PBS News Hour - Full Show - July 20, 2026 - PBS News Hour full episode

Episode Date: July 21, 2026

Monday on the News Hour, President Trump vows to make Iran pay for the killing of U.S. service members. Recent fatal shootings by ICE officers prompt questions about how they're recruited and trained. Plus, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu moves to defy an order by Israel's highest court, raising concerns of a constitutional crisis ahead of upcoming elections. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

Good evening. I'm Amna Nawaz. Jeff Bennett is away. On the news hour tonight, President Trump vows to make Iran pay for the killing of U.S. service members, where the war goes from here. Recent fatal shootings by ICE officers prompt questions about how they're recruited and trained. And Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu moves to defy an order by Israel's highest court, raising concerns of a constitutional crisis ahead of upcoming elections. A country in which a governing authority takes the law into its own hands is a country where the seeds of disorder and anarchy are sown. Welcome to the News Hour. The United States is again bombing Iran this evening, continuing campaign it resumed nearly two weeks ago.

President Trump also resumed his threats against the Islamic Republic after three American soldiers were killed over the weekend. In the meantime, Iran's allies in Yemen said they would close a number. another major oil supply route to the Red Sea. Liz Landers begins our coverage. Ahead of a new day in Iran, a familiar story played out in the darkness of night as the U.S. announced a new round of strikes just like these.

Impact after impact meant to further degrade the country's capabilities to attack ships in the Strait of Hormuz, and after a violent weekend involving U.S. allies. Missiles streaked across the sky in Jordan this weekend. And the warning to brace for impact came seconds after fiery explosions were caught on camera. An American military base, the target of those Iranian missiles and an attack that killed two U.S. soldiers. 25-year-old First Lieutenant Tyler James Feehan and 19-year-old private Isabella Gonzalez were killed during the Friday attack, the Pentagon confirmed.

An unidentified third service member at the same location remains listed as missing in action. On his way back to the White House from the World Cup final, President Trump vowed to memorialize those killed in action, saying U.S. strikes against Iran were, quote, in honor of the fallen. Well, we feel very badly, but, you know, those great people, those great patriots were out there fighting that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. They've got very little left. They've got some missiles. They've got some drones. They've got some manufacturing ability. Not much. Trump went on to say he'd avenge the deaths, writing in a social media post today, quote, every time Iran kills an American soldier, they will pay for that killing many times over. While the president insists Iran has little left, another unidentified American service member was killed in a separate incident on Saturday in northern Iraq during the controlled detonation of an Iranian drone. A second soldier was injured.

Since the war with Iran that Trump started jointly with Israel in late February, 17 American service members have been killed. Monday strikes marked the 10th straight day of airstrikes against Iran since the memorandum of understanding struck between the U.S. and Iran fell apart. While both sides maintained that diplomacy remains possible, Iranian officials insist the country's leaders will not bow to bullying. When the United States speaks of diplomacy, what it means is. is coercion, intimidation, threats, and sanctions. As long as it remains in that framework and

seeks to impose its demands on the Iranian nation, our response will in turn be to defend Iran's dignity and national sovereignty. As Iran continues to bombard Gulf nations, Kuwait and Bahrain, with missiles and drones, the conflict is now bringing in other Iran-aligned groups. In Yemen, the Houthi rebels are escalating their involvement, forcing neighbor Saudi Arabia to respond with its own ground strikes this month. In retaliation, the Houthis announced today they would close another global shipping lane and choke point, the Bab al-Mandeb. The narrow strait that separates Yemen and Djibouti is the gateway to the Red Sea, already an alternate route for Saudi oil exports as the Strait of Hormuz has become increasingly constricted during the

conflict. Secretary of State Marco Rubio this weekend once again called on U.S. allies to do more to help the war effort and keep the crucial waterways open. The Straits of Hormuz are international waterway, and they continue to launch against ships in that international waterway. Other countries should join us in the stuff, but the United States is involved, not just in protecting those ships,

but in targeting the places that they use to launch these missiles and drones. Additional closures to mid-east waterways may increase prices for consumers who are now watching gas prices climb back to $4 a gallon. For the PBS News Hour, I'm Liz Landers. For a perspective on these latest developments in the war and the regional ramifications, we turn now to Marwan Mwacher.

He's the Vice President for Studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He's also the former deputy prime minister and foreign minister of Jordan, and he joins us now from Amman. Marang, welcome back to the show. Thanks for joining us. Thank you. Thank you for having me. You are on the ground there in Jordan that was attacked by Iran this weekend as that war restarted. Just tell us what it's like there on the ground. What's been the reaction to this latest turn of events? Naturally, people are concerned.

I mean, we are concerned about the continuation of the war. We are concerned about the hits that took place in Jordan. We are also concerned about the economic disruption that this is happening. Frankly, most people today don't understand what purpose is this war serving. Is it the downgrading of Iranian nuclear capability? the United States has already said that this has been done. Is it regime changed? It has been made repeatedly clear that there will not be regime changed to aerial bombardment.

