PBS News Hour - Full Show - September 16, 2025 – PBS News Hour full episode

Episode Date: September 16, 2025

Tuesday on the News Hour, FBI Director Kash Patel defends his record on the investigation into Charlie Kirk’s murder and the firings of career officials. The Federal Reserve is set to meet with a newly confirmed Trump ally and a board member the president is trying to fire. Plus, former Sen. Joe Manchin on his new memoir and whether polarization has killed the political center. 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. And I'm Jeff Bennett. On the news hour tonight, FBI director Cash Patel defends his record from the investigation into Charlie Kirk's murder to the firings of career officials. The Federal Reserve meets with a newly confirmed Trump ally and a board member the president is trying to fire both voting on whether to lower interest rates. And former Senator Joe Manchin on his new memoir and whether polarization has killed the political center. What do you have is two major corporations, one's called the Republican corporation,

one's called the Democrat corporation. And big money is driving this. Welcome to the News Hour. Prosecutors in Utah have charged the man accused of shooting and killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk with aggravated murder, a crime punishable by death if convicted. The suspect was arraigned in court late this afternoon. Meanwhile, across the country on Capitol Hill, FBI director Cash Patel clashed with Democratic senators on his handling of the Charlie Kirk investigation and on his leadership

of the agency. Our White House correspondent, Liz Landers, starts off our coverage tonight. Tonight, the suspected killer of 31-year-old conservative activist, Charles, Charlie Kirk potentially faces the death penalty. I do not take this decision lightly. Local prosecutors charged 22-year-old Tyler Robinson with aggravated murder, a capital offense. Charlie Kirk was murdered while engaging in one of our most sacred and cherished American rights. The bedrock of our Democratic Republic.

The free exchange of ideas. Robinson was also charged with felony discharge of a firearm, punishable by. life in prison, as well as other crimes, including obstruction of justice and witness tampering. Law enforcement revealing new messages between the suspect and his roommate, both handwritten and over text, prosecutors reading them aloud. The roommate looked under the keyboard and found a note that stated, quote, I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kurt, and I'm going to take it. I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can't be negotiated out.

You affirm that the testimony you're about to give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So I'll help you guide. All this comes as FBI director Cash Patel today defended the investigation of Kirk's killing and his handling of the Bureau's Affairs in a fiery Senate hearing. It is my time to address your falsehoods. You can try all you want to not take responsibility for what you have said. Sir, you're making a mockery of this committee. Sir, you don't tell me my time is over. At particular issue was when Director Patel prematurely announced a suspect was in custody the night of Kirk's killing.

Patel posted less than two hours later that the person in custody had been released, and officials had to make clear that the gunmen remained at large. Mr. Patel was so anxious to take credit for finding Mr. Kirk's assassin that he violated one of the basics of effective law enforcement. at critical stages of an investigation, shut up and let the professionals do their job. I put that information out. And then when we interviewed him, I put out the results of that. And could I have been more careful in my verbiage and included an A subject instead of subject? Sure, in the heat of the moment.

Before departing for a U.K. state visit, President Trump said he has full faith in his FBI director. Cash, you know, take a look at what he did with respect to this horrible person. that he just captured. He did it in due days. Patel today also faced questions about recently firing senior officials who have since sued him, accusing him of illegal political retribution, part of a broader personnel purge of the president's perceived enemies in law enforcement. The only way people get terminated at the FBI is if they fail to meet the muster of the job and their duties, and that is where I will leave it. Those are allegations. And that is an ongoing litigation. So they'll have their day in court. So will we.

Patel has faced growing scrutiny over his leadership, taking criticism from skeptical Senate Democrats that he is the right person to help lower the national temperature in a time of heightened political violence. Let's be clear. Republicans are not Nazis and Democrats are not evil, as Mr. Patel has claimed. But not all Democrats leveled criticism on the director. Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar tried to connect by invoking recent deadly shootings in her state. the politically motivated assassination of State House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband and the shooting at a Minneapolis Catholic school that killed two young children. In a moment of empathy, Patel vowed to work with Congress on gun violence prevention. Minnesota has suffered untold tragedy in these last few months, and whatever creativity we can use to eliminate even just one shooting,

one horrific death. I am in favor of engaging with Congress fully to do. So don't give me this both sides. Other senators turned up the temperature and pointed blame for political violence, not on guns, but on ideology. The facts are plain and clear, and we have to speak truth in this moment, or there's no other side of the mountain. The vast majority of Americans are against political violence,

but there is a vocal, active minority that encourages and celebrates it, and that minority is overwhelmingly on the left. Senator Tillis. The last word in the room from retiring Republican Tom Tillis begging both political parties to reflect on their rhetoric. I'm just saying that there are people out here on our side of the aisle that still need to look in the mirror. Patel's hearing really covered a wide range of issues, but one theme that kept reemerging, violence in America. He's trying to reassure both Democrats and Republicans that his agency is prepared to handle those challenges as it continues to invest. investigate the Charlie Kirk murder. Meanwhile, Patel will likely face another round of tough questions

