PBS News Hour - Full Show - October 12, 2026 - PBS News Hour full episode

Episode Date: October 13, 2026

Monday on the News Hour, federal agents search the home of Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar, raising questions ahead of the midterms. Ukraine disputes President Trump's claim of an energy ceasefire, as pressure mounts to reverse a diesel deal with Russia. Plus, while the economy remains the top issue for most of the country, Arizona voters focus on access to water in their drought-stricken state. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

Good evening. I'm Jeff Bennett. I'm the Navazz away. On the news hour tonight, federal agents searched the home of Democratic congresswoman Ilhan Omar, raising questions about the investigation and its timing ahead of the midterm elections. Ukraine disputes President Trump's claim of an energy ceasefire as pressure mounts to reverse a diesel deal with Russia. And while the economy remains the top election issue for most of the country, Arizona voters focus on access to water in their drought-stricken state. It's about making sure that there's resources, not just for us, but for the generations that follow. Welcome to the News Hour. Federal agents searched the Washington, D.C. home of Minnesota Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar early this morning. The reason for the search has not been made public. Agents with Homeland Security investigations, the investigative arm of ICE, were seen carrying boxes from the home into an unmarked car. Omar accused the Trump administration of political intimidation, writing on Solic. social media, quote, make no mistake, this is an attempt to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement. For more, we're joined now by Devlin Barrett, Justice Department

Reporter for the New York Times and author of the book, The Department of Revenge, how Trump took control of American justice. Devlin, always great to have you with us. So the DOJ says this search is part of an ongoing criminal investigation. What have you learned about what prompted it and what investigators are looking for? So, Jeff, the Trump administration has been signaling just such a move for months now. If you go back to the spring, J.D. Vance, the vice president, said that Ilhan Omar, quote, definitely committed immigration fraud. And, you know, DHS officials have since said they're investigating. So this move isn't much of a surprise, but I think it does speak to the way that law enforcement actions keep happening at the impetus.

and prodding of the White House. And what's at issue here, according to our sources, is all the paperwork in the Congresswoman's family that led them to becoming U.S. citizens. That's paperwork that her father filled out, paperwork that was done later, and what they're investigating is false statements on immigration documents, potentially,

and various types of fraud and conspiracy. A federal judge had to approve this search warrant, So what does that suggest about the evidence investigators presented? Would it have been that those sort of documents that you're talking about? Right. So they have to show probable cause to believe that evidence of this crime or possible crimes existed at her house. And probable cause is not the same thing as, you know, the amount of evidence it takes a jury to convict. We are told by sources that prosecutors first applied for this search warrant more than a week ago.

And that led to a back and forth with a federal judge over whether they had shown enough of a legal argument for why they needed to do this and whether they had considered the issues related to the constitutional protections that are specific to a lawmaker. And of course, we're talking about federal agents searching the home of a sitting member of Congress. How extraordinary is that? What safeguards are supposed to govern an investigation the sensitive? Well, the federal government does investigate lawmakers all the time. That's not particularly unusual. But so unusual here is that they're doing it 22 days before an election because the Justice Department has, for many years, followed something called a 60-day rule, which is basically meant to go quiet, make the Justice Department go quiet about things exactly like searches of lawmakers, homes, and businesses, because they don't want to be seen as trying to influence the election. Here, what you see is a very publicly observable, overt, active investigation that past administrations would have done everything they could to try to avoid doing just before an election. What would legal experts look for to distinguish a legitimate criminal investigation from one driven by political motivations?

Well, it's things like what is the basis of the evidence that leads you to probable cause? Obviously, a judge has determined that there is some probable cause here. But at the same time, we also know that there was the judge didn't immediately accept that application, that there was some back and forth before they got to this point. I think one of the ways in which the Trump administration sort of creates its own headaches and its own problems when it comes to criminal investigations is, remember how this process began. It began with the vice president of the United States publicly declaring, her to be guilty. And there's obviously a long history of the president himself, Donald Trump,

accusing Ilhan Omar of various things. So the challenge that will, that the government will have to overcome if it perceived to try to charge her is overcoming questions or skepticism about what was the motivation behind this investigation. And when you say, if the government proceeds, what would come next in this investigation? Well, it's, If they decide they have enough evidence that they can get an indictment, then they would present their evidence to a grand jury. What's going to happen now is now that there's been a search, and we've seen agents taking away boxes of evidence, they're going to have to sort through everything they've taken. And there may be some legal fights to come over what of that evidence that is seized is properly part of the investigation.

And so we don't know if there's going to be a legal fight over that. I wouldn't be surprised if there is. But the next prosecutorial step, assuming that they know what evidence they have and they believe it would survive a vote in a grand jury, would be to present the evidence to a grand jury. Devin Barrett of The New York Times and the author of the book, The Department of Revenge, How Trump Took Control of American Justice. Devlin, always a pleasure to speak with you. Thanks. Thanks, Jeff.

