PBS News Hour - Full Show - February 6, 2026 - PBS News Hour full episode

Episode Date: February 7, 2026

Friday on the News Hour, the U.S. holds indirect nuclear talks with Iran amid escalating threats and a buildup of U.S. forces in the region. Mike Huckabee discusses Iran's future and the next phase in the Gaza ceasefire. The effects of the Trump administration's suspension of immigration visas for citizens from 75 countries. Plus, the athletes and games to watch at the Winter Olympics. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

Good evening. I'm Amman Nawaz. And I'm Jeff Bennett. On the news hour tonight, the U.S. holds indirect nuclear talks with Iran amid escalating threats and a buildup of U.S. forces in the region. U.S. ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, discusses the next phase in the Gaza ceasefire and his hopes for Iran's future. Iran is a real problem, and it's not just a Middle East problem. It's a problem globally. If Iran is serious about wanting to change, this would be pretty dramatic after 47 years of saying, to America, let's hope they can. And people affected by the Trump administration's suspension of immigrant visas for citizens from 75 countries speak out about the impact on their lives.

Welcome to the News Hour. Today, across two continents, the U.S. confronted two very different nuclear challenges. For the first time since last year's war in Iran, U.S. and Iranian diplomats restarted diplomacy, focused on that country's nuclear program. And for the first time today, the U.S. accused China. of conducting a secret nuclear test just one day after letting the final nuclear arms-controlled treaty with Russia expire. Nick Schifrin's been covering both stories and joins us now. So, Nick, let's start with the U.S. and Iran. What do we know about how those talks went today?

Well, the Trump administration has provided no readout at the moment. But in the lead-up to these talks, we heard from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the top negotiator Steve Whitkoff that Iran must not make any nuclear fuel domestically, must restrict the range of its ballistic missiles. must end its support for proxy groups and account for highly enriched uranium that has been missing since last summer strikes. Today, the U.S. held indirect talks. You see Whitkoff there with the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, meaning Oman's foreign minister, who then met with Iran's foreign minister Abbas Aronshi, who said the talks focused on nuclear weapons and were a, quote, good start. We were able to exchange our viewpoints, to express our concerns and our interests for a possible, deal between the two sides on our nuclear question.

Iran said there would be a new round of talks, no confirmation of that from the U.S. side, which for the first time included the top U.S. military commander from the Middle East, a reminder omna of President Trump's threats against Iran and that military buildup still in the region. So what do the experts tell you all of that means for the possibility of an actual deal? Well, that's the question I put to Kareem Saadipur of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. very skeptical of any deal of Iran's nuclear program, missile program, or support for proxies,

including Hezbollah and Hamas. The Iranian regime still seems so intent on defying the United States, and they fear that if they give in to pressure, it's going to project weakness and invite even more pressure. Up until now, Iran has shown no flexibility on moderating its ballistic missile program or its regional proxies. And so the Iranian goal is to limit this conversation only to nuclear and even then to drag on the conversation. Drag on the conversation so it doesn't get bombed by the United States. A U.S. official, though, confirms to me that Iran is trying to reconstitute its ballistic missile program. Look at the before right there and now look at the after of a missile production facility.

Listen to distinguished scholar at Middlebury College, Jeffrey Lewis. He's studied these kinds of images for years. We can see those facilities in satellite images. And so Israel attempted to destroy many of those buildings, but now they're back. It seems pretty clearly that Iran is well on its way to resuming production of its missiles. And U.S. officials, I'm going to acknowledge that could mean Israel, if not the U.S., try and strike those missile production factories again in 2026. Let's turn now to those allegations, accusations of a secret nuclear test by China.

What exactly is the U.S. saying happened? Yeah, so for the first time today, the U.S. revealed that China conducted explosive nuclear tests, including in June 2020, and sought to conceal them by putting the explosion inside an underground chamber. That would be China's first explosive tests in some 25 years. Now, former senior officials told me today that they have known about that test for years. So what's interesting, perhaps, mostly today, is the timing. The fact that China conducted that test has not been declassified until today, which happens to be the day after the U.S. let New START, the final nuclear arms control treaty expired.

The Trump administration and some experts have long argued that New START wasn't adequate because it didn't address China's growing arsenal. And so today, it seems to be an attempt to try and pressure China. into some kind of three-way talks with the United States and Russia about arms control overall. But honestly, Beijing has always resisted any kind of limits on its nuclear program while it's growing its arsenal, says Jeffrey Lewis. China has largely resisted entering any kind of formal talks, partly because their number is lower than the U.S. and they're in the process of catching up.

But I think at a deeper and more profound level, it's because all of the things we want, predictability, transparency, these are things that China thinks. things are bad for it. Because China is worried that if we find them to be predictable and transparent, that we will be more comfortable pushing them around in a regional security crisis because we will know where their red lines are. Which means no trilateral talks with China anytime soon. And tonight, I spoke to former Biden senior officials and also Republican senior arms control officials. And both argued to me that the U.S. should deploy more nuclear warheads. And now that new start has expired, they can do exactly that.