tomorrow up on Capitol Hill in the morning in the House Judiciary Committee. All right, Jeff. That's the debut report from the newest member of our News Hour family, White House correspondent Liz Landers. Liz, we're so glad you're here. Liz, it's great to have you on the team and not a moment too soon because there is no shortage of news to dig into. So welcome. I'm thrilled to be here and so excited to join the NewsHour team. Well, for more on Patel's hearing and his tenure. so far at the FBI. I spoke earlier today with Asha Rangappa. She's a former FBI agent, now a lecturer at Yale University. Asha Rangappa, welcome back to the News Hour. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for having me.

So let's just begin with your reaction to the charges that we learned about today, brought against the accused gunman and the killing of Charlie Kirk, and prosecutor's decision to seek the death penalty. Was all of this to be expected? Yes, I think so. And what is notable about the charges is that, they have tried to find as many ways to charge the most serious crimes possible. So, for example, they are charging aggravated murder because people other than Mr. Kirk were put in danger, there are charges relating to children witnessing this act. And there's also a targeting enhancement that's included on many of the counts alleging that the shooter targeted Mr. Kirk because of his political beliefs.

I want to turn now to that hearing featuring the FBI director, Cash Patel. We took questions before a Senate committee and just want to get your reaction to it. And in particular, how you think he handled some of those tougher lines of questioning from Democrats in particular? I think that it's a mixed bag, to be honest. I mean, many of his responses were evading some of the questions. Now, there is ongoing litigation right now where three senior former FBI officials have sued Director Patel and the Department of Justice for unlawful termination. So on many of those questions, he kind of hid behind the shield that he couldn't answer those

questions with ongoing litigation. So I don't know that he was completely responsive. He was asked, of course, about the firings of those agents. And as you mentioned, they're suing him. and accusing him of political retribution. I'm curious from the folks that you're still in touch with from inside the Bureau, how is all of that resonating with them? What's it like for folks who work there right now?

It is really low morale. I mean, these firings have reverberated throughout the Bureau. Many of these firings were because of matters that these agents worked on or were supervising. And, you know, that obviously sends a chilling effect within the Bureau. And then on top of that, there has been a serious reallocation of agents towards things like immigration enforcement, which is really not something that the FBI typically does. So I think all of these create a sense of uncertainty and anxiety and very much not consistent with the very steady state culture of the Bureau that normally is in place. And we saw Director Patel asked about those reallocation of resources.

There was also a lot of focus on his performance just in the last few days in the wake of the shooting of Charlie Kirk about how he went to go dine at an exclusive New York restaurant hours after the shooting, how he posted wrong information about someone in custody and then had to later correct it. And we should point out the president has defended him. He points out that they did get a suspect in custody within two days and have now charged him. But was that criticism of his performance in your view? Was that warranted? I think so in this case especially because you had an ongoing investigation where the suspect at the moment where he was dining at the restaurant was still at large. And in that kind of fast moving situation, especially where you have a local field office that is partnering with state and local law enforcement on the ground, you really want to be careful before you put out information to make sure it is 100% accurate and that it is going to, further the investigation and not impede it. And I think the putting out prematurely that there was

a suspect in custody really had the potential to, you know, maybe dissuade some people from turning in leads, for example. It's really just not the kind of thing that the director of the FBI would be doing, normally speaking. This would really be handled by the FBI field office that is the closest to the ground in working with the partners. Ash, a last issue I want to put to you here with something else that came up in the hearing about left-wing violence in particular. We've heard this idea repeated by the president as well, blaming the shooting on what he calls left-wing radicals, this idea that left-wing violence is on the rise.

What do we know about that? Is there data to back that up? There is left-wing political violence, but compared to other politically motivated violence, it is not the largest percentage of the instances that we've seen. The Cato Institute actually published a study showing that right-wing violence constituted about 54% of recent events, Islamic terrorism about 21% and then left-wing motivated violence about 21%. So it's a little bit inaccurate in terms of the emphasis on it, but it does exist. All right. That is former FBI agent currently with Yale University.

Asha Rangappa joining us tonight. Asha, thank you so much for your time. Thank you. He still faces second-degree murder charges in the state following the shooting of Thompson last December on a Manhattan Street. In his decision, the judge wrote that while Mangione was clearly expressing an animus toward the health care industry, it does not follow that his goal was to intimidate and coerce a civilian population.

