PBS News Hour - Full Show - December 4, 2025 – PBS News Hour full episode

Episode Date: December 5, 2025

Thursday on the News Hour, a classified briefing on the Pentagon's strike of an alleged drug boat opens up partisan divides over whether the act constituted war crimes. The FBI arrests a suspect in connection with pipe bombs placed at the Democratic and Republican party headquarters. Plus, Ukraine faces a corruption scandal as it tries to negotiate an end to the war that Russia started. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

Good evening. I'm Jeff Bennett. And I'm Amna Nawaz on the news hour tonight. A classified briefing on the Pentagon strike of an alleged drug boat opens up partisan divides over the attack's legality. The FBI arrests a suspect in connection to the pipe bombs placed at the Democratic and Republican Party headquarters on the eve of the January 6th Capitol attack. And Ukraine scrambles to contain a corruption scandal while trying to negotiate an end to the war that Russia started.

We speak with Ukraine's ambassador to the United States. Caribbean in early September. Republicans backed the decision by a special operations forces commander to target survivors of the first strike in the administration's campaign against alleged drugboats. But Democrats accused the commander of targeting a shipwreck, which would be a violation of international law. Both sides agreed that Secretary Hegsef did not provide what would have been an illegal order to kill everyone on board. Nick Schiffran begins our coverage. Admiral, General, what's your message to the American people? On Capitol Hill today, the U.S.'s most senior military officer and the admiral at the center of a contentious strike gave their version and revealed more video of the September 2nd attack that targeted what the administration says were 11 narco terrorists.

A U.S. official tells PBS News hour that Admiral Frank Mitch Bradley and chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Dan Kane, told lawmakers in classified briefings that the first strike killed nine people and that, that after the first strike, the boat was still seaworthy. The men on board still had drugs and communications, which meant they were still combatants, and a rescue boat was approaching. Bradley then ordered the second strike, 30 to 60 minutes later, to kill two more people. A third and fourth strike sunk the boat. That narrative embraced by Republicans, including Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton. I saw two survivors trying to flip a boat, loaded with drugs, down for the United States,

back over so they could stay in the fight. The first strike, the second strike, and the third and the fourth strike on September 2nd were entirely lawful and needful, and they were exactly what we'd expect our military commanders to do. But one of the lawmakers critical of today's briefing tells PBS NewsHour that the ship was capsized by the first strike and almost submerged. The survivors had no means of communication, and it's not clear if the boat nearby would come to their rescue, House Intelligence Ranking Member Jim Himes. What I saw in that room was one of the most troubling things I've seen in my time in public service. You have two individuals in clear distress without any means of locomotion with a destroyed vessel

who were killed by the United States. Any American who sees the video that I saw will see the United States military attacking shipwrecked sailors. sailors. But there was bipartisan agreement that Secretary Pete Hegeseth did not give a written or verbal order before the strikes to kill everyone on board. Admiral Brattle was very clear that he was given no such order. The Admiral confirmed that there had not been a kill-them-all-order. The U.S. military says since September it's launched 21 strikes killing more than 80 in a mission designed to save American lives from drugs. In mid-October, the U.S. struck this submarine, And instead of targeting survivors, rescued them because unlike the previous case, their ship was no longer seaworthy, Cotton said today.

They were treated as they should be as non-combatants. They were picked up by U.S. forces. Democrats and many former military lawyers still question whether the overall campaign is legal. But when it comes to the September 2nd strike, it appears Republicans who lead Congress are satisfied with the military and administration's explanations. NewsHour, I'm Nick Schifrin. For more, we turn to Democratic Congressman Adam Smith, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee. He was among the members of Congress briefed by Admiral Bradley and General Kane today. Thanks for being with us. Thanks for having me. Appreciate the chance. So let's start with what you saw in that briefing today. How would you describe the video of the September 2nd U.S. strike on that boat?

Well, it's disturbing to me because what we saw, and we saw the whole video from the moment that they identified the boat to when they did the first strike. And by the time of the second strike, you have two survivors with their shirts off on top of a capsized boat, that the bow of the boat is above water, but there's not much above water. And they're on top of that boat. And that that was what the decision was was to strike those two people on that boat. So it's very disturbing. Now, you know, the admiral offered an explanation for why they felt that those two people on that were still, quote, in the fight at that point and legitimate targets, but I have serious questions about that conclusion, and I think we need to do a much deeper investigation.

Did Admiral Bradley or General Kane say anything about the legal guidance they received from the uniformed lawyers before ordering the second strike? Absolutely, and there's two layers to this. One is specific on the second strike, but then there's the larger issue, and the problem with all of this is because their definition of return to the fight was they considered it plausible that the cocaine was still on that boat. I find that somewhat questionable as well. It was hit by a strike. It was on fire, visibly burning for a while before the fuel tank separated and then capsized.