Nick Schiffen starting our coverage tonight, Nick, thank you. Thank you. In the day's other headlines, the White House defended then removed a racist depiction of the Obamas from President Trump's social media. It was posted shortly before midnight, and it was met with anger from Democrats and some members of the president's own party. The president's post, which borrowed imagery from this video, was deleted after backlash on both sides of the aisle.

The video on Truth Social, focusing on debunked claims, about the 2020 election included a racist animation, a former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama, their heads superimposed on the bodies of apes. The president's post sparking widespread condemnation from lawmakers. House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffrey said, the Obamas are brilliant, compassionate, and patriotic Americans. They represent the best of this country.

Donald Trump is a vile, unhinged, and malignant bottom feeder. Republican Senator Roger Wicker. Senator Roger Wicker. This is totally unacceptable. The president should take it down and apologize. And this from Senator Tim Scott, praying it was fake because it's the most racist thing I've seen out of this White House. White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt initially defended the actions of her boss. This is from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from the Lion King. Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public. It should be noted there are no ape characters in the Lion King.

A few hours after Levitt's defense, the post was deleted. A White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said a staffer erroneously posted the video. Mr. Trump's political rise included years of attacks on former President Obama that centered on conspiracy theories and racist rhetoric. I have a registered Republican. One three-time Trump voter today called into C-SPAN to say the Post was a breaking point. What an embarrassment to our country. All this man does is tell lies. He is not worthy of the presidency. And I just want to apologize to everybody in the country for supporting this rotten, rotten man. Also today, the U.S. has arrested a man, Zubayar al-Bakouh, who is suspected of playing

a key role in the 2012 consulate attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including an ambassador. Abakush will now face American justice on American soil. We will prosecute this alleged terrorist to the fullest extent of the law. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, alongside FBI Director Kash Patel, and U.S. Attorney Janine Piro, told reporters Albaqqqqqq was extradited to the U.S. and was indicted on eight counts, including murder, arson, and terrorism-related charges. Another man, Ahmed Abu Qatala, who is suspected of masterminding the 2012 attack, was captured in 2014 and convicted.

In Pakistan's capital city, officials say a suicide bomber targeted Shiite worshippers in a mosque during Friday prayers. The blast in a densely populated area on the outskirts of Islamabad killed at least 31 people and wounded over 160 others. The bombing was the second major attack in the Capitol in recent months. The Islamic State claimed responsibility for today's suicide blast and to have targeted Shiite Muslims a minority in the country in previous attacks. The FBI and Arizona law enforcement say they are aware of and looking into the authenticity of a new message concerning Nancy Guthrie, the 84-year-old mother of today show host, Savannah Guthrie.

The search for Guthrie entered its fifth day today. Whoever is out there holding our mother, we want to hear from you. We haven't heard anything directly. On social media last night, Savannah Guthrie's brother, Cameron, renewed the family's pleas for their mother's potential kidnapper to contact them. Investigators still have not identified any suspects or persons of interest. The FBI had said an alleged ransom note had demanded money by an initial deadline of yesterday evening. The note has a second deadline of Monday. On the Wall Street today, stocks surged in a massive end-of-week rally.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average shot up 1,200 points to top 50,000 for the first time ever. Chip companies helped drive the surge, sending the NASDAQ up by 2%, and the S&P also rallied 2% for its best day since May. And Hall of Fame quarterback Sonny Jorgensen has died. Over an 18-year NFL career with the Philadelphia Eagles and the Washington commanders, then known by a different name, the prolific passer piled up franchise records with both teams. His career-defining legacy in Washington

made him a celebrity in the nation's capital. After his playing career, he became a broadcast analyst for another 38 years. Jurgensen was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame back in 1983. He died of natural causes in Florida after a brief stay in hospice. Sonny Jurgensen was 91 years old.

Still to come on the news hour, the White House launches a new website aimed at lowering prescription drug prices. Kathleen Parker and Kimberly Atkins store weigh in on the week's political headlines. And sports journalist Christine Brennan joins our podcast to preview the athletes we should be watching at the Winter Olympics. This is the PBS News Hour from the David M. Rubenstein studio at WETA in Washington, headquarters of PBS News. As the Trump administration advances its vision for rebuilding Gaza and reshaping, how the territory is governed, uncertainty looms over what comes next as the ceasefire moves into its next phase. Critical issues from security and humanitarian access to political control

remain unresolved. Earlier today, I spoke with U.S. ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee. I began by asking him what success looks like in phase two of the ceasefire and how the administration plans to measure progress. Well, I would tell you, it's already working in the sense that for the past four months, we haven't had to rush down to the shelter and dodge a ballistic missile. So the ceasefire itself has been quite successful. Everybody in Israel is breathing a sigh of relief. They're putting their kids to bed at night, tucking them in and not thinking they're going to wake up in the middle of the night to a siren. All the hostages are back.