Mangione has pleaded not guilty. He also faces a federal case where prosecutors say they plan to seek the death penalty. President Trump is in London tonight for his second state visit to the United Kingdom. Upon arrival, Mr. Trump and the First Lady were greeted by American and British officials, including a royal representative. King Charles III will welcome the president to Windsor Castle tomorrow, and Prime Minister Kier Starrmer will host him for talks later in the week. Starrmer is hoping to finalize terms on steel and aluminum tariffs. Before leaving the White House today, President Trump offered few details on trade and instead focused on his relationship with his royal hosts. They'd like to see if they could get a little bit better deal, so we'll talk to them.

But primarily it's to be with Prince Charles and Camilla. They're friends of mine for a long time, long before he was king. Also, during that Q&A with reporters, President Trump took issue with a question from an Australian reporter who pressed him on financial conflicts of interest. That is inappropriate President Trump says a president in office should be engaged in so much business activity. Well, I'm really not. My kids are running the best. as I'm here. In my opinion, you are hurting Australia very much right now. And they want to get along with me. You know, your leader is coming over to see me very soon. I'm going to tell them

about you. You set a very bad tone. That was just one of several tense exchanges with journalists in recent days as President Trump continues his long-running battle with the media. And as the New York Times is pushing back against a $15 billion defamation lawsuit filed by President Trump, the suit cites a number of articles and a book written by Times journalists, saying they were part of a pattern of intentional and malicious defamation in the lead-up to last year's election. A Times spokesperson said the case lacks any legitimate legal claims and instead is an attempt to stifle and discourage independent reporting. President Trump also sued the Wall Street Journal in July over its reporting on his ties to the late financier, Jeffrey Epstein. In the Middle East, Israeli forces unleashed

a long-threatened ground assault to seize the center of Gaza City today, the Israeli military released unverified footage showing the offensive, saying it aims to, quote, destroy Hamas military infrastructure. During an address today, the military's chief of staff also cited the release of hostages as a goal of the offensive, and he insisted that Israel, quote, operates in accordance with international law. We do our utmost to mitigate harm to civilians. On the ground, residents reported heavy strikes this morning. Hospital officials say at least 69 people were killed, including 22 children. Thousands are attempting to flee the city, but hundreds of thousands more remain behind, wondering where to go.

The situation in Gaza, even if you want us to be patient and to endure, there is no water or charity kitchens, no food and no life. Tell me, how would you want me to be steadfast? Should I die? What do they want from us? We have been dying for two years. Leave us alone and now. Israel's offensive comes as the UN's Human Rights Council accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza. In a report today, a team of independent experts commissioned by the council called on the international community to fulfill their legal obligations under international law to end the genocide and punish those responsible for it. Israel rejected the report, calling it distorted and false. here at home, President Trump today extended the deadline for shutting down the social media app

TikTok for a fourth time. That's after reaching a framework deal with China to keep it operating. Meantime on Wall Street today, stocks drifted lower ahead of tomorrow's Fed rate decision. The Dow Jones Industrial Average slipped 125 points on the day. The NASDAQ lost around 15 points. The S&P 500 pulled back slightly from recent records. Still to come on the news hour, In the wake of Charlie Kirk's killing, we delve into online subcultures, the suspect appears to have joined, how the Trump administration is pushing back against wind power and a look back at the life of legendary actor Robert Redford. 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. The Federal Reserve is widely expected to cut its benchmark interest rate by a quarter of a point when it meets tomorrow the first time it has cut rates in about a year. But the meeting has also been described by those who watch the Fed as the strangest and most unprecedented meeting in many years. And that's due to the changing membership of the board and because of the heavy political fire from President Trump as he seeks more control over the Fed. His newest appointment to the Fed Board of Governors is Stephen Myron, who was sworn in just in time for the meeting today after being confirmed quickly last night by the Senate. And the board member, the president, is trying to fire Lisa Cook, remains in her seat after a federal appeals court ruled against Mr. Trump last night. For a closer look, we are joined now by David Wessel, director of the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at the Brookings Institution. It's always great to have you here at the desk.

So we are not inside that meeting, obviously, David, but let's talk about the dynamics. There's really nothing to compare this to in recent decades, right? I mean, not even Nixon's pressure campaign on the Fed. No, absolutely not. This is really, I think we're wearing out the word unprecedented in this Trump administration. But as you say, there's a governor who was sworn in just less than an hour before the meeting began, and a governor who is there only because the appeals court ruled in her favor at the last moment. So it is unusual. I'd love to be in, some of these FOMC meetings, the federal marketing meeting, are probably boring. This is one I would like to have seen. Like, Stephen Myron has said in an interview of the Wall Street Journal that I may not be the smartest guy in the room, but I think I'm the most annoying guy in the room. So I wonder whether he's keeping his mouth shut or speaking up.

And as you mentioned, Lisa Cook's future isn't settled yet. The president has indicated he's going to appeal to the Supreme Court in his effort to remove her. If he's successful, what would the ramifications be? Well, there are two ramifications. One would be, it would be an assault on the independence, the political insulation of the Federal Reserve. Removing a governor on these rather flimsy charges or allegations would be very unusual and unprecedented. So there's the long-run thing.

