PBS NewsHour full episode January 12, 2018

JUDY WOODRUFF: Good evening.
I'm Judy Woodruff.
On the "NewsHour" tonight:
SEN.
RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL), Minority Whip: He said these hate-filled things, and he said them
repeatedly.
JUDY WOODRUFF: President Trump sparks outrage across the globe with reportedly vulgar comments
about countries in Africa and in this hemisphere that send immigrants to the U.S.
Then: from paradise to Mexico's deadliest city.
We visit the beaches of Acapulco in our continuing look at the effect of growing violence on
the country's tourism.
JAVIER MORLETT, Victims Rights Advocate (through translator): These gangs came from a fragmentation
of big gangs.
They don't have the ability or the logistics, so they abandon the drug business and instead
start attacking civic society to survive.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And it's Friday.
Mark Shields and David Brooks talk about the latest controversy involving President Trump
and the role of immigration in the United States.
All that and more on tonight's "PBS NewsHour."
(BREAK)
JUDY WOODRUFF: The president of the United States is at the center of a storm tonight
over crude and offensive language.
The "NewsHour" has opted not to repeat the word in question, but President Trump was
widely quoted as asking a group of U.S. senators yesterday, "Why are we having all these people
from 'blank'-hole countries come here?"
Today, waves of indignation washed over the White House.
Lisa Desjardins begins our coverage.
DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: That is what Reverend King preached all of
his life, love.
LISA DESJARDINS: Even as he honored the words of Martin Luther King Jr.
DONALD TRUMP: No matter what the color of our skin or the place of our birth, we are
all created equal by God.
LISA DESJARDINS: President Trump ignored questions about his reported words about immigrants
from Haiti and Africa during a meeting at the White House yesterday.
QUESTION: Did you refer to African nations as (EXPLETIVE DELETED) countries?
QUESTION: Mr. President, are you a racist?
LISA DESJARDINS: Earlier on Twitter, Mr. Trump strongly denied making defamatory comments.
He wrote: "The language used by me at the DACA meeting was tough, but this wasn't the
language used."
He later wrote he -- quote -- "never said anything derogatory about Haiti."
Senator Dick Durbin, the only Democrat in the room, insisted the president did ask why
the U.S. would want immigrants from Haiti or Africa, and did use a derogatory expletive.
SEN.
RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL), Minority Whip: In the course of his comments said things which were
hate-filled, vile and racist.
To no surprise, the president started tweeting this morning, denying that he used these words.
It is not true.
He said these hate-filled things, and he said them repeatedly.
LISA DESJARDINS: Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told one of his colleagues that the
reported comments are basically accurate.
But two other Republicans at the meeting said they do not recall those remarks.
House Speaker Paul Ryan was careful in his response, stressing personal ties from his
hometown in Wisconsin.
REP.
PAUL RYAN (R-WI), Speaker of the House: First thing that came to my mind was very unfortunate,
unhelpful.
We have got great friends from Africa in Janesville who are doctors who are just incredible citizens.
And I just think it's important that we celebrate that.
LISA DESJARDINS: Other Republicans were much more sharp.
Utah Congresswoman Mia Love, whose parents emigrated from Haiti in the 1970s, called
the comments "unkind, divisive, elitist, and fly in the face of our nation's values."
And Florida Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, herself an immigrant from Cuba, said the president's
language -- quote -- "takes your breath away."
REP.
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN (R), Florida: This is a president that has had a sordid -- a sordid,
terrible history of making racist statements.
LISA DESJARDINS: But among the president's conservative base, his self-described tough
language on immigration was cheered.
TUCKER CARLSON, FOX News: President Trump said something that almost every single person
in America actually agrees with.
LISA DESJARDINS: FOX News host Tucker Carlson:
TUCKER CARLSON: I don't understand what the sin is.
You're not allowed to point out that other countries aren't as good places to live as
America?
Like, what is the problem?
LISA DESJARDINS: Around the world, leaders from a number of African nations quickly condemned
the president's reported words.
JESSIE DUARTE, Deputy Secretary-General, African National Congress: Ours is not a (EXPLETIVE
DELETED)-hole country.
Neither is Haiti or any other country in distress.
Boniface Mwangi, Kenyan Activist: What Trump said about Africa is a lie, and it speaks
more of Trump than anybody else, that Trump is a shameful, disgusting, embarrassment of
a president.
LISA DESJARDINS: All this comes a week before the January 19 deadline to fund the government,
and as the White House and Congress continue to work out a plan on immigration.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And Lisa joins me now.
So, Lisa, as you're reminding us, all this happened as there were conversations going
on about coming up with a deal on immigration reform.
Where does this leave Republicans?
How are they reacting to this?
LISA DESJARDINS: Well, there was certainly a higher-than-unusual unreturned call rate
from my Republican sources today, but those that I did talk to and those that I respect
said this was a difficult day for them, for two reasons.
One, they're worried on how this reflects on their party, a party they know needs to
expand its base ultimately, and then, two, for how they look at the president.
Congress knows Republicans in Congress still need this president.
They still have to work with him.
They're wondering now, is Stephen Miller and the conservative hard-liners, are they the
ones who are kind of calling the shots at the White House?
And how can they criticize this president and still get a deal within days?
