Skip to main content

tv   PBS News Hour  PBS  September 24, 2019 6:00pm-7:00pm PDT

6:00 pm
captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> brangham: good evening. i'm william brangham. judy woodruff is away.sh on the nr tonight: >> therefore, today, i'm announcing the house of representatives moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry. >> brangham: impeament on the the speaker of the house says that president trump's actions with ukraine require a seriousat investn. then, alone befo the world. as calls for his impeachment swirl, president trumpds his "americairst" vision at plus, more brexit chaos. britain's supreme court rulesni the prime er broke the law when he suspended parliament. and, "know my name." chanel miller, the survivor of the stanford university rape case, reclaims her voice and, speaks out. >> i would look around and think, "is anyone actually
6:01 pm
hearing me?" it's a terrifying position to be in, to feel like you can cry on the stand, that you couldye a statement, and people still don't hear you. >> brangham: all that and more on tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ >> life well-planned. learn more at raymondjames.com. >> when itomes to wireless, consumer cellular gives its customers the choice. our no-contract plans give y
6:02 pm
l as much, or tle, talk, text and data as you want, and our u.s.-based customer service team is on hand to help. to learn more, go to consumercellular.tv >> bnsf railway. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: >> this program was made g.ssible by the corporation for public broadcast and by contributions to your pbs station from viewek like you. thu. >> brangham: questions of impeachment are growing tonight around preside trump. the speaker of the house says the house is moving forward with an offial impeachment inquiry. that's after a whistleblower alleged that t president tried to force a foreign leader to aid his re-election. in turn, mr. trump says he'll release the record of a critical phone call. congressional correspondent lisa
6:03 pm
sjardins begins our coverage.co >> desjardins: a dizzying day of developmen. speaker of the house nancy pelosi went furtr than ever, late this afternoon, on formallm beginning impeachment. >> the actions of the trump presidency revealed the dishonorable fact of t president's betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national surity, and betrayal of the integrity of our elections. therefore, today, i'm announcing e house of representatives moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry. >> desjardins: at the united nations, a president arrivingk to tout u.s. policy immediately faced questions about his own actions, and whether he pressuredkraine to investigate the biden family. >> i think it's ridiculous. it's a witch hun >> desjardins: hseemed to confirm, and defend, the fact that he withheld hundreds of millions of dollars in aid for ukraine recently. >> my complaint has always been-- and i'd withhold again, and i'll continue to withholdnu until such time as eurnae and other ons contribute to ukraine, because they're not doing it. >> desjardins: the "washington
6:04 pm
postand others reported the president froze nearly $400 million in aid foukraine this summer, one week before a phone ca witnewly-elected ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskiy. it is still not clear if the withheld money came up on that call, but this afternoon, mr. trump announced he has ordered the release, torrow, of the complete and unredactedda transcript of his conversation. in turn, house intelligence chair adam schiff said thetl tifywer wants to t before the committee as early as this week. meanwhile, calls for impeachment e grew. >> i hen patient while we tried every other path and used evher tool. i believe, i truly believe, the time to begin impeachment proceedings against this president has come. >> djardins: it was a remarkable 24 hours for democrats, starting with aca on blast in the "washington post" from seven freshman democrats, all with military ann
6:05 pm
na security backgrounds. all sit in vulnerable districts and had previously been hesitane to call for hment, but now "if tr, we belieseir minds: actions represent an impeachable offens we do not arrive at th conclusion lightly." on the campaign trail in delaware today, biden pushed back against any allegations of wrong-doing. >> that's what he does. >> desjardins: republicans, meanwhile, are largely urging restraint. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. >> what we have here is an allegation related to ukranian
6:06 pm
aid by a whistleblower. that's about all we ow now. i'm not going to address all of these various hypotheticals that have been aired out, about what may or may not have happened, in the house.pp i think all of that is quite premature. >> desjardins: but even within the present's own party, concern is brewing. louisiana senator john kennedy said both the bidens and the president's phone calls should be investigated. know more about prt andke to presidt zelenskiy, but we'd also like to know about hunter biden. >> desjardins: president trump t meets wi ukrainian president tomorrow. as house democrats press forward wi. an impehment resoluti >> brangham: as the push for impeachment grows, we want to hear from capitol hill. we start with one of the seven freshman democrats who wro
6:07 pm
that piece in the "washington post." congresswoman abigail spanberger is a democrat fromirginia, and she sits on the house foreign affairs committee. we spoke earlier this evening. congresswoman spanberger, thank you very much for being here. you obviously heard the speaker's announcement that she nis moving forward with official impeachment inquiry. in the piece that you wrote inat the "washington post" last night, you wrote, "these allegations, this is about the president's behavior with regards to ukraine, are stunning, both in the national security threat they pose and the potential corruption they represent." you spent some time in the c.i.a., can you give mae sense about what it is that is most iooubling about his beh >> what's most troubling about these allegations is the fact that we see a president who allegedly pressured a foreign vernment to provide information to, dig up dirt on a political opponent, and that he potentially sought to use security assistance funds, taxpay dollars, to leverage and to create that pressure fro
6:08 pm