In the short run, he would have four appointees on the Federal Reserve Board, four out of seven. That would give him a majority. and a majority of the board could begin if it chose to fire some of the regional Fed Bank presidents. So it's a big deal. Regarding these allegations, Lisa Cook acknowledged in court filings

that one of her properties was listed as a vacation residence, even as the administration claims that she claimed both her properties as primary homes to get better mortgage rates. What do we actually know about these? We know lots of little things, and we don't have the whole picture. At the time, she did all this,

interest rates were very low, might not have been any advantage to say it was not your primary residence. As you say, she's provided, her team has provided obviously to the press, these documents that say she told him it was a vacation home. It's a condo in Atlanta, which she doesn't appear from her financial disclosures to be renting out. So we have a lot of shreds of information. We don't really have the whole story. Interestingly, what the appeals court said is we don't care about the substance. We don't care whether this constitutes for a cause under the law. the appeals court said she was denied due process and that alone was why they decided to let her sit

today's meeting looking ahead if the fed cuts rates tomorrow as expected what does that mean for everyday americans so the fed controls short-term interest rates and that means that lower rates on auto loans lower yield on your money market mutual funds uh lower interest rates on credit cards the mortgage rates though are set in the bond market and the bond market has reacted it's expecting further rate cuts this year. So the bond market, which is A, expect expecting further rate cuts, and B, seems to be rather pessimistic about the economy, has pushed down long-term rates. And that means mortgage, the 30-year mortgage was 7% in January, and it's now about 6.3, 6.4%. Is that why the last time when the Fed cut rates, mortgage rates actually

ticked up? But now they've already come down in advance of this meeting. Exactly. So lots of things determine what goes on in the bond market. But what we see now is the markets are anticipating that the Fed will cut interest rates twice more this year and then maybe even more in 2026. So that's why this is different. The last time it wasn't seen as a series of cuts. What are you going to be paying attention to when J. Powell speaks? A couple of things. One is we will get the Fed's projections, Fed officials predictions. So we'll see whether they expect to cut twice more in the air. Secondly, it'll be interesting to see if anybody dissents at this meeting? Will any of the Trump people dissent and say that the Fed should have

cut rates by a half a percentage point? And then we'll see how Jay Powell handles the very delicate question of the president continues to attack. He's got you got a new guy here. You got an old person who's being safe. How does he navigate that in his last few months as Fed Chair? David Wessel, you always managed to clear things up for us and we're deeply appreciative. That's the goal. As investigators continue to seek answers about what drove the young man accused of killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk, conspiracies about who he is and what he believed are flourishing. William Brigham takes a closer look at what we know about the suspect's life online.

One focal point for investigators are the inscriptions carved onto the bulletings. casings that were believed to be owned by the alleged shooter. They contain a number of seemingly sarcastic, irreverent phrases that are common in gaming and online communities, phrases like Bella Chow and Hey Fascist Catch, and a series of arrows, up, right, and several pointing down. So to help us decipher what those inscriptions might mean, we turn to Ryan Broderick. He's the author of the newsletter called Garbage Day and host of the podcast, Panic World. Ryan Broderick, thank you so much for being here. We heard earlier today the latest on the investigation into this alleged shooter, but I want to ask you about those bullet casings. They clearly imply that the suspect lived a very, very online internet focused life, heavily steeped in gaming in these subcultures. From your expertise, what can we glean by what was written on those bullet casings? Well, the bullet that struck and killed Charlie Kirk allegedly had a phrase of a very common meme written on it.

It is part of a subculture called furries. They are people who dress up in animal costumes. And this screenshot has been traveling around the internet forever. It doesn't mean that Robinson is a member of that subculture, but he is of an age where he would have grown up online seeing it everywhere. It's a bit of what they would call cringe humor. The other bullets recovered by law enforcement include a reference to the satirical, the fascist video game, Hell Divers 2. You basically play as fascists in space. And the message, hey, fascist catch with the arrows written on it, references the most powerful bomb attack in the game.

So the idea is you play those buttons, you throw the bomb, it's a massive explosion. The other bullet referenced by law enforcement is the Italian folk song Bella Chow. it is common among anti-fascist and leftist communities, but it's also a popular fixture in pop culture. It was used in Netflix's show Money Heist. It's referenced in the video game Far Cry 6. And then the last one, which reads, Yorke LMAO, is what you would just call boilerplate troll behavior.

It's meant to embarrass any sort of law enforcement investigator looking at the bullets. How dare you try to find meaning in what I've written on these bullets, which is something that we've seen with a lot of other young Gen Z extremists over the last year or two. So should we take these comments literally? Are they meant to be tongue-in-cheek jokey? Are they some combination? I mean, it sounds like it's very hard to glean an ideology here. That is the main question. So it is possible that Robinson is a leftist and anti-fascist, someone you would consider on the political left. It's equally possible that he is trying to muddy the waters. We've seen this with other spree shooters at schools across the country this year where a shooter will write conflicting political messages in Nashville, Minneapolis, we've seen this, dating all the way back to 2019 with the use of memes in the Christchurch shooting in New Zealand.