And we start the day's other headlines in Saudi Arabia. Officials extended the closure of Riyadh's airport after Houthi strikes over the weekend killed at least 13 people and injured hundreds more. Security camera footage shows the moment that missiles and drones struck King Khalid International Airport. The Iran-backed Houthi rebels have repeatedly targeted the facility during the past week. Saudi officials are reportedly investigating how their defense systems failed to stop the strikes. Meantime in Yemen. Saudi-backed forces released video today claiming to show fighting with Houthi troops to the east of the capital, Sanah. The latest uptick in violence comes as the Saudis are seeking more U.S. involvement in the ongoing conflict.

In Florida, more than 100,000 people remained without power today as the region cleans up from Hurricane Isayas. These apartment units at the end of the Florida panhandle were laid bare after the store. ripped the roof off. Residents described its sheer force when it made landfall on Friday as a Category 2 storm. It sounded like a freight train. It was so loud. I can't even, the sound is almost undescribable.

Local officials say the storm is to blame for four fatalities. It weakened as it moved north, but still brought heavy rains to the central Appalachians and Mid-Atlantic. Meantime on the other side of the country, powerful waves crashed into high homes along the boardwalks of Southern California. As tropical storm Rachel swept through this weekend,

it's since been downgraded, but officials warn that possible flooding and heavy rains remain a threat. In Washington, D.C., a federal judge says that she is furious with Justice Department lawyers after hundreds of trees were removed from a local golf course this past weekend. The judge had ordered that any such work at East Potomac Golf Links received prior approval. At a hearing today, a DOJ lawyer said the government had done its best to gather details on the removal, to which the judge responded, quote, you did not do your best, you did your absolute worst. President Trump has said he wants to turn the century-old public course

into a championship caliber facility, which local preservationists are fighting to block. In Erie, Pennsylvania, authorities released the names of the adult victims and the suspected gunmen, and what the police chief there described as the worst scene he's ever experienced. Officials believe 45-year-old Matthew Stone Sr. shot and killed eight people, including his wife, children, and young grandchildren before killing himself. Members of the community held a memorial yesterday outside the home where it happened.

Julius Wyndham's partner, who was pregnant and his one-year-old daughter were among those killed. He says the suspect never seemed distressed and expressed shock at what happened. Words can't even explain what I'm going through right now. But I've got to be strong for my community. Police say their investigation is ongoing. In France, a fire destroyed the oldest covered food market in Paris today. The fire tore through Paris's historic market, Marché desain-Saint-Fran Rouge, before dawn this morning.

The site dates back to the early 1600s and has become a popular destination for tourists. offering traditional French cuisine alongside international fare. Officials are investigating the cause of the fire. No injuries have been reported. Breaking Bad Actor and Disability Rights activists R.J. Middy has died at the age of 34. He was best known for playing the son of Brian Cranston's lead character in the iconic TV drama.

Middy was diagnosed with cerebral palsy as a child and later became an advocate for disability representation in Hollywood. No cause of death was immediately available. Two American economists have won the Nobel Memorial Prize in economics for research that has helped governments better respond to economic crises. Robert E. Hall of Stanford University and Michael Woodford of Columbia University were honored for work that the Nobel Committee says has made it possible to manage major economic crises far more effectively. Their research examines how decisions made by businesses and households shape the broader economy and how policymakers can respond when trouble strikes. Woodford, who was 70, called the award a tremendous honor and a surprise.

The economics prize is the last of this year's Nobel Awards to be announced. Wall Street was open this Columbus Day, also observed as Indigenous People's Day. Stocks ended mixed, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average adding nearly 200 points. The NASDAQ lost ground, giving back nearly half a percent. The SMP 500 ended just a touch lower. Still to come on the news hour, Tamara Keith and Amy Walter break down the latest political headlines. Author Michael Lewis discusses his new book on government workers who attempted to resist Elon Musk's doge cuts, and the founding director of the Smithsonian's Latino Museum discusses finding a permanent home on the National Mall.

This is the PBS News Hour from the David M. Rubenstein studio at WETA in Washington, headquarters of PBS News. Russian missile and drone strikes on Ukraine continue tonight, a day after President Trump declared a ceasefire on attacks against NSAe. infrastructure, an agreement neither country has confirmed. Mr. Trump is blaming Ukraine for rising energy prices rather than the war in Iran and has moved to East sanctions on Russian diesel imports. Our William Brigham brings us up to date. Despite statements from Washington, in Ukraine today, a supposed ceasefire seemed as far away as ever.

Burnt out buildings and shard memories are familiar sights to people here. Yannukusk's baby granddaughter has known nothing but war her entire life. We ran out in whatever we were wearing. They attacked civilians, not soldiers. There were no vehicles here at all. There was nothing. And they attacked civilians. So what sort of ceasefire can there be?

That ceasefire was announced not by Vladimir Putin or Volodemir Zelensky, but by President Trump. He wrote on his social media platform, there is now an energy ceasefire, agreed. to by the two countries where they pledge not to attack each other's energy infrastructure. The president reiterated that point a short time ago outside the White House. Well, they agreed. You know why? Because I said you agree. That's why. And he again blamed Zelensky for the continued fighting, even though the Ukrainian president has said he's prepared to meet Putin at the negotiating table.