a national security perspective, this is tremendously worrisome first and foremost the fact that we would have seerity assistance funding at play, leveraged, potentially not going where it needs to go after it's been appropriated by congress is troubling elemennumber one. the fact that we would have a president who would potentially put himself in a position of pressuring a foreign governmen that's not how our diplomatic relationships are supposed to go. and then, of course, there's the primary piec that we should not have a president of the united states who is using h power to scollect information for wn personal gain. and i think there are so many troubling threads here with these allegations that we really do need fu investigation to understand if they are true or if they are not. and i think the ramifications from a national security perspective, though very far
6:09 pm
beyond where we are right now. allegations to other nations?he does this mean we have a president that might treat another country favorably if they were to proactively provide formation about one of his political rivals? there are so many elements that are deeuply troublingt the core facts of it, the fact that we have a president who wouleld rage his political position for his own personal gain and put u.s. assistance dolbllars on the in such a manner, those allegations are striking. >> brangham: y mentioned in your piece last night and just now that if these allegations are true, we still don't have all the facts. the president himself i pointing out that we still haven't seen a transcript of tha phon. we haven't seen the whistleblower's repo i. do you thi's too early to talk about an impeachment all the facts y, despite theknow president's admission? >> well i think thel important thing about an impeachment inquiry or the congressional power of inherent contempt, subpoenas or any other tools we
6:10 pm
have, these are tools that allow congress to get to the bottom of issue. these are tools that allow us lo have a privileged process when vestigating these allegations. i don't think that it should be a forn egone conclusat we are definitely destined toward impeachment. rthink i wanted to be vy clear, as did my colleagues, that these allegations, if true are, impeachable offenses, but the goal at this point in time is tmake clear the gravity of these allegations to the american people, to our colleagues in congress, and toad cate that we ue every tool available to congress to ge to the bottom of it and the move these allegations true or false. >> brangham: ifhe president releases tomorrow, as he has promised, the trits of that one call, will that benough to settle these questions? >> oh, i don't think so. think there are so may pieces of evidence that we need to have and so many questions that we need to have answered. why would the president have withheld hundreds of mil hs li dollars of security assistance
6:11 pm
to ukraine? were there other phone calls that occurred? what are theetails that the whistleblower, who came forward thaturrently the d.n.i. is not allowing that information to go to congress as required by law? there are many more unanswered questions than the actual substance of one particular phone call. and as a former c.i.a. case officer, as a former law enforcement officer, for me it is all about facts and evidence. so i hope tt my colleagues and pertainly members of the press and the americaople won't think that there is just one pie of evidence that weof need totrove one way or theher. my hope is that we will pursue every element of informatione possibly can have so that if we are getting to the pilot where we say these allegations are true or false, we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that that is, in fact, the case. >> brangham: if the house were to gather all this evdence and see that it was important enough to vote to impeach the president, by all measures, the senate is not going to convictes the ent. do you still think it would be
6:12 pm
worth it to go through this exercise? >> i am of the belief that people who are elected to office are going to put their oath to upho the constitution ave and beyond their political affiliation. i believe and i have faith that any elected member of th congress or senate will eventually put country before party when the choice is there the make. if throughout the course of an investigation it becomes clear enough that there would be a positive vote articles of impeachment within the house of representatives, my expectation is that in order to get that ouome based on facts and evidence, it would be clear within the senate what it is swo that thed be weighing in on. >> brangham: all right. yopresentative abigail spanberger, thanvery much. >> thank you very much, william. i appreciate it. >> brangham: we turn now for a republican perspective on these impeachment calls. congressman andy harris of maryland is on the house ukraine caucus, and he joins me now. congressman, thank you very much for being here. i wonder if you could just give me your initial reaction to
6:13 pm
today's developments, that thet house is goin move forward with an impeachment inquiry. >> well, this is nothing new. there are dozens if not over 100 members ofhe househo have wanted to try to impeach this president. they tried the mueller investigation. now they're going to try this. you know, i just... lo,ok i just think the american people need to see the transcript of the president's calel and v president biden's call where he was holding up a billion dollar of aid to the ukrainian government. his son was earning $50,000 a month. what did his son do while his father was negotiated over a billion dollars in aid.e the americanple need to know the truth. >> brangham: let's talk about the president's actions. the president has admitted that he pressured the president of the ukraine to look into the biden, repeadly, according to some times eight times in one phone call. the president has also acknowledged that hethheld
6:14 pm
aid from ukraine proceeding this phone call. do nonof those actions trouble you? >> well, let's put it in perspective. you know, therskrainian government has corrupt oligarchs in charge of a lot of things in the government, including the agency that hunter biden was associated with. and we have heard rports that military procure. and a lot of these funds were going to milita from curement is corrupt in the ukraine. the president is right to ask the ukrainian government to investigate corruption when it involves hureds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money from the united states. >> brangham: but if it was thes esident saying repeatedly, i want you to look into joe biden and hunter bide within the full knowledge that could likelb his opponent in the presidential election, that does not give you pause? >> look, we're not going to talk about hypotheticals. tomoow we'll know what th transcript wa. let's talk about it after we know what the transcript was and then let's udee vice pre bide on the release the transcripts of his dealings with the ukrainians wn he was vice president, because that goes to the heart of the matter.