So what is this war serving? Is it to open the Hormu Straits? The Straits were open before the war. What this war is doing basically is an economic disruption to the region. And the hardening of Iranian regime. which is going to make it difficult to reach in the end, a political settlement with Iran after the war. In terms of how it's resonating on the ground and in the region, though, I'm sure you saw there's been reporting today. The Wall Street Journal late today said the Iranian missiles that struck in Jordan

struck housing for U.S. troops at an airbase in Jordan. That's the attack that killed to U.S. soldiers. So does the fact that it's U.S. troops and U.S. targets that seem to be targeted by Iran here. Does that make a difference to people in Jordan or Jordanian leaders? Well, no country would like its own sovereignty to be violated. No country would like to see hits on its own territory, and Jordanians are no different. What we are seeing, though, is more precision in the hits that the Iranians are using. There is no question that they have their ability to hit targets they want with precision has been made. made a lot better than what it was before.

What Jordan is mainly concerned about is, one, the economic disruption that this is causing. Tourism is hurting very, very strongly. But also that it is becoming also clear that there is no military solution to this conflict. The United States has made it very clear that it is good at military victories, but it's not so good at political settlements. The countries of the region, in the end, are going to have to deal with Iran, are going to have to come to a political settlement with Iran.

Iran also is not making this easy by continuing hits, not just against Jordan, but against Gulf countries, against its own neighbors. In the end, any political solution is going to be made even more difficult with these developments. Well, as you now see, the deal that was signed last month has largely fallen apart. So shipping through the Strait of Hormuz is essentially stalled again. And now we're seeing the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen threatening to cut off another major supply route.

That's the Bab el-Mandab Strait that's aiming to cut off the Saudi supply route to the Red Sea. What are the implications there? Well, huge for Jordan. Jordan's only outlet to the sea. is Akaba in the northern Red Sea, and a lot of exports as well as imports go through Babelmanth. It is true that we have other routes, through the Suez Canal, through land routes.

But much of the trade that Jordan has with the world happens through the Babelmandel. Of course, we also are affected by the closure of the Hormus Straits, particularly oil, that largely comes to Jordan, which is an oil importing country, through the Hormuz Straits. So the economic repercussions are really severe because of the Hormuz traits,

and more importantly, if the Babel Mandev is closed. As you've seen so, the Iranians are really using their leverage here with economic pressure, closing off that straight of Hormuz, affecting the global oil supply, hitting American allies in the region. In your view, in the last minute or so we have here, what's the best U.S. leverage? right now, what should their next step be? I think the US has very little options, frankly, Amna.

The US has not really studied this well. The US has thought that they could achieve a quick victory in Iran. That is clearly not the case. Iran is applying a strategy of strategic defense. They are able to withstand all these hits. these hits and that is going to make it very difficult for a political settlement but in the end a political settlement is necessary and the continuation of the war is only hurting the countries of the region most of whom are U.S. allies all right that is the former foreign minister of jordan marwan

washer joining us tonight good to see you thank you so much for your time thank you we start the day's other headlines in the UK where Andy Burnham became British Britain's seventh prime minister in a decade, vowing to tackle a range of issues from the cost of living to health care. He first traveled to Buckingham Palace, where King Charles formally asked him to form a government.

Burnham then enjoyed a warm welcome at his new official residence of 10 Downing Street. The former mayor of Greater Manchester replaces Kier Starmor, who resigned amid pressure from his own party. In his first remarks, Burnham pledged what he called a circuit breaker moment

to change the course of Britain's politics. Let's build a new national sense of unity, of common purpose and positivity. Let us make this the moment when Britain starts to believe again, the moment we bring back hope. Burnham is set to announce parts of a 10-year agenda tomorrow as he appoints new members to his cabinet. President Trump was among the world leaders congratulating Burnham on his new role. The controversial influencers Andrew and Tristan Tate will remain in federal custody as they fight extradition to England. The brothers were arrested in Miami this weekend and faced dozens of new rape and sex trafficking charges in the UK. Speaking to reporters, their lawyer insisted the brothers are innocent and called the allegations against them politically motivated and, quote, garbage.

The dual U.S. and U.K. citizens are prominent figures in the so-called manosphere, where they promote their own brothers. of hypermasculinity and misogynistic views. The judge said another court hearing for next Monday. In New York City, the FBI says a former U.S. Army soldier set off an incendiary device outside a federal building that houses a number of government offices, including an immigration court. Eyewitness video shows a man pouring a liquid onto a set of steps before setting it ablaze. The individual was quickly wrestled to the ground, and authorities identified.

him as 43-year-old Andrew Arabeaka. Investigators say they found what appeared to be anti-ice material in his possession, including a cart that read, ice off our streets. Authorities say he also came, in their words, armed with bad intentions. Today, the extremism was brought here. The building was attacked. Mr. Arabeca was looking to injure people and harm people. He had two axes. a hammer, a machete, and three knives. Three people suffered minor injuries in the attack. No charges have been announced, and the investigation is ongoing.