Is it possible that there was still cocaine underneath the part of the boat that was underwater, I suppose, but there was no evidence of that. And also, what does it mean that the cocaine was still there in terms of these two people still being a threat and in the fight? Now, you know, the broader definition is anyone shipping cocaine in the direction of the United States. Because keep in mind, they don't even know that this cocaine was coming to the U.S. That makes them a target for lethal force? I mean, this is the death penalty for drug dealer.

Do we want to give the President of the United States the authority to kill anyone he deems a drug dealer, to make him judge, jury, an executioner with no due process? Are they really in a fight? Look, and I've worked with a lot of people who served in Afghanistan and Iraq. And when they went into a place, they were in the fight. People were shooting at them trying to blow them up. That was a definite risk. We're talking about two guys on a capsized boat, completely unarmed,

who may or may not still have had cocaine in the boat that was sinking underneath them. Does what transpired amount, in your view, to a war crime? I am not personally going to make that conclusion. I think it's irresponsible to do that. War crimes are determined by trials and by thorough investigation. So I want to have a thorough investigation. I will say this. Based on what I've seen, I am deeply concerned about the legality of the strike.

I'm deeply concerned about the legality of the entire operation, and it needs a further investigation for a possible war crime. Absolutely. So what guidance then would you give to the men and women in uniform who are under orders to carry out operations like that? these? Well, at the risk of having the Justice Department investigate me, and I did not serve in the military, so I'm not at risk of being called back in court-martialed, I would give the same guidance that Senator Mark Kelly and the other five members gave in that video.

And it's in the UCMJ. You know, you have a responsibility to make sure that the orders that you are given are lawful. Don't forget that responsibility. It's really important, particularly when you have a secretary of defense who has contempt for the law on every level, his attitude is the law is an impediment to him doing what he has to do. That's not the way the United States of America is supposed to work. And if you're working for this guy, you better be extra careful because you know, A, SACDF doesn't care about the law, and B, he certainly doesn't have your back, as was witnessed by the fact that instantly he said, yeah, wasn't my decision, it was his decision. I fully support the order he gave.

So it's a very, very dangerous time to be a service member right now, given the way the Secretary of Defense is behaving. In the time that remains, I want to switch our focus to the Defense Department Inspector General report, concluding that Secretary Hegseth put U.S. personnel at risk by sharing details of planned strikes on Houthi leaders over the unclassified messaging app signal. He told investigators that the messages weren't classified because they did not include target names or locations. How do you respond to that explanation? No, first of all, that's completely wrong.

That's not what happened. He absolutely did say, this is what we're hitting, this is when we're hitting it, this is who is hitting it. That's what he released. Look, it's not complicated, all right? Anybody who's ever had any interaction with classified information would instantly look at what Secretary Hanksett did here and say, yeah, wrong, shouldn't have done that. So it's bad that he did it. It's worse that he doesn't see anything wrong with it. He gets a report that says that he unnecessarily put service members at risk in his

conclusion is, oh, completely exonerated, nothing to see here, no problem. He's not even going to fix what he did. So what happens now? President Trump is standing by Heggseth, the Republican chair of the House Intelligence Committee, says he's confident in Hegeseth's leadership. So what, in your view, does meaningful accountability look like? Yeah, it puts us in a very difficult position. And look, this is a problem with the entire Trump administration. In a variety of different ways, President Trump and Secretary Hegeseth have made it perfectly clear. The law doesn't apply to them. So how do you use the, you know, the United States government to enforce the law with the president and the Secretary of Defense who don't believe in the law? What we're going to do

on our part is we're going to continue to press for congressional oversight. Key to this is what will the Republican majority in the House and the Senate do. And we want a public hearing. We want a public discussion of what is the justification for this mission. What was the justification for this particular strike on September 2nd? So what I'm going to do, and a lot of us in Congress are going to do is we're going to keep pushing for that oversight and for that accountability. Congressman Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, thanks again for your time this evening. Thanks for giving me the chance.

And the News Hour has reached out to Republican members of the relevant committees, and we hope to have them on the program soon. legal developments. The Supreme Court, in a brief unsigned opinion, has allowed Texas to use a redrawn congressional map that could add Republican seats in next year's midterm elections. It reverses a lower court decision that found the new boundaries were likely unconstitutional. Separately, a federal grand jury in Virginia has reportedly refused to re-indict New York Attorney General Leticia James for alleged mortgage fraud. This comes just 10 days after a federal judge threw out charges against both James and former FBI director, James Comey,

because Trump's hand-picked prosecutor for both of those cases, Lindsay Halligan, was found to be unlawfully appointed. The Justice Department could try to seek an indictment against James for a third time. Turning now to the Middle East, only one hostage body remains inside Gaza after Israeli officials identified the most recent remains handed over by Palestinian militants to be those of Soutisok-Rinthalak from Thailand. The final hostage left in Gaza is a deceased Israeli police officer, Ron Gvili.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today vowed to secure his immediate return. We are committed to bringing Ron back for a proper burial on Israel, and we'll spare no effort to do so. Separately, an audit by Israel's own justice ministry found that Palestinian prisoners detained by Israel since the October 7th Hamas attack faced grueling. conditions that included overcrowding, starvation, and near-daily beatings. It is a rare admission from Israeli officials of what former prisoners have long alleged they endured.