6:15 pm
you know, we're deing with a government that was rife with corruption and the question is whether we should be sending hundreds of millions of dollars en that goverwithout them taking a position to stop the corruption in the ukraine. >> brangham: your colleagues across the aisle say we need to do this impeachment inquiry because it gives us more legal tools and facilitates the investigation that weeel we are being stonewalled on. this is e democrats talking. do you believehat th-- if you believe all the facts should come out and this will be a useful process, do you think this impeachment in be useful? >> look, the facts are going to come out tomroin whethe triptsds are released. the allegation was that the president in a phone call with the ukrainian leader had some kind of quid pro quon an investigation. we'll find out tomorrow. let's talk about it after the american people ar the anscript. and scen let's release the transcript of the vice president dealing with the ukrainians involving a billionrs in foreign aid. >> brangham: the president has said, as you areng acknowled
6:16 pm
that he'll release the transcript. the democrats argue they also ed to see the whistleblower's complaint, the person who eithee d of this call as it was going down or read the transcript and said, som ahing ss it here. would you support the whistleblower's complaint coming >> well, we kow he didn't hear the call, because we know it was second hand, his knowledge ofon the call. the bottom line is that his complaint was that the phone egations ofde and all what was done on the phone call, we're going to know thewe transcript tomorrow. that's the whistleblower's allegation. the president has gone ahead and said, okay, let's look at the transcript. i think it's the right thing to do. i apaud the predent for doing it. then we need the look deeper into what was going on dinuring the obama administration when vice president biden was dealing with ukraine and his son was rning $50,000 a month from a corrupt oligarch. >> brangham: do you think wen the director of nae tional intelligence on thursday testifies before the he has been asked repeatedly to
6:17 pm
give this whistleblower's complaint. should that come forward? should he provide more inrmation about that particular complaint?ic >> look, my understanding, and again, you know, that's not myea f expert tease, but it's centered around whether this is urgenting and the law says if the dni felt it was urgent, thr it needs to be reported to congress. that's a judgment call. but again, tomorrow we're going to see the transcript. we're going to know exactly what went on. >> brangm: the president has hibtsed a few times that he thinks the democrats are overplaying their hand, th the end if they e go forward wih this inquiry that it will play to his political benefit. do you think that's true? t do you thi democrats are overplaying their hand here? >> i absolutely agree. the bottom line is the american people want coress to deal with the problems that americans are facing and what theye concerned about. right now they're not really concerned about the ukraine. they're concerned about jos. they're worried about the economy. they're worried about what's going on here in the united states. congress will be distracted.
6:18 pm
the last time this happened in 1998, the pay that held the impeachment was punished at the polls. it will be the same way next year. >> brangham: all right. representative andy harris ofyo maryland, thanvery much of being here. now for a broader look at these developments-- how house democrats got to this point. what's next for them, and the and, for the president. again, our lisa desjardins is on capitol hill tracking the latest, and white house is following the pnt atlcindor the u.n. general assembly in new york. e to you both. what a difference a day makes. help me understand, with a few ceptions, the facts that were on the table yesterday are largely the same facts that are on the table today. how did this change so dramaticly? >> that's a great question, william. i think talking to deocratic aides, even those most closely involved in the decisions today did not expecting things to move i do think a sign of the growing
6:19 pm
mentum was that letter from the seven house democratic freshman. they weren't just any freshman. they really were seen as almost holdouts on the question peof hment, and they also were seen as having the most credibility when it comes to s nationurity. so when they came out as a group late last night saying, question , "we think it's timeu the moveher on impeachment if these accusations are true, we think that is impeachable," which was skipping a step from where the rest of democrats have been i thinkat really was part of a wave of growing momentum over the weekend, and because of that,a dam that was breaking became more visibly breaking to house democrame.ki fohe different question is, william, what exactly happened today? what does any of this mean? i think the headline is thaint democrathe house are moving to impeachment proceedings. whatever you want to cahem, nancy pelosi is now on board that effort. and here is another interesting thweg, william, as ll try to get our hands around what is
6:20 pm
happening, i asked for some time line information, got it from only one member,amilla jaipol, a democrat from washington state. she said, "the powet is ill now move more quickly on this question. it will not be a matter of months, she said, it will be faster than that." >> brangham: i kno kw you, la, you have also been talking with republican members, as well. you heard congressman harris just now putting his defense r rward. what are the otuse members you're talking to saying about all this? >> just in the past few minutese we havn responses from house repuican leader kevin mccarthy and senate republican leader mitch mcconnell. both of them are putting out a message thatheyink this is another attempt to overturn the trump presidency from their point of view. it's important that mccarthy he's saying that doesn'tr. think nancy pelosi has the power to declare this an offial inquiry, that to do that the full house some 're going to see some real process debate