That's a situation someone like Lindsey Graham found himself in today, who tweeted out he
didn't deny that he heard these statements, but neither did he say for sure that he did.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, if that's where the Republicans are, what about Democrats?
LISA DESJARDINS: Yes.
Democrats think this is a momentum shift for them.
That's no surprise.
And they think that this speaks to a larger issue that goes their way, which is not just
demographic shifts, but philosophy, a more open America, an America that's open to the
world.
And we also know, strategically, Judy, they are preparing in the House, Democrats, to
offer a censure resolution.
That is a very big deal.
We have to watch how far that goes.
No such effort in the Senate.
But I think what we have to watch is how these folks really use this politically, but more
than that how they take this and deal with the issues in front of them now.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So the immigration deal, negotiations themselves, where does that stand?
You had this bipartisan group of senators come out of their meeting, come to the White
House saying, we have got a deal.
But the president rejected it.
LISA DESJARDINS: Right.
That's right.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Where does it go?
LISA DESJARDINS: Right.
He's got a vote of one that can make something sing or make it die.
Hear's what's happening in the Senate.
Those bipartisan talks among those group of six led by Senators Durbin and Graham, that
group is sticking by its plan for now.
Senator Durbin's office tells me they are going to try and sell that plan to both the
Democratic and Republican conferences outside of the president.
So I think the plan here is to try and change the president's mind, essentially, see if
they can work with him.
One source I talked to said today this is a president who clearly does change his mind
within the course of one single meeting, as we saw in the last week.
He said messages that means things -- different things to different people.
So, for now, that bipartisan group is going to stick with their plan.
However, Judy, conservatives, especially on the House side, want something different,
and they're pointing to a different group of leaders, the number twos in the Senate
and the House, who are all meeting, the whips, so-called.
They have had one meeting.
Staff met today.
But, to be honest, Judy, they're not far along in coming up with a real deal.
They don't meet again until next week.
And that's John Cornyn, Steny Hoyer, that group.
And it's that group that conservatives would like to have a role, but it's not clear if
they will or not.
JUDY WOODRUFF: But, meantime -- and, again, you pointed this out -- we're just a week
away from a potential government showdown.
How does this immigration disagreement fit into the discussions over government spending?
LISA DESJARDINS: As much as Republicans have some tough choices to make right now, this
is where Democrats have a tough choice.
They have said some, some of them, that they will not vote for another funding bill until
they get a DACA bill this week.
However, the real DACA deadline isn't until March.
That's when all of the DACA program expires.
Some of them point out some people lose status every day.
But Democrats have to decide, are they willing to shut down government this week over DACA?
The House side, it sounds like they're willing to force Paul Ryan to get 218 Republicans
for a funding bill if there's no DACA deal.
It's not clear he can do it.
The Senate side, Judy, there's an issue for Democrats.
That's their moderates.
I'm not sure that those moderates would shut down government over DACA this week.
That is to be determined.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And, again, to remind everybody, DACA being those young undocumented immigrants
who came to this country as children without documentation and what happens to them.
LISA DESJARDINS: That's right.
Thank you.
Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Lisa Desjardins, thank you again.
Terrific reporting.
LISA DESJARDINS: Thank you.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And in the day's other news: President Trump declined again to withdraw
the U.S. from the Iran nuclear deal, despite his fierce criticism of the pact.
But he warned this is a last chance, and he did reimpose some targeted sanctions on individuals
and businesses in Iran.
We will have a look at the Iran deal controversy later in the program.
The president has canceled a scheduled trip to open the new United States Embassy in London.
In an overnight tweet, he complained that the U.S. got a bad deal on the finances and
location.
He didn't mention calls for mass protests of any visit, but a British lawmaker who represents
the area near the new embassy says that is the real reason for the cancellation.
MARSHA CHANTOL DE CORDOVA, Member of Parliament: I think Donald Trump has chosen not to come
to London and come to Battersea to open the embassy because he's scared.
He's scared at the hundreds of thousands of people that will be here peacefully protesting
against his visit because of his racist and his misogynistic views.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The president blamed the Obama administration for the embassy deal, but the
decision and arrangements were made under President George W. Bush.
The U.S. ambassador to Panama says he is resigning because he can no longer serve under Mr. Trump.
John Feeley is a career diplomat.
According to Reuters, his resignation letter says that he took an oath to serve, even when
he disagrees with a president's policies.
But, he says, "If I believed I could not do that, I would be honor-bound to resign.
That time has come."
Feeley's decision came before Mr. Trump's comments from yesterday.
They are still searching tonight for mudslide victims in Southern California, but hope is
starting to run out.
Seventeen people have been killed ages 3 to 89.
Today, a river of mud covered the 101 Highway, as rescue crews scoured the debris.
At least five people are still believed to be missing.
In Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel is a big step closer to ending her country's prolonged
political deadlock.
Merkel's conservative ruling party and a center-left party agreed today on a framework for formal
coalition talks.
In Berlin, the chancellor acknowledged pressure to form a government, given the elections
took place nearly four months ago.
ANGELA MERKEL, German Chancellor (through translator): In the long time since the federal
elections, we have seen that the world is not waiting for us.
We are convinced that we need a new awakening for Europe and have developed the corresponding
ideas for this between the party chairmen.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The framework deal includes pledges to strengthen the European Union and
curtail the number of migrants entering Germany.