The leaders of Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo signed a U.S. mediated peace deal today aimed at ending a decades-long conflict. Government forces in eastern Congo have clashed with rebels believed to be backed by Rwanda. Today we're succeeding with so many others have failed. President Trump celebrated the deal, which includes critical mineral cooperation. The region is full of rare earths and integral to much of the world's technology. Trump hosted his African counterparts at the former U.S. Institute of Peace, which had been vacant since its administration laid off most of the institute's staff this spring.

Trump renamed the building for himself yesterday. The New York Times has sued the Pentagon, saying restrictive new press rules violate both its First Amendment and due process rights. The rules, which went into effect in October, give Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth the power to revoke press credentials or ban journalists for seeking or reporting information that had not been approved for release.

Most organizations refused to agree to the rules and walked out en masse. That left mostly conservative pro-Trump outlets who agreed to the terms in their place. The Pentagon itself has not yet commented on the suit. And on Wall Street today, stocks held near their all-time records but ended mixed. The Dow Jones Industrial Average slipped, but only slightly, while the NASDAQ rose by 50 points.

The S&P 500 also closed higher, just half a percent, below an all-time high. Still to come, on the news hour, we speak to Ukraine's ambassador to the U.S. about ongoing negotiations to end the war. The Trump administration intensifies social media efforts to hire more immigration agents. This is the PBS News Hour from the David M. Rubinstein studio at WETA in Washington and in the west from the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism at Arizona State University. The FBI announced today an arrest in its nearly five-year investigation into who placed pipe bombs near the Republican and Democratic National Party headquarters in Washington, D.C. on the eve of the January 6th Capitol attack back in 2021.

A 30-year-old man, Brian Cole Jr. was arrested in charge today. FBI deputy director Dan Bongino spoke at a press conference this afternoon. Folks, this is what it's like when you work for a president who tells you to go get the bad guys and stop focusing on other extraneous things, not related to law enforcement. You're not going to walk into our capital city, put down two explosive devices, and walk off in the sunset. Not going to happen. We were going to track this person to the end of the earth. Joining us with more details is the reporter who broke the story, Carol Lennox. She is senior investigative reporter for MS Now and co-author of Injustice,

How Politics and Fear Vanquished America's Justice Department. Carol, thanks for making time for us. Glad to be here, Jeff. So based on your reporting, why has this case been so hard to crack until now? You know, Jeff, this case has been one of the highest profile and the most data intense and enormous of all the FBI investigations that I've been covering and, honestly, of several generations in FBI history. It's really been an intense case. And the breakthrough here was not based on new evidence or a new tip, but was based on a re-review, essentially, of evidence that was

already in FBI storehouses as a result of subpoenas that were issued far and in 2021 and 2022. It's really striking that, as our sources told us, this suspect could have been arrested years ago if these dots had been connected. You will remember that the FBI had three million different data lines in this investigation. They focused, especially on phone records,

first to figure out how many people were around the Capitol and around the DNC and the RNC when these bombs were planted January 5th, the night before the certification of the election. And then the FBI subpoenaed almost every large hardware store and box retailer looking for people who had purchased some of the components that would be used in this kind of explosive. And then they looked at also subpoenas of the records for all sorts of sneaker retailers to find anyone who purchased a particular kind of Nike shoe that they could tell the suspect had worn based on surveillance. And anyway, a re-review of that information led them to Brian Cole, a 30-year-old man living with his parents in Woodbridge, Virginia.

Is there any evidence that these pipe bombs were planted as a diversion from the January 6th Capitol attack? There's nothing in the criminal complaint that the Justice Department filed in making their charges against Mr. Cole to indicate what his motives were, to indicate that he had a plan to try to pull police away from the Capitol. at the same time that pro-Trump supporters were essentially breaching and marching up to the Capitol and breaking the glass and getting inside the building. Carol Lenig, Senior investigative reporter for MS Now. Carol, thank you for sharing your reporting with us. Thank you, Jeff.

sector corruption scandal is rocking Ukraine. Last Friday, the country was shocked by the exit of President Vlodemir Zelenskyy's chief of staff, Andrei Yermak, also Ukraine's second most powerful man. He resigned after the state anti-corruption body raided his home. As special correspondent, Jack Hewson explains, it's a crisis striking at the heart of government as the country fights for survival against Russia's brutal invasion. As Ukraine's government scrambles to contain a corruption scandal, Kee's residents are left to sweep up the shards of another night of Russian attacks. This blocking Key's outer suburbs was shredded by an Iranian-designed Shahed drone, windows

punched out, cars upturned. Amid the wreckage, we meet Pavlo, displaced from Donetsk, already grieving his son killed just months ago. My son was volunteering. The Russians hit him with a drone right in his car. He was delivering food in Kromatorsk, four and a half kilometers from home. Pavela fled the east for the safety of Kyiv, but Russia's drones have followed him here. He tells us how he stood awake in his living room, listening as they came. Eyewitness footage shows the moment of impact.