I think you'd have had a hard time convincing anyone in Israel if you'd have told them four and a half months ago that every hostage would be back. As phase two starts, it's going to be a method. process, but it is underway. The Board of Peace is established. The technocratic government is being formed. The one big peace that still has to happen is the disarmament of Hamas. But I think that's on the way as well. And it's progress. The meantime, the Rafa crossing has reopened, but the number of Palestinian medical evacuees has been limited. Why is that process moving so slowly? It's a difficult thing to get people in and out safely. They have to be properly vetted so that you don't bring terrorists in or take terrorists out.

There's a legitimately diligent effort to get this done. But we're talking about people who are vastly displaced, people who are displaced because Hamas extended this war long before it should have been extended. People are still adjusting to the fact that Gaza is basically a rubble. once again, Hamas could have ended this long before the destruction, but they didn't. They wanted to hold hostages and torture them and starve them and make it difficult for them. And I'm hoping that when they disarm and we get rid of them, things will start progressing much more rapidly. You mentioned the president's newly announced Board of Peace earlier. There are critics who say that it effectively sidelines multilateral organizations.

What problem is the Board of Peace meant to solve that existing international organizations cannot. Well, the Board of Peace is a different kind of board in that it is made up of people who have chosen to be a part of it and people who want to actually do some heavy lifting and making Gaza livable again. I don't know of any other organization internationally. That is, that committed to doing something right. We saw here in Israel what happened when the United Nations was in charge of the food program. It was absolutely dismal. 92% of the United States, of the food that was supposed to go to people who are hungry, ended up getting looted or stolen or hijacked. And those are the UN's own numbers. That was last summer. So the Board of Peace

is supposed to try to make this much more effective and efficient and put people in charge that actually know how to run something. Is the administration moving away from the UN model altogether? I wouldn't say that. I think we recognize I'm not a big fan of the UN. It seems to be cumbersome, expensive, and not all that effective, but it has its purpose. But there needs to be a much more lean operation in order to get Gaza on its feet. And I think that it's not something that you can just say to nations, say to Iran or North Korea, I'm sure you guys will have a really knowable experiment here and you'll want to do it the right way. So this is going to be a board of people who not only want to be on it, but who quite frankly meet the criteria.

of wanting to do it right. On the matter of Iran, have you been briefed on how the talks, the Iran talks went in Oman today? And we know that the Prime Minister Netanyahu has said that Iran cannot be trusted. Is there a deal that you believe Iran can commit to? That's hard to say. Jeff, it's something I hope happens. And I told the president the other night, I said, look, nobody would like to see a negotiated peace more than I would, because if we have a war, I'm going to be right in the center of it. And I just soon passed from that.

So I've been here less than a year as ambassador, been through four wars already. But will Iran agree to something? And will they agree to what the president has laid forth, which is you don't have enrichment, you don't have nuclear weaponry. And you're going to have to deal with this incredible array of ballistic missiles that you keep building up because you're threatening the world. And through not just Iran, but their proxy organizations, they've created havoc. And then if you add to that, the number of people they've made,

murdered in their own streets because they were protesting the lack of food and water. Let's be honest, Iran is a real problem. And it's not just a Middle East problem. It's a problem globally. Well, what is the U.S. prepared to do? You've said that the president will not disappoint the Iranians who put their lives on the line as they protest the Iranian regime. One thing I'm confident about this president, he makes a promise and he keeps it. He told Iran last summer that they could do it the easy way or the hard way. They didn't listen. They did it the hard way. And he sent B-2 bombers in through the operation of Ben Nighthammer. You'd think they've learned something. I often say that in the South, where I grew up, Jeff, we say there's no education

at the second kick of a mule. They got a real kick of the mule last summer. I'm wondering, did they get any education from that one? If not, they may stand behind the mule again. And there probably won't be much education in the second kick of a mule. As we wrap up our conversation here, I wonder, you know, so many Americans, how they currently understand Israel is shaped by its response to Hamas. What do you worry gets lost about Israel, its society, its values, when the country is viewed almost exclusively through this lens of war? I think Americans are pretty naive if they don't understand that Israel had hostages being held in tunnels who were being tortured, starved, raped, and beaten. If America had

hostages, and it was the sons and daughters of Americans, do you think we would stand by and just say, well, I hope they could let loose someday? We would be scratching and working, and we would be doing everything we possibly could to get those hostages out. Israel gets blamed for a lot of stuff. They didn't start the war. Hamas did on October 7th, and they didn't just murder 1,200 civilians. They butchered them. What I wish Americans would do is to look at this honestly and objectively. I wish they would understand who is at fault, why it went as long as it did, and ask themselves, if this was your son, your daughter, being held in those tunnels, raped and tortured,

would you stand by idly, or would you do whatever it took to bring an end to it and get your children home? The U.S. Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee. Thank you for your time, sir. We appreciate it. Thank you, Jeff. A new website, Trump RX, that the president says will help Americans by lower-priced prescription drugs is now online. The site lists drugs at reduced rates with coupon codes to be used at participating pharmacies

or directly through manufacturers' websites. It's part of his pledge to lower drug prices in the U.S. where consumers tend to pay much more than their European peers. Stephanie Sy has more. Omna, Trump's RX currently has about 40 brand name medications on offer from five companies, including popular weight loss and infertility treatments. At an event yesterday, the president called it one of the most transformative health care initiatives of all time. This launch represents the largest reduction in prescription drug prices in history by many, many times.