There is word that the MeToo movement fighting sexual harassment and assault is beginning
to make a stir in China.
A Beijing university announced last night that a prestigious scholar has been ousted.
It cited multiple allegations of sexual misconduct made by several women.
Women in Saudi Arabia were allowed to attend a soccer match at a sports stadium yesterday
for the first time.
But it came with restrictions: They had to sit in designated family sections.
They also used separate entrances.
It is one of a series of small steps to give Saudi women greater rights.
Back in this country, President Trump underwent his first physical examination today since
taking office.
He spent much of the afternoon at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda,
Maryland.
Then he departed for a weekend at his Florida club, Mar-a-Lago.
And Wall Street had another healthy day, after retailers reported strong holiday sales.
The Dow Jones industrial average gained 228 points, almost 1 percent, to close at 25803.
The Nasdaq rose 49 points, and the S&P 500 added 18.
Still to come on the "NewsHour": Haiti's ambassador on the president's reportedly vulgar remarks;
the Trump administration's latest moves to destabilize the Iran deal; trouble in paradise,
an unprecedented wave of murder in Acapulco; and much more.
Now for reaction from one of the nations targeted by President Trump in yesterday's discussion
of immigration with members of Congress, I'm joined by the ambassador of Haiti to the United
States, Paul Altidor.
PAUL ALTIDOR, Haitian Ambassador to the United States: Mr. Ambassador, thank you for being
here.
Thank you for having me.
It's a pleasure being here.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Your reaction to what you were told and believe the president said yesterday.
PAUL ALTIDOR: Surprise and disappointed that such statements would come out of such a prestigious
office like the office of the president of the United States.
But, again, those statements were alleged to have been made by the president of the
United States.
Rather than us simply come out and condemn them, which we do condemn, regardless who
says them, we did -- as a government, we did summon the U.S. charge d'affaires in Haiti
to come explain or at least give us some clarity on what was said prior to us jumping into
conclusions.
And, two, I have been actually trying to get some clarity as well from the State Department
here in Washington, D.C., as to whether or not the statements were actually made.
But, again, like I said, regardless if those statements were made, unfortunately, the country
of Haiti once again finds itself in the middle of yet another feud that has nothing to do
with us as a people, and we wanted to be certain that this issue is clarified.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Did the U.S. diplomat in Haiti speak to your government and have an explanation?
PAUL ALTIDOR: Well, I know this meeting took place earlier this afternoon.
I have yet to speak with my foreign minister to get all the details about this.
But, summoned, we know she came to the Foreign Ministry and discussed with our foreign minister.
I have yet to have all the details on what was said.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So you haven't gotten a read yet on what she said?
What about the U.S. State Department here?
You said you have been reaching out to them.
Have they responded?
What have they said?
PAUL ALTIDOR: So far, we have not received any formal response yet from the State Department.
Keep in mind, things have been moving quite -- very quickly throughout the day since this
news broke out yesterday.
So, we're hoping between tonight and tomorrow there may be a formal response from the State
Department as to what -- exactly what was said.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, you don't -- you feel you don't have clarity yet on exactly what the
president said, or you do?
PAUL ALTIDOR: Well, we know something was said.
We know, unfortunately, something was said about Haiti and a group of other countries.
Again, we condemn the statements.
We condemn the unfortunate things that were said, especially on this special occasion.
Here I am sitting here today talking to you about some regrettable statement when Haiti
is mourning, is actually commemorating the earthquake that happened back in 2010.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Right.
And this is the anniversary of that happening.
PAUL ALTIDOR: Exactly.
On this exact date, 300,000 people lost their lives.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Three hundred thousand people.
Mr. Ambassador, several people have reported from that meeting that the president said,
speaking of Haiti, "Why would we want people from Haiti here?"
If you were to have the chance to talk to President Trump right now, how would you answer
him?
PAUL ALTIDOR: Well, first, we hope, if the statements were made by the president of the
United States, we would prefer to think he was ill-informed, misinformed about Haitians,
the community of -- the country of Haiti, because what we're talking about here is a
country, a neighbor of the United States with a very long history with the people here.
Haitians lost their lives.
Haitians gave their blood back in 1779 to fight for the independence of this country.
So, our history here with the United States goes back a long, long, long way.
And to this day, as I'm talking to you, we have Haitians in universities who are professors
here.
We have Haitians who are driving cabs all throughout this country.
We have Haitians taking care of the American elderly.
We have Haitians teachers teaching American students.
In other words, we feel there is misinformation as to who we are as a community.
So, in light of what's happened, we're not here to simply condemn the statement.
We also, as a government, as a people, to open our arms.
So, if I'm talking to President Trump today, what we're asking -- we're asking two things.
One, as a candidate, he did go to Little Haiti in Miami to address the community.
So we're inviting him back to come and discover some of those the communities where Haitians
live.
Come to Boston, Mr. President.
Come to Miami, Mr. President, and discover the resiliency.
Discover exactly what this community of Haitians are doing.
And since we're also talking about immigration as well, we're hoping the president would
take time to see some of the TPS, to see exactly how much contribution as a community we continue
to provide here in this country.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Do you believe the president owes you, owes your country an apology?
PAUL ALTIDOR: If something was said, just if I were to come here and step on your foot
accidentally, we just hope this is good manners.
Again, we don't want to keep this conversation as to who said what.