I heard the sound of a Shahid getting louder. It came from over there. Then, an explosion. A car flew into the air. I was thrown backwards onto the sofa in my living room. It seems like these that the residents of Kiva are increasingly waking up to as Russian missiles and drones hit their cities nearly every night. And tonight's been a particularly heavy one.

There's been 10 hours and 31 minutes of alarm over the course of this evening. I was staying in central Kiv, woken up pretty much every 20 minutes by booms in the distance. And I'm just a visitor. If you've got to live with this night after night, it grinds you down and that's exactly what the Russians are seeking to achieve. The Shahed that hit this courtyard is the same as those hitting power stations taking out electricity to millions.

And Russia's onslaught is being exacerbated by corruption. The scandal centres around Timor Mindich, Zelensky's former media business partner and a number of cabinet members, including former Deputy Prime Minister Alexey Chernoshov. The group were accused by investigators of embezzling public money that should have been spent on repairing Ukraine's energy grid. Then, on Friday, Zelensky's chief of staff, Andrew Yermak, was raided. It's not confirmed if it was in connection with the energy scandal, but he has since resigned. All involved are close to Zelensky.

Zelensky came to office six years ago on a wave of popular revulsion against corruption. For decades, Ukraine has been synonymous with the word, and Zelensky's promise of a new leader untethered to the system led to a landslide. Now, that bubble has burst bitterly. Anti-corruption activist Daria Kalanukes says public suspicions of the president's office have increased since the summer when Zelensky's government tried to neuter the anti-corruption agencies.

Protest then erupted, forcing Zelensky into an immediate U-turn. This is the closest square to the office of president. So you can see here, I guess 10,000 people were here. here during summer rallies. Since then, investigators have exposed a $100 million kickback scheme within Ukraine's state nuclear energy and a go time. The scheme allegedly forced contractors to pay 10 to 15% kickbacks,

delaying repair works. They have delayed the construction in order to have larger kickbacks. They don't care about this country. They just care about easy money, self-enrichment. People of Ukraine are outraged. As a direct result of corruption, millions of Ukrainians face longer, colder, blackout conditions. Up 22 stories, and with no electricity, meaning no elevator, lives Anna Sviatoslav with

her son. They face daily outages. Everything depends on electricity, water, food that cannot be heated, warmed up or cooked. We can't even wash our hands or take care of other needs, toilet, bathroom and so on. There is absolutely no water for that either. And there is no heating. In one instance in 2022, Anna says they went three days without electricity. She blames Russia first for bombing them.

But the news of the scandal, aggravating their suffering, has angered her like millions of others. When you are thinking about how to keep your child warm and just normal, so that your child has decent conditions, and then you hear what they say is going on in government, you know, they used to chop off. hands for that. While the Ukrainian people shiver in the dark, political pressure is growing on the presidency. Under Zelensky, power has been consolidated around the president's office and his

erstwhile chief of staff. But public outcry and the ouster of Yermak means opposition MPs like Alexei Goncurenko want decentralization and reform. And suspicions are growing about Zelensky's involvement. Do you think Zelensky was in full knowledge of what was going on? I hope not, but I don't know. but it's something which investigation should answer. But he was definitely absolutely aware of what the system Yermak was building,

because he was building it under his orders. Odors were coming from Zelensky. I am absolutely sure about this. So don't be fooled that it was like Zelensky, who he didn't know, who was so busy abroad, and so on. It's not true. But damage to Zelensky is also damage to Ukraine's position. on the international stage.

It allows Putin to delegitimize Ukraine as corrupt and frustrates Ukraine's Western allies that wanted an anti-corruption drive as a condition of aid. Speaking last month, Zelensky called for unity and calm. Everyone, we need to get together, come to our senses, stop the quarreling. There is an unspoken pact between the Ukrainian people and their president to temper their criticism

in a time of darkness and war. But with the people's suffering now being compact, by their own politicians, patience is running thin. For the PBS News Hour, I'm Jack Hewson in Kiev, Ukraine. Today, Ukrainian officials are meeting with U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to continue negotiations over an American plan to end the war in Ukraine. On Tuesday, Whitkoff and Kushner visited Moscow to hold nearly five hours of talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Today, Putin said he endorsed only parts of the plan.

This was a necessary conversation, a very concrete one. We went through each point again. Sometimes you said, yes, we can discuss this. But with that one, we cannot agree. Meanwhile, Ukraine is struggling to hold key frontline towns in the eastern region of Donetsk that have been destroyed by the war. This is a new drone video from Mirnorad, where before the war there is a population of nearly 50,000 people.