How are you going to make Putin abide by the sea fire? I think what's happening is he wants to make a deal, and we have to get Zelensky to want to make a deal. For his part, Zelensky said he hadn't heard about the ceasefire before Trump's post, but is ready to comply if Russia reciprocates. It's a pity because they always, I mean, they will find any kind of reasons not to stop this war. If Russia will not attack our energy, we will not attack their energy. But just hours after Trump's declaration, Russian drones attack. exploded in Harkiv, including at an energy facility on the outskirts of the city. More than a dozen people were injured.

Today, the Kremlin offered a different proposal. If Ukraine holds elections to replace Zelensky, they'd hold their fire on voting day. Separately, on Friday, President Trump announced a controversial agreement to lift America's wartime sanctions on Russian diesel fuel in an effort to lower U.S. domestic prices. And then this weekend, President Trump's negotiators, Steve Whitkoff and Jared Kushner, reportedly told Ukrainian officials to stop targeting Russian gas facilities and threaten to cut off intelligence sharing and weapons sales if they didn't. In response, European leaders doubled down on their defense of Ukraine and the need

for a united front against Russia. There is a clear understanding that now is not the time to east pressure on Moscow. and that's why today ministers adopted nearly 1,600 new sanctions listings targeting Russia's military-industrial complex. This is the single largest expansion of our sanctions list since Russia's war started. Even as President Trump's diesel deal alarmed European allies, America's top general in NATO, Supreme Allied Commander Alexis Grinkevich says this war will not undo the transatlantic alliance. No one should question the commitment of the United States to this alliance.

I mean, I'm right here. I'm an American officer that was sent here by President Trump. So for more on the Ukraine-Russia war and on President Trump's recent moves, we return again to Andrew Weiss. He's the former State Department official in the George H.W. Bush and Clinton administrations, and he's now vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for international peace. Andrew, always good to have you back on the program.

President Trump surprised a lot of people on Friday with this move where, contrary to American sanctions on Russia, he announced unilaterally that he will allow Russia to sell millions of gallons of diesel onto the world market. What do you make of that move? President Trump seems to thrive on throwing out surprises, and clearly he is scrambling with the U.S. midterm election just two weeks out, and American voters, focused on affordability and disurgeon diesel prices. So the idea, though, that Russia is going to swoop in and make a meaningful impact on diesel prices is a fantasy. And if you start to pick

at the numbers that President Trump announced on Friday, this is a drop in the bucket. And let's just be very specific about that. At first month, Donald Trump is telling us the Russians will deliver about 2.2 million barrels of diesel to the United States. That's less than 75% of a single day of U.S. transport demand for diesel fuel. It's peanuts. So Ukraine, I'd like to ask you about the war effort here, Ukraine argues that this is a betrayal and that this is money that is simply going to go right back into Russian coffers and fund their war effort. Is that a fair accusation? The Ukrainians were totally blindsided. They sent their senior negotiating team to Miami to meet with the two main people at the White

House, Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, and Steve Whitkoff, the president's longtime friend and golfing partner. And they were in meetings with them when suddenly they heard about a phone call between Trump and Putin and the announcement of this purchase of Russian barrels of diesel. This is, if you peel back what's going on, there's a series of important diplomatic encounters that are going to be unfolding over the course of the next three months, culminating in a meeting that Donald Trump is hosting at his golf club in Miami of G20 leaders in December. And Donald Trump, who thrives on sort of bully tactics, keeping people off balance, really wants a peace agreement to be hammered out by December. And given that

Donald Trump sees that there's no real point in his mind in pressuring Vladimir Putin, he's going to pressure Vladimir Zelensky, and that's where he thinks he has the greatest leverage. It's really unfortunate, given that the Ukrainians are the victims in this unprovoked war of aggression. What do you make of that strategy? Do you think that the president doesn't have a lever to press Putin and does to press Zelensky? So the U.S. has more leverage over the Ukrainians, simply by virtue of the fact that the United States is a crucial supplier of special types of weapons that Ukraine can't get anywhere else,

that Europe is currently paying for, and then perhaps even more importantly, due to the kinds of intelligence support and targeting support that the United States provides to Ukraine on a daily basis. And now you have the administration for the second time, the first time was after that horrible meeting in the Oval Office in February of 2025. You have the administration threatening to cut off both of those things to the Ukrainians. It's a way to sort of shock the Ukrainians. Donald Trump, I think, hopes into making some kind of sweeping concessions. The problem, of course, is that Vladimir Putin isn't interested in a deal on reasonable terms. His goal here is to destroy Ukraine's very survival in existence as an independent country. And the idea that the