Protests in New Delhi turned violent today after police intervened in a student-led demonstration, calling for reforms to India's education system. Tear gas canisters boomed through the streets, and police beat people with batons. Some protesters threw stones at security. officers dressed in riot gear. The chaos erupted as supporters of the so-called cockroach movement march toward Parliament demanding that the education

minister resign amid anger over the leak of a national exam. Today's protests were among the largest against Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government in years. In Mississippi, family, friends, and supporters paid tribute at a funeral today for Nolan Wells and demanded answers about the death of the black teenager who went missing after a July 4th boat trip with his white friends. Nolan had such a gentle, calming spirit about him. His mother, Christine Wansley, remembered the 18-year-old as a gifted athlete and a role model to his younger siblings. Reverend Al Sharpton gave a eulogy in which he criticized what he called the unanswered questions in the teen's death.

And he invoked the history of racist violence in Mississippi, which included the killings of Emmett Till and and Medgar Evers. Based on the history, we got to be able to dig deep. We can't have people in law enforcement saying there was no foul play before an investigation. Sharpton promised a $50,000 reward for new information about the case, an amount later matched by actor and producer Tyler Perry. An investigation is ongoing. President Trump signed orders today that would impose 50 percent tariffs on a wide range of

Canadian goods, including wine, cement, and hockey sticks. The White House says it's using a section of the Tariff Act of 1930 to justify its levies, saying they're in response to what it calls Canada's discriminatory treatment of American products. It's just the latest threat to the economic relationship between the U.S. and its second largest trading partner. The new tariffs are set to take effect in 30 days. The meantime on Wall Street today, stocks drifted lower to start the week. The Dow Jones Industrial average fell around 300 points.

The NASDAQ slipped just 12 points, so almost flat. The S&P 500 also closed with a small loss. And Vice President J.D. Vance and Second Lady Usha Vance have welcomed their fourth child, a son named Alec Neal Vance. President Trump posted this photo on social media earlier today, offering his congratulations to the Vance family. The baby is the first child born to a second child born to a second. sitting vice president in more than 150 years. In a statement, the vice president wrote, quote,

Usha and the baby are happy and healthy and our kids are overjoyed to meet their little brother. The 41-year-old Vance has often advocated for Americans to have more children. We offer our congratulations to the family as well. Still to come, on the news hour, test results create more confusion about the source of the cyclosporiasis outbreak. Tamara Keith and Jasmine Wright break down the latest political headlines. And we look back at the highlights and controversies of the World Cup. This is the PBS News Hour from the David M. Rubenstein studio at WETA and Washington, headquarters of PBS News. Two fatal shootings this month involving immigration and customs enforcement officers have reignited protests and renewed questions about tactics, training,

and recruitment at the agency. Both incidents took place during traffic stops, one in Maine and the other in Texas. None of the agents involved were wearing body cameras, and neither of the victims were the intended targets of the operation. For more, we're joined now by John Sanweg. He's an attorney, and he served as acting director of ICE under President Barack Obama from 2013 to 2014. John, welcome back. Thanks for being with us. Yeah, thanks for having me. So two men were killed in these latest stops. In Houston, Texas, it was 52-year-old Lorenzo Salgado, Orojo, originally from Mexico. in Biddeford, Maine. It was 26-year-old Johann Sebastian Durand Guerrero, originally from Colombia.

In both cases, DHS has said the men attempted to flee and they weaponized their vehicles. From what we know, do the facts say to you that deadly force was justified here? No, I'm not. It's really difficult to tell based on the limited information we have available to us thus far. But I think if you take a step back and you look at this trend, right, where we have at least 17 shootings involving ICE agents, not including other DHS officers, five of which have been fatal. It's clear to me we have a problem. And I think it's pretty easy if you spent any time at ICE understanding the source of the problem of that is how this administration is deploying these ICE agents

and how we're using now vehicular stops as part of the tools that the ICE agents are using to effectuate these arrests. I'll just say quickly, historically, traffic stops have never been a major part of ICE's operations. They don't need to be a major part of ICE's operations, given that ICE can arrest the individual as, are getting in their car or after their car. And from a training perspective, because they weren't such a critical part of what ICE does, they've never been a major focus of training like you'd see with other law enforcement agencies. So, look, at the end of the day, I think that, you know, as you know, Secretary of DHS recommended a pause.

I think that made a lot of sense. We have a larger problem here, regardless of whether any one of these shootings was individually justified, the trend itself is what's disturbing. Well, the Secretary recommended a pause, and the President intervened to say that those vehicular stops have to continue, so it doesn't seem like they're will. be a pause. But I want to ask you about the body cameras in this as well, because none of the officers seem to be wearing them in these instances. We know ICE is flushed with cash after some major funding bills, including $20 million for body cameras specifically. Why wouldn't those have

been rolled out by now? It's hard for me to say, right? The administration at least vocally is saying that they're in favor of the body cameras. It certainly can't be, as you point out, money, right? I mean, the agency has never tens of billions of dollars in the big, beautiful bill, tens more billions in this kind of two-year appropriation money that was recently given to them. So it's not a financial issue. The only thing I could say is it's a prioritization issue. Now, if you go back at the history of the agency, I mean, it's probably fair to ask why weren't ICE agents wearing these already, even before the Trump administration. I think a lot of that, though, goes back to what I was talking about earlier, how ICE agents were being deployed.

historically, the vast majority of immigration arrests ice makes are of individuals who are already in somebody else's custody. And when you're taking or you're picking up someone at a local jail or you're going down to the border patrol station and picking them up at the border, it doesn't raise those same concerns that you have when you're deploying ICE agents to do these at-large arrests inside the communities, right? There, they're engaging with the public in a way where we need that body camera. But look, I know there have been excuses offered here about the shutdowns or this or that.