Ukrainian soldiers inside the city are being supplied with food and water delivered by drone. Putin reiterated today his argument that Russia can capture militarily the parts of Donetsk that Ukraine still holds or Ukraine could hand them over. With me now, to discuss this and more is Ukraine's ambassador to the United States, Olga Stefani Shina. Thank you so much for being here. Hello, Anna. Thank you for having me. Before we jump into the latest news today, I want to get your response to the report we just saw earlier from Jack about this latest corruption scandal, President Zelensky is managing.

His right-hand man, his chief of staff, Andre Yermak, was among those ousted as part of that scandal. The question now becomes, did President Zelensky know about this and look the other way, or did he not know what was happening in his government? What would you say to that? He reacted as a president publicly. He also demanded that the ministers and everybody who were part of this process are retired and subjected to a fair trial. And also he had this dialogue with parliament, for example,

and it evolved in the decision to resign for the chief of his office. And this was also a personal decision to him. And I think as a president, he did everything he could and beyond that. And he said that if there anything else will be exposed, the reaction will be the same. As you well know, your Mac was leading the negotiating talks. We've heard from President Putin in the past this repeated message decrying corruption in Ukraine. Are you worried this corruption exposure will somehow limit your leverage in peace talks?

Absolutely not. So this is a domestic issue. And this is a case which has been raised by Ukrainian authorities, created by this government and institutions, and created by the demand of Ukrainian society. In fact, while it has been the major mainstream narrative of Russian Federation presenting Ukraine as a failed state, as a corrupt state, but on the opposite, we have a democratic elections, we have a democratic and functioning administrative system throughout the war, which is not the case for Russia, because even the war they have, our fighting, is on our territory.

Without having it on their territory, they are still non-functioning country. I want to ask you now about the latest on the peace talks. Our own Nick Schifrin has some new reporting that he's heard from European officials that the U.S. is actually pushing Ukraine to give up parts of that eastern Donetsk region that you still control, parts that Russia has failed to win despite 11 years of war. Can you confirm that the U.S. is pressure on Ukraine to do so? Nothing evolved from the talks in Moscow. There's no basis even for a discussion on that.

Just in a couple of hours, our head of delegation, Rustam Umarov, nominated by president, will have a meeting with Steve Witkov, the special envoy of President Trump, to discuss the follow-up and to hear the readout from the meeting in Moscow. But what my president is saying, that stopping on the existing line is something that could really work to stop the war and then continue thinking onwards. But at this point, no formula is considered agreed. In this process of mediation and peace talks, we know that U.S. presented peace plan has evolved. The language has changed.

Nick Schifrin has also reported that the number of troops Ukraine is allowed to have has grown from 600,000 to 800,000. Are you satisfied with the text of the U.S. plan right now? Well, the good thing that now the dialogue is really structured, is structured around the plan. But also, separately from the plan, there is a dialogue on the security guarantee. and dialogue with European allies on their part in that, which includes also membership in European Union. So all of these documents, all of these issues, they should be counterbalance. And also we have heard over the recent talks in Florida that ending the war is only one piece of engagement of the United States, a larger economic engagement into Ukraine, is something which is of U.S. interest.

And this is also something that really we care about. U.S. peace plan text final for you, or are there still changes that you want to see in there? No, it's not final, of course, and we will be able to see what would be the next steps only after the meeting today, and also after the head of our delegation will report to my president on that. You mentioned there's a separate document that relates to the security guarantees. It was reported today, I should put to you, by the German outlet Der Spiegel, that French President Emmanuel Macron warned on a call with European leaders

and President Zelensky, he was worried the U.S. will betray Ukraine on the issue of territory, in his words, without clarity on security guarantees. This was based on a leaked transcript of that call. And other European leaders agreed with that concern. Do you share that concern? We have been betrayed many times. We have been betrayed in the middle of the 90s when we abandoned all our nuclear arsenal in exchange of security guarantees that never happened.

And it was a mistake of many to think that Ukraine is too weak to withstand for itself. And I think it's not the case. We're acting like our line is that we're acting in a good faith to the extent it is only possible helping and backing up the effort of the United States to secure a sustainable peace. In terms of that concern, though, do you worry about U.S. interests or how they're negotiating or how they're leading these negotiations. This is also on the back of the reporting that Steve Wickoff was advising a senior Russian official

on how they should tactically handle President Trump when it comes to these talks. Do you worry that the U.S. is actually negotiating with Ukraine's best interests at heart? Well, I think we all collectively decided to give it a chance. This is a totally new reality. These are different people with a different background. So, and we cannot really throw all the responsibility for everything to one player, to President Trump, for example, or a special envoy, Wittkov.