And it's not even close. You're going to see numbers that you're not going to believe. But health policy experts cautioned the impact would likely be muted, especially for the 85% of Americans who have prescription drug coverage. With more, we're joined now by Dan Diamond, a reporter for the Washington Post who focuses on policy and public health. Dan, it's good to see you. So talk about how Trump RX works in practice. It's not a website that sells drugs direct to consumer, but it's more for information, right? Yeah, it's a government program, a government website intended to help Americans get discounted

prescription drugs. So you can be directed to a manufacturer's website. You can print out a coupon in some cases, maybe even call up a pharmacy directly and get the drug sent in the mail. It's more about information than actually purchasing the medication. What kinds of drugs are available at these discounted prices right now? Why these specific drugs and are more expected to be added? The Trump administration has negotiated with 16 different pharmaceutical companies. Some of those companies have put their drugs on this website so far. So Novo Nordisk, which makes drugs that are used for weight loss, like Ozempic and Wegovi. You can go on the website and find access to discounts on those drugs.

EMD Serrano, which does fertility medication. There's significant discounts for drugs there as well. And then other drugs around diabetes, thyroid medication. But notably, a lot of these drugs are older, and there are generic alternatives for these medications. The pharmaceutical companies that are participating were not looking to give discounts on their bestsellers, their newest drugs. So in many cases, these are drugs where there might have already been discounts available.

And if you go on the website and look, there is a warning even. If you have insurance, you might be able to get a discount that is better than what is available through Trump RX. Plus, most Americans have insurance where co-pays may be less than even the discounted price of these drugs, right? And yet not all insurance policies cover these really popular weight loss and fertility drugs. Is that where experts say were likely to see the greatest impact in consumer benefit, Dan? I think so. I think that's where there has been bipartisan excitement, even, over the obesity access.

I talked to folks in Bernie Sanders' office when that announcement happened. Even they were saying this is something that would benefit many Americans. The challenge, I think, is that there are many drugs that are not listed here. I mean, if there are 43 drugs or so listed on the website right now, that is a tiny, tiny fraction of the medications that many Americans need. And the question is, how fast will more drugs come online? The Trump administration has said they're trying to add more. But as of right now, the benefits are limited really to the categories you highlighted.

Will Trump RX have any larger impact on other drug prices? I think the effort that the administration has made that goes beyond the website is what I'm watching. So the president and his deputies, I think to their credit, have tried to bend the ear of pharmaceutical companies on these high drug prices. They've gone to foreign leaders and asked them to raise the price of drugs overseas to help carry the cost of research and development here. So Trump RX is a part of that broader strategy. If Trump RX does have more drugs available, if it is expanded to the 90% or so of Americans who have health insurance, then it would be more beneficial. But there is a broader strategy here, too. You've also written, Dan, about the politics of this move by Mr. Trump.

It's being touted by the president as the most impactful prescription drug reset in history. And, of course, it fits into his broader agenda to convince Americans he's helping make life more affordable. Will enough Americans feel the benefit of this program in coming months to help the president make that case? That's a great question. So Republicans historically have lagged behind on health care, especially in election years. There are polls. I saw one from KFF, a reputable firm recently, that found a double-digit lead for Democrats on most health care issues. Who do you trust to handle your health insurance? But on the issue of prescription drugs, it has narrowed. I think Republicans were only lagging behind by five. points, which suggests that there is a messaging success potentially for Republicans.

But health care has always been a crucial issue when voters go to the polls. Republicans are trying to make this more of their issue. And that's why this has been such a Ballyhooed event by the White House, why they had Dr. Oz walking people through this televised infomercial almost to show how Trump RX worked. That is Dan Diamond with the Washington Post. Thanks for joining us, Dan. Thank you. This week, the Trump administration was sued for a sweeping pause of immigrant visa processing for people from 75 countries.

The freeze, which started last month, was aimed at nations. The administration said, quote, whose migrants take welfare from the American people at unacceptable rates. This comes on top of full or partial travel and visa restrictions on citizens from 39 countries, which federal officials say are necessary to prevent overstays and protect national security. Liz Landers has more on the impact. The travel bans in visa suspensions have upended routine work, marriage, and family visa processes, leaving many U.S. citizens across the country in limbo. Over the last few weeks, we've spoken with some of them, including one man who asked us not to use his name

because he worries it might affect his Brazilian husband's visa application. Hi, my name is Samantha Cuffey. I'm David Zwezon. My name is Chris June Def. My name is Ashley Ramos. I recently remarried three years ago to my husband, who is from Morocco. I am a mom of five, and I'm a public school teacher that teaches Spanish. My entire family actually are originally from the island of Dominica and migrated here in the late 80s, early 90s. And I was born shortly after.