Honestly, at the end of the day, it's just a prioritization issue. It just wasn't a priority. And I hope that now, you know, in light of these incidents, it will be. As you mentioned, we don't know a lot yet. So there are still many questions left unanswered. But we do know a little bit about one of the officers who's reportedly involved in the main shooting, a man named David Brayette. His ex-wife and several family members told the Associated Press he had a history of violence, that they believe he never should have had a badge or a gun.

His ex-wife, Ashley, actually told the AP that he called her. He acknowledged that he killed Duran Guerrero. And here's actually part of what she said about the encounter. I believe that this man was murdered. I believe that David, David's mental health played a part in what happened. I think what happened was he was standing there during that operation, had a PTSD moment, and hit fight or flight mode. And unfortunately, a man lost his life due to it. Now, John, I want to be clear, we don't know about this man's problem.

particular hiring circumstances, but there are questions about the vetting and the training of ICE agents in this hiring surge. I want to play for you one more bit of sound because our White House correspondent, Liz Landers, asked Tom Holman about that vetting process earlier today. Take a listen. So you're satisfied with the training right now of ICE agents? Nothing needs to be improved. There's always room for improvement. That's a loaded question. It's always room for improvement. Things change all the time. FBI updates their training. D.A. Updreysers training. Every police department updates your training. Could I used to, look, you can never be over the training.

I wish there was more training. John, you ran this agency. Does all of this lead you to have concerns about the vetting and the training of the ICE agents? Oh, absolutely. I have real concerns here. This, in particular, instance, raises concerns about the vetting. As you indicated earlier, I don't know all the details of his background.

And I'm not saying that there aren't circumstances by which someone like this could be hired, provided their current state suggests they have the suitability to be a federal agent. But it's incredibly rare for someone with that kind of background to be hired as a federal agent. And it raises real questions that in this crazy push we're seeing to double the size of ICE, to recruit people to cut short their training, get them deployed as quickly as possible, that were dropping the ball in the vetting operation.

And really what concerns me is if you look at what historically ICE only hires a couple of hundred agents a year. And so the vetting officers were built to handle that volume. And now we say to them, hey, you're going to hire two, three thousand people in a year. We want them to vet it and onboarded as quickly as possible so we can get them on the streets as quickly as possible. It certainly makes you think, boy, there's a real chance here that as they're building this thing on the fly, they're going to drop the ball on the vetting. And unfortunately, again, without knowing for sure whether this is a case of drop the ball, you know, the vetting was messed up here or something else going on. It absolutely raises concerns from me about, wow, are we failing to do a proper suitability check on these potential candidates, giving them, you know, minimizing their training, then putting them on the streets.

without knowing exactly who they are or what's in their background. Hey, John, before I let you go, I want to ask you briefly about a bit of reporting from the New York Times, who looked at the hundreds of assault charges that the Trump administration has filed against people and protesters who come out to kind of record and protest some of the ice crackdown. They found of the more than 400 cases that have been resolved so far. The administration lost nearly half. Defendants were acquitted or the cases unraveled. What does all of that say to you? I think what it says to me, though, is again, we've had this kind of, you know, it makes me worry

about the quality of the vetting before charging decisions were being made, right? We had this time period that I will give Secretary Mullen credit for it seems to have dissipated, where you had ICE agents put in this position to aggressively confront these protesters. I will say that based on the shift in tactics thus far, that those incidents have gone down. But you saw the Justice Department that was quick to charge everyone and anyone, including and obviously in many of these cases, not necessarily all of them, many of these cases where there was flimsy evidence as to whether or not there was the intent to actually assault an officer or actually contact was made. Look, I recognize that this situation, right, ICE agents have an incredibly difficult job, and I do have a lot of sympathy for them. But this idea of kind of charging everything, even when the evidence doesn't support a federal criminal charge, doesn't do them any favors.

John Sondwag, always great to talk to you. Thank you so much for your time and perspective. Thank you. The Israeli Parliament has dissolved, paving the way for October elections. And the country's longest serving leader is bracing for one of his toughest ever re-election fights. Benjamin Netanyahu faces questions over his leadership during and since the October 7th Hamas attacks. That includes questions about a new constitutional crisis, pitting his government against the judiciary. Producer Carl Bostic in Tel Aviv reports with our Nick Schifrin.

In Israel, dissent is boiling. Hundreds of protesters fill Tel Aviv's Habima Square to voice their disdain. For a leader, they argue, is corrupting Israel's democracy and misleading his own people. There is no government above the law. We are all equal before the law. And all of us have to do what the court says, even if we don't agree with it. Earlier this month, for the first time in Israeli history, Netanyahu's Lakud Party said a decision by Israel's Supreme Court can be ignored.

