PBS News Hour - Full Show - November 21, 2025 – PBS News Hour full episode

Episode Date: November 22, 2025

Friday on the News Hour, President Trump welcomes New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani to the White House after vilifying him during the campaign. The Trump administration demands that Ukraine accept its peace plan that includes major territorial concessions to Russia. Plus, one state's efforts to protect vaccine access as the federal government casts doubt on their effectiveness and safety. 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 welcomes New York City mayor-elect Zoran Mamdani to the White House after vilifying him during the campaign. The Trump administration gives Ukraine a deadline to accept its peace plan that includes major territorial concessions to Russia. Right now, Ukraine may find itself facing a very tough choice. either the loss of our dignity or the risk of losing a key partner. And one-state's efforts to protect vaccine access as the federal government casts doubt on their effectiveness and safety.

We're already seeing, you know, lots of measles, lots of pertussis, these are vaccine-preventable diseases that don't need to happen. Welcome to the NewsHour. President Donald Trump and the future mayor of New York City, Zoranamom Dani, met today at the White House after months of trading insults. In an Oval Office meeting, they were far more civilized with the president at points praising the mayor-elect despite their political differences. I expect to be helping him, not hurting him. A big help, because I want New York City to be great. And what I really appreciate about the president is that the meeting that we had,

focused not on places of disagreement, which there are, many, and also focused on the shared purpose that we have in serving New Yorkers. Both said that they'll look to work together to improve the nation's largest city. Our White House correspondent, Liz Landers, has been following today's meeting and joins us now from the White House. So, Liz, what happened today in that Oval Office meeting? And what was behind the change in tone that we saw, especially from President Trump? Amna, today was quite the turn of events, especially after these two men have been trading

barbs through the media really for months now. In the past, President Trump calling Mamdani a communist. Mamdani, in turn, calling the president a despot today a much calmer tone between those two men, indicating that they plan to work together in the future. Mamdani spokesperson had said before this meeting that this was a customary type of meeting, that the mayor of America's largest city would go meet at the White House with the president and that they were hoping to focus on issues like public safety, economic security, and affordability. And it was really that last part that we heard over and over from these two men today, affordability. I just have to say, throughout this whole Oval Office meeting today, it was quite a different tune,

especially from President Trump. Listen to what he said earlier today. I don't care about affiliations or parties or anything else. I want to see if this city could be unbelievable. If he could be a spectacular success, I'd be very happy. And one of the most surprising moments in this Oval Office meeting that happened around 3 p.m. today was Mamdani, the mayor elect of New York, got a question from a reporter about the fact that he has made comments likening President Trump to a fascist in the past. Mamdani started to explain himself and President Trump stepped in from the resolute desk there saying, it's okay, you can just say yes.

That's easier. It's easier than explaining. So the president almost sort of coming to Mamdani's defense trying to explain this for him. Just a very unusual setup that we saw there today, Amna. Some remarkable moments in that meeting today, Liz. But based on your reporting, what can you share with us about what the meeting actually focused on? This largely focused on this issue of affordability. And we've heard President Trump talk about this now in the last few weeks. I think after those special elections at the beginning of month where a lot of voters voted in the ballot box and said that economic issues, affordability is their top issue right now. We heard that repeatedly throughout this meeting. President Trump

saying that he hopes to work with Mom Donnie about lowering the cost of rent in New York City, building additional housing units there as well. They also talked about getting Con Edison, that's the energy provider in New York City, getting those prices down too. And Mom Donnie echoing this as well. When we spoke to those voters who voted for President Trump, we heard them speak about cost of living. We focused on that same cost of living. And that's where I am really looking forward to delivering for New Yorkers in partnership with the president on the affordability agenda. Now, President Trump in the last few weeks has threatened to withhold federal funding for New York City for projects like infrastructure projects, public safety, hospitals, et cetera.

There's all kinds of federal funding that goes to various cities. Today, though, he seemed to back off that a little bit. He was asked about that threat in particular, and he said, look, I don't want to send money to New York if it's being used in ways that I don't agree with. But he said that after today that he didn't think that that was going to happen, Omna. Liz, as you reported, they both indicated they'd like to work together moving forward. Any takeaways from the meeting about what that looks like? Well, they were asked if they would have future meetings. And President Trump said that he certainly hoped so.

look, the president recognized that there are topics and areas that they will disagree on, but he even went so far today as to say when asked by reporters that he would feel comfortable living in Mamdani's New York City under his leadership after this meeting today. But now, one more thing to add when we're looking ahead to the midterm elections next year in 2026, it will be very difficult for Republicans to tie the entire Democratic Party to Zeran Mamdani's policies. When we see today that President Trump agreed with much of what Mamdani was talking about and many of these policies, they seem to find common ground on, Omna. All right. That's our White House correspondent, Liz Landers, leading our coverage tonight.