And I have enjoyed the fruits of their labor and they're working hard. and going through the citizenship process and doing everything they can to be able to achieve their own version of the American dream. My wife and I met on my first trip out to Nigeria in 2021. I'm a travel content creator, and I had been trying to visit every country in the world. But we had stayed in touch. As our relationship developed, we eventually decided to get married in May, 24, and we immediately filed our petition. and we are currently waiting on our visa for her to come. Join me in the United States. I met my husband through a language exchange app. He was learning English.

I was trying to learn Moroccan Arabic specifically. He just became part of my everyday life. My kids as well through our video chats and lessons. I've been to see him now four times. I'm going again in about two weeks. He's the most emotionally supportive partner you could ever ask for. And we've been waiting a long time. when we thought we were almost done.

I am totally responsible for caring for our 25-year-old special needs daughter. My daughter is completely dependent, and she will be her entire life. And we have a 27-year-old son who is slightly on the autistic spectrum. We had gotten the services of what they call a direct support care provider. And her name was Jennifer. And she had worked with us from mid-June, I think, mid-June, 2025, up until last Friday. and she is from the country of Sierra Leone. And Sierra Leone is on the Trump administration's band list.

I'm a U.S.-born citizen. My husband is a Brazilian citizen. We met at a bar, and it was as cheesy as a pickup line and talking. When we decided to get married, we wanted to make sure we did everything legal. We wanted to make sure we did everything legal. I think the average American really doesn't know what this process is. And this right here, this is what I have given in support of our case. This is to show the relationship, but also to prove my financial standing, his ability and potential to, you know, have gainful employment when he

comes. It's very expensive. We had kind of expected it to take about two years. and possibly be getting that visa in May of this coming year. But now that looks like it's sort of on indefinite delay. Our visa won't get denied, but it's just going to be put on hold. It's not going to be processed. And so we're just kind of sitting here without any idea kind of where that ends. When I saw Dominica on that list, it was honestly a shock. Folks are really terrified because they're like, I don't know when next I'm going to be able to see my family.

I don't know if I'm going to be able to move freely, even within this country. Like, people who are citizens feel like just because of the fact that they have an accent or that they look a little bit different. This really felt like the door slamming shut, and it was just immediate panic. What do we do? Where do we go? There's no instruction. There's no information.

There's just a blanket thing saying there's going to be a pause. finding replacement for Jennifer is much harder than most people would realize. The load on me is tremendous. It's a struggle to be able to get enough sleep, a struggle to continue eating well, and that's critical, is not just my daughter and my son. I have to take care of myself in order to take care of them. You kind of feel like, you know, it's this punitive policy that doesn't really go about doing, you know, what it says. if you need to vet people more, then vet people more. But to just say, no, we won't even take a look is a real gut punch. And it, you know, it feels like you're let down.

I think when people see the pause, they assume this is protecting us in some way from foreign invaders or stopping illegal immigration. And that's not the case. This is preventing families from being together. My plan was to bring my family to the United States and to build. Now the only option seems to be leave. That is the worst feeling. You should never feel punished for loving someone.

For more on these restrictions, we are joined by David Beer, director of immigration studies at the Libertarian Kato Institute. David, nice to have you back on NewsHour. Thanks for having me on. Let's start with what that report showed. It's obviously this is impacting a wide range of Americans. Who is this affecting right now? and has the United States seen policies like this before?

Well, we absolutely have seen policies like this before during the first Trump administration when he basically shut down almost all visa processing in 2020. That was created a huge backlog of people who had to be processed under the Biden administration put people in very similar situations. I encountered people who had to actually move out of the United States to be with their loved ones.

in another country. And we're seeing similar decisions being forced upon people today. If you look at the totality of it, about half of all legal immigration, permanent immigration from abroad, has now been banned by these policies. So one out of every two immigrants. If you look at African immigrants in particular, legal immigrants, again, it's almost 70% of legal immigrants from, you're looking at the statistics from 2024, have now been banned by this administration. over 100,000 of the 300,000 or so who are now affected by this policy on an annual basis are the spouses and minor children of legal permanent residents and U.S. citizens. So very close relations.