Something was said in the name of Haiti that we find regretful, we find unfortunate, because
this fits into a greater narrative as a government we're trying to address, too much stigmas,
too much stereotype about the country of Haiti.
So, we hope this is a new beginning of a new conversation about the country of Haiti and
its people.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Ambassador Altidor, I want to ask you, because we were just talking about
this, about your own personal experience.
You came to the United States as a teenager.
PAUL ALTIDOR: Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You came to Boston.
PAUL ALTIDOR: Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Just talk for a moment about what you found when you came the United States?
PAUL ALTIDOR: Well, I came here just like most.
This is a typical story of other immigrants who come here.
I came here in the middle of winter with a T-shirt on my back from Haiti into Boston
in the middle of January.
But what happened?
What happened is, just like most other folks who happen -- who are fortunate to be here,
went to school, got my little part-time job, mate it to MIT, and became a Haitian ambassador.
So, this is our Haitian success story, but also an American story, as far as we're concerned,
in part because our two people, our two countries have been living side by side jointly for
a very long time.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Your father, you were saying, was a taxi driver in Boston.
PAUL ALTIDOR: That's correct.
That's correct.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So he spent a number of years here in Boston, in this country, contributing
to the economy of this country, working as someone who brought his family here.
PAUL ALTIDOR: Exactly.
Exactly.
And not only contributing to the economies of this country, but also making a great contribution
to the economies of Haiti as well.
So, the bottom line, again, we are hoping the American public, including the president
and others, get to know us as a community better.
Too much misinformation is out there.
Too much misconception about who we are.
So, we're hoping to use this opportunity to engage the American public in a different
conversation about who we are as a country, as a people.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, you have certainly begun that conversation right here.
And we appreciate it, Ambassador.
PAUL ALTIDOR: Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Ambassador Paul Altidor, thank you.
PAUL ALTIDOR: Thank you very much for having me today.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The agreement led by President Obama that limits Iran's nuclear program has
been a consistent target of President Trump.
Today, the White House made a major announcement about how the U.S. will proceed with the deal,
which also includes European allies, China and Russia.
John Yang reports.
JOHN YANG: President Trump has made no secret of his disdain for the nuclear agreement.
Here he is last October:
DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: The Iran deal was one of the worst and most
one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into.
JOHN YANG: Today, he didn't speak publicly as he declined again for the third time to
reimpose broad sanctions that were lifted in 2015 as part of the multilateral accord.
But the president warned, this is the last time, unless the deal is revised.
He wants a supplemental agreement drawn up within 120 days to address what he sees as
the pact's failings.
In a statement he said, "If at any time I judge that such an agreement is not within
reach, I will withdraw from the deal immediately."
Mr. Trump also wants Iran's long-range missiles to be addressed under a revised pact.
Mr. Trump also ordered targeted sanctions on 14 businesses and individuals to punish
the Islamic republic for its behavior.
He cited thousands of arrests that followed recent anti-government protests.
Europe's top diplomats said yesterday their governments are sticking with the existing
agreement.
British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said there's no other viable option to the deal,
known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
BORIS JOHNSON, British Foreign Minister: I don't think anybody has come up with a better
idea.
And I think it's incumbent on those who oppose the JCPOA really to come up with that better
solution.
JOHN YANG: Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif rejected today's U.S. announcements, and said
the deal is not renegotiable.
Joining me now for more on today's announcement is Mark Landler of The New York Times.
Mark, thanks for joining us.
MARK LANDLER, The New York Times: Happy to be here.
JOHN YANG: So, the president says he wants changes, or the United States is out.
What changes does he want?
MARK LANDLER: Well, what he wants is a series of what the White House is calling triggers.
These are things that, if Iran doesn't go along with whatever the particular provision
is, the sanctions against Iran would automatically snap back.
And these fall into the category of allowing unfettered inspections of nuclear facilities.
They also want to eliminate the sunset provisions.
In the current nuclear deal, Iran is allowed to resume some nuclear-related activities
on a timetable extending over the next 10 to 20 years, such as enriching uranium.
The president wants those eliminated, so that, in effect, any activity that could allow Iran
to produce a nuclear weapon would be foreclosed, not just for 10 years or 20 years, but forever.
And that's what he's demanding of both lawmakers and Congress and, more difficultly, allies
in Europe, who are very unlikely to agree to that kind of a renegotiation.
JOHN YANG: And, as you point out, he's asking this of allies of Europe.
He's negotiating with allies in Europe, not with Iran.
Explain that.
MARK LANDLER: Well, I think the idea here -- and the White House did say today they
ruled out the idea of bringing Iran to the negotiating table -- the idea here, in effect,
is if you get the United States, Britain, Germany and France to line up in favor of
these changes, that you could, in effect, present it to Iran as a fait accompli.
There are a couple important missing pieces here.
Two of them are China and Russia, who, as you said earlier, are signatories to the deal,.
They'd presumably want to have a role in this, and then finally Iran itself, which has said
over and over again the deal is done, it's not negotiable.
So I think that, in a sense, the White House is setting up a scenario that will be very
difficult, if not impossible, to pull off.
JOHN YANG: Why don't they just pull out of the deal?
If the president says this is such a bad deal, why doesn't he just unilaterally pull out?
MARK LANDLER: Well, I think there has been an interesting change in conditions on the
ground in Iran.