U.S. President is now doing things that will give Vladimir Putin extra-conser, confidence that he can possibly wait out the West, that he can sort of split apart the U.S. from our European allies and destroy the U.S.-Ukraine partnership that's been built up over the past nearly five years of war is, again, very unfortunate, and it's bad strategy to boot. I mean, you've also seen the president echoing what the Russians have been saying, the president this weekend saying that basically calling for Zelensky to be kicked out of office or voted out of office, something that the Russians have also asked for. Given all of these developments, this seeming shift in American policy,

how do you see this playing out? It's a really dynamic moment in what has been a roller coaster. And I think for a lot of us who've been watching the war, we've been sort of, I think, pleasantly surprised by the way the administration's policy had unfolded, particularly the persistence of the intelligence support and the continued provision of advanced U.S. weapons to Ukraine. So a lot of us have been breathing a very audible sigh of relief. That's been now thrown into question after the developments on Friday and over the weekend.

The hope, of course, is this will be another tempest in a teapot and the European partners of Ukraine. Key U.S. allies such as France, Germany, and the U.K., will somehow manage to kind of calm things down and bring the administration back into some kind of a reasonable line. with both Ukraine and Europe. The risk, of course, is that Donald Trump, who has had his popularity hit badly by the war in Iran and the clear inability to end the war in Iran, is now looking elsewhere in the hope that he can distract the American people and put some points on the board. That, again, is a really, I think, misplaced hope. There is no quick solution to the war in Ukraine. The only hope here is for the United States, the Europeans and the United States. The Europeans and

Ukrainians to persuade Vladimir Putin that the war is futile and that he is not going to get what he wants and that the longer this war drags on, the more the Russians are going to bleed out. And so far, there's some signs that that strategy is persuasive. Just in the past month alone, NATO estimates that Ukraine killed upwards of 50,000 Russian soldiers in one month alone. Those are staggering losses. Andrew Weiss of the Carnegie Endowment, always good to hear from you. Thank you. Thank you. For many Arizona voters, the top concern heading into the midterms isn't inflation, immigration, or education.

It's water. With the state gripped by prolonged drought, candidates are facing growing questions about how to secure the state's water future. Our Stephanie Syre reports now for our ongoing climate series, tipping point. Canals like this one, which winds through the heart of Phoenix, carry water to this desert metropolis. But the water is becoming scarcer. It's obviously a really big concern. In fact, our family is considering moving for variety factors, but sustainability overall, and water is obviously a huge factor.

Matt Beedler, a father who works in IT sales here, is not the only Arizona in starting to fear the worst. For the first time ever, worries about water are the top concern for this swing states voters, even overtaking immigration and affordability, according to a recent survey from the Center for the Future of Arizona. Water's certainly been in the political conversation in the past, but this is very new. You know, I don't think I've seen candidates running for governor talking about water issues in the past.

At least not to this degree. The shift follows deep federal cuts this summer to Colorado Riverwater allocated to Arizona's cities. And those before me didn't protect our water, so I tackled the problem. Now water issues are dominating the airwaves and the political debate for governor. Everybody's concerned about water. Reaching into the competitive race for the open U.S. House seat in Arizona's first district, Democrat Amish Shah. This is the state of Arizona. We live in a desert and we're running out of water.

So obviously, our voters are really scared and upset about this. we have a precious resource that we absolutely need to conserve. Shaw says the state should conserve water, fight for fair allocation, and stop using water for data centers. His Republican opponent, Jay Feeley, says the economy and affordability are still the district's top issue, but water is a big concern too. People are concerned about that, and it does impact so many different areas when we're talking about data centers. We're talking about building more homes to bring down the cost. We're talking about bringing industry here.

You know, those are all impacted. As Arizona voter Victoria Richardson plays with her young son in the park, she has data centers and his future on her mind. I'm more concerned with the amount of data centers that are going in in Arizona because of the amount of resources that they're taking and the amount of water that they're going through, especially like in a desert climate. It's about making sure that there's resources not just for us but for the generations that follow. According to one analysis, data centers use a small fraction of water in Arizona, with

agriculture consuming 75 percent of the state's water. Sarah Porter, who directs the Kyle Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University, says the state has invested heavily to avoid a water crisis, but headlines have scared many residents. People imagine, you know, the worst case that they imagine is waking up and turning on the tap and no water running from the tap. And that simply isn't in the cards. That doesn't mean there won't be changes coming for residents in the state, whether that's restrictions on water use or higher rates due to the cost of expensive water infrastructure. Phoenix is building an advanced water purification plant meant the city says to supplement the Colorado River supply, not replace it. Nazario Prieto is the same.

city's assistant water services director. How much does it cost to not have enough water, right? What is the cost of that? And then when we start looking at the shortages on the Colorado, the water, any water source is going to get more and more expensive. The Center for the Future of Arizona's Sybil Francis says every community faces different degrees of water shortage, which candidates would be wise to address. It's not like there's one answer to this, but I think every politician should be communicating with their communities about what they are doing, how they see the issue and what they're doing. For voter Matt Beidler, it comes down to the long-term economics.