The case was about the sale of a news channel to Netanyahu's critics. But retired Supreme Court Justice Ayala Prokatcha argues the case is really about democracy, even though retired justices don't usually engage in public criticism. A country in which a governing authority takes the law into its own hands is a country where the seeds of disorder and anarchy are sewn. You can't stick to original ethics when the situation is burning and it's collapsing. Prokatchez was an Israeli High Court justice for more than a decade. She worries Israel's on a slippery slope of democratic backsliding.

The total combination of the anti-democratic activities that have begun three years ago and have escalated more and more and more, reaching the peak of the breakage of our democracy. It's an attack against the Supreme Court, actually weakening the gatekeepers of the government. Since 23, Netanyahu has tried to overhaul Israel's judiciary, passing legislation to allow the ruling coalition to have more influence in picking judges, including on the Supreme Court, and trying but failing to prohibit a doctrine that allowed Israel's high court to strike down government decisions judged extremely unreasonable. This is the reason that why we are facing such a constitutional crisis.

Elliot Sharga is the founder of the Quality of Government Movement, a civil watchdog that advocates for government transparency and is himself a former Lakud official. Mr. Netanyahu to escape from justice, the mend at least 50 times the basic laws in Israel, just adopt the system to use their needs, is political, is the legal needs, just to remain in power, and just to escape from justice. In three months, Netanyahu faces an election

that his aides admit he might lose. He wanted to take control on all the media in Israel, that they will be able to control the people, especially before the election. And if he will lose, he won't get a result of the election. And we can face what you guys face in America in 6th of January. But the court's critics and advocates for judicial reform have long called it out of control. If you go back 25, 30 years, you would have a Supreme Court exercising its right of Judiciary Review of overturning a law once every two or three years, then all of a sudden you're getting it two times a year, then three times a year, and then pretty consistently.

So eventually people in the parliament are saying, who elected you? Michael Orrin served as the Israeli ambassador to the United States under Netanyahu from 2009 to 2013. There has to be a greater input of Israeli public opinion in the decision of judges, who becomes a choosing judges, as in the United States. You have that ability to impact the composition of the Supreme Court. We don't have that. But the reason that Netanyahu

today faces such a political challenge is that even some of his historic supporters are fed up. He is a person who has lost the trust of a tremendous amount of Israelis. He has not taken responsibility for October 7th which is a big issue here. He

has poised in relationship with just about everybody's work with in the past, not with me, but just about everyone else. And it's time for change. And that sentiment is fueling Netanyahu's opposition. Gaddi Eisenkott, a retired Israeli army chief, is running against Netanyahu and leading in the polls. When the Minister of Justice of the State of Israel calls not to comply with the High Court decision, he's actually hinting it's something else to us.

It's beyond the desire to weaken the Israeli judicial system. The desire here is to destroy. And like many here, I am not here, I am not. Like many here, Eisenkot criticizes Netanyahu for wars in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran, none of which have ended or could be considered a victory. There are military achievements. There are great challenges, but no resolution was achieved in any arena. That concern echoed by Eisenkot's supporters.

I think the Israeli side is now ready for change. Mr. Netanyahu, who served the country for 30 years, I think it's enough, especially after October 7. And so Israelis and the world look to see whether the upcoming elections produce a new era of Israeli politics, or a continuation of Netanyahu rule. For the PBS News Hour, I'm Nick Schiffran. Health officials are still trying to determine the source of a multi-state outbreak of cyclospora infections likely linked to shredded iceberg lettuce. There may be more than 7,000 cases of

cyclosporiasis nationwide, the largest recorded outbreak in U.S. history. The Centers for Disease Control says more than 1,600 people have been sickened, and another 5,000 in more than 30 states are under investigation. Our William Brangham has more on the latest. Amna, the FDA said today that a lettuce sample from the company Taylor Farms that was initially reported as positive for cyclospora was actually a false positive. But the agency also said that based on other data, it still believes Taylor Farms lettuce is linked to this outbreak. Some of that lettuce ended up at Taco Bell restaurants.

It is all prompting more questions and adding to the confusion for the public. So as we often do when things are confusing in the public health world, we turn to Caitlin Jettelina. She's adjunct professor at the Yale School of Public Health and the author of the Substact column, Your Local Epidemiologist. Caitlin, great to have you back. Help us understand the strange back and forth that's going on here. The FDA initially said to Taylor Farms, this is your lettuce. We found a sample of it and then said, well, no, it's actually not that sample, but we still think it is connected to you. what do we know concretely about the origins of this outbreak?