You have had this outbreak of anti-government protests.
On one level, those protests made President Trump, if anything, more intent on walking
away from the deal as a way of punishing the regime.
But, oddly, particularly for the Europeans, the unrest in Iran is an even stronger reason
for sticking with the deal.
And the argument the Europeans make is you want to keep the spotlight on the Iranian
administration, on the Iranian leadership.
Ripping up the deal only allows the government to say the villain here is the United States,
it's not our own corruption, our own misuse of funds, et cetera.
So there's a strong reason logically to stick with the deal a little bit longer.
I think that's the case that President Trump's advisers, Secretary of State Tillerson, Defense
Secretary Mattis, his national security adviser, McMaster, I think that's the case they made
to the president.
He clearly didn't want to do it.
He didn't want to do it three months ago or last year either.
But I think they were able to get him to sort of grudgingly agree, provided, as he said
today, this is the last time he's willing to do it.
JOHN YANG: And what would be the effect if this -- they don't get this deal, they don't
get what the president wants, and he says he's going to pull out unilaterally?
What would be the effect?
MARK LANDLER: Well, if the United States reimposes sanctions on oil exports and on Iran's Central
Bank, it really does collapse the deal, because any European company that is thinking of investing
in Iran or conducting trade with Iran is going to stay away, out of fear that they will suddenly
find themselves at odds with the U.S. Treasury Department.
So it really is a death blow to the deal.
I think a lot of people are wondering whether, if 120 days from now, we see some progress
toward getting new legislation on Capitol Hill, and perhaps the Europeans saying, look,
we're not going to renegotiate the deal right now, but we're standing with you in an effort
to perhaps think about doing a follow-on agreement after this deal expires or enhance sanctions
against Iran on its ballistic missile program, that perhaps they could once again sell the
president on staying his hand.
That's a highly uncertain scenario, but I think it's what the deal's defenders are now
resting their hopes on.
JOHN YANG: One hundred and twenty days to go.
Mark Landler of The New York Times, thanks so much for helping us understand this.
MARK LANDLER: Thanks for having me.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Stay with us.
Coming up on the "NewsHour": Mark Shields and David Brooks tackle a busy week in politics;
and an immigrant's take on finding the path to belonging and acceptance.
This week, the U.S. State Department issued its top travel warning, usually reserved for
war zones like Iraq, or Syria, but the do-not-travel advisory covered places much closer to home.
It cautioned Americans from against traveling to five states in Mexico.
One is home to the famed resort city of Acapulco.
Special correspondent Danny Gold has our second look at violence in Mexico from that Pacific
Coast locale, and found a place that Frank Sinatra once crooned about, heaving under
the weight of crime and violence.
DANNY GOLD: Just over the hill from the strip of hotels that overlook Acapulco Bay, an all-too-common
sight, heavily armed police and a forensic team.
We just got a call that there are a number of bodies that have been found in a house.
We're in Zapata.
It's one of the more notorious neighborhoods in Acapulco.
This is the grisly work of a violent gang, led by a man known as The Virus.
They're pulling this truck up here to take the bodies out.
They don't want us to see that.
In Acapulco, it's not just a war on the violence and the gangs.
It's a war of perception.
And they don't want people thinking about and seeing the violence that's going on here.
After the police put two bodies in this truck, they left the area, and we were able to take
a look for ourselves.
This right here is part of what the police are trying to keep us from.
It's two freshly dug graves.
You can see there is still blood right here.
There's some rope right here.
And they pulled two bodies out of here just a moment ago.
Just hours before we met him, this 20-year-old, who requested that we protect his identity,
was held hostage just a few feet away from the shallow graves.
He's one of few people who have escaped death from The Virus and his fellow gang members.
MAN (through translator): After a day at work, three people came and covered me and took
me by force and started firing gunshots everywhere.
They hit me and took me to a house where there were lots of other captured people.
They hit me again and again.
They said they were going to kill me and they had already buried four people in the backyard.
DANNY GOLD: What are you going to do now?
Do you feel safe enough to go back to your neighborhood?
MAN (through translator): No, I don't.
What I want more than anything is to leave Acapulco.
There is no peace or security here.
DANNY GOLD: 2017 just marked the fifth straight year that Acapulco has been Mexico's most
murderous city.
But it hasn't always been like this.
The city gained prominence in the '50s and '60s as a tropical paradise for celebrities
and millionaires alike.
The Kennedys, John Wayne, Elizabeth Taylor, all were regulars.
Sinatra even mentioned one of his favorite vacation spots in "Come Fly With Me."
But as the violence shot up over the last decade, international tourists have been frightened
off.
Mexicans, like Iro and Sandy, now make up the bulk of those vacationing here.
And have you guys seen anything that would make you concerned about being here?
IRO, Tourist (through translator): No.
Everything is very calm, and we have had fun.
The last three days we have spent here, nothing has happened.
DANNY GOLD: Protecting tourists is extremely important for the city.
On Acapulco's main strip, it's common to see federal police, state police, city police,
a new tourist police force.
Even the military has been brought in.
However, the citizens of Acapulco say there is little being done to stop gangs from preying
on them.
LAURA CABALLERO, Business Owner (through translator): We love Acapulco.
That is why we stay here and enjoy it.
But there is a lot of extortion here.