We haven't seen anything outside of the COVID-19 pandemic. We haven't seen anything as severe as this restriction. The State Department has cited concerns that some of the immigrants were at high risk of becoming a drug. on the welfare system. How vetted are these immigrants? And is there evidence that that is actually a problem? No, absolutely not. You have to have a financial sponsor in the United States who is willing to take ownership of you. You are also banned from accessing any means-tested benefits for the first five years that you are in the United States. And so there's both the restriction on accessing the benefits and you also have someone who's there who has to prove their ability

to financially support you. And if you look at the immigration system as a whole, we're now banned half of the legal immigrants to the United States, we have estimated that the immigrant population over the last 30 years has reduced the deficits by $14.5 trillion over that 30-year period. So immigrants, legal immigrants who are coming here, coming to work, coming to support themselves,

are a benefit to the United States, reduce deficits, support the American system of government. The visa pause affecting nationals of these 75 countries is currently being challenged in court. What do you make of the legality of the government's blanket pause here? Well, if you look at the Immigration and Nationality Act, one of the fundamental questions that Congress was trying to resolve for almost four decades from the 1920s to the 1960s was whether we were going to discriminate based on nationality.

They put a provision in that law that says you cannot discriminate against visa applicants based on their nationality. The administration is openly flouting that restriction and basically daring the Supreme Court to strike it down and say that, you know, this is illegal. They've already sort of gotten the Supreme Court's okay on part of the ban for 40 countries because the president signed an executive action proclamation saying he is. is ordering them being suspended, but 75 of the over 90 countries affected by this. It's just effectively the Secretary of State's tweets who are banning these people. This is not some formal policy from the President of the United States.

So I think the litigants here will have a stronger case because it's really not a formal policy adopted in any kind of formal manner. You recently wrote for Cato, quote, that President Trump is leading the most anti-legal immigrant administration in American history. What does that mean? How so? Well, not only are we banning about half of the immigrant visa applicants under this policy, we've also effectively shut down the refugee program for about 125,000 individuals who would

have otherwise been able to immigrate legally as refugees from abroad. He's also shut down the diversity visa lottery, which is basically the only way that many people without family connections can immigrate legally to the United States. He is, in addition to those actions, shut down the legal ways for people to apply for asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border and enter the country legally there. So overall, he's reduced legal immigration far more than he's reduced illegal immigration into the United States during his first year in office. David Behr, thank you so much for joining us.

Thanks for having me. For more now on the fallout from President Trump's call to nationalize elections and his immigration crackdown, we turn tonight to the analysis of Atkins Storr and Parker. That's Kimberly Atkins Storr, senior opinion writer and columnist at the Boston Globe, and Kathleen Parker, a columnist with the Washington Post. David Brooks and Jonathan Kepart are away this evening. Good evening. It's great to see you both. Good evening. Nice to be here. Thank you. So President Trump is openly talking about nationalizing voting, something that is plainly unconstitutional. He's doing this months before the midterm elections. Kimberly, do you hear this as bluster or a deliberate attempt to undermine the elections and then see doubt about the legitimacy of future election results? I think it's definitely the latter, Jeff. We have seen Donald Trump since before his first term, even before he won the election in 2016, casting doubts and disparaging with no, with absolutely no evidence. The U.S. voting systems.

in claiming fraud, either as a hedge before an election he may think may go badly for him, or as a way to disparage the results after they happen. That has been part and parcel, and it's really dangerous. I mean, this call is not just the call to nationalize elections, which, as you point out, the Constitution makes very clear that elections are handled by and large by states with the federal government playing a minimal role. But I'm concerned about call, you know, not denying that ice will show up at election stations, that the call for this increasing redistricting, mid-decade redistricting in states in order to try to game the system.

Elections are supposed to be sacred in any functioning democracy, and that the president of the United States is the one making the call to disparage them and try to rig the system is really alarming. Kathleen, to Kimberly's point, we've seen this from President Trump before. How much this time feels more organized and because of that, more dangerous? I agree. It is more organized. And everything he does in terms of, he's trying to undermine the confidence and faith in the electoral process all along. And with this whole, now he's still clinging again to the 2020, you know, we know it's his, it was a fully, um,

regular election he lost and he can't let it go because i think he's taken a page from mind comp frankly you know the saying that if you say tell a big lie often enough and repeat it then people will believe it and the theory was further refined by the propaganda head in nazi germany uh mr joseph gobel and uh the idea is apparently it's true that that they would know i guess that people will believe a big lie quicker than they'll believe a small lie. So Trump goes big, you know, with everything he does, big beautiful bills, big, beautiful lie. And I think he's just going to keep going and trying to make people lose confidence. Maybe they stay away from the polls.

Maybe they get together. His MAGA troops will come together and challenge the election results. I think you're right that ICE will show up. And I think the activists and the MAGA, you know, the MAGA troops, so to speak, will be present at many polling places. So it's very dangerous because where does that lead, you know, ultimately. It gives Trump an opportunity to say, maybe it gives him an opportunity to challenge the next election, whether it's the midterms or the presidential election in 2026, assuming he allows it to come to take place. matter of ICE potentially at polling places. Our White House correspondent, Liz Landers,

asked that question at a White House press briefing this past week because it was Steve Bannon who floated it and the White House didn't rule it out. Here's that. Thank you, Carolina. Steve Bannon recently said, quote, we're going to have ice around the polls come November. Is that something that the president is considering? That's not something I've ever heard the president consider now. I guarantee to the American public that ICE will not be around polling locations or voting locations in November? I can't guarantee that an ICE agent won't be around a polling location in November. I mean, that's frankly a very silly hypothetical question.