If you want to live here, if you want your home to still have valuation, there needs to be a sustainability plan to, you know, proactively get in front of the changing climate here. With early voting already underway, Arizona voters are asking candidates for exactly that. A plan. For the PBS News Hour, I'm Stephanie Sy in Phoenix. President Trump is back on the campaign trail tonight in Ohio with the midterm elections closing in.

Joining us now to break it down. And more is our politics Monday duo, Amy Walter of the Cook Political Report with Amy Walter and Tamara Keith of NPR. It's always great to see you both. So the president's going to be in Ohio tonight and he appears increasingly concerned about rising gas and diesel prices, but rather than acknowledge the impact of the war in Iran, he's. blaming the war in Ukraine. Tam, what do you make of this effort to shift blame for an economic problem that's becoming harder to ignore? And he's also trying to solve it by importing diesel from Russia, which seems to be pretty clearly prohibited by laws, including one he just signed. He's getting

a lot of bipartisan pushback from Congress on that. The reality is that the American people blame the president and his policies for high prices, and that is a problem for the president and his party in this midterm year. And Amy, how do you see Republicans calibrating, if at all? Well, listen, they understand that this is a cost of living election. And so what you'll hear them talking about in their campaign ads is about ways in which they're trying to bring costs down. Maybe they'll be taking on big pharma or insurance.

but they'll talk about affordability. A couple of them, of course, have come out and said the war needs to end. We've seen just a handful of incumbents saying that. The thing about the president, too, and he's been going after other people, too, and blaming or going after them, either blaming them for the high costs or just choosing to put his anger and deflecting it there. And I think what we have is a president who is very good when he is up against one foil. So when he was running against Hillary Clinton, when he was running against Joe Biden, and he could make the election about them, it really helped his numbers, actually, when he was able to shift it over there. He doesn't have that foil this time around. And you can see he is really struggling to figure out how do I make it about something other than me. Meanwhile, voters are saying, we'd like you to spend more time talking about the issues that matter to us, not just the issues that maybe.

are grabbing your attention at this moment. And let's shift our focus to South Carolina, because this is a Senate race that Republicans would and could normally take for granted. It's become surprisingly competitive. And the war in Iran has emerged as a point of contention with the Republican in that race, Darlene Graham, on the defensive. Take a look at last night's debate. Several days after one of those votes, she had the audacity to walk out onto this stage

and admit that national security isn't really her thing. South Carolina, if your surgeon said that appendectomies aren't really his thing, would you still hand him a scalpel? No, so why would we hand Darlene Graham a full term in the U.S. Senate? At least I'm honest. If I don't know something, I'm glad to say it, and I'll say it again tonight, but you have, you are deceiving the people of South Carolina. You have flip-flopped on everything. Republicans spending time and money in South Carolina to defend a seat. That's right. Look, this is one of those races that has come up pretty late.

First, the Democrat that started the conversation here, Dr. Annie Andrews, got kind of a head start in this race because when she was running against the late Lindsey Graham, he is a very polarizing figure, and she was able to raise a lot of money. So she had a lot of money in the bank ready to go, she thought, in a campaign against Lindsay Graham. Now that it's Darlene Graham, his sister, she has been able to build up her own name ID and message, while the Graham campaign was sort of on their back feet, right? Not a lot of people know anything about Darlene Graham. So this has taken a race that, you're right.

In any other year, a deep red state like this shouldn't be a problem for Republicans. But because a few people know much about Darling Graham, Andrews has had a head start with her fundraising, and she's been able to communicate. Republicans now have to come in and start spending here. They cannot take any seat for granted, even a seat as deep red as this. And, Tam, on that point, this close to the midterms, the travel schedule says a lot. So President Trump, he's in Ohio, he's going to head to Alaska, Montana, Arizona, Georgia, and then he heads back to Ohio again.

What does that tell you about the GOP's political vulnerabilities? Well, it tells me that they are defending a lot of territory that they would rather not be defending. You also have to keep in mind that they are dropping hundreds of millions of dollars in Texas to try to keep Texas red. And the fact that they have to do that is remarkable. The fact that the president is then having to go to Alaska and Montana, these are not states where Republicans should have to be. defending territory, and yet they are. This isn't just a case of like, oh, an unpopular Republican president can only go to red states, so he's going to red states to hold rallies. In fact, he's going to red states where they are also spending money on the air to try to maintain the Republican

control of the Senate. Yeah. And you've got some reporting about those taxpayer-funded Trump ads that were on there not too long ago? Like literally, really not too long ago. You know, the president had posted on October 5th that the U.S. government would no longer be paying for those ads, that instead, MAGA, Inc., his super PAC, would pay for them. These ads are very pro-Trump. They really look like campaign ads. In fact, one is literally a copy of a campaign ad that the campaign had put together during the 2024 cycle. Okay, so he announces on October 5th, taxpayers won't be paying for these anymore. Well, in the intervening week, $10 million of taxpayer funds went to put these ads on the

air. So the announcement was not immediate, apparently, and only after a federal judge intervened and put an order in place, a temporary order, the ads finally came off the air, a White House official confirming that the ads will stop airing finally, but that they missed the judge's deadline by a little bit. And Amy, Tam mentioned a minute ago the Texas Senate race. You've got James Tala Rico. He's back on the campaign trail. After falling ill, he was not seen publicly for a couple of weeks.