Liz, thank you. Turning to the day's other headlines, in an about face, the U.S. Coast Guard will again classify swastikas and nooses as hate symbols. That was the official stance for the past few years, until earlier this month when officials issued a draft policy document calling those emblems potentially divisive. That policy was due to take effect in December. But after news reports surfaced about the change, the Coast Guard issued a new memorandum saying, quote, these symbols reflect hateful and prohibited conduct. that undermines unit cohesion. The latest Coast Guard policy appears to take effect immediately. In North Dakota, abortion is once again illegal after the state's Supreme Court failed to reach

the required majority to find a ban on the practice unconstitutional. The state's only abortion provider left in 2022 and then challenge North Dakota's abortion laws that same year. A legal saga ensued with the Republican-led legislature revising the state's laws to ban abortion outweigh. outright. With today's decision, North Dakota once again joins 12 other states with near

total abortion bans. In Ohio, a police officer was acquitted of all charges in the killing of Takaya Young, a pregnant black woman. We, the jury upon our oaths of law and evidence in this case find the defendant not guilty of murder as charged. A jury found Connor Grubb not guilty on charges of murder, involuntary manslaughter, and felonious assault in the death of the 21-year-old. Grub and another officer had responded to a call in August of 2023 after Young was accused of shoplifting. Body camp footage shows Young declining to come out of her car before it rolled toward Grub and he fired. DeKaya Young's family denies she stole anything and plans to continue a civil suit against the local township and police chief. Turning overseas in Nigeria, officials say gunmen kidnapped students and staff from a Catholic school this morning in the second such attack this week.

The Christian Association of Nigeria says more than 200 school children and a dozen teachers were abducted in Niger state. It's not clear who the attackers were. But this follows a similar incident on Monday in which 25 girls were abducted. At least 1,500 students have been kidnapped in the region since 2014 when Boko Haram extremists kidnapped 276 schoolgirls. An Indian fighter jet crashed during an air show in Dubai today, killing the pilot who was. was the only person on board. Spectators captured the moment the plane plummeted to the ground and burst into a giant fireball. It happened on the last day of the largest aviation showcase in the Middle East.

It's the second known crash of the lightweight Tejas aircraft, which is built by a state-owned company and is a staple in India's Air Force. Indian officials say they're investigating the cause of the crash. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened his security cabinet today to discuss the recent spike of Israeli settler violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. Netanyahu is facing pressure from the Trump administration amid concerns the attacks could jeopardize the fragile ceasefire in Gaza. The meeting took place as Palestinians in the West Bank village of Huara blamed settlers

for setting a massive blaze overnight at a scrapyard. The owner of the site surveyed the damage. today and said he's committed to staying. This car repair field is mine, and it's my source of income to raise my kids. These settlers are causing destruction everywhere here, in our lands everywhere. Where can we go? We want to remain steadfast on our land, no matter what. Israel's military says it had reports that Israelis did indeed set the fire and that police

are investigating. Back in this country, the Department of Transportation released a new crash test dummy that more closely resembles the female body. The new dummy is aimed at making cars safer for women who are 73% more likely to be injured in a head-on crash and 17% more likely to be killed. The current standard crash test dummy was developed in 1978 and is modeled on a 5-foot-9 man weighing about 170 pounds. There is currently a female version, but it's basically just a small. version of the male one. Today's update likely won't be used in new car safety testing until 2027 at the earliest. On Wall Street today, stocks swung higher to end an otherwise tumultuous week. The Dow Jones Industrial average jumped nearly 500 points on the day. The NASDAQ rose almost

200 points. The S&P 500 also ended the week on a positive note. And Mexico's Fatima Bosch has been crowned Miss Universe 2025, a dramatic win in a competition marked by controversy. Miss Universe is Mexico. Bosch is the fourth Mexican woman to be crowned, but her victory was seen as vindication. Two weeks ago, she and other contestants walked out in protest after the competition's co-owner berated her during a live-streamed event. He later apologized. Mexico's first woman president, Claudia Scheinbaum, praised Bosch's victory back home, saying, quote, women are prettier when we speak and we participate. Still to come, on the news hour, Jonathan Capehart

and Matthew Contenetti weigh in on the week's political headlines. Representative James Clyburn discusses his new book on the first eight black members of Congress. And an 80-year-old becomes the oldest woman to hike the entire Appalachian Trail. This is the PBS News Hour from the David M. Rubenstein studio at WETA in Washington and in the west from the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism at Arizona State University. President Trump today gave Ukraine a Thursday deadline to accept his 28-point peace plan to end the war that Russia started. Russia is cautiously welcoming the plan, which would require Ukraine to make a number of concessions its previously rejected. Stephanie Tsai reports on the difficult decision Ukraine must now make.

Today in Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelensky addressed his nation as it faces an existential dilemma. Right now, Ukraine may find itself facing a very tough choice, either the loss of our dignity or the risk of losing a key partner, either the difficult 28 points or an extremely hard winter, the hardest yet and the dangers that follow. A life without freedom, without dignity, without justice, they will expect an answer from us, though the truth is, I already gave that answer.