He has his own tactics where he's trying to narrow the approach, to think that having discussion around the plan is something that could work, and we have to give it a try. Meanwhile, we're negotiating with European allies on the security guarantees. We're scaling up the capability to purchase defense weapons, and we're enabling our air defense. to be more capable. So everything is happening in parallel. Do you worry that the U.S. will lose interest the longer this process goes on? I think it has not been happening before

because deeply inside the soils of the American politicians, everybody understand that it's a good against the evil. This is not something which is right. And I think everybody understand that if in a 21st century, one country attacked the other. And this attack, not only the territorial thing, but also the war crimes, massive tortures and rapes and abduction of Ukrainian children,

is recognized as normal just because somebody is tired of paying attention to that. I think it opens the door to any other aggression around the world, something that we were not even able to imagine to ourselves. That is Ukraine's ambassador to the United States, Olga, Stefani Shana, joining us tonight. Madam Ambassador, thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. President Trump's return to the White House. And as Liz Landers reports, there are concerns about the agency's recruitment tactics and changes made to hiring and training standards. Slickly produce social media videos. Join ICE and help us catch the worst of the worst. Televised ads targeting local police. And a celebrity endorsement. We need your help to protect our homeland and our families.

These are all part of a major. multi-million dollar recruitment campaign launched by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, ICE, to enact a key campaign promise of President Trump. On day one, I will launch the largest deportation program in American history. His deportation agenda was supercharged when the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed in July. It included almost $75 billion extra for ICE, making it the highest funded law enforcement agency in the U.S. government, outstripping the FBI. And the agency announced a lofty recruitment goal of hiring 10,000 new agents by the end of the year,

which would more than double the number of deportation officers from roughly 6,000 to 16,000. We've never seen an expansion of ICE like this. John Sanweg served as acting ICE director under President Obama and says the hiring goal may lead to compromises. How realistic this goal is and whether you can maintain those standards, all depends on the time frame. Unfortunately, I think we're saying that the administration is so eager to get them deployed. They were saying a couple of things. One is a reduction in those standards. To make its recruitment quota, ICE has removed all age requirements and cut its training program length in half.

The administration is also offering student loan forgiveness and lucrative overtime packages and signing bonuses of up to $50,000. It's pushing those perks in traditional places like job fairs, as well as almost anywhere potential recruits spend their time. online. That's going to be on social media. It's going to be through streamers, so YouTube and other places where user generator content is, but also large-scale broadcast and streaming platforms like Hulu, HBO Max, Amazon Prime, all of this sort of thing. Joseph Cox is an investigative journalist at 404 Media and has reported on ICE's recruitment strategy. He says the agency aims to target two main groups, people with military and law enforcement experience and Gen Z. They're really trying to do essentially everything they can to target and find

these people. ICE has spent millions on broadcast ads aimed at police officers frustrated with their city's enforcement of immigration law. You took an oath to protect and serve. But in too many cities, dangerous illegals walk free as police are forced to stand down. And on social media, the Department of Homeland Security has launched a campaign it describes as aggressive. It's posted a meme referencing the video game Halo to its official X account with the slogan, quote, Destroy the Flood. That's very dehumanizing language. The flood is a insect parasite enemy in the video game.

And you go through the replies, and there are people who find it absolutely abhorrent and disgusting. It's also shared images using wartime imagery like Uncle Sam and slang, like in this post, with the caption, quote, want to deport illegals with your absolute boy. But some critics worry this will draw recruits with the wrong motivation. They're normalizing extremism, but also warping what it means to be a person who protects your country. Wendy Vaya co-founded the Center for Global Hate and Extremism. She's tracked the campaign, including posts shared by far-right groups like the Proud Boys. The recruitment for the new staff is very much saying, come with us, and we're going to make America different.

what it is. They present it as a violent but white place. When asked about their social media recruitment posts, Assistant Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Trisha McLaughlin said, quote, these are the type of smears that vilify are brave ICE law enforcement and are leading to 100% increase in assaults against them. ICE only recruits patriotic professionals who have the integrity and moral compass to perform such critical roles in keeping America safe. While the agency emphasizes its mission to protect public safety and national security to potential recruits, a recent New York Times analysis found the majority of immigrants arrested and detained by ICE do not have U.S. criminal records, and roughly 8% have been convicted of a violent crime.