There's all sorts of conspiracy theories about where he was. How does he push back against what is clear misinformation, disinformation, without amplifying it? Yeah. Well, it seems to me that in this day and age, getting out there as quickly as possible, trying to tell people as much as you can, so it doesn't look as if you're hiding something. But people are going to believe what they want to believe as well. I think the thing about the Texas Senate race,

again, it is quite remarkable that we're still, that we're talking about this state and how much money's been spent, and that the Democrat now has been on the offense for pretty much this entire campaign. This is the first opportunity that Republicans have had to kind of put him back a little bit, based on something that was just a rumor that started.

But fundamentally, you know, and you think about where the race for control of Senate goes through, going back to Tam's point, the fact that it really is going through Texas, Alaska, Ohio, and Iowa, all states Trump won by double digits. That is the story of the 2026 midterms right there. And if those states are in play statewide at the Senate level, that means that various House races underneath those further down the ballot are also in play. Amy Walter, Tamara Keith, always a pleasure. Thank you both. You're welcome.

New reports out today show Elon Musk has donated more than a quarter billion dollars to support Republicans in the midterm elections since July. And that brings his total political contributions this election cycle to more than $365 million, making him by far the largest known donor and one of the biggest political contributors in modern U.S. history. Musk has kept a lower profile this election cycle, but questions about his influence on the federal government remain. And that influence is the focus of a new book by Michael Lewis,

the best-selling author of Moneyball and The Big Short. Lisa Desjardin spoke with him about Musk's time leading Doge and the federal workers who found themselves in its crosshairs. In the early months of 2025, Elon Musk oversaw Doge's shock and awe campaign to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget. Those promised savings never materialized, and Musk left the government after four months.

But the chaos and cuts, including tens of thousands of layoffs, many later deemed illegal, left a lasting impact on the civil service. A new book by Michael Lewis untangles some of what happened with new details from inside the institutions Musk assailed. It's called blockers, rebels in the deep state. after the name Musk used to describe federal workers unwilling to follow his orders. And Michael Lewis joins us now.

Thank you so much. Thanks for having me, Lisa. You start with the story of Colin O'Brien. He was the Chief of Security at the Independent Institute of Peace who single-handedly tried to keep out Doge from taking over their building. He ultimately failed, but at one point, dramatically was able to lock in a group of Doge employees and security officers to prevent them from getting into the building. Yes, hermetically sealed them within his own building.

Why did you start at that point? Because I think that the very beginning of this story, it's still going on. Just because Doge is gone doesn't mean this stuff like this is still not going on. But the precondition for what happened in the federal government, this kind of seizure of power, starts with a pretty crude seizure of all the guns. Like, you don't think of it because it wasn't a shooting war,

but it was this independent entity, the Institute of Peace, it has congressional funding, but it's chartered to be at arm's length from the president, for sure, and that Doge was coming in to show that they could take that too. And to do that, they needed not only the FBI, who they eventually co-opt, but the private security company that the Institute of Peace hires, and the way they get them is they say,

if your guns, your guns don't come on our side, we're going to remove your State Department contracts. Your much larger contracts. You're much larger contracts. They blackmail them into that. So if you look at the very beginning of this phenomenon, they seize power very crudely, and then they lop off the heads of anybody who's like an independent referee, the inspectors general, anybody who might identify, actually identify,

waste, fraud, abuse, corruption. And so they create the environment in which they can do whatever they want to do. So that's why I started with that. When I read the book, it felt like you were reaching a few epiphanies, and there's one of them that I'd like you to read. Oh, sure. So, yeah, you know, look, I think the civil service is like this great, undiscovered gold mine of material of people.

It's incredibly important. And this is, I think, I'm setting up the civil service. American civil servants, as a group, have learned that any attention they receive tends to be negative attention. And in any case, the sort of person who goes to work for the government isn't usually looking to be the life of the party. The federal bureaucracy wasn't exactly out of touch with the society it served, but its society was out of touch with it.

What do you mean by that? I mean, I think... I mean, I think... I mean, I think what I've written about these people demonstrates the point. They're unbelievable characters doing unbelievably important things. Like, I drink this without worrying about it because someone in the government has done something. And you eat the food because someone in the government has done something. The government is filled with these experts who could make far more in the private sector,

who obsessed with some interesting thing the private sector won't deal with. And their stories don't get told. I feel like every politician before they get up to give a speech or do a town hall should have to identify one civil servant whose work they admire and explain why they're important. So we all get a little bit of an education. One of those civil servants that you talk about is Kathleen Walters. She was the IRS privacy chief essentially in charge of protecting their data when Doge came to take the data. Yes.