Ukraine's national interest must be respected. Today, Russian President Putin praised the plan. We have this text and received it through existing channels of cooperation with the U.S. administration. I believe that it can also form the basis for a final peaceful settlement. Vice President J.D. Vance and U.S. Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll discussed the U.S. proposal with Zelensky this morning. President Trump wants it signed by Thanksgiving. I've had a lot of deadlines, but if things are working well, you tend to extend the deadlines. But Thursday is it. We think it appropriate times.

Later in the day, President Trump had this to say. He'll have to like it. And if he doesn't like it, then, you know, they should just keep fighting, I guess, you know. Adding even more pressure, PBS NewsHour has learned from senior European and U.S. officials that the U.S. is threatening to cut off the program that sells weapons to Ukraine and cease intelligence sharing if Ukraine rejects the administration's proposal. The 28-point plan presented to Kiev includes long-standing Russian demands. Ukraine would have to limit the size of its military. NATO would not be allowed to send any troops into Ukraine. Ukraine would have to give up the portion of the Danesk region that it still controls. That would give Russia control over the entire Donbass, which would be demilitarized.

The U.S. would recognize the Donbass, occupied Crimea, and the occupied portions of Zaporizia and Kersan as de facto Russian. In addition, NATO would change its language to prevent Ukraine's future membership. The U.S. would lift sanctions on Russia in stages and on a case-by-case basis. All parties would receive full amnesty for their actions, and $100 billion of frozen Russian assets would be earmarked for Ukrainian reconstruction. Separately, a document details for the first time the Trump administration's definition of a security guarantee. The text, confirmed by a senior American and European officials states that, quote, the United States affirms that a significant, deliberate, and sustained armed attack by the

Russian Federation across the agreed armistice line into Ukrainian territory shall be regarded as an attack, threatening the peace and security of the transatlantic community and may lead to an armed response. European leaders today spoke to Zelensky via conference call and rallied around the wartime leader, with German Chancellor Mertz writing, Ukraine can count on us. And Polish President Tusk stating, when it comes to peace, all the negotiations should include Ukraine. British Prime Minister Kirstarmer also weighed in. But we have to work from where we are to the just and lasting peace. I know that's what President Trump wants, and he's been working to that end. But we must reiterate the principle that matters about Ukraine must be determined by

Ukraine. The Europeans are working with Ukraine to come up with a revised plan. For the PBS News Hour, I'm Stephanie Tsai. For more on this, we turn now to Richard Haas. He spent decades serving Republican administrations in the state and defense departments and on the national security staff. He's now President Emeritus at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of the Substack, Home and Away. Richard, welcome back. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for having me. So before we dive more deeply into this plan, let me just ask you about President Trump's demand here that Ukraine accept this plan by next Thursday or risk losing weapons sales and intelligence sharing.

Does a deadline ultimatum like that help move closer to a deal? It actually works against it because it raises questions about whether the United States is. States is really on Ukraine's side. Let me give you a parallel. Imagine if President Trump had gone to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and said, look, you've got a week to accept the Palestinian state, here are the borders, you've got to withdraw from these settlements, you have to accept the sharing of Jerusalem, and so many Palestinian refugees have to come back to the Palestinian state. And if you don't agree to that, we're going to cut off American aid for Israel. Obviously, the reaction to that would be incredibly negative and strong. That in some ways is what we're

seeing with Ukraine. The United States is making really big, fundamental, even existential demands and is giving Ukraine a kind of one-week take or leave it often. Existential demands, as you put it. So when you look at what Ukraine's being asked to give up here versus what's being asked of Russia, just on the territorial plans, as was just laid out, they're being asked to concede land they still control the entire Donbass occupied Crimea and more being recognized as de facto Russian. Is this a plan? President Zelensky can sell to Ukrainians? I'll be honest with you. I don't think he can sell it. I also don't think he should. I don't think aggression should be rewarded. And again, there would be tremendous pushback after

three and a half years of this phase of the war. I think the dilemma for President Zelensky is how to say no without saying no. And you get into what you might call the yes buts. There's something here to work with. We have concerns here. We have concerns there. And then the question is, how does this White House react to a situation where Russia, Russia might well accept the plan because it's quite tilted in its favor, and Ukraine has real problems with it. And we'll have to see how that plays out, but that's likely to be where we are in a week. What about the language in which NATO is changing its language or asked to change its language

to prevent future Ukraine membership, but then the security guarantee language that includes Article 5 like protections, sort of unclear about when an armed response would be triggered? Is that clear to you about where that line is being drawn? No, it is unclear, as you say, and that's a problem. It's a difference almost between a security assurance and a security guarantee. There's a lot of wiggle room about the nature of a Russian attack that would trigger a response, and then there's further questioning about what would be the extent or nature of their response. And what's so critical about that here on is what putting this proposal would put all sorts of limits

on Ukraine's ability to take care of its own defense, essentially would have to trust the United States, to be there for it, but these are not ironclad assurances that are being extended. So again, for Ukraine would be an enormous risk, particularly, and you remember this, in 1994, the United States, Britain, and Russia gave Ukraine guarantees. And as we obviously know now, they turned out to be worthless. What about the way the European leaders have responded here, stepping in to show solidarity for Ukraine, come up with a revised plan? Could that plan replace this U.S.-led plan?