Yeah, so this is a nasty parasite. And the only way to determine the common culprit is through patient interviews followed by lab genetic testing. And what we're seeing constantly as a very strong signal in patient interviews hasn't changed, that it is some sort of lettuce. And the FDA trace back data through invoices and shipping records and receipts narrow it down to Taylor Farms in Mexico. Taylor, the FDA, regardless of this false positive, the FDA continues to say Taylor Farms is overwhelmingly linked to the outbreak. And this is for two

reasons. One is because the false positive was on lettuce coming from Mexico. That was not part of the recall. So if it really truly was a positive, we would need a lot, much larger recall. And second, outbreak investigations don't rely on one single lab test. They rely on the weight of all of the evidence. And like I said, epidemiological evidence, trace back data, and not finding a parasite on one lab sample doesn't mean it isn't there. So sure, this false positive whiplash was maybe a small setback, but it did not reverse what scientists have been discovering the past few weeks leading up to this. Do you have a sense as to why this is so complicated?

It always seems like in past outbreaks, it's very quickly identified. Salmonella from this farm on this type of produce. Why is this one proving to be such a tricky nut to crack? Yeah, so this is one of the most opaque, confusing, unclearly communicated outbreak responses I have ever seen. And it's really the perfect storm of three factors. One is the parasite itself. It's nasty.

Symptoms can take up to 12 days to appear. So patients are being asked to recall meals from like two weeks ago. And I don't remember the last meal I ate two weeks ago. So it's a lot of laborious work. Second is that we have a hollowed out federal response, right? Neither the FDA nor the CDC has a permanent director right now. We've lost a lot of staff, some lab capacity, as well as a lot of reorganization these past 18 months. and this federal coordinating as well as centralized communication or lack of centralized

communication is causing a ton of confusion. And then the third factor we can't ignore is that this is a private company, Taylor Farms, linked to the outbreak, really muddling a lot of waters with its PR approach. So put together, many of us on this outside are putting these pieces together like a puzzle and trying to read between the lines. But the most obvious bottom line here is let's avoid iceberg lettuce in these 27 states until further notice. And anything else beyond that? I know a lot of people saw the news over the weekend at the end of last week thinking,

OK, I'll just avoid Taco Bell and shredded lettuce. Is there anything else people ought to be doing to protect themselves? Yeah, so distribution networks are complex. And suppliers don't just serve one fast food chain. So this is not just Taco Bell. This may be grocery stores and food services, operations in bulk. And we don't actually know exactly what is recalled. We actually have to decode it ourselves.

The Catero Farms supplied a very confusing recall notice. So the safe thing right now is to avoid iceberg lettuce all together in these 27 states. That's the safest thing to do. If you're high risk, like a pregnant woman or 65 and older or immunocompromised, If you're especially in Michigan or some of these high case states, I would do extra caution with any produce that has hard to wash crevices like raspberries. A third sort of thing you can do is farmers markets or local farmers. Often sides step these complex bagged lettuce supply chains, which is a partial fix and not risk-free, but it's something that you can do. This all ends when this contaminated product is out of the supply chain, and that's going to take time.

Caitlin Gentilita, always great to hear from you. Thank you so much for being here. Yeah, thank you for having me. Arizona is holding its primary elections tomorrow, where Republicans will choose a nominee to challenge the incumbent Democratic governor in November. That is where we start tonight on this Politics Monday with Tamara Keith of NPR and Jasmine Wright, White House correspondent for notice. Amy Walter is away. both. Great to see him. Start in Arizona. We've got the Republican primary there for governor. Representative Andy Biggs is the frontrunner. He's the former House Freedom Caucus chair. He is endorsed by President Trump. Representative Dave Schweigert is also running with a sort of competing

vision for the party. And the winner will take on Arizona's current Democratic governor. That's Katie Hobbs, who is running unopposed. So Tam, no Republican has lost a statewide primary in Arizona with Trump's backing. Does that bode well for Andy Biggs? It sure does. And President Trump's backing, President Trump's endorsement in Arizona, especially, but in basically in red districts, it's like a golden ticket. And the president and his political team have at times worked to move people to even shift districts. We saw that in Arizona where a candidate was encouraged to move to a different district and then got the Trump endorsement running in that district. district he doesn't live in. Essentially, Trump and his team are moving the puzzle pieces, trying to set things up so that Trump loyal candidates will get through the primary. Now, whether

they can win in a general election in a state where, and especially in districts where the voters are quite moderate or where the composition of the district is quite moderate, that's another question. The record isn't quite as strong there. Well, jazz, the primary is one thing. The general is another. Katie Hobbs barely eeked out a win, less than a percentage point back in 2022 against Carrie Lake, who was also backed by President Trump and often repeated those lies about the stolen 2020 election. Who did the Democrats want to run against here? Well, Arizona has proven that they don't like putting folks who deny the election into higher office. It's just something that time and time again, we've been asked this question specifically about this state because we

have seen folks like Carrie Lake and others who have taken the mantle, taking up President Trump's to get that approval, his positions on these things. And time and time again, Arizonaans have rejected him. Now, Katie Hobbs has a kind of mixed track record. She is viewed by a lot of Democrats as probably the most vulnerable Democratic governor going into the midterm elections. But just in the last few days, we know that they move that race from a toss-up to now lean Democratic. And part of that is because of the success of Andy Biggs. He is, for all intent and purpose is likely to get that primary spot. But then going into the general, that's a huge question, someone being so close to Donald Trump, particularly in an election where people

are concerned about affordability and think that the president isn't focused on the real issues at hand. So let's turn now to Maine because there's big news this weekend after Graham Platner was forced out of the Senate race. Troy Jackson now seems poised to clinch the Democratic nomination to replace Platner. Here's just a part of the campaign ad that Jackson's team posted last night. We're not from the left. We're not from the right. We're from the bottom and we're rising. And I know what happens when working people decide that they've had enough. When we do, we stand up, we lock arms, we fight back, and then we win. Let's go and beat Susan Collins and send a working class fighter from the Northwoods of Maine to the United States Senate.