She ultimately was unsuccessful, though she was able to sort of fend them off for a little while. She was locking herself in conference rooms with the lights off so they couldn't find her because they were running around looking to fire her. It was an actual hide-and-seek inside the IRS. This is the human being who stands between your tax return and a political operation that would weaponize it, that would use it against you. Why was Doge trying to get that data? How did they use it? It was DHS. Now, it was probably Doge and DHS.

It was something called the ICE Innovation Lab. But inside the IRS, there is a database of 7 million tax returns of... undocumented workers. We have told the undocumented community for 30 years that if you file your taxes, you pay taxes, you're more likely to gain a path to citizenship. You're showing that you're willing to participate in the society, contribute to the society.

And we've told that community that the tax returns are as sacred as citizens' tax. There's no information will be used against you. What Doge in the DHS figured out, ICE figured out, was the tax returns contained the most recent home address of 7 million people, and they wanted to go find the people in their homes. What we do know, because I found people who owned and ran apartment buildings for low-income Latinos through the South and Southwest, that suddenly, in April of last year, ICE patrol people,

the ICE Army was showing up at midnight with the addresses and knew exactly where people were. And the people who run the apartment buildings had instituted programs in response, like, We'll move you every six months, so your address is always changing. Because we don't know how, but somehow they are, the federal government has found it. Yes. When I bumped into these people, they said, wait, wait, you just explained to us, like, how they know where they live. Elon Musk is actually back in government. He's been appointed to work with the Pentagon on an initiative dealing with the future of warfare. You were able to speak to insiders around Doge. What does that tell you about the culture there and what might be ahead from Elon Musk? Doge is mysterious because Elon Musk isn't a fool, but he looks like he was on a fool's errand.

He said he was going to cut $2 trillion out of the deficit. He only attacked a part of the government that was about 20% of the budget. He was never going to cut $2 trillion. It was never going to work. It was doomed to fail if actually he was trying to do what he said he was trying to do. If, on the other hand, what he was trying to do was so chaos and confusion and create a lot of smoke and explosions so that the huge power grab that then happened could happen without people really paying as much attention

because so much is going on at once. Well, then it made a lot of sense. Now, what's odd about this is if you talk to Elon Musk's friends, they say Elon never lies. He always at least believes what he's saying. But it just seems impossible he could believe what he was saying about Doge. The lies are so preposterous.

So what worries me about him anywhere near the federal government now is that just don't trust him. I mean, like, I don't know what he's going to do. And I know he's going to, whatever he's going to say, I know it's not reliable. He may think it's true, but, like, it's the words of a fabulous. So, I mean, maybe it's useful. Maybe he can help. But I'd be very wary.

Michael Lewis, the book is Blockers. Thank you so much for talking about us. Thanks for having me. For six years, the National Museum of the American Latino has existed without a building of its own. And that is about to change. In August, the Smithsonian's Board of... of Regents voted to give the museum a permanent home in the Arts and Industries building. That's a 145-year-old landmark on the National Mall.

The choice is practical as well as symbolic. Because the Smithsonian already owns the building, it can move ahead without seeking congressional approval for a new site, sidestepping a potential political fight as President Trump has sharply criticized the Smithsonian and proposed cutting funding for the museum. Jorge Zamaneo is the museum's founding director, and he joins us now. Thank you for having me. So why does this museum matter and why is now the moment for it? Well, this museum is so important.

This is a project that's been over three decades in the making. People have been advocating for this museum, bipartisan support. They know that there was a lack of representation for Latinos in Smithsonian museums and in museums across the nation. So they made it their passion to make sure this would happen. In December 2020, the museum was enacted. The legislation was passed to make sure that we have been doing. the understanding of Latino culture and the impact Latinos I've had in the United States.

So this is a 30-year-long effort. Why has it taken so long? Most museums do take a while to get passed in legislation. If you look back at the National Museum of African-American history and culture, that was 100 years in the making. So I imagine, you know, 30 years is not too bad, right? But it's important, you know, to make sure that everybody's behind us. Preserving those stories, preserving that legacy, and how do we get that done? So I feel fortunate to have joined this project about four and a half years ago to continue that journey. The initial vision, as I understand it, was to create a new museum from the ground up. You're now taking over one of the Smithsonian's oldest buildings.

What do you gain from that approach and what do you give up? Well, when we first looked at the Arts and Industry building, it was one of the buildings that was in the legislation for us to study. And the amazing thing about it is that it's so symbolic. It's right at the heart of the mall. We call it the Gorson of the Mall, right? That's not lost in us, that's symbolism. So when I revisited this building last year with the board,

And we said, you know, now that we've had some time to think about our story, our narrative, how we're going to develop this museum, this would really work. This building is, we could expand this building. We could expand the footprint. We could double the square footage. And it's a perfect opportunity to be at the heart of the mall and say the first National Museum opened in 1881 is also going to be the latest museum to open for the Smithsonian. How do you build one museum that reflects the diversity of the diaspora? You've got geographic, cultural, generational, political differences and nuances. How do you capture all of that without flattening the differences?