This is a common tactic for what you would call an accelerationist. For those who aren't familiar, an accelerationist is someone who wants to accelerate the end of the status quo, end of society, someone who wants to push politics and political. violence to such an extreme that, you know, the order of the country would fall apart. It is a very nihilistic, very apocalyptic view that has become more and more popular, particularly on the dark corners of the Internet in the last 10 years. So when Utah's Republican governor, Spencer Cox, says that this is evidence of leftist ideology, you seem to believe that's not nearly as clear cut with what we know now. I don't think so.

But we have seen these tactics used on the far right more. commonly. They know the playbook after an incident like this. So with law enforcement digging through manifestos, looking for evidence of a larger ideology, this is a pattern we see after every incident like this. And young extremists know this. So clearly, as you're saying, this, this person lived a very, very steeped in the online world life. How has Charlie Kirk's murderer been viewed online, broadly speaking well you have to imagine this is going exactly according to plan charlie kirk's death was telegraphed for social media it took place at a public event where kirk was surrounded by smartphones the shooter would have known that there would be an audience charlie kirk is an extremely

popular influencer on the right in a very well-known figure of derision on the left he's a very polarizing figure right and so the minute that footage of his death hit social media it went more viral than I think anything we've ever seen like this. And now the wild goose chase that internet users are going on to figure out why Robinson allegedly carried out the attack fits perfectly in with previous shootings like this. If you wanted to cause as much chaos online, this is exactly how you would do it. And we've seen this with internet users digging through Tyler Robinson's mother's Facebook history, looking for any sort of meaning in the means written on the bullets themselves. And then the general chaos of the modern social media

age. So we've seen conspiracy theories. We've seen AI play a prominent role in misinformation. It is complete chaos. And that is only exacerbated by the way that the Trump administration and the FBI have been handling this in the public, putting out as much info as they can, even though it's conflicting, sending people off in different directions about what may have happened. It is an information nightmare. Amidst all this, we're seeing so much of an attempt to pin the blame on left-wing ideology or right-wing ideology. Is that the right way to think about or talk about these online subcultures? I don't believe so. I think the thing to really focus on here is that Tyler Robinson is of a generation that has grown up in America where there have always been

school shootings, always been spree shootings. And many young people, many young extremists that we've seen come out of the woodwork over the last few years since the pandemic, see public violence as a path towards fame, towards glory, another way to go viral. And they talk about this on platforms like Discord and websites like 4chan. This is common knowledge for young people. And so, of course, there is the knee-jerk reaction to blame this on anti-fascist or leftists or trans communities or right-wing commentators. But this is a larger problem, a much more politically complex problem. And it's one that is very ingrained in American society in the 21st century at this point. All right. That is writer and podcaster Ryan Broderick. Thank you so much for being here.

Thanks for having me. From his roots in West Virginia to his pivotal role in some of Washington's biggest battle, former Democratic senator, now independent, Joe Manchin, built a career on bucking partisan lines and pushing for pragmatism over ideology. In his new memoir, he recounts untold stories from the Senate, interactions with the White House, and outlines a vision of leadership rooted in what he sees as principle and collaboration. The book is Dead Center in defense of common sense. Former Senator Joe Manchin joins us now. Welcome back to the NewsHour. Good. Be with you, Jeff. You know, in reading this book, You are far tougher on Democrats than you are on Republicans. You paint Democrats as the main

driver of government overreach and dysfunction. Was that your intention in writing this book? Offering a rebuke of your own former party? Well, first of all, I've been a Democrat in my entire life up until last year. The only people I caucus with the Democrat, and I saw the dysfunction, and then basically I couldn't take it anymore. So I can only give you a synopsis of how do Democrats, me leave. Now, since the November election, 160,000 plus more have left the Democrat registration. And I would like to tell all of my friends, Democrat friends, that you've got to figure out what your core is, your base. When you make a mistake, you just say we made a mistake, and we're going to fix that. So I never joined another party. I didn't go to the Republican Party,

and I said, they probably wouldn't like me any better, but I don't know the inner workings of the caucuses of the Republican Party since I never caucused with them. But I just knew I didn't want to be associated with this party dysfunction I see on both sides. Well, you said in the book that you actually wanted Republicans to win the Senate majority in 2024,

believing that they were the only hope in preserving the Senate filibuster as a guardrail against partisan rule. Is that a view that you still hold, given that Senate Republicans recently changed the filibuster rules? No, they haven't changed the filibuster. Well, to push forward with the lower level

executive branch. Well, what they want to do is they're basically bundling them right now. Okay, and I've told them, I think that is wrong. I've called my Republican friends, and I said, what you're doing is you're snipping around the edges and what goes around comes around. Because if you can do that, when the Democrats come in, I'll do more. The difference of all I said that back in 2024 was this reason. Chuck Schumann, a Democratic Party, already said that they wanted to get rid of the filibuster. They tried and pushed me and Kirsten Simmons, we wouldn't do it, okay? And that stopped them. Or they'd have done it then.