And you can argue it's not a hypothetical question. It's not a rhetorical question because in many ways this is a multi-front strategy, legal pressure, DOJ demands, raids at the Fulton County election office. How do you see it? That's exactly right. And we can use another historic analogy, which, is during Jim Crow, the fact that police were often sent around polling stations in order to discourage people of color from casting votes, even though the Constitution was amended

to specifically protect that right. The law won't protect you if you don't have government that is backing it up and actually flouting it. So all of this is from playbooks from the darkest times in our history, and they can't be ignored. I'm concerned about it because I don't. don't want people, once people lose faith in their elections, that's a big pillar of democracy that falls in itself. On the matter of the president's immigration agenda, we have some fresh polling data.

Six and ten Americans disapprove of the job ICE is doing, while about three and ten approve, and opinions about the agency and its actions are sharply divided along political lines, as you might imagine. 91% of Democrats, 66% of independents register their disapproval. Republicans, though, remain supportive with 73% of. approving of the agency's work. Kathleen, why is that? Has ICE become an identity issue rather than a policy issue,

the way that they are carrying out the president's agenda? Well, I don't really know exactly how to answer that, but I think that, you know, I'm first surprised that that number of, that percentage of Republicans are approving of what we're watching. And I think, you know, the image of that little boy was so powerful. And I think Americans generally saw that and thought, well, no, we can't have that in this country. That's not what we do here. And the image is powerful.

And I think when we look at the elections coming up, the midterms, you're going to see a lot of people turn out on the ICE issue. Whether it's, I don't know what you meant exactly by, whether it's an identity question. But I do think it's definitely a pivotal voting issue that will have legs through the midterms and possibly their eyes. depending on how they change their behavior, if they do. And this is a live issue on Capitol Hill because Democrats and Republicans right now are debating how ICE can carry forward with the president's immigration approach as part of its funding. And yet, it appears Democrats have folded on their demand that ICE agents not wear masks. Chuck Schumer said, well, they can wear masks if it's an unusual circumstance.

And they're also not, including in their demands, this notion of what we were talking about before. that ICE doesn't show up on election day at the polls. This comes back to this issue why Democrats aren't as tactically ruthless on the things that they say they care about as compared to Republicans. I think that's exactly right. And at this moment, when we're talking about a partial shutdown, most of the government now has been funded, they did a good job of carving out this issue so that they could hold firm. I think if Democrats do anything other than completely hold the line on what they have seen, the snatching up of men, women, and children,

deporting them without full due process, American citizens being targeted, two American citizens dead on the streets of Minneapolis, if this is not the issue where Democrats can say, no, we hold the line, and we are not giving an inch on this, not because it's politically right, but because it's morally right,

I just don't know what it is that they're doing. they should maybe consider giving their jobs to someone who will. How do you see it? Well, I do think Republicans tend to be more ruthless just as a rule of conduct. But I think if the Democrats force the hand and the government has to shut down partially, it's going to send, well, it'll make Donald Trump very happy because he'll have chaos again. And he's the captain of chaos. But so many other agencies within the Homeland Security Department will be affected,

FEMA, TSA. I mean, people are going to be stranded at airports, and again, we'll have all sorts of travel issues, and there's even other things. Like Coast Guard, I think, would be docked. Yeah, well, you mentioned airports. I want to squeeze in this last topic, President Trump offering to unfreeze roughly $16 billion in federal infrastructure funds, already appropriated for the Gateway Hudson River Tunnel Project. But this is only if, according to the reporting, the Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, agrees to... to rename both Washington-Dulles International Airport and New York's Penn Station after Donald Trump.

Kimberly, you've been shaking your head. Left to right, no. You know, it's just, it's amazing that with all the issues that we're talking about, the president is still so concerned about his own vanity and pettiness that he probably can't stand the fact that DCA is named after Reagan and he wants one to.

I mean, really, this is what he's spending his time on. Well, he may actually deserve Dulles Airport as we were talking about. It's a terrible airport. Not the friendliest airport. No. But I think instead, I just think, what did this fellow miss in childhood? You know, can we just give him a daily, you know, participation trophy, perhaps?

Kathleen Parker, Kimberly Acton Store, a thanks to you both. Thank you. The 2026 Winter Olympics are now officially underway after the opening ceremony in Milan, which is co-hosting with the City of Cortina. Today's star-studded spectacle featured performances by Mariah Carey and Andrea Bocelli, among others. About 2,800 athletes from more than 90 countries are taking part. And this week's episode of our podcast, Settle In, is all about the games and what you need to know. I spoke with Christine Brennan of USA Today before she flew to Italy for more on the games, the athletes, and the world coming together in an uncertain era.

