It's really a situation where Cooler, I think, was able to get the deal that he wanted to make the movie he really wanted to make. It is original. It is not from existing intellectual property. It felt completely fresh to me. me.

Okay, how about one more while you're at it? Yeah. I always try to give a little bit of love to the superhero genre when it does a good job. Why not? I think this year's Superman was pretty good. Is it the best movie of the year? Maybe not. But I think this is truer to who I think Superman is than some of the other recent efforts.

Everybody okay? Hey, buddy. Eyes up here. Good film. Enjoyed it. All right. Mike Sargent, what did you like among the big movies this year? Wake Up Dead Man, a Knives Out mystery, which is the third film in the Knives Out series starring Daniel Craig as Ben Guant Blanc. And this is written and directed by Ryan Johnson. And this is actually, I think, maybe the best of the three. It's an interesting premise.

It's about a priest who's killed and everybody in the parish is potentially a subject. This leans strong into character and it really shows that this series could go on for a long time. The other film I have to mention is Weapons and this is a film by

Zach Krieger and it stars Josh Brawlin, Julia Garner and what this film reminds me as a storyteller and a lover of stories is it's not just the story, it's how the story is told. You're either negligent or complicit. Yeah, there are plot points, there are plot holes and things, but you don't care because it's so much fun to sit there and go, okay, what's going on?

All right, well, that leaves us wanting more. Thanks for that. So, Linda, how about among the indie or smaller films? Pick one that's stuck with you. It's hard to define indie and small for me sometimes, but I did think one of the quieter films that I very much enjoyed this year was Blue Moon, which is directed by Richard Linklater, and it stars Ethan Hawke. Two of them back together again after a number of projects together. Hawke plays the lyricist Lauren's Heart, and it's set on the night that Oklahoma opened. And Oklahoma is when Richard Rogers, who had been Hart's songwriting partner, was pairing up with Oscar Hammerstein,

and obviously they went on to have a lot of success together. So this is sort of the night that Hart feels his partnership slipping away from him. And it's just very moving, and it's very much about art and people who make art. And I enjoyed it a great deal, and I really recommend it. All right, Mike, have you got a smaller film for us? I do. Actually, it's a film called The Secret Agent,

and this is from writer-director Kleber Mandanka Filho. And it's about a tech specialist who's in his early 40s. He's on the run from an authoritarian regime. Takes place in Brazil. Now, what makes this film work besides Wagner's award-winning performance is that how it's shot. You almost feel like you're watching a documentary. It's very little artifice. Things are dirty.

It seems very real. Every single actor, you completely believe them in their role. This is one of those films when you watch it and then you go and you watch some kind of Hollywood movie. It just seems like, wow, seems like totally false. All right, so speaking of documentaries, it was a good year for documentaries. Linda, give us a couple that you liked. There's one that I really liked called The Perfect Neighbor, which is, it's a very upsetting film, I will say, out of the gate.

It is about a white woman who lived near a black woman and her kids and a lot of other people's kids, and this woman just became very agitated by the kids and was harassing them, and ultimately it ends in this tragic, violent end. And it's just a terrible story. It was mishandled, but it's just an awful situation. Sheriff's office, come outside with your hands up. The other one that I would mention on a kind of a happier note. I've spent my whole life distancing myself from my mother.

Jane Mansfield. It is a documentary that the actress Mariska Hargote, who is on Law and Order SVU, made about her mother, Jane Mansfield. It's called My Mom Jane. I'm so skeptical when famous people make documentaries about their families, but she absolutely redeems the whole project. It's very honest, it's very fair to everybody. It's a beautiful story with some surprises,

but also a lot of just very heartfelt storytelling about her mother and her kind of relationship with her mother's memory. All right, Mike, what jumped out at you in the documentary world this year? Two documentaries I'll mention. One is called Sly Lives, aka the Burden of Black Genius,

and that's directed by Questlove. And this is a documentary about Sly of Sly and the Family Stone. They are a band that fused funk, soul, rock, and they broke racial and gender boundaries in the late 60s and early 70s. Guys and girls and black and white. So you get all that input.

They sounded like nothing else sound. This goes beyond this, the usual musical doc. It explores the emotional cultural burden placed on black genius in America. And it really paints a very vivid portrait and really makes you appreciate the genius of Sly Stone. The other documentary by the great Raul Peck

is a documentary called Orwell 2 plus 2 equals 5. And it's about George Orwell and his life. And what's interesting about this documentary is that it juxtaposes what's going on today along with his writings from over 60, 70 years ago and what was inspiring him to write the pieces he wrote like Animal Farm in 1984.