6:21 pm
coming up, but i tink wheyou talk about the merits, more importantly, william, there seem to be two main camps of republicans, those ar dented defenders of the president as we ard from a few mutes ago. but most republicans are not sure what to make of. this one of the more philosophical members i talked to, max thornberry, towed me he is concerned about what this does for the dialogue to the country and that if there is just a continuing sho uting over impeachment, he's not sure how one issue over another cn be separated. so there's a little concern about what this could do for a divide. >> brangham: we certainly have a lot of other moving pieces in. this we're gointo -- the president says he's going to release the transcript of this call. we have not seen the whistleblower's complaint, but we know thdirector of national intelligence testified thursday. what are some of the other steps you might e? >> i think that's rigght. we also are told by the hou intelligence chairman, he's ping the whistleblower themselv will appear before the committee. that would be in a closed session. so there will be morine rmation that does put
6:22 pm
democrats in an interesting position that they're movin forward, they're taking a big step before they have all the information, but they're confident based on what they already know, not just in th investigation, but in several investigations that it's time to move up, ramp their steps on impeachment. but you know, william, the end game here is for impeachment is the senate. and the house is taking a big step here, house democrats are but ultimately for a president to be b convicted, the senate hs to get on bord, and right now the senate is nowhere near that. but house democrats seem to believe that now theres enough evidence to build a stronger case if not taking the president out, at least convincing voters perhaps to vote against him next year. >> brangham: yamiche, turning to you, obviously there's this d growing army omocrats saying to speaker seems to be behinde that. you're with the president. how is the president and the white house reacting to all of this today? >> the president is responding
6:23 pm
to democrats saying that the going to be opening a formal impeachment inquiry against him by lashing out aa them. he's saying this is part of a continuing witch hunt and this really started with the rsia investigation d connues on now. he has been tweeting and talking about this all dame heays hes the victim of "presential harassment." he also accused democrats of trying to ruin and demean his day here at thed unitions. he has been e-mailing with the white house press secretary, stephanie graceham.ha he said the democrats are trying to weaponize politics. i asked her, h are you going to deal with all of this? he said, we'll release th transcript of that call that. will make all of this look ridiculous. rebut of course democrats asking for the ctual whistleblower complaint, that's much different than just thetr script some this is going to be something that's going to continue to develop, and the white house is still trying tot geer their plan. >> brangham: we saw the president today was also touting his approval rating amongst the ao.p. and tweeting out tt percentage.
6:24 pm
obviously we have an election coming that seems to be the sort this.w rumble underneath all of does the president see that this is a threat to him or does he see this might be a benefit to >> impeachment is really a double-edged sword for president trumn on the one publiy he's saying that impeachment would be positive f him, it would help him get reelected by energizingr his vo but privately, people who are close to the president are also vy worried about whether or not this will be too distracting for him. this will be so focusedn impeachment and the impeachment inquiry that he wilus on what republicans want to get ndone in thmeo in office.c i have also been talking to people on the campaign, and thea aign was fund-raising off of this idea that the president might be peached. asking supporters for money for what they were calling an the other thing to note, the. campaign manager of president trump's 2020 election bid was actually saying this is going to agn mobize voters here.
6:25 pm
i should say, there are risks on both sides. i have been talking to sources all day who are saying, we got p here becauople were really worried about whether or not this was going to be something good for either party. so what we'll see is really risks on both sides and people really trying to figure out whether this is going to be good for their party. >> brangham: all right, yamiche and lisa, thanks for bringing us up to speed. >> brangham: in the day's other news, president trump took on globalism-- and iran-- in his formal address at the united tions today. he spoke against the backdrop of the growing impeachment talk in washington. again, yamiche alcindor reports. >> alcindor: the president's tone may have been subdued... >> if you want freedom, take pride in your country... >> alcinr:t his talk was still tough, as he pushed his "america first" approach.ur >> the fdoes not belong to globalists.
6:26 pm
the future belongs to patriots. >> alcindor: in his address to the united nations general assembly, president trump targeted familiar foes. in particular, he called for allies to help count iran. >> all nations have a duty to act. responsible governments shou subsidize iran's bloodlust. a >> alcindo, he called out chinese trade policy. >> it has embraced an economic model depeent on massive market barriers, heavy statema subsidies, currency manipulation, product dumping, forced technology transfers and the theft of intellectual property. and also trade secrets on a grand scale. >> alcindor: the president also used the world forum to make his case for his domtic agenda. he praised u.s. employment res and highlighted his tax cuts. and, he was uncompromising on illegal immigration.