When you talk about millions of individuals on a final order of removal here in the United States, that all should be deported or removed, but yet you don't have the officers to go. go out there and to target them and apprehend them and to remove them, you need to beef up their resources. Chad Wolf, who led the Department of Homeland Security as acting secretary during the first Trump administration, says the agency's recruitment tactics are not a main concern. And once you get those recruits, right, into the pipeline and you start vetting them, you start talking to them, you start interviewing them, that's where the rubber meets the road, right? That's when you're really going to determine whether or not that person is suitable for

that type of job based on their background, based on their temperament, based on a variety of different factors. But the agency has reportedly rushed new recruits into its training program before being properly vetted, leading some trainees to drop out due to failing background checks, academic requirements, or fitness standards. Yeah, I mean, some of these moves, frankly, have resulted in some embarrassing candidates. Ice agents have tremendous authority when they're out there on the streets. We have to know that these people, A, have that integrity. When no one's looking, are they going to do things the right way? And secondly, are they getting into this for the right reason? Obviously, there's a tremendous concern as well that the administration is going after

individuals who harbor some animus towards immigrants. Assistant Secretary McLaughlin defended the agency's vetting process saying, quote, any individual who desires to join ICE will undergo intense background investigations and security clearances. No exception. From Texas to California, border patrol agents are being hired at a breakneck speed. Former ICE director, John Sandweg sees parallels with the scramble to expand border patrol under President George W. Bush. When we rushed to hire Border Patrol agents, we ended up getting individuals who just weren't well suited for, you know, some of the stressful encounters you have as a law enforcement agents. They resorted to force too quickly. They resorted to force that was unreasonable.

After loosening its hiring requirements and training standards, arrests of CBP officers for misconduct increased, including for high-profile corruption cases involving agents working with cartels to smuggle drugs across the border. Do you have concerns that this explosive growth in ice could lead to some of those same problems that we've seen in the past? I understand the concern. I think that is a challenge, but it is doable. It's not, I mean, we're the United States. I think we can figure out how to hire, you know, thousands of individuals and give them the right training and put them out on the streets to do a job. So far, the administration says its recruitment campaign is working, recently announcing that it will finish hiring 10,000 agents within days.

An effort that is reshaping the face of law enforcement on America's streets. For the PBS News Hour, I'm Liz Landers. And we'll be back shortly with a look at the rising rates of colon cancer diagnoses among young people. But first, take a moment to hear from your local PBS station. It's a chance to offer your support, which helps to keep programs like the News Hour on the air. For those of you staying with us, we take another look now at why a growing share of mothers with young children are leaving the workforce, erasing gains made after the COVID pandemic when working remotely became more common. Economics correspondent Paul Solomon reports on the impact.

Here, I'll put it up. always saw herself as a working mother. She and husband Stephen worked for the U.S. Institute of Peace funded by Congress while raising two sons in Washington, D.C., until March. Overnight and with barely any warning, almost the entirety of the workforce of the United States Institute of Peace was laid off kind of en masse. Dozed, including both Barbera and her husband.

The rug was really kind of taken out from under us because we, only went from two incomes to zero incomes. We went from having a family health insurance policy for us and our two young children to no health insurance. Even moms who haven't been axed are leaving their jobs, especially in the back-to-the-office federal government. Those positions are predominantly held by women, and in particular women with children, who often are willing to forego wages in the private sector for more flexible work environments, work environments that historically the federal government has provided. We've seen this continual perpetual decline in mother's labor force participation. The first half of 2025, it shrunk by

three percentage points. A lot of good stuff. In the pandemic era, remote flex time schedules helped push women's participation up to a record 78%. Once the flexibility vanished, however, It was either going to be my kids or it was going to be my work and I chose my kids. A breed or a bubble breed. Mom of four, Casey Pileo juggled her job, an accountant for the New York Giants, and kid care when she worked from home. Then... My employer was calling for everyone to return to the office, so that was really like the final straw for me. That was like the breaking point where I knew like I couldn't do that.

If school was closed, who was going to stay home with my kids? If she had to be picked up because she was sick, I was going to be the one to leave work to go get her. Like, something had to give. I felt, like, forced, and in the position I was in, there was no other option. You're going to smush that one? Same for Jennifer Orenas Cardinus,

who depended on FlexTime to balance her job as a school psychologist with the needs of three-year-old twins and a new baby. But last school year, I was told to come at a certain time, to leave at a certain time, whereas in years past, as long as I did my job within the hours that I was there, I wasn't really given too much grief over it. Arenas Cardinus loved her work, wanted to stay, but she says, trying to manage work expectations, trying to manage home life with twins and a new baby. It just, it came to a point where it was unmanageable. Could you not have put the kids in infant care or something like that? If we were to go that route, then my entire take-home paycheck would be going into their child care.

Made sense for her family, but it wasn't necessarily better for her clients. When I was able to do video calls with families or call outside of a typical school schedule, it worked out a lot better for families. I was able to accommodate them and meet them where they were at. Why do you think your school, and other places, of course, eliminated hybrid work if there was an advertisement, advantage to the people they were serving. I think there's this misconception that if you can't see your employees and what they're doing, that they're not doing the job. There are real costs to the mothers like Arenas Cardenas, who've left or lost their jobs, says Economist Heganis. When you step back from the labor force, it's not only something that affects you today.