They did it in 2013 when Harry Reid, I begged him not to do it. And I said, when you do that, you'll rue the day you did. And they have because what happened then and then the Supreme Court, when the Republicans got it, did it. And all they had to do was just sit down and work with each other. There's a way to do this to allow a president to have his cabinet and his staff. They're playing games with this. Our Democrats are doing it, and the Republicans have done it. That has to stop.

And so now they're saying, we've got to, so we're going to bundle a bunch. That's wrong, okay? Because when you take the participation from the minority, then you're basically, what you've done is you're watering down the whole principle of this Senate. The Senate's the most deliberate body. The reason the Senate has worked so long and so good for so many is because when it does something, it's lasting. okay and the minority always has participation so you might not be the majority party but you're just not sitting on the sidelines you're still participating you're still involved that was that's that's

the beauty and the brilliance of our founding fathers how they set it up what you're describing sounds pretty simple and straightforward why isn't it simple and straightforward in practice these days nothing simple and straightforward because it looks like one side's giving up to the other or giving in to the other, the political dichotomy of what's going on and the duopoly of two businesses, what do you have is two major corporations. One's called the Republican Corporation.

One's called the Democrat Corporation. And big money is driving this. And their business model is fear and hatred and tactics of that. And the more they can keep you, the public, afraid of the other side, to the point that you almost hate the other side and all the propaganda that goes out,

You can't look like you're working with a person you just told me I had to be scared to death up. It's gotten so far out of hand. And that's why I said, how do you bring it back? And, you know, we've contemplated a third party. I really think that the country is ready for an independent American party. And the reason I say independent American party is that most people that are still participating in voting are registered, no party affiliation. That's the highest percentage. and more are going in that direction than going to the respected parties.

You describe yourself in the book as not being beholden to either party, but there are those critics who say that you wielded your swing vote power when you were in the Senate to stall progress. How do you respond to that? I never stole progress. What I did is I basically just kept lobbying for common sense. And I'll give you a few examples if people were upset with the amount of things that they wanted to do with the BBB bill. Build back better.

Build back better. It was $3.5 trillion. They said it was $6 trillion. And then they said it was $3.5. After, just in the last year, they evaluated that bill. It would have been more than $10 trillion. They gave away everything but the country's door. Everything was given away.

And the bottom line was there was no accountability responsibility. The book that we have written there, I hope gives you an idea that people might have had thinking a different thought process about me, thinking I'm trying to grandstand. I wanted to be in the middle. I didn't want to be in the middle. But I've always voted in the middle. If you're always voting and no one controls you, guess what happens when it's 50-50 and 49 are already one way, I'm the one person.

Then the bull's eye, the target, comes on you. I said, I became a spear catcher. I didn't volunteer for that position, but I said, this doesn't make sense. I'm not going to vote for. It doesn't make sense. And I've always been that way. So the book basically says how I was raised, and I've told him this in that little town of Farmington, I was raised that basically you'll be held accountable and responsible for your

words in action. When you say something and it's not basically contained and put back in perspective, action will happen, and usually it's not good. So you are always going to be held responsible. And I never forgot that. And I've been very careful with the words I choose. I don't denigrate people. I don't call them names.

I said, listen, and I'm not going to campaign against a setting colleague. I never have. But that's a very hostile working environment in Congress. You're expected to get the other side, even if it's your friend that might have a D by the name if you're an R or vice versa. You're expected to be against them all the time. It doesn't work that way where I come from. You can't tell me to be my friend. and then go to work every day with me as my co-worker and try to get me fired.

We're going to have a conversation. This book's title, Dead Center, it struck me while reading this book, there are two interpretations of this title. One is the one that you intended. The other being that the political center is dead. It suggests that polarization has hollowed out the middle ground and that there's no room for centrism or bipartisan compromise. Has polarization killed the political center?

It's made it almost impossible to have a center, even though a person comes and they're a very centrist person. They might have a D or an R by their name because of the two-party systems to be involved, the way it's set up now. And they go to Washington, they get elected. They got to pick a side. Wait a minute, I really don't want to go that far left or that far right, but I really wouldn't work with both. Well, I'm sorry, you've got to pick a side. I really believe that the country is ready for an independent American party that will force the ones. We want the grand old party to be grand again.