6:27 pm
>> if you make it here, you will not be allowed in. you will be promptly returned home. you will not be released into our country. >> alcindor: today's speeches also featured a number of authoritarian and far-right figures, including leaders from turkey, egypt and brazil. the brazilian leader dismissed warnings about wildfires in thei amazonorest. >> ( translated ): the amazon is not being devastated, nor is it being consumed by fire, as the media misleadingly says. >> alcindor: meanwhile, president trump did meet with isone traditional ally, br prime minister boris johnson. it came hours after britain's highest cot struck down johnson's decision to suspendrl ment. the president offered moral support.do >> he'g a fantastic jo not sy, and-- but doing a really great job. and i think he'soingo make great progress come october. >> alcindor: for the p newshour, i'm yamiche alcindor at united nations in new york. >> brangham: mudslides and power outages hit the u.s. virgin
6:28 pm
islands today, as tropal storm karen arrived. the storm also brought heavy rain to puerto ro, and winds of 40 miles an hour. hours earlier, an earthquake shook the island, but caused little damage. farther north, tropical storm jerry could reach bermuda on wednesday. it had sustained winds today at 60 miles an hour. in northern california, threats of wildfires brought blackouts for more than 24,000 homes and businesses. pacific gas and electric shu off electricity in parts of the sierra nevada foothills overnight, amid hot, windy conditions. in the last two years, downed power lines have sparked huge fires in the state. as a result, p.g.& e. is now in fet,ral bankruptcy proceedings. u.s. health officials say there have been hundreds more casesg of llnesses affecting e-cigarette users since last week. in all, nine people have died in recent months, and hundreds have been hospitalized. at a u.s. house hearing today, dr. anne schuchat of the centero for disease coand prevention said officials still
6:29 pm
there have changed, andducts out the use has probably increased. but we don'tet know if there's a new, particularly risky product out there, or a substance that's in the product, or manipulation that's dangerous. >> brangham: the trump administration has proposed a ban on flavored e-cigarettes.rn and, this afn, the governor of massachusetts pdered a temporary ban on the sale of all vapiducts. the european union's highest court sided with google today, ruling that e.u. privacy standards do not apply globallya thmark decision limits the reach of the so-called "right to be forgotten." that standard lets users i europe request that sear engines remove some links from their names. france had asked that the rule be applied everywhere, not just within the e.u. famed opera singer placido domingo has withdrawn from performing witdrthe new rk metropolitan opera, amid sexual harassment accusations.
6:30 pm
in a statement, he says he strongly disputes the claims, but does not want to be a distraction. he says he will not be returning to the met. domingo is 78. and, on wall street, stocks sank on worries about idreachment and in consumer confidence. the dow jones dustrial average lost 142 points to close at 26,807. the nasdaq fell nearly 119 points, and the s&p 500 dropped 25. still to come on the newshou n whatt in the brexit saga, after a critical move by the prime mister is ruled unconstitutional?do out of the s. the survivor of the stanford university sexual assault case reclaims her voice. plus, writer ta'nehisi coas on myth, memory, and his first novel, "the water dancer."
6:31 pm
>> brangham: british prime minister boris johnson's campaign to leave the european union, deal or no deal, hit a roadblock today. the supreme court of the united kingdom ruled that his decision to recess parliament wasia illegal, and that lawmakers can return to work immediately. ciaran jenkins with independent television news has all the details from another chaotic day. fi reporter: for u.k. democracy, a ng day. for the prime minister, boris johnson's reasons for suspending parlionent, the reass he gave the queen, were torn to shreds by the country's 11 most senior judges, aanimously. >> the decision ise her majesty to prorogue parliament was unlawful. >> reporter: we were witnessing, said theupreme court presidt, a one-off. history forged, as the prime minister's five-week suspension of parliament was overturned. >> parliament has not beenor ued.
6:32 pm
this is the unanimous judgment of all 11 jues.he >> reporter:onsequences? boris johnson's polate. opponents, through the courts, will have him hauled back before parliament. >> there is nothing to stop us resuming the immediately important job of scrutinizing this minority tory government as we hurtle towards brexit >> reporter: pliament is soon to be unlocked. >> i'm ready for work. look forward to parliament sitting. >> do you expect the prime minister to be sitting there as well? >> i've no idea who will andwo n't be there, but i will be the. >> reporter: he's staying as
6:33 pm
prime minister, but rushing back, ahead of schedule tonight, from the u.n. general assembly. >> i strongly disagr withan this judgementwe in the u.k. will not be deterred from getting on and delivthe will of the british people october 31. of the e.u. on >> reporter: the final, t monumental worugh, is the supreme court's. its ruling on these two legal challenges begin to set the u.k. constitution in stone. >> today's ruling confirms that we are a nation governed by the rue, of law, laws that every even the prime mister, is not above. >> rorter: and so boris johnson is forced back tomorrow to westminster, and a deluge o scrutiny. >> yang: stormy days indeed for british politics. so where does all this leave boris johnson, and where does it leave brexit?
6:34 pm
charles kupchan is a senior fellow at the council on foreign relations, and a professor atge. during the obama administration, he was the senior director for european affairs. mr. kupchan, thanks for being here. where does this leave brexit? the deadline is five weeks away. this ruling today?cal effect of >> well, it's a political bombshell of sorts in that there isn't a written constitution u. th no one knew how the supreme court was going to act. they didn't pis their words. they said boris johnson is standing in the way ofhe constitutional function of parliament, that it's unl ful, that it's void, and parliament was supposed to be suspended for ses.ral more we it's meeting tomorrow. it hemsiboris woirn even more, but there was already legislation passed by parliamens before he nded it that said i a no-deal brexit cannot happen. so right now doesn't have a lot of good options on october 17/18, there is a meeting of the heads of state of the e.u.