DANNY GOLD: Laura Caballero is the president of a business owner's association.
This empty space on Acapulco's main strip used to be her successful restaurant.
Things changed after gang members demanded high-priced extortion payments from her.
LAURA CABALLERO (through translator): They asked us to give them money every month in
order to stay in business.
DANNY GOLD: Caballero's restaurant is just one of over 2,000 businesses that have shut
their doors in Acapulco over the past three years.
Is there anyone you can go to, the police, politicians, anyone who could do something
about this?
LAURA CABALLERO (through translator): No, definitely not right now.
I had friends who denounced the issues, and this cost them their lives.
Right now, there is total impunity and total corruption.
JAVIER MORLETT, Victims Rights Advocate (through translator): The fragmentation of gangs in
Acapulco is so big that we don't know exactly how many there are.
DANNY GOLD: Javier Morlett is an advocate for victims rights, a job that hits close
to home.
He lost his own 20-year-old daughter in 2011 to violence.
He says that gang wars that have taken over Acapulco differ from Mexico's standard drug
wars and offer a frightening new reality.
JAVIER MORLETT (through translator): These small gangs came from the fragmentation of
big gangs.
They don't have the ability or the logistics, so they abandon the drug business and instead
start attacking civic society to survive.
Since there are no businesses that could finance politicians in their campaigns, the ones financing
political campaigns are the gangs.
When politicians rise to power, they owe favors to these financiers.
Therefore, when politicians take power, they must establish a coexistence with those who
financed them.
And they cannot act against them.
DANNY GOLD: With a fragile system of law and order, those that can afford it in Acapulco
turn to private security, one of the few businesses still booming.
Joaquin Badillo, who goes by the nickname Jacko, runs a private security firm that employs
over 1,000 guards across the city.
They protect private businesses like shopping malls and residences.
Is your business growing as well?
JOAQUIN BADILLO, Business Owner: Yes, I have to say that.
But this crime of extortion is growing because not all the people have the money to pay the
private security.
So they prefer to pay the extortion because it's cheaper.
DANNY GOLD: Acapulco's police chief, Max Sedano, surprisingly believes there is no criminal
extortion in the city.
MAX SEDANO, Acapulco Police Chief (through translator): They make accusations that there
are businesses closed down due to extortion, but the reality is that the businesses close
down due to a lack of tourism, due to a lack of commercial activity.
DANNY GOLD: We did talk to some business owners, and they all told us they had to close because
of extortion.
MAX SEDANO (through translator): I have not seen a single person who has told me that
he had to close their business due to extortion.
DANNY GOLD: Sedano, a highly decorated police and military veteran, was brought in by the
federal government to help clean up both the city and the police force.
MAX SEDANO (through translator): When I joined this administration, the city police were
just coming out from a workers strike which lasted many months, one that deteriorated
the institution.
The morale of the policemen was very low.
The police then provided new uniforms and equipment.
I can tell you that the police force is changing and we are going to have a great transformation.
DANNY GOLD: We ran into Acapulco mayor, Evodio Velazquez, during a public appearance at a
busy night market.
EVODIO VELAZQUEZ, Mayor of Acapulco (through translator): There are a lot of violent acts
here, but, today, we are recovering.
We are remodeling public spaces all across the city.
Acapulco has around one million residents, so we are a huge city.
Of course, there are areas where violence is prominent, and we are working to eliminate
it.
DANNY GOLD: Miles from the scenic beachfront views, in one of the slums controlled by the
gangs, we arranged to meet up with this gang member.
He painted a much drearier image of the city, and his life in it.
Can you talk a little bit about why you decided to join?
MAN (through translator): Because nothing ever happens here.
At first, I was simply working with drugs, but then I became a person who liked drugs,
and now I need them to do everything.
DANNY GOLD: How do you feel when you see maybe a politician on TV saying how Acapulco is
an amazing great place to come on vacation, how it's like paradise?
MAN (through translator): They're lying.
They say that everything is OK, but we are not saying the same here.
Nothing is seen negatively on the TV, so tourists come here.
DANNY GOLD: The gang member sees the police and politicians not as a solution, but a major
part of the problem.
MAN (through translator): I have seen people killed.
All the officers do is turn their backs and go.
There are many people who have asked the police to help them, but they don't do anything to
stop this.
The police is bought here.
The authority isn't the law.
Here, who governs is the cartels, the gangs, the hit men, and the extortionists.
There is no future in Acapulco.
It's not even worth trying here.
DANNY GOLD: Every day at sunset, Acapulco's famous cliff divers take this brazen plunge.
But it's the city itself that will remain in freefall until it can finally control it's
crime and violence.
For "PBS NewsHour," I'm Danny Gold in Acapulco, Mexico.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The first year of the Trump presidency has been marked by moments of controversy
and remarks that regularly drew some sharp criticism.
This week brings perhaps one of the most striking examples yet, and again spotlights Mr. Trump's
views on race.
That brings us to the analysis of Shields and Brooks.
That's syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks.
Welcome, gentlemen.
MARK SHIELDS: Judy.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, it's a tough subject, Mark.
We have been talking about it for much of this program, interviewed the ambassador from
Haiti earlier.
What's your takeaway from what happened in that meeting yesterday with the president
and the members of the Senate?
MARK SHIELDS: Judy, first of all, revealing, and revealing at several levels.