You want the Democrat Party to be responsible and compassion. Okay. Well, I think they're further from that today than they've ever been, and they're not going to come back because they're getting rewarded for this horrible behavior. Boom, let's bring it back. The book is Dead Center in Defense of Common Sense. Former Senator Joe Manchin. Thanks so much for being here. Appreciate you. Thank you.

Now to the latest on President Trump's War on Wind Power. Last month, the administration abruptly halted construction on a nearly finished $6 billion, 65 turbine wind farm off the coast of New England, known as Revolution Wind. The holdup has put thousands out of work and raises business. big questions about not just the future of this project, but similar efforts across the eastern seaboard. Science correspondent Miles O'Brien's been covering it all. He joins us now from Groton, Connecticut. So, Miles, we can see this huge project behind you. I'm assuming that's part of Revolution Wind. Why has it been such a big deal in this battle over wind power? It's a big deal because it's a big project, Omna, 700 megawatts, which equates to power for 350,000

homes in Rhode Island and Connecticut. It's run by a company called Orsted out of Denmark. Over my shoulder, you'll see a giant vessel, which is a wind turbine installation vessel. Vessels like these cost more than $260,000 a day. So the meter is running on a ship that should be out 20 miles from where I am doing its work to finish this project, which is at the 80% completion state. I saw this machine in action, the latter part of last year in December. It's an extraordinary thing.

That whole thing jacks up and the turbines are built and the blades are put on. The project is big and its sudden stop is a big loss for the economy here. I sat down with the governor of Rhode Island, Dan McKee. I don't think the Trump administration really understands the consequences of this action, right? in the job loss, the energy loss, the loss in terms of our ability to compete. And then the other thing that it sends is the signal to businesses. What are permits worth if all of a sudden, when you're 80% in a project, regardless of what the project is, that somehow the federal government is not going to honor those permits?

So, yeah, the governor says he is willing to engage in a political deal. There have been other threats by the Trump administration to shut down wind projects. Empire wind in New York is still going after a close call. A vineyard wind to the north of here in Massachusetts is still going. The governor said he will entertain even a pipeline deal, a gas pipeline deal, if that's what it would take. But so far, no, there's no deal on the table. He would like an audience with the president, Omna. So, Miles, 80% completed and then abruptly halted.

What justification did the Trump administration give for why this president? project was stopped? Well, the Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright, says wind and solar are worthless. Those are his words. He says they, because of the intermittency, they don't work at nighttime if it's solar or when the wind is not blowing when it comes to wind. And the Secretary of Interior, Doug Bergam, has said this project has not been vetted, that it was fast-tracked. But the initial permitting for this actually goes back to 2011 for Revolution Wind specifically. in 2019, the whole process began. The Defense Department has looked at this at least a couple of times, and yet they say

there is a national security issue. Here's Doug Bergen. Yes, they were permitted, but they got moved through a very fast, ideologically driven permitting process. We've been asked, as part of an executive order from the president, to take a whole government approach to review those. I think the fact that the subsidies have been either cut back or limited means that it's likely that there will not be future offshore wind built in America.

So that initial environmental assessment goes way back. And the other issue that's come up time and again is the cost. The cost of this electricity is locked in for the next 20 years at 9.8 cents per kilowatt hour. That is about half of what electricity costs by other sources in this part of the world. So it is cheaper power. It is ready to go online. Meanwhile, there's a lot of workers that are feeling the hurt in this. I spoke yesterday to a painter. who's worked on these projects for a couple of years, 10 years of painting experience. He goes out for 12 weeks at a time, Omna, and works overtime out offshore and makes $75,000. It's enough to get him through the year, and he needs the money. He's got six kids. I also, earlier today, went out with a fisherman, Gary Yerman, and a lot of fishermen have been against this. And Gary, in particular, is a strong Trump supporter.

He has started a business, which allows fishermen to provide security and other services to the wind farms, it's been a real boon to them during their quiet times. Listen to Gary. You know, a lot of people think Trump's crazy, you know, so on, so forth. And there's a lot of money that's been spent to, you know, create this green energy, which I believe that we need more energy in this country. You know, and I don't understand why. So, yeah, I think that it just gives the opposition more, you know, fuel to, you know, go against Donald Trump. So I think politically, it could go against him. So the big picture here, Amna, is that there's wind projects out there, about a half a dozen of

them, including this one, which ultimately represent enough power to generate electricity for 11 million homes up and down the eastern seaboard by 2030. That was the Biden administration goal. but the Trump administration simply cannot tolerate wind. The president is a long-time opponent of it from the time when a wind turbine or a series of them were installed off his golf course in Scotland. So the country and this region in particular

is at an energy turning point. This is cheap electricity. In many cases, it's built. And many people here are wondering what the logic is in leaving those pylons just standing there rusting in the ocean. That is our science correspondent. at Miles O'Brien, reporting from Groton, Connecticut tonight.