It could, but that's up to us to the United States to accept it. The danger for the Europeans is what are they prepared to do? What can they do if the United States basically says, sorry, we're going to walk away from Ukraine. And there's real questions about the ability of the Europeans to step up to the role of being Ukraine's principal external security provider. But we could well be there. In the minute or so we have left, I want to pull from your years of experience. when you step back and look at the way this process has played out, the way the U.S. has led this negotiation.

What do you take away from that? It's inconsistent with my experience. Normally you negotiate and you work out through consultations, a plan with your friends, and then you present it to your adversaries. This was done the other way around. So you have both the process and the content working against Ukraine. Plus, there's the added thing that a big motive for the administration seems to be

to put Ukraine on the back burner and to focus on using this to bring about a new era of U.S. Russian relations. So again, Ukraine is essentially losing out here. Richard Haas, always good to speak with you. Thank you so much for making the time to join us. Thank you. This week, this season. CDC changed the language on its website to falsely suggest that vaccines may cause autism, even though there's no scientific evidence to prove such a link.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said he personally directed that reversal. It's just the latest in a series of changes to federal vaccine guidance and policy since Kennedy took office. In anticipation of more changes to come, a number of Democratic-led states have taken steps of their own. They're trying to protect access to vaccines, and to push back on misinformation. William Brangham reports from one of those states, Colorado. Good question. At every child pediatrics, just outside Denver,

Natalie and Melissa Barba brave their way through flu and COVID shots. It's going to be okay, I promise. I promise. Relax. Their mom, Sandra, has been vaccinating her kids here for years. So when she hears misinformation swirling around vaccines, she knows where to turn. I just come to my doctor. I talked to her about it, like, do you feel this is true?

And then she just tells me, like, a little bit of the statistics, and I feel more comfortable, and I trust her. So over time, that difference can get worse. Her pediatrician is Dr. Sophia Maharana. This practice serves lots of patients who are uninsured or on Medicaid. Recently, she's noticed a shift in some of her patient's views about vaccines. I had a patient come in for her six-month appointment, I think, And the mom decided that she didn't want to vaccinate.

She'd vaccinated all her older children. I've known this family for years. And when I asked her why, she said, I don't know. I just don't know. I'm worried. Well, what are you worried about? What can we talk about? And she really couldn't define her fear.

So the COVID booster is a vaccine to help you decrease your chance of getting COVID. It feels like there is a boulder to overcome of misinformation that has somehow rooted itself in our communities. And while we have an army of pediatric care providers, public health professionals, pharmacists, nurses, and families who are willing to go over that boulder and figure it out, you don't know how big it is or how deep it is or how it's rooted. Part of the problem, Mahara says, is the federal government, where longtime vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. now leads the Department of Health and Human Services. In May, Secretary Kennedy said the CDC was no longer recommending COVID shots for healthy kids or pregnant women.

In June, he fired all 17 members of the CDC's vaccine advisory panel, known as ASIP. Several of his replacements on that panel have held anti-vaccine views. In August, Kennedy said the government was winding down $500 million in research contracts to develop new MRI vaccines, like for bird flu, and other viruses. And now, ASIP is reportedly considering changes to the childhood vaccine schedule. Amidst all of this, policymakers, doctors, and academics here in Colorado are trying to increase access to vaccines, as well as pushback on misinformation, including some that is coming straight from the federal government. I think both in the same arms probably Colorado's governor, Democrat Jared Polis, has been a key player in some of those efforts.

He signed a law that allows the state to consider sources besides the CDC when setting requirements for the vaccine's kids need to attend school. Another new law ensures state-regulated insurance plans cover the cost of some vaccines, regardless of what the CDC does. And Colorado's chief medical officer issued a standing order allowing pharmacists to administer COVID vaccines without a prescription. I think it's really about trusted messengers. It's about data and science.

It's also about ease of access. And that's one of the reasons we tried to make it as easy as possible, like COVID, flu vaccines at your local grocery store, your local pharmacy. So anything we can do to make it easier and get good information in front of people to make the best decisions for them and their families, that's exactly what we're trying to do. But Polis has also faced some criticism when it comes to vaccines. Last November, he praised Trump's pick of RFK Jr. as health secretary. Do you still stand by that?