I have no doubt the president said it.
There were six Republicans in the room.
Lindsey Graham has confirmed it basically to two other Republicans, Jeff Flake of Arizona
and Tim Scott, his colleague from South Carolina.
Everybody else has gone mute on the subject, showing moral cowardice, when addressing this.
Even Mitch McConnell, the voluble Senate majority leader, is mute.
And so it's really sort of tragic.
It's one thing, Judy, when Donald Trump uses Pocahontas to attack or taunt one senator,
Elizabeth Warren.
This, quite frankly, is beyond that.
I mean, this is racial.
It's racist.
It is.
And for Paul Ryan to call it unhelpful or unfortunate, this shows the moral cowardice
of the Republicans in response to it.
I mean, this is a man who thrives on being divisive, insists on being divisive.
We now have the lowest unemployment rate in 17 years, good economic news, as you reported
earlier in the show, and yet he remains mired in the mid-30s, where a great majority of
people do not think he's honest, do not think he's level-headed.
And it's a tragedy for country, for the relations, and most of all an indictment, a serious indictment,
of this presidency.
JUDY WOODRUFF: How are you reading, David, what happened, what he said?
DAVID BROOKS: Yes, well, I think it's pretty clearly racist.
It fits into a pattern that we have seen since the beginning of his career, maybe through
his father's career, frankly.
There's been a consistency, pattern of harsh judgment against black and brown people.
And so he's at it again.
And I guess I'm reminded first just the way it's rotting the Republican Party.
This is the one thing Republicans -- they can tolerate a lot of things in Donald Trump,
but the white identity politics, the racial politics, that's just a cancer.
And that's the one thing they can't tolerate, but they are -- seem to be tolerating.
My other thought is, we have been with this guy so long, we forget what, like, a normal,
admirable political leader or human being looks like.
And so a normal, admirable human being is curious about the world, and is sort of interested
in different cultures.
El Salvador, Haiti, Nigeria, they're interesting.
Has compassion for people from around the world.
It's hard to live in this country and not have admiration and compassion for the immigrants
who come here from Africa, from El Salvador, from Haiti, and like the ambassador we just
saw.
That story -- you meet that story every week.
And so to not have any of that normal human compassion or curiosity go through the guy's
head is part of the deeper character flaw here that we have apparently learned to tolerate.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, David says it's rotting the Republican Party, Mark.
What -- is it doing damage to the country?
MARK SHIELDS: Yes, it is, Judy.
Whoever the next president -- I assume that president will be elected in 2020 -- faces
a formidable task of repairing relations, of repairing the United States' reputation,
of just healing wounds both at home and abroad.
Just to add one point to what David made -- and I agree with it -- before I became a leading
pundit and David's colleague here...
(LAUGHTER)
MARK SHIELDS: ... I used to do political campaigns.
I worked for Senator J. William Fulbright, former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, in his last campaign in 1974 in Arkansas.
He was a man who was not falsely modest.
He'd been president of the University of Arkansas at the age of 34, a Rhodes Scholar, and the
Fulbright scholarship program was his creation.
And in talking one night about presidents with whom he had served, not under, whom he
had served -- with whom he had served, six, and he said, of John Kennedy, he said, "Whenever
I went to the White House when John Kennedy was president, I was proud as an American
that he was my president."
I cannot believe anybody, irrespective of how partisan they are, how devoted they are
to the Republican side, could say that they feel proud that Donald Trump is the president
or their president or our president.
I think it does damage to the country, does damage to the office, and it does damage to
the national spirit.
DAVID BROOKS: Yes.
And for the Republicans, A, for all evangelical leaders, the treatment of the refugee, and
the poor, the outsider, that's not -- the Bible is not ambiguous about that.
And Donald Trump is certainly against that spirit.
For the party, there's a more specific problem, which is they have become a pretty anti-immigrant
party.
And there are decent, normal human beings and admirable people like Senator Tom Cotton
who wants to sharply cut immigration.
And they think they can divide their views on immigration, which are purely policy views,
from the white identity, racial undertones that Donald Trump has now permanently -- or
not permanently -- but has taken into this party.
And that is not possible.
If you want to restrict immigration, which is a legitimate point of view -- I disagree
with it, but it is a legitimate point of view -- somebody like Tom Cotton has an extra burden
to rise up against what Donald Trump said, to show, hey, restricting immigration is not
synonymous with bigotry.
And if he doesn't do that, then whatever his policy views will always be tainted by the
sense that there's an aroma of bigotry around it.
JUDY WOODRUFF: I mean, as far as -- but, as far as we know, he hasn't said anything to
dispute -- or to confirm or dispute.
MARK SHIELDS: No, he made a statement today, he and David Perdue of Georgia, who were two
of the six Republicans at the meeting.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Saying they couldn't remember.
MARK SHIELDS: Specifically couldn't remember.
So, I would say these are two people who probably need medical attention, if they were in a
meeting less than 24 hours ago.
(LAUGHTER)
MARK SHIELDS: And Lindsey Graham and everybody else there seems to remember it, but they
don't remember it.
JUDY WOODRUFF: But this comes at a time we have got these contrasting, some would say
contrasting, views of the president this week.
Mark, you had the Michael Wolff book.
We have talked about that.