Let's talk about some of the big storylines to watch, because there's so many fascinating personalities and so many potentially exciting moments. Let's start with women skiing and Michaela Schifrin. Because if you are someone like me who loves a redemption story or loves a comeback, this could be the one, right? Absolutely. Tell us about Michaela. Michaela Schifrin is only 30 years old. She's lived a lifetime or two or three, you know, early success, Sochi and Pyong Chang.

And then absolutely a devastating Olympics in 2022, which she just broke my heart to work. And you and probably millions of people watching. No, and it just had a terrible run of bad luck, didn't finish. Everything that she had done so beautifully over the time she'd been in the public eye, it all fell apart. You know, everything that could go wrong did go wrong. But, you know, great why people love her so much and why she is such a terrific role model and good person is the way she handled it, answered every question,

showed up at interviews, didn't run away, didn't hide. Didn't hide? Absolutely pro. Talked about her mental health. Talked about how hard this was. It's bigger than sports. And she handled it beautifully. And here she comes. She is back. Only 30, as I said. So there's still plenty of time. Okay. Let's talk about figure skating, because I know that's where you're going to be focusing a lot of your reporting and work as well. And I feel like that is, that's where a lot of core memories for viewers are made. And certainly for me growing up watching, I still have memories of these great American skaters like Michelle Kwan and Christy Yamaguchi and Tara Lipinski. How are the Americans doing? Can they medal this year?

Yes, they can. They should. I think they will. I actually think this could be the greatest U.S. figure skating team ever assembled. 1960s the last time that two Americans in figure skating won gold men and women. This U.S. team, Ilya Malinen, who's 21 from the D.C. suburbs, born and raised DC, the son of two-time Olympians, both. His mom, I covered his mom. You covered his mom? Yeah, Tatiana Malinina. She was in the 2002 games and then in Salt Lake and then withdrew. So he's coming in with a good pedigree. Exactly. Born and raised in the United States, he is by far the prohibited Olympic gold medal favorite in the men's event. And also just a, you know, a terrific young man. He gets it, the bravado, he calls himself the quad god. You know, he's...

He calls himself the quad god. And you know what? It ain't bragging if you can. back it up as they say? Well, guess what? He landed seven quadruple jumps in his long program, four minutes, in the Grand Prix final in December, and that is the most quadruple jumps ever by a human being in the history of figure skating. So, hello, quadguide. The reigning world champion is Alyssa Lou, and she's 20. And get this, she won the national championship, first one at age 13, youngest U.S. woman to ever win a national title. Alyssa Liu won another national championship at 14. She was so little that her competitors, second and third place, had to help her up to get

to the top of the medal stand. So national champ at 13, national champ at 14, retires at 16, on retires two years later, at 18, wins the world title at 19, and now makes her second Olympic team at 20. I love this story already. She has come back with a totally different perspective. She didn't want to, you know, she hated the life of a young kid regimented as she was. She wanted to go skiing and take vacations and do stuff that she couldn't do. And be 16.

Yeah. And so she did. And she did that for two years. And she loved it. And she goes, now I want to come back to skating. We are at this moment of enormous global uncertainty, right? There's all these shifts in terms of alliances and just America's place in the world. And I wonder how, as you're preparing for this, because I know you prepare a ton going into these games,

do you anticipate some of that's going to show up at the games? I mean, will there be protest? Will people try to use this platform to make a statement? What are you kind of getting ready for? You know, the thing you wonder right off the bat, and I'm sure everyone listening or watching, would maybe go, yeah, this is the one that comes to mind. Will the Americans be booed? Really?

And that's a question. And I asked that as a question with a question mark at the end. I don't know. I have never seen in all the opening ceremonies I've covered, which is all of them, going back to 84 in L.A., I don't recall hearing booze. Do I think, I will answer my own question, do I think that the Americans will be booed as they come into the opening ceremony? My guess is probably not. Number one, a lot of U.S. tourists go to these events, come overseas. Other countries that might be friendly to the U.S. also, although, again, that certainly has been an issue.

in the last year with the Trump administration. But I also think in general people, even if they're angry about things, don't necessarily force that or direct that to the athletes who are coming in, right? And it's fascinating. You feel the question has to be posed. Oh, without a doubt, the notion that politics

doesn't enter the Olympics. And there might be people going, oh, wait, but, you know, they don't have politics. Are you kidding? I mean, this is a, it's a mirror of our society. And you can find the rest of that episode of Settle in on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. Be sure to watch Washington Week with The Atlantic right here on PBS, Jeffrey Goldberg and his panel, which tonight includes the news hours Liz Landers, explain why President Trump's calls to nationalize the midterm election are raising alarm bills.

And this weekend on Compass Points, Nick Schifrin and his panel examined the state of U.S.-Russia-Ukraine peace talks as the war rages into its fifth. year. Meanwhile, on horizons, ahead of the Super Bowl, William Brangham looks at how online sports betting has driven a rise in gambling addiction. And that is The News Hour for tonight. I'm Amman of Oz. And I'm Jeff Bennett. For all of us here at the News Hour, thanks for spending part of your evening with us. Have a great weekend.