Tam, he once campaigned alongside Graham Platner. Does that matter in this race and at this moment for Democrats? Certainly, there could be ads cut that show Troy Jackson and Graham Platner together. That is something that could be done by Susan Collins and her team. But I think that Democrats are eager to coalesce behind a candidate. And in a lot of ways, Jackson is the candidate that Platner presented himself to be, which is to say he is very working class. He has strong union roots. He comes from the north of the state, all of these things. Now, what he is not is a charismatic speaker like Graham Platner. Plattner really took people by storm with his ability to tell his own story.

Troy Jackson does not. He speaks like, you know, the person who he is, which is to say not a slick politician in any way. Jazz, how are you looking at this? Well, I think the Democrats are a little bit encouraged that they're kind of over this last hump. the main politics took a little bit more attention than I think that they expected it to. And I also think that they didn't perhaps expect Troy Jackson to be able to put that kind of coalition together as he is now. He does have a couple more hurdles to get to before he is the nominee. But I think people are betting for him to move forward. So at least you're having a more

stable race at the moment. Of course, the problem is when it comes down to Susan Collins. She is a unicorn in that state and has managed to defeat all Democratic challengers to this date and you know people were hoping it was Graham Platner now it's not the question is whether or not Troy Jackson can supplant that and take up that oxygen that Graham Platner was he certainly can take up the sort of populist messaging that that Platner had it's it's an open question as to whether he can excite people in the same way and he's working on a shorter timeline too yes how that goes I do want to get both of your takes on the fallout from President

Trump's speech light late last week He worked to revive a lot of the debunked claims about the integrity of our elections. And he called for more restrictive voting laws that he's continued to push for ahead of the midterms. Tam, I know you've been speaking with swing voters you've been following for a long time. Now, what do they tell you? Is this what they want to hear from the president right now? You know, it was a real mixed bag, but almost all of them said, you know, I wish he would have talked about the Iran war or why is he doing this? Why are we looking backwards? Why aren't we looking forwards? There was a whole variation of the same message, which was like, why exactly was this a prime time address?

And only a handful of the voters were persuaded in any way. The others just sort of treated it as the ravings of a president who continues to look back at the race that he lost. As he continues to look back at the race, he's also pushing for the passage of this Save America Act that would put more restrictions on the voting. process. Did he move the needle on that? Yeah, I think one of the things that have been most interesting to me in the post days since that speech is the lack of push we've seen by the broader group of Republicans who are supportive of the Save America Act to bring up some of those claims, some of those perhaps false claims that the president said. I think you are seeing some movement on the Save America

Act. We know that Speaker Mike Johnson in the Reconciliation 3.0 bill that hasn't exactly been unveiled yet said that he's going to put $10 billion. for states to who states could access that money if they adopt some of the measures in the Save America Act. But that is very far from the bill that the president is pushing, very far from the priorities that the president is pushing. Of course, when we're talking about proving citizenship, when we're talking about ending mail-in ballot, except for some very specific groups. And so you're not seeing Republicans rush to do what the president wanted them to do, which was past the Save America, and also spread around some of these claims and perhaps conspiracies in these classified documents that were declassified.

And so I think that that to me has been kind of the most interesting part about it. And the thing is that this is an election about affordability and the cost of living and people's frustration with that. And relitigating an election or talking about the Same America Act, that's just not what Republicans want to run on. Tamara Keith, Jasmine Wright, great to see you vote. Thank you so much. Yeah. There was a hero's welcome for the Spanish soccer team as they arrived in Madrid, where throngs of fans cheered their World Cup win over Argentina.

It followed a tense final match, as Spain made history securing their first title since 2010 and their second cup title ever. Stephanie Sy tells us more. Omna, it was a 120-minute display of athleticism and a win for soccer, as one commentator put it. Spain's signature possession-based play eventually wore down Argentina's tenacious defense. In extra time, with Argentina down one man from a late red card, Spanish forward Faron Torres delivered the defining goal. The only goal of the game scored 106 minutes in. Spain's victory ends Argentina and its star Lino Messi's World Cup reign and caps off a tournament that defied expectations on several fronts. For more, I'm joined now by Leander Charlochans.

soccer columnist at The Guardian and author of The Long Game. Leander, I hope you had fun at the game yesterday. It sure was a long game, especially for us soccer neophytes. Spain, of course, controlling possession of the ball through much of the match, but they couldn't seem to break through Argentina's defense, even with so many shots attempts, at least until the very end. What do you think Spain did tactically to ultimately clinch the win? So what you watched last night was a game that was very, very, very much.

very, very lopsided, where Spain is a much better team. Spain counter presses really well. Spain trapped the Argentines in their own half that on the rare occasion, when they even got onto the ball, they couldn't escape their half. They had trouble connecting passes. It's just that Spain also was having a tough night, just putting the ball in the goal. And this is what we've seen a lot from Argentina. This is by no means the best team in the world hasn't been for some time. Arguably, wasn't even when they won the thing in 2022, but they're absolute specialists at grinding out these difficult matches,

at making it tough on their opponents, at stealing a goal here and there and getting the result they need. That is a very veteran Argentine team that came into this final realizing we can't go toe to toe with the Spanish team. We need to kind of break this game. We need to be defensive.