6:35 pm
he will go. he will me one last pitch to get a deal. he's probably not going to get it, and at least according to parliament, he has to say, i need an extension. brangham: he has tok the e.u. for an extension? >> what are the chances they will give him that? >> i would say ahigh likelihood, because if theyhi didn't givan extension, then brexit would be on the e.u.'s watch. he'll get it. but will he ask foit? he has made his claim to fame, we are getting out on october 31 no matter what. is he going to ask for thatns exn? is he going to defy parliament? that because he woail if he did breaking the law. >> brangham: prime minister johnson has been in ofice for two months now. he's lost a series of major votes in parliament. he's lost his wrking majority in parliament. h's losing members of his conservative party. what does this -- what could today do to his standing? can he remain as prime minister?
6:36 pm
re i think he will probably stay for a few moeeks to get to that conversation with the.u. to see if he can't get a deal. i'm guessing he will stay and not resign in part is because he would like an election,but he wns an before october 31,be use after that if it's after extension, the brexit people l may hast confidence in him. the opposition wants an election to come after october 31 precisely because boris johnson will be weaker. right now it's anybody's guess how this plays out theext few weeks, but at least for now it looks like brexit won't happen on october 31 because thea parliament forbid it. the parliament is now backed by the supreme court. >> brangham: so taking ak bigg b picture or pullick a little bit, what's the effect of all this chaos in britain on the world, on the united states? well, i think it's safe to say that britain is going to be tied up in knots for years,
6:37 pm
because whether breck yet happens or whether it dosn't happen, they will be trying to sort this out. the relationship with the j the relationship with the united states. britain is effectively missing in action. it's closed for business. that is a problem for a country that has been the closest paner for the united states. we as this newscast has been saying are also tied up in knots politically. so it's interesting that at this moment the two angelo saxon countries most responsible for building modernity as we it, it's a globalized world, are in deep political trouble. >> brangham: charl kupchan, thank you very much. >> brangham: now, the survivor of a rape casehat captured the country's attention is reclaiming her identity and her voice. amna nawaz sat down earlier today with chanel miller. after she was assaulted in 2015 at stanford university, she chose to stay anonymous. but now, miller is talking very
6:38 pm
publicly abouthe difficult, traumatic road she faced trying to seek justice. >> nawaz: for years after her assault, she was known to the world as "emily doe." but this week, chal miller is stepping into the spotlight with her own name, and her own words, in the new memoir, "know my name in january of 2015, miller was sexually assaulted while unconscious by brock turner, often described then as a star swimmer at stanford university. ato graduate students witnessed the attack behind a dumpster, chased turner down when he fled, and pinned him down until police arrived. after the trial a yern later, er was convicted of three felony counts of sexual assault, facing up to 14 years in prison. but judge aaron persky sentencej him t six months in county jail, saying "a prison sentence would have a severe impact on the sentence spark outrage, including among califoia voters, who recalled the jud in 2018, the first time that's happened in more than 80 years. miller's own powerful statement
6:39 pm
in court, 7,000 words-plus, helped fuel that outrage, and gave voice to sexual a t survivors everywhere. it was published in buzzfeed and millions, even read aloud on the floor of congress.ly turner served hree months. and miller stayed quiet for years. but with her new book, chanel miller is now sharing her stldy with the w we met in new york earlier today. chanel, thank you so much for being he t the under. nk you verying if me, amna. >> nawaz: i want to ask you about the story you lay out in nawaz: when you wake up ingin an unfamiliar place and you have no mory of the nighbefore, and a deputy turns to you and says, you're in the hospital and there's reason to believe you have been sexually assaulted. what goes through your mind att? that mom >> i was in complete denial. i think you can't acct immediately that the entire
6:40 pm
trajectory of your life has just changed. you want the believe that you can retuor to youdinary life that you were on some sort of notrack and that you wil that's what i wanted to believe. >> brangham: at the time, we should clarif you had no idea that the night before, as you said, when you went to a party th your sister, you passed out and had been assaulted. >> uh-huh. >> brangham:. >> nawaz: you don't learn this until days later when you see a news story pop up into your feed. the very first line of that story reads, "a former stanford swimmer has been charged with raping and an intoxicated, unconscious woman in an on-campus attack." you wrote at the time that you knew it was you. >> uh-huh. >> nawaz: how did you know that. >> because everything in the sty lined up, but i still whe reading the news, i felt disembodied. dn't want to affiliate my identity with this graphic description at was being depicted on the news. i felt extseremely exand
6:41 pm
stripped down. i had no ability to coveryself up or maintain any sense of dignity or privacy. >> nawaz: when you were first asked -- because it's a choice whether or not you want the press charge, right? -- the state will move ahead with charges regardless, but if you want to participate is a choice. when you writen hindsight, you said, "i didn't know that if a woman was drunk when the violence occurred she wouldn't be taken seriously. i didn't know that if he was drunk when the violence occurred people would offer him sympathy." how did you see that idea play itself out over the yengar lea up to and before the trial? >> in the beginning, when i read the stor t it was very cle me what happened. if someone runs, they're exhibiting consciousness of guilt. they don't want to be caught, but he was. so i thought, all right, he was where w his head hung low andck
6:42 pm
apologize for what he has done, and instead heeaawyered up and came after me. i never thought it would go this far. i never thought we would go to trial. i didn't understand that theres much to be discussed. i didn't think that a year and a half later i would be in a testimony stand talking about facetimeing my boyfriend and what i had to eat for lunch and dinner that day. it seemed to disiintegrate into this meaningless interrogation, and what was vethy clear i beginning quickly became murky. i feel that so much of te sha i experienced throughout that process was learned, and it's really incredible to me how much of the shame cumulated and washr ingestedghout that process by so that by the end i didn't recognize myself, i had noi grap of the situation. i feel like i didn't deserve to be treated well.