That's a great question. Latinos are not a monolith. It's not a race. It's not about politics. So how do we do that? And it's really about the impact Latinos in the U.S. have had in this country on that American history narrative that we know goes back centuries. And how do we capture those stories?

And how are they connected? What are the shared experiences that we have that make us Latinos? It's not just a census. It's not a name that you see. You check off a box and you say, I'm Latino or I'm Hispanic. It's about a culture that we're building together. And that's what we want to represent. President Trump, as you all know, he has criticized the Smithsonian.

He has floated cutting off federal support. How much does that political pressure affect decisions you're making right now about what this museum will say and show? Well, we always go back to scholarship, and we're presenting facts, and we're presenting all the stories we can. When I interview with people in the field, when we go across, we go across, we always go across the country meeting Latino communities and meeting people for the first time.

We don't ask them what their religion is. We don't ask them what their political affiliation is. It's more about what is that impactful story that you can tell us. What are the objects we can collect to tell those stories? And that's what really matters. Is there an exhibit or an artifact that really excites you? Well, I'm excited about the latest exhibit we have

at our Molina Family Latino Gallery at American History. It's about salsa music. And the amazing thing about that, it's not just a music exhibit. talking about its Afro-Cuban roots in the Caribbean and how the music evolved into New York and to what's also music is today. It talks about immigration, it talks about resistance,

it talks about all these different topics, and that's what makes it exciting. But what I really do wanna see in this museum is an opportunity for the visitors to first come in, and whether you have Puerto Rican heritage or Cuban or Colombian or Mexican, you walk in and you see something that resonates with you. That first thing that tells you,

my story is not part of this larger narrative. What's the timeline for the museum opening at stores? The last museum took a little bit over 12 years to build, to raise them money for it to collect the objects. So we're hoping to be along those same parameters. You know, can we open in the next decade or so? We exist as a museum already. We have a gallery.

Now we have a building. And that's very symbolic. And it keeps that momentum going. We meet those milestones we need in order to achieve that opening date. We were speaking during Hispanic Heritage Month. What are you doing to market? And what do you want Americans to understand about Latino history in this country? The most important thing we're doing right now is.

now is part of our making history tour. We're reaching to communities across US. We visited over 26 different states, over 50 different cities, and rural communities to make sure we're engaging Latino communities. We just got back from Minneapolis. We were in Houston earlier this year. Next year, we were going back to LA and New York,

and also smaller towns throughout the year to make sure we connect with people and say, what is it you want to see in a museum? And we'll have a community day. We'll have a town hall meeting. And we're going to start collecting those objects you're going to see in the permanent exhibit. So that's the exciting part.

Jorge Zamaneo, great to speak with you. Thanks for being here. Thank you for having me. Military veterans bring valuable leadership skills and experience to the civilian workforce, but translating those skills into job opportunities can sometimes be a challenge. Tonight, Dwight Baudorf, a Marine Corps veteran,

wounded while serving in Iraq, shares his brief but spectacular take on why veterans deserve a fair shot at service. Veterans often get stereotyped. Either everybody's a hero or everybody has post-traumatic stress disorder. There are hiring managers and employers that make assumptions on both sides, and I think both do a disservice to the veteran. We want to be treated like everybody else.

All we're asking for is for a fair shot and for you to put some effort into learning what some of those military jobs and skill sets are. I was 19 when I deployed to Iraq. It was the summer of 2006. In October, my vehicle, the LAV, was hit by an improvised explosive device, also known as an IED. Two of my friends lost their lives. I came out with some serious head trauma and fractures,

and then spinal muscle and nerve damage, which ultimately led me to a medical retirement from the Marine Corps. I had envisioned 20 years in the Marine. Having that ripped from you in milliseconds is devastating. Integrating back into civilian life was difficult. When you're a company commander, for example, and you put that down on your job application on your resume,

most people are not going to know what that means. But you have led hundreds of people through really tough environments. You've been in charge of tens of millions of dollars. You've been directly responsible for life and death. for life and death, objectives, logistics, human resources, all of these things that theoretically should translate well into the civilian workforce, but a lot of civilian leaders don't understand that experience.

So I currently serve as a municipal manager in the Pittsburgh area. So we're the power company, we're the water company. Essentially, we're the CEO of the town being adaptable and figuring out a way to get it done. Those are skill sets that are really, really, really useful in almost any field that you go into in the civilian sector. There is no such thing as not my job in the military.

Every place needs leaders who are calm under fire, who can adapt, who will get the job done, even if the mission parameters change. There certainly should be a better avenue in connecting those service members and veterans to civilian jobs. My name is Dwight Botorf. This is my brief but spectacular take on translating military. military service into civilian life. And you can watch more brief but spectacular videos online at pbs.org

slash news hour slash brief. And that's the news hour for tonight. I'm Jeff Bennett for all of us here at the PBS NewsHour. Thanks for spending part of your evening with us.