Do you still think that he is the right person at this moment? Well, I don't think he's who, the person I supported for president, would have appointed, but he's better than having a pharmaceutical executive in there, like President Trump's prior Director of Human Services. I disagree to the extent that he cast aspersions on vaccines or does anything to put data in front of people that isn't true or is misleading. Polis had said he supported Kennedy's nomination, in part because he, quote, helped us defeat vaccine mandates in Colorado in 2019.

I think mandates are counterproductive because what you have here, is if somebody refuses, what does that mean again? Their kid's not going to be able to go to school, then you're doubly penalizing that kid. We want to welcome everybody. We don't want to hold the kids responsible for the decisions good or bad of the parents. But like much of the country, since COVID,

Colorado has seen rates decline slightly for childhood vaccines against measles, polio, and whooping cough. Last year, it ranked among the bottom 10 states for kindergartners who'd been given those vaccines. A lot of the gaps in coverage are not because parents are refusing, it's because they don't have really good access. Dr. Sean O'Leary is a pediatrician and professor at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. He also serves as a liaison from the American Academy of Pediatrics to that federal vaccine panel, ASIP. He says the way vaccine policy is being debated today is dangerously off course.

It is so far off the rails. What's going on at these meetings is chaotic. And it is clear that these people should not be making decisions about the health care of Americans. It is just beyond the pale. One spring and one side. O'Leary is also leading a statewide group of experts, providers, and community leaders called Colorado Chooses Vaccines. It'll monitor changes coming from Washington, press for new policies at the state level, and launch statewide campaigns to bust vaccine myths. We're already seeing, you know, lots of measles, lots of pertussis.

These are vaccine-preventable diseases that don't need to happen. My fear is that we're only going to see more and more in that. I don't see RFK Jr. trying to stop vaccines. I just see him trying to improve their safety. Aviva Wordkin is a naturopathic doctor near Denver. She co-founded the Colorado chapter of Children's Health Defense, the anti-vaccine organization that RFK Jr. used to lead. If the state of Colorado is saying,

We are getting a lot of what we believe is to be bad information coming out of the administration, and we want to do educational programs, increasing access to vaccines, because we believe, as most medical institutions in the country do, that vaccines are safe and helpful and save lives. You think that that's an ill-advised effort? I think it's an unnecessary effort to some degree. I certainly believe a lot in public education and outreach, but it seems to me that This effort is being motivated by convenience over safety. You ready for it?

There is a growing concern that people seem to share, that what's coming out of the administration will mean that they will have less access to vaccines that they want. Do you think that that's a legitimate concern? It does seem to be an anticipatory, fear-based response. I can't imagine at this point

that the administration would eliminate access. So I understand if people People have their perspective where they view RFK Jr. as anti-science and totally anti-vax, even though he's vaccinated all of his children, and he doesn't seem to be blocking access. I understand how you can look at something and develop a fear before something is actualized. But providers, like Dr. Sophia Maharana, argue some damage has already been done. You can put all the vaccines on the shelf you want. If you also have a sign next to them that says,

I don't know if these work well or these could cause you problems, the fact that they're there creates a barrier to us giving information to our patients. That's good for their health. For the PBS News Hour, I'm William Brangham in Colorado. Well, as President Trump plays nice with one Democrat in the Oval Office, he's called six others traitors and said the social media video that they posted could be punishable by death. For analysis of the week, we turn now to Capehart and Contonetti. That is Jonathan Capehart of MS Now and Matthew Contonetti, Wall Street Journal, opinion columnist and scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

David Brooks is away this evening. Welcome to you. Thanks for being here. Thanks for having us. Jonathan, let's jump into that meeting in the Oval Office because President Trump went from calling Zoran Mamdani a communist, threatening to strip his citizenship, to complimenting him, stepping in to defend him in the Oval Office,

as Liz reported earlier. What happened? Threatening also to send the National Guard in, if he were to win the election. It was the most extraordinary moment, for me, the most extraordinary moment of the Trump presidency. I was wondering if Merlech Mamdani

would be the Volodymyr-Zolensky of the day. And instead, what we saw was an incredible love fest. And by love fest, I mean, the president of the United States just heaping all sorts of compliments and, dare I say, love on Mamdani. And I think there's three things happening here.

Game respects game. And so I think the president looked at how Mamdani ran his campaign, how many votes he got in the election, a million votes versus President Trump got 700-something thousand votes when he ran in a presidential election in New York City.

You could tell that the president respects Mamdani as a result of that. And the third thing, the president, at various moments in that meeting, totally undercut Republican arguments against Mamdani, including Congresswoman Elise Stefani, who's going to run for governor of New York, who had been calling the mayor elect a jihadist for months. And when asked, the president said, no, it's extraordinary. Matt, what surprised you about what stood out to you? And also, is it harder now for Republicans to go after Monsani in the same way? I think if you had to cut ads tonight, yes, it would be hard. But this relationship is only just beginning. I think over the course of the Trump era, we've discovered there's a difference between meeting Trump and rally Trump or social media Trump.