6:43 pm
i felt hallowed out and pty by the time the year and a half was over it was an extremely brutal process that i don't exo ct anyoneo through. >> nawaz: when the sentence ame down,gain, there was a flurry of attention because of how lenient it was. and you wrote about that in the book you said, "the judge had given brock somethg that would never be extended to me, empathy. my main was never more valuable than his potential." what did you mean by that? >> i mean, there was nothing ever to sugst that i had a life outside of the courtroom, that oi wasn a track of my own, that i had my own dreams and enjoymentsrend goals befohe assault happened. i felt like nothing morthan a body. i was spoken about in a very just physical way, but i didn't
6:44 pm
feel human. and i always felt suffocated, like no matter what i said, idn co be heard. i would look around and think, is anyone actually hearing me? it's a terrifying position to be in, to feel like you canic on stand, that you can yell a statement, and people still n't hear you. you feel invisible, like you will forever be muted. >> nawaz: you had the relive many of those momts on the stand in public in front of strangers. you had to be asked and reasked and reanswer a lot of those questions over many, many months. all of those das?u kept going in what did you tell yourself in those moments? >> it feels like you're in te watered, like taking in water, lapping it up, but you can never stop to get a breath of air, and only when i cried henough would they finally say, okay,e enough, stop, y would release me to the bathroom.
6:45 pm
and i would wake up in the morning, and i would think, i'm still here, and i'm still showing up in court each time. doesn't that mean something?v the fact, if i wast, you know, posturing and speaking with a cle voice, even if i was humiliating mys telf e stand, the fact of the matter is i was there. i wa sitting in front of everyone. i was taking it. and the fact of just showing up no matter how you y sow up reminded me that i'm still going, and i'm going to make it> rangham: let me ask you about your statements. you saw the millions ofeople reading it, responding to it, writing to you about wt,hy do you think it resonated the way that it did? >> i think it wa honest that i was honest about the panic attacks that i had, the shame, the guilt, the fear that nderyone cod relate to it, a i think we're all so used to experiencing that in an isolated
6:46 pm
context that we're not taught ty oppeak about it. so i think it was liberating for people to have those parts of their internal lan dscanally put into life. >> nawaz: when you hear six months and you understand he will be inail for matter of weeks, do you start to question why you went tough everything you went through? >> oh, yes. it felt almost like a je. like it was so anti-climactic.l you have this tension andon grief and trauma oer a year and a half, and you get there, and they say, all right, six months, which will ultimately be three. it felt like this really light dusting off. no big deal. thank you for coming. >> matt: for all those "people power" knew you only as emilye. what is it like to see your name, chanel miller new york bio letters on the cover of a
6:47 pm
book? >> it'wos reallerful. i feel like i can fully exist in the world. i feel like in the beginning i was really scared that i wouldbe randed by this case, that that would be my label exclusively. the fact that i'm able to merge as a writer with this tangible obct to anchor me is really wonderful,nd i feel very proud of that. h matt: chanel miller,, you so much for your time. >> thank you so much for havinge >> brangham: mix fantasy and history, to tell aale of slavery and memory. in the latest addition to our "newshour bookshf," jeffrey brown sits dowwith ta'nehisi coates about his new book, part of our art and cuure series, "canvas." >> brown: ta'nehisi coates, appearing before congress this
6:48 pm
year to make the case for reparations for the human and economic costs of slavery... >> the typical black family in this country has one-tenth the wealth of the typical white family. the matter of reparations is one of making amends. >> brown: ...an example of the forceful advocacy and powerfuldv data-driven argument f which he's become so well-known, writing influential magazine articles, and a series of non-fiction works, including his 2015 national book award- ndnning "between the world me." but, it turns out, for the last ten years, he's also been writing something else, going beyond facts and figures.>> he math and the numbers are really, really important. but when you start getting todu indi people-- there's a part in "between the world andme when i say, "slavery is not an amalgam of people, it's literally this person doing dot, t, dot." and this is the attempt to live in the world of such a person. >> brown: and that an answer to "why fiction?" >> yes, that definitely an answer.es
6:49 pm
>> brown: colatest book is "the water dancer,on a plantation in 19th ctury virginia, along the undergroundf railroad systeafe houses that helped slaves escape to freedom, and in philadelphia.ur historical f are woven in, most notably harriet tubman, thh former slave whose heroic resc missions brought hundreds of aves north. in new york recently, coates said he wanted to counter what he sees as the many myths of the thissouth, that continue t day. >> what became clearo me is that you can't win this argument by showing documents. the facts won't do it. people are holding onto something else. this is the reason why peopleas gather, for instance, to protest taking down confederate statues. this is not a oblem of history. this is a problem of myth. >> brown: when you say "myth," you mean, like"story >> story, yes, exactly right.