We need to be opportunistic. And so they managed to keep the Spanish at base, until the 106th minute just by kind of defending, defending, defending, and not actually taking a shot themselves until the 115th minute of the game when they'd finally gone behind and had no choice but to start pushing forward.

Yeah, and this is the first time I understand in 60 years that a team failed to register a single shot in 90 minutes. Several sports writers, Leander, have condemned some of Argentina's players combative behavior on the pitch. And we learned this afternoon that FIFA is investigating whether Argentina players violated codes and clashes on the field postmatch. So do you agree that they crossed a line that besmirches the sport in these tactics and did that rough play strategy end up costing them in that late red card?

Well, you know, soccer is a sport that I'm not entirely sure can still be besmirched at this point because it is both the beautiful game and it can sometimes descend into some pretty ugly scenes. I think you saw that last night. I think Argentina understood that it needed to kind of be dirty in that way if it was going to be able to compete with Spain. But yeah, it got pretty messy there towards the end when the game was over. No pun intended. And, you know, the Argentines just took out their frustration on the Spanish players who were celebrating one of the crowning achievements of their careers, winning the World Cup.

Some punches were thrown after the Argentines had already committed. a lot of fouls during that game. So they did not cover themselves in glory in the playing sense and not in the sportsmanship sense either. Leander, we have to talk about Leonel Messi, who at 39 years old still had an extraordinary World Cup, even though he was in tears at the loss yesterday. Is this it for him? Or is this the last World Cup appearance?

I was convinced after 2022 when he won the thing in Qatar with Argentina that he was done then when he was 35 years old. So I'm not going to make the same mistake. but I will say that his legacy is untarnished and cannot be broken down at all at this point. He has taken Argentina teams that were always flawed in different ways to three World Cup finals now. So it doesn't really matter what he does or doesn't do from here on out. He will still be remembered as the greatest player of all time. Just zooming out, Leander, a lot of the worst fears about this World Cup didn't materialize.

Ratings were high. The seats were sold out. Foreign tourists enjoyed our ranch dressing. but then you also had politics come into play with President Trump inserting himself at different times. How would you rate the overall success of these games? I think this was an outstanding World Cup. We had just wonderful Cinderella stories with Cape Verdi and with Curacao, and we saw upsets and all the stars came out to play.

So broadly, it was really successful. And it accomplished everything that FIFA sort of designed for it to do. It made a ton of money. The Guardians reported that this World Cup will clear, north of $15 billion in revenue for FIFA, which is more than it had projected. And so the kind of policy decision it made of, you know, cozying up to Donald Trump and making sure that it kept him on their side has kind of worked out for FIFA, which, of course, has a long history of cozying up to presidents and autocrats in order to make sure that

its signature events, which drives the revenue that keeps FIFA's graft machine going, comes off without a hitch. Leander, you wrote a book about U.S. men's soccer. When you look at this tournament, where do we stand? There still appears to be a big gap between the U.S. and some of the most elite teams in the world. What you're starting to see is the U.S. getting closer to the elite national teams, but still having a ways to go.

And I don't know that you are going to fully catch up until you start producing more world-class players. And in order to do that, you have to really take advantage of this broad grassroots system that we have. this country. And the issue there is that to so many people, to so much young talent, youth soccer is still inaccessible because it's expensive. We have a pay-to-play system that has frozen out. So many young players, so many demographics that you would really like to be able to participate in the sport year after year after year. And so that's the problem that we have to solve for

the U.S. to get better at men's soccer. It's not a popularity issue anymore. It's an accessibility issue. That is Leander Charlockens with The Guardian and author of The Long Game. Thanks so much. Thank you. Before we go tonight, the PBS family is mourning the passing of one of its own. Sylvia Bug has died. Sylvia most recently served as chief programming executive and general manager for general audience programming after holding a number of high-level posts both here and at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, among others. In a statement, PBS CEO, Paul Paula Kerger said that Sylvia helped shape the programming, quote, that defines our service to the American people. Adding, quote, she will be gratefully remembered for her commitment to ensuring public media's programming reflects a broad range of voices and perspectives.

Sylvia was a dedicated and passionate leader and a staunch supporter of our team here at the News Hour. She died unexpectedly this weekend at just 55 years old. And that is the News Hour for tonight. I'm Omna Nawaz. On behalf of the entire NewsHour team, thank you for joining us.