And in meeting Trump, if you're not Vladimir Zelensky, typically meetings go very well with Donald Trump. And he wants to convey that he is a good hope. he's welcoming. And so he wanted to convey that same atmosphere meeting Mamdani, much to the surprise of the Republicans. The other thing here is they're both outsiders. They're both populists. In the democratic world, in the democratic socialist world, populism is expressed through Israel-Palestine and through economic issues. In national populism, Republican populism, it's expressed on the border, cultural types. But there is still this kind of fundament that connects them. And I think that's why Trump was a little bit nicer than a lot of us expected.

What about the affordability issue? I mean, our latest polling shows there is no more single important issue for Americans today. When they asked about what should be the president's top priority, lowering prices, 57 percent said that should be. At the next closest issue is immigration at 16 percent. Jonathan, this is an issue that Mayor-elect Mamdani has been laser focused on. Was that informing some of this meeting, too? Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. I mean, the president's been talking about, quote-unquote, the affordability issue, this new issue that's out there. No, that is why Democrats won elections up and down the ballot around the country, particularly governor in New Jersey, Virginia, and obviously, Maryland Mamdani in New York City.

And so, again, for the president to tie himself to Mr. Affordability, Zeran Mamdani, I think the mayor-a-let got more out of this, I'm sorry, the president got a whole lot more out of this meeting, I think, from his point of view, then the mayor elected. I mean, affordability elected Mamdani, but it also elected Donald Trump last year. Inflation was one of the number one issues that got Donald Trump the popular vote for the first time in 20 years for Republican. The issue is, how are you going to get to affordability? And I think that's where the two politicians diverge. Momdani wants to have more government-controlled solutions, more price controls.

Donald Trump, with that big asterisk of tariffs, is usually about deregulation, tax cuts, more supply. We're going to have an experiment, which means reach that affordability end quicker. I also want to ask you about this week a remarkable video we saw from six Democratic lawmakers, all of whom have national security and defense backgrounds, urging military members to disobey unlawful orders. Take a listen. Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren't just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. Now, President Trump called for them to be arrested. He called it seditious behavior

from traitors punishable by death. White House press secretary, Caroline Levitt, was asked if the president was calling for the execution of members of Congress. Here's what she had to say. No. Let's be clear about what the president is responding to. You have sitting members of the United States Congress who conspired together to orchestrate a video message to members of the United States military, to active duty service members, to members of the national security apparatus, encouraging them to defy the president's lawful orders. Jonathan, I asked Congressman Crowe about this yesterday, who's featured in that video, what specifically they're asking military members to do.

He said it's not about a specific order. Is it clear to you why they put this video out? Yes, because they are concerned about what the president could do, what the president might ask the military to do. And it's not a stretch when you see, you know, judges have issued rulings telling the president and the administration to do things or not do things, and the administration openly defying the courts. So it's not unreasonable for members of Congress who have served in the military

to have concern about how that might reach its way into the Pentagon. And, you know, I'm glad you played that clip from the White House Press Secretary, because right there in her answer, you see the disingenuousness. The members, that video, they said unlawful orders. And what the press secretary said, you know, they're asking them to defy lawful orders. That is not what the members of Congress were asking service members to do. And one other thing. I was talking to Senator Ruben Gallego yesterday, and he made the point what those members of Congress were doing. was nothing more than is what's in the training that service members get.

They are just reiterating what they get in training. There's nothing extraordinary about what they said. I want to ask for your response to the video, but also to put to you that Senator Slocke, who's in that video, said she and other members of the video have gotten close to 1,000 threats since it was posted. Congressman Crow posted some of the threats he's been receiving, calling for his family to be killed.

It's chilling stuff. but how dangerous is the president's rhetoric on this? I think a lot of the rhetoric has been very dangerous. I think both sides here have been not covering themselves in glory. On the one hand, you're calling the president, a fascist, a dictator, and training, someone who's going to issue unlawful orders, even though they can't name a single unlawful order that the president has given. And then, of course, you have the president himself calling this sedition, treasonedible by death.

If we want to lower the temperature, it will take responsibility. responsibility on every party. But what has struck me about this is how it's a partisan split screen. Both parties are playing to their bases here. The Democrats are rallying behind these congressmen and the Republicans almost uniformly are rallying behind President Trump. So I don't think that this is going to have a long-term effect politically on the president. Jonathan, do you want to respond? I sort of bristle at the idea that this is a both-sides thing. What we have here in terms of the threats, particularly against these members of Congress, it's that you have the President of the United States retweeting or whatever you want to call it,

threats against members of Congress. He is the one who, in language and in, if you want to go back to January 6th, indeed, who is fanning, fomenting the nastiness that is out there. If we want to lower the temperature, if we want to change the way, way we do politics in the country, it has to start with the chief executive. It has to start with the president. And he has shown an unwillingness to do that. And it also has to be followed through by all of us, including people who are portraying him as an authoritarian who poses an existential threat to this country. There's lots of evidence that it's not unwarranted.