6:50 pm
>> brown: so you're taking actual things and ging it a different sort of life in fiction? >> yes. much of that myth was drawn out of actual history: robert e. lee is a historical fire, and there's a mythological rort e. lee. i felt that maybe there was an opportunity to do the exact same thing with blacks who lived under the period of ement, that there were stories and myths that could be drawn outat and written in a compelling and >> brown: how much research nt into it? did you-- you're laughing as >> a lot! >> brown: you approached this the way-- you're a non-fiction n writer, you're a journalist. >> i did. that was the start, so i visited a ton of slave plantat >> brown: did you read many first-hand accounts? >> i read a ton of first-hand accounts. >> brown: but how much did it end up informing the-- >> i couldn't have written the book without it. i felt like the greatest challenge in the book was that there was ready, i think, in most people's minds, an image of
6:51 pm
slavery. and that image revolves around whips.nd it revolves arhains, it revolves around cotton picking. it revolves around rape.al these arof these tropes that are already there. >> brown: and they're all true. >> and they're all true. e.ey're definitely all t but when i went back through the documentation, the thing that struck me most, in fact,as how much family separation was a part of the story of enslavement. much of the grieving, that i saw is a wife separated from her huomand, a mother separated her child, a father separated fr a child, child separated from a grandmother. d that's the place "the water dancer" lives. >> brown: but there's . coates is also a long-time reader and writer of comics and fantasy stories, including part of the "black pantheies. he's given his young protagonist in the novel hisowind of supe-- one based on the power of memory. er's an interesting superp to give an enslaved person,
6:52 pm
memory, right? almost an inability to forget. >> a lotf this is about how african americans remember their own history. i think this is no longer true, but certainly, let's say two or three generations before me, there rtainly was a prevailing notion that we didn't talk about enslavement. we just didn't mention i you just move on, you don't repeat the traumas. but one of the implicit ideas in this is that you can't actually move. there's so much that you can't do, when you're so intent on forgetting. and there's so much more you can do if you actually grab it by the reins, you know, grab memories by the reins say, "look, this actually happened." >> brown: coates' celebrity has taken him far, and he is regularly cited as one of today's leading public intellectuals. i asked if he felt pressure to make everything he puts out-- including this novel-- feel"i ortant" to the moment.or >> it doesn't have to be important, but i have to feel
6:53 pm
like it's really good. i have to be excited, but i don't need to be operating in front of a big crowd every timet i need to be e by the challenge. lei need to not be able to. that w true before i had an audience, that will be trueau after my audience leaves me. >> brown: coatesnovel is the latest by a celebrated african american artist to explore painful history d culture in creative new ways. >> i think you have is a number of afran americans who have a level of prominence in literature, inhe arts, in media, working actually with other african americans. they aren't alone. >> brown: more comfortable? or more urgent? >> no, i think the desire was always there. but i think it's very different when you have a commof
6:54 pm
people who are working at a certain level, telling those stories. >> brown: and what do you think this is, or might add up to, in terms of a re-telling of the history, the myth, the actual history? >> i think part of the history of rism anwhite supremacy this country is the stranglehold it's had on the story the country tells itself. i if theany ea of optimi what i'm optimistic about it's in that area. there's politics that happens at the ballot box, and then there's politics, another kind ofthat politics that happens in our culture. en you see white kids, little white kids, dressing up as black panther for halloween, something's shifting, someing's changed. that wasn't true when i was a kid. who you see as a hero-- who you see as a human being-- all of that informs the actual politics. and it's that greater context where i probably see the most
6:55 pm
shift and the most change. >> brown: all right, the book is "the water dancer." ta'nehisi coates, thank u very much. >> thanks for having me, jeff. >> brangha and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm william brangham. join us online, and again here tomorrow eveng. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and good night. aj >> funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> bnsf railway. >> consumer cellular. >> financial services firm raond james. >> the ford foundation. working with visionaries on the frontlines of social change worldwide. york.rnegie corporation of new supporting innovations in education, democraticge ennt, and the advancement of international peacend security. at carnegie.org. >> and with the ongoing support
6:56 pm
of these institutions and individuals. >> possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. ocaptioning spo by newshour productions, llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
6:57 pm
6:58 pm
6:59 pm
7:00 pm
>> pati narrates: new york, new york. one of the best food cities in the world. the best chefs, the best restaurants. if you can make it here in the culinary industry, you've made it. one of the most unique, prestigious experiences in the city is a dinner at the james beard house. the former home of legendary chef and television personality james beard. i've been asked to cook for a very special event, . the cinco de mayo dinn oh my gosh, i love this color! did you see? and a few recipesr that i wantwith you. the event, a light, creamy dulce de leche caramel mousse that ut melts in your mo because one dessert is never enough,wo i'm making a chocolate salami. it's not really a salami,t

21 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on