It is something that ripples throughout your entire lifetime earnings trajectory. And there are broader effects beyond the mothers, the moment. I'm not contributing to the economy. I'm not receiving a salary. I'm not able to pay taxes as I have been consistently for the last 20 years of my life. And so when you're taking that and you're taking many thousands of mothers who are going through this, it's going to create a ripple effect. Last year, women only earned an average of 81% what men did, despite now making up the bulk of the college-educated workforce. The motherhood penalty hasn't gone anywhere. What happens is as soon as they have children, you see women's earnings decrease significantly

that first year or so, and then she never recovers. She never gets back onto the trajectory that she was before having children. I've applied to over 140 jobs since early April and have not had success yet. Nicoletta Barbera is technically still part of the labor force since she's looking for work and technically unemployed. I've been told by recruiters or colleagues at other organizations that hundreds and hundreds, if not thousands of people, just like me, are applying to these jobs. And it's especially bad being in the D.C. area, rife with federal job cuts. I have a lot of pressure and stress and feel a sense of urgency to provide for these children.

I'm applying to jobs that are several positions below what I would normally be applying to. maybe even taking a 50% pay cut from what I was being paid earlier. Some jobs she doesn't even apply for. Where I assume that I won't be selected for a certain type of position because of my age or the fact that I'm a mother of two young children. I self-select myself out of positions where maybe a man wouldn't do that. Arenas Cardenas chose to leave, but she'd love to be back working her old job. Even in my hometown here in Arizona, there's multiple school agencies.

throughout town who are looking for school psychologists. And I'm sure that there's multiple school psychologists just like myself who are kind of in the same boat. Casey Pileo intends to be a full-time mom for the foreseeable future. I thought I would be able to have my flourishing career and be this amazing mom. I wasn't able to do that. Wasn't able to do it, which figures to have economic repercussions for her, And perhaps for us all.

You could do show and chair. The PBS News, our poll, Sawbro. Carry your backpack so fun. Well, many people associate colon cancer, but that's not the case, as the number of young people being diagnosed is on the rise. News Hours Dima Zane reports on the latest research and patients' experiences. The number of young people being diagnosed with cancer is on the rise, and that includes colon cancer, which many people associate with old age, but not anymore, says Dr. Andrea

Sersik, head of the colorectal section at Memorial Sloan Kettering. Normally for colon cancer patients, they were in their 60s, 70s, or 80s, and then all of a sudden we were seeing this influx of young adults. I never thought that I would have cancer. because I was like just young 26 years old, you know. And it was heartbreaking. In estimated 154,000 people in the U.S. will be diagnosed with colon and rectal cancer in 2025, according to the American Cancer Society.

One in five are young, under the age of 55. MTAAS Hussein is one of them. He never thought colon cancer would affect him, especially at such a young age. The first time I got my bleeding, I should have gone to colonoscopy. Because I ignored that I got my, I started bleeding seven months prior to I got diagnosis. Katie Stanley was a young new mother when she started noticing changes in her body.

For a few years, her symptoms were passed off as related to having children. At that time, I was having so many issues. All I needed was an answer. And I feel like I was just getting kind of brushed off as it being something else. While many factors have been associated with the rise in cancer diagnoses, the exact reason still needs more research, Sersik says. We think it's likely what we call sort of environmental factors or a combination of environmental factors,

change in our lifestyle, our diets, what we're ingesting in addition to kind of processed foods, high sugar, antibiotics, exposure to certain things like microplastics. One tool in the fight against colon cancer, early screening. In 2018, the American Cancer Society became the first organization to drop the recommended colorectal cancer screening age from 50 to 45. In 2021, more organizations followed suit. I had to fight and advocate to get myself a colonoscopy at a local GI doctor.

But the lowered screening age doesn't help a population of young patients like Stanley, who still didn't qualify when she had symptoms in her early 30s. So why not screen everyone from the start? Sersik says it's just not feasible to do colonoscopies for everyone in their 20s and 30s, but she hopes the increase in interest, research, and funding will significantly improve and lead to earlier detection. The best we can do right now is to pay attention to our own symptoms and be our own advocates. That's what Stanley did. She received a colonoscopy years after her first symptoms began.

I was diagnosed at the end of a colonoscopy when they found a 15 centimeter tumor blocking my colon. And a week later, a surgeon staged me at stage four. with spread to my sacral bone and possibly my lung. There are a few things you can look out for. No screening required. Any symptoms that are persistent, and usually by persistent, we mean lasting a few days, of things like red blood pro rectum, so rectal bleeding, change in battle habits like constipation or diarrhea, unexplained weight loss, abdominal pain, you know, super, super tired from anemia,

potentially. really the person should get checked out by their primary care provider or, you know, not necessarily even to start with the gastroenterologist, just to have that conversation of what's going on. Colonoscopy is an uncomfortable, annoying calendar date, but it is so much better than dealing with the diagnosis of cancer. For PBS News, I'm Dima Zane. And that's the NewsHour for tonight. I'm Jeff Bennett. And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On behalf of the entire NewsHour team, thank you for joining us.