Let's talk about another moment this week that brought about some of the challenges we've seen in terms of how the president interacts with members of the press specifically. We saw him hosts the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Muhammad bin Salman, at the White House. He was asked about the 2018 killing of the Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and here's what he had to say. You're mentioning somebody that was extremely controversial? A lot of people didn't like that gentleman that you're talking about, whether you like him or didn't like him.

Things happened. Jonathan, as you know, it was ABC's Mary Bruce who asked about Khashoggi. She later asked about Jeffrey Epstein. The president lashed out at her. called her a terrible person, a terrible reporter, threatened to revoke ABC's license. That followed him calling another women reporter, Catherine Lucia Bloomberg, Piggy on Air Force One. What does all of this say to you right now about the president's relationship with journalists and how he views the press? Well, he views the press with the lowest of regard.

He certainly has a problem with women journalists who ask him tough questions, who do their jobs of trying to hold the president of the United States account, to account. And he takes it personally. The idea that the president of the United States would talk about my former colleague at the Washington Post as, you know, it is a controversial guy basically insinuating that he deserved being murdered and chopped up with a bone saw in Turkey, that the president of the United States used to be the person who stood for free press, for democracy, for the role of the press in upholding a democracy. And yet, there, he has no problem undermining that across from someone like MBS, and certainly by berating the terrific journalist from ABC who asked very straightforward and

pointed questions. Matt, I'm going to give you the last word here in the minute or so we have left. What do you take away from this? A big takeaway is we've heard Donald Trump speak this way to reporters and to women reporters since the first Republican debate in August 2015, and Megan Kelly, who was then challenging Trump as the Fox anchor, that's not new. What is new is Donald Trump's political situation,

and I think he understands that the economy, affordability, these bread-and-butter issues we've been talking about do pose a real risk to the Republican majority next year. And I think that's why you're seeing a more elevated, angry Trump in some of these interactions with the press. You think he's lashing out more because he's feeling more pressure. Is that right? I think that's, I can only say what has changed. What has changed is that Donald Trump's political situation has deteriorated since these off-year elections earlier this month.

Matthew Contonetti, Jonathan Capehart. Great to have you both at the table. Thank you so much. Thanks, Amna. spent more than three decades in Congress. And in his new book, he turns his attention to the trailblazing black men who were the first to walk those halls. Jeff Bennett recently sat down with the congressman to learn more.

They were the first eight black members of Congress elected during Reconstruction when American Democracy was being rebuilt after the Civil War. Their presence was revolutionary. Their power was short-lived. And their stories were nearly erased. In his new book, The First Eight,

Clyburn restores their legacy and draws a straight line from their struggle to today's fight over voting rights, representation, and democracy itself. Congressman James Clyburn joins us. Now, thanks for being here. Thank you very much for having me. You say that when people would visit your office and see portraits of the first date on your conference room wall, people were often surprised because they assumed that you were the first black South Carolinian elected to Congress. Was that the catalyst for writing this book? It was. And I had just finished my, or just released my memoir. And so one particular episode that led me to open a conversation with my staff.

And I said to them, my next book is going to be about those eight people. And I started writing it just to inform about their existence and what happened, doing their service, and then the election of 2020 came. And the aftermath of that election led me to start over and rewrite the book to me a little more instructive rather than just informative. Reconstruction to me is among the most fascinating chapters of American history. For folks who were less familiar with that time period, what about that moment allowed these men to be elected and serve?

Well, when Reconstruction King, after the Emancipation Proclamation of 18, they became effective. The second one became effective in 1863. Well, we had to redo the government. In South Carolina, of course, they had to come up with a new constitution, which was done in 1868. And because South Carolina had been at the center of the slave trade, as it relates to the United States, States of America, South Carolina became the only state ever to be majority black. And as a result, when the new government came, two-thirds of the South Carolina House of Representatives was black.

And at one point in its history, we had five congresspeople, four of them were black. And so these people shaped the state. And no matter what people may say about it, this state had the leading the economy, the second most productive economy in the country. And they did everything they possibly could to restore. I used the word throughout the book to redeem the South. They themselves, I call them redeemers because they called themselves. they wanted to redeem the South, three Civil War days. And the book argues that we are in a third reconstruction.

So when you look at current battles over voting access, over representation, over what can be taught in schools, what patterns do you see emerging? What forces that undermined reconstruction back then do you see now? Exactly the same thing. You know, I say that one of the things I want people to get from this book is the power of one vote. The three most significant things that happened to the blacks during this period were all three were decided by one single vote. The impeachment of Andrew Johnson, he failed to be convicted in the Senate by one vote. The committee, they're recommended to the House of Representatives that they give the 20 disputed votes.

to Rutherby Hayes, who then was able to get elected president by one vote, 185 to 184 in the Electoral College. That committee was a 15-member committee, and they voted 8 to 7, one vote, to give those votes to Rutherby Hayes. So Reconstruction came to an end by one vote. And then Jim Crow came about as a result of that. 185 to 184. Jim Crow began by one vote.