Miles, thank you so much. You're welcome. and the Sundance Kid, The Sting, and all the President's men. Redford's legacy is as much about art as it is about integrity. Senior arts correspondent Jeffrey Brown has this remembrance. Get away from me. I want to fight him. He had the looks, the charisma, the talent.

Robert Redford was one of the biggest stars in Hollywood history, appearing in more than 50 films, directing others, and using his fame to promote causes dear to him, the environment and independent filmmaking. In 2018, you reflected on his life and work when I sat down with Sissy Spaceic and him at the Toronto International Film Festival to talk about their film,

The Old Man and the Gun, which Redford had announced would be his last leading role. If I told you, you probably wouldn't want to see me again. Who said I was going to see you again? Would you? The first project I ever did to tell you how my beginning was

was a Perry Mason, TV. back in 1959. It looks like he put up a little fight. What's that? Looks like hair from a wig. And the title was the case of the tortured toupee. I still don't know what that meant. But anyway, that was my first job.

But you remember... His first triumph came on Broadway in 1963, with Neil Simon's Barefoot in the Park, a role he brought to the screen four years later opposite Jane Fonda. Paul, if the honeymoon doesn't work out, let's know. If any moon doesn't work out, let's not get divorced. Let's kill each other. Let's have one of the maids do it.

I hear the service here is wonderful. We'll jump. Like hell we will. Major's dardom came in 1969 as the Sundance Kid, a sly, charming outlaw, partner to Paul Newman in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Oh, oh, oh, oh, hey! On air, fans can reel off a list of favorites,

Among them, in 1973, The Way We Were with Barbara Streisand, and The Sting, again with Newman, for which Redford received his one and only Oscar nomination for acting. This is Bob Woodward of the Washington Post. 76, as journalist Bob Woodward to Dustin Hoffman's Carl Bernstein, breaking news of the Watergate scandal. Our faith in ourselves and our faith in our country. Other standouts, the candidate.

The Great Gatsby, Three Days of the Condor, The Natural. Redford also stepped behind the camera in 1980. His first effort, ordinary people, about a family grieving the loss of a child, won Oscars for Best Picture and Best Director for Redford. I can't stand it. I really can't. Well, don't then. Go to Europe. Later, films he helmed included A River Runs Through It in 1992 and Quiz Show in 94.

which also earned nominations for Best Film and Director. Redford, who was born in 1936 in Santa Monica, California, traced his path back to his childhood and the magic of going to the movies. I grew up in a lower working class neighborhood, and so the only entertainment we had, there was no television at that time as radio, that you would walk to a local theater and see a movie.

And so what I remembered was the joy of leaving this love, life you were forced to lead and go into a room that was suddenly dark with a lot of people that you knew sitting there with you and all the lights would go down and then something would come on the screen that was fresh and new that took you out of where you were. I think that made a strong impact on me, the value of that, which I think is why I was eventually drawn to film. Beyond the big screen, Redford became known as a passionate environmentalist, taking up causes especially in his adopted home of Utah.

And his most lasting legacy may be the Sundance Institute, first born out of his effort to preserve land, later transformed into a haven for independent filmmakers, home to one of the world's leading film festivals for documentaries and dramas. We are here to support the filmmakers. Stephen Soderberg, Quentin Tarantino, Aver DuVernay. Just a few of the many filmmakers

who first broke through at Sundance, dance before becoming major artists in their own right. You know, there are other stories out there to be told, and they're not being given a chance. How about starting something that you create a mechanism for people to come and not only develop their stories, but then have a place to go that led to the festival. I just want to say this guy has done more for independent film than anybody that I've ever heard of. Yeah.

I think the idea is that if you're lucky enough to have some success, what are you going to do with it? Today, tributes flowed. Filmmaker Ron Howard called Redford a tremendously influential cultural figure. Meryl Streep, a co-star in Out of Africa, said, One of the Lions has passed. Rest in peace, my lovely friend. Numerous other social media posts echoed similar sentiments. Step on it. After playing an aging but still very charming bank robber in The Old Man in the Gun,

Redford spoke of coming to the end of his career. When you're thinking about leaving, when you're thinking about having, at the end of a career in terms of acting. You want to go out on something that's upbeat and fun, fun to do. This movie is a real meditation on aging, is it not? How to age gracefully, what to do as you age? I don't spend a lot of time thinking about that. You don't.

I think the character doesn't think about it either. He just goes about what he loves doing. Actor, director, champion of the environment, and independent filmmaking. You're clearly proud of what's. you create. I am. Robert Redford died at home in the mountains of Utah. No cause was given. He was 89 years old. For the PBS News Hour, I'm Jeffrey Brown. And that is the News Hour for tonight. I'm Omna Navazz. And I'm Jeff Bennett. And I'm Jeff Bennett. For all us here at the PBS NewsHour. Thanks for spending part of your evening with us.