And this is really life is like science fiction, because what you see him talking about, what he was writing about, what he's saying is disturbingly prescient today. All right. I want to give you both a shot at a film to see with the whole family. Absolutely. If you're looking for a movie for kids, Zootopia 2 is out, and even though it's big, it's Disney, I do think it's visually inventive and a lot of fun. The other one I would mention, there's a film coming out at Christmas called The Coral. Which stars Rafe Fines as the director of a community chorus during World War I. Some people absolutely are going to find it a little bit corny, but I found it beautiful and really moving. All right, Mike Sargent, what do you have in the family fair? There's a film called Arco.

It's about a little boy who travels from the future into our future and meets a little girl, and he needs to get back home. And without saying much more, the animation is terrific. very much a beautiful film worth watching. And I have to say, another film that I did not expect much from is the bad guys, too. How are we supposed to get a fresh start when we get blamed for every bad thing that happens? It's a sequel to the DreamWorks animated heist comedy, and this is really such an enjoyable film. It's really, I think it sets the bar pretty high. A good list for all of us.

Mike Sargent and Linda Holmes, thank you both very much. Thank you. We end this holiday week with a very British tradition, pantomime, but with a modern twist. For those less familiar, a pantomime, or Panto, is a family holiday comedy show filled with fairy tales, music, slapstick, and audience participation, and it's a seasonal staple across the UK. This year, one production is selling out. It's a retelling of the fairy tale Snow White that blends classic Panto with Muslim culture and humor and even teases at its online trolls.

From Britain, Minnie Stevenson of the Independent Television News brings us this story. Ah, but! They were all these disgusting people. Tis the season of glitter, goodwill and glorious Panto, where the jokes are loud and the costumes are even louder. Introducing the Muslim Panto, Snow Brown and her seven uncles, or Chacha in Urdu. A fairy tale flipped and served with enough one-liners to derail even the grumpiest uncle. Snow Brown coming here, taking out phantomite, goes back to Islamistan.

I'm so glad I'm in this role and having the previous shows honestly I started tearing up at one point because the little girls were running up to me and they looked like me and I looked like them and they were like I love your hijab oh my god you look like me I have your name and it's just really heartwarming to see and be that representation I wish I would have had when we grew up we just want everyone to enjoy the fun and you don't have to be Muslim to come and watch it Its creator Abdullah Afzal is on a mission to spread Muslim joy in the festive season. From Glasgow to Notting Hill, across 11 cities, the Muslim Panto has sold over 24,000 tickets. When it comes to Pantamam, it's a British institution. It's very important in the British culture. It's something that families go out to, but it's my history. The upbringing I had, the conflicts between being a British and Muslims at that time when I was growing up. growing up but I'm proud of both those things I'm proud of being Pakistani I'm

proud of being British and I'm bringing it to the stage and and people like me are coming and enjoying the show of course not everybody is a fan and satire is not dead the Panto has become embroiled in its very own cultural with some online trolls seizing upon the show you know we've got to use it as fuel and inspiration to to better ourselves and I've just enjoyed it and I've been attacked by a right wing fly here you know actually the snow brown name actually came from a right wing troll One of the comments was, Sinda Aliya, what's next?

Snow Brown. I went, all right, yeah. And now you named the show after them? Because of them, their inspiration. The comedy is halal and the joy unmistakable. It makes me feel proud to be Pakistani and Muslim and British and have all those cultures kind of combined. It's a twist to a typical pantor,

but it's still a pantor at heart with all the fun associated with it. I like the atmosphere of the Muslim pantos and the funny, funny and the humour and the acting. It just reminds me about something that I would watch when I was later. The ultimate unifier in the festive season you may ask. Cababs, of course, enter the kebab queen. Everyone loves a kebab. Wherever you're from.

Yeah. And you know what? I've had quite after the show when we've met the audience, I've had a few comments where people have said, you know what, I'm going to go home and have a kebab. It really made me want to have a kebab now. In a world that I'm going to have a kebab. In a world that often feels divided, this Panto offers something simple,

a stage big enough for everyone, and a reminder that sometimes the best magic is seeing yourself center stage. Be sure to watch Washington Week with The Atlantic tonight on PBS. Host Jeffrey Goldberg and his panel break down what's left on President Trump's Project 2025 to-do list and what it could portend for the new year. That's tonight here on PBS. And on the next PBS News Week, how researchers in Yellowstone National Park

are using AI to try to one day to code the language of wolves. That's Saturday on PBS News Weekend. And that is the News Hour for tonight. I'm William Brangham. On behalf of the entire NewsHour team, thank you so much for joining us. Have a great weekend.