And so I hope people will get from this the power of a single vote. And if you see what is now taking place in this country, a Supreme Court that I think is run amok, undoing the Civil Rights Act of 64, undoing the Voting Rights Act of 65. Of course, the Supreme Court is doing more

with the Voting Rights Act. It's the Congress and the presidency that seem to be undoing this civil rights act of 64. We're in this moment right now where President Trump is faced with sagging approval numbers. There's all of this fallout surrounding the Epstein files. There's public fatigue over the high cost of living. Did Democrats, in your view, have real leverage in this moment? And if so, how do you maintain it? Well, you've got to stay vigilant.

If you look at historically, Democrats seem to think that once you win an election, you sit back and wait on the results to come. That's not the way you do it. Once you win an election, you build upon that win. You keep the win that WIND into the sales. And that is what it will take to sustain. Yes, I saw numbers just this morning. that on the generic polling, Democrats are up by 14 points. I've never seen it that high before.

That was the PBS NPR Marist poll. Yes, congratulations for being what I feel to be accurate. But the fact of the matter is, how do you maintain that? If you go up, it can go down. In fact, there's old saying, what goes up must come down. So it's going to come down. So the question is, whether or not we are going to prepare ourselves to keep the wind in our sales. We'll just have to wait and see. Congressman Jim

Clyburn, the book is the first eight, a personal history of the pioneering black congressman who shaped a nation. Thanks for coming in. Always good to see you. Well, thank you very much for having me. hikers who set out to complete the Appalachian Trail reaches that goal. A through hike, as it's known, means traversing nearly 2,200 miles across 14 states in a single 12-month period. It's a monumental feat of physical and emotional endurance, but it's not just a journey for the young. As a retired school teacher from Michigan explains, my name is Betty Kellenberger. I've just completed a through hike of the Appalachian Trail, and in doing so, because I'm 80, I set a record. I'm

the oldest female to have completed the through hike. I read about it, my little weekly reader in elementary school, and I just thought that would be wonderful. Had that thought and kind of buried it, lived with it, but buried it. I had lived through COVID, and somewhere along the line, the idea of doing the Appalachian Trail re-entered my vision. And initially I thought, oh, yeah, right. And then I thought, well, how long do you think you have? Did I think I had another 10 years to think about it? How long? And so I just got busy and started training and got out there. Early on, in Georgia, I tripped on a rock, face planted, ended up with two black eyes and a bloody nose. And one of my first thoughts was, I didn't quit.

At least I didn't quit. So I got up and I continued hiking. And on that one, that was in 22, I was able to get from Georgia to Harper's Ferry, which is considered halfway. And then I had picked up a partner, a trail partner, and we flew to Maine. Then we were going to hike south. He fell coming down off of Katadn, hurt himself. I went on then by myself, which probably wasn't the brightest thing I've ever done, but I had Lyme, I had gotten myself severely dehydrated, I had a concussion, and I met a couple of hikers who

pointed that out to me. They realized I was in trouble, and we got me into town, the town got me into the hospital, and the doctor said, no, you need to get off. So then I went out last year, started at Harper's Ferry and headed south, and that particular time I ran into a little lady named Helene, the hurricane that just destroyed the South, and they didn't want us right there in the midst of everything in making the mess worse, and then offered us a deal. They said, if you get off now, when you come back in 25, your first step on the trail will be your step one, and you can bring with it your accumulated mile. So I did. I came back this spring and finished up. Once I got closed, people kept saying, how old are you? This might be a record. And I thought, ah, I don't think so.

But then pretty soon it came back, yeah, it was, it was going to establish a record. If I could live through Maine and get to Katahdin, then it was just a whole new level of excitement. I think we were made for movement. We were made to think. We were made as spiritual beings. It doesn't mean they have to go out and hike the Appalachian Trail, but they have to move. Life is a journey, and we travel a lot of journeys. And what we want to do as we're traveling is not focus on the end, but focus on the journey itself.

because once it ends, it's over. And the only thing you have are your memories. Make use of the time that you've been given. Man, I want to be more like Betty. Well, be sure to tune in to Washington Week with the Atlantic later tonight right here on PBS. Jeffrey Goldberg and his panel discuss how and why President Trump lashed out in new ways this week.

And watch PBS News weekend tomorrow for a look at rising tensions on the Israel-Lebanon border, even as the ceasefire with Hezbollah nears the one-year mark. And that is the NewsHour for tonight. I'm Omna Nawaz. On behalf of the entire NewsHour team, thank you for joining us and have a great weekend.