We talked about it with last week, which portrays with just about the most negative adjectives,
descriptions you can possibly imagine, the most charitable one being that he's just bouncing
around the White House, doesn't know what he's doing.
But then the next day, the president shows up at this meeting with Congress on immigration,
and he looks like he's in charge, he's carrying on a conversation.
Do we just set that aside?
And, I mean, how do we interpret this president?
MARK SHIELDS: I rarely take issue with a question you pose.
I didn't think he seemed to be conversant.
I mean, he was there.
He wasn't unpleasant.
And he certainly spoke in terms of love, as far as the immigration law is concerned.
But, Judy, he didn't know what was going on.
He was ready -- and it's a little bit like the pillow, the last person whose head was
on it leaves the impression.
I mean, he was ready to endorse Dianne Feinstein on a clean DACA bill, until Kevin McCarthy,
the House Republican leader, said, we can't do it.
And then, of course, he joined that.
And it wasn't an impressive performance.
It was a performance that didn't show a meanness and was obviously intended to rebut the charges
in the Wolff book that he was totally out of touch.
DAVID BROOKS: Yes.
Well, I think it's possible to fervently oppose Donald Trump and still not believe in fairy
tales.
Like, the fairy tale is, it's like the madness of King George in there, that he's just -- he's
like a child, he can't do anything, he can't remember anything, he's bouncing off the walls,
he's watching TV, screaming at Twitter.
And, frankly, if you watched his Twitter feed, you would have that impression.
But when you talk to people who have gone and had meetings with him, a lot of them,
he's surprisingly affable.
He's sort of normal, runs the meeting OK.
And so it's possible to believe that, that, yes, he's not a total basket case, he is running
a White House that is churning out policies, and still believe that he is guilty of bigotry,
of being ignorant.
And so it's possible to believe both things.
And I think we saw both things this week in Donald Trump.
But he's not a total monster.
He's not a blithering child.
But neither is he up to the standards that we would expect in a president.
MARK SHIELDS: Yes, he's inflicting great damage upon this country, and he will leave in his
wake great disenchantment, disillusionment.
There's nobody who's encouraged to get involved in government, in public service.
He calls nobody to a higher commitment, to the public good.
And he knows nothing.
I mean, at that meeting, he's terminally incurious.
I mean, this is a man who ran on immigration as his issue in 2016, ran successfully on
it, and is totally unconversant with the elements of the issue.
DAVID BROOKS: I don't deny any of that.
MARK SHIELDS: OK.
(LAUGHTER)
JUDY WOODRUFF: All right, well, one thing the White House is saying this week -- and
the president brings it up every chance he gets, David -- is the economy.
And you did have some companies this week saying, well, we're doing more hiring.
Wal-Mart raised their minimum wage.
They have given people bonuses.
A number of other countries (sic) are doing that.
They're -- some are interpreting this as, this is about the tax cut.
Does the president deserve any credit when the economy -- I mean, the Dow Jones industrial
average keeps shooting up.
Where does credit go?
DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I rarely link a president to credit in the economy while they're in
office.
You can have effects as president that will have downstream effects years later, but there's
no short one-to-one.
With this tax plan, if you give companies a big windfall, which is what they got, they
are going to have internal decisions.
Well, what do we do to help our company with this money?
And some will say, well, let's give it to the shareholders.
Some will say, let's invest it in R&D.
Some will say, you know, we have got a turnover rate among our employees.
Let's raise their salaries, increase their benefits.
And so Wal-Mart tended to do that.
And so I think we will see -- and there will be positive effects.
You give people money, they are going to spend it in some way.
And so we could see an increase in R&D, I hope.
And I hope we will see an increase in wages.
Does that mean the tax bill dramatically increased growth overall?
Well, the consensus among economists, that it did, but pretty little.
And so I think you give credit where is due.
It's not surprising to me that some companies would react in this way.
But I wouldn't expect to see a total jump in growth overall.
MARK SHIELDS: Wal-Mart raised its minimum start at $11, which is good.
I mean, it's better than it was.
I mean, it's not -- no one's living in clover on $11 an hour, but that's a positive.
Any time any company raises benefits and salary, with the income and economic disparity we
have in this country, is good.
The same day, they announced a closing of 63 Sam's warehouse.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Right.
MARK SHIELDS: And some on the very day that they announced them.
And it's a -- so you take the plus.
And Republicans, beginning with Speaker Ryan, say, oh, it's all the tax bill that's responsible
for this.
And I think that's a question that goes both ways.
I mean, this is good.
Bonuses are the cheap way out.
Bonuses is a way of doing it one...
JUDY WOODRUFF: Because it's one shot, yes.
MARK SHIELDS: One shot.
It's not an increase.
It's not -- it doesn't -- I mean, it's better to get a bonus than not get a bonus, but it's
not going to be there six months from now.
So, I think the jury is not even in, let alone out, on the tax bill.
(LAUGHTER)
JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, we have some time to watch what happens.
MARK SHIELDS: We do.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Mark Shields, David Brooks, thank you both.
MARK SHIELDS: Thank you.
JUDY WOODRUFF: We end this week with one immigrant's take on belonging.
Award-winning novelist Akhil Sharma is a professor of literature at Rutgers University and a
contributor to "The New Yorker" magazine.
He offers his Humble Opinion on opening up to understand the experiences of others.
AKHIL SHARMA, Professor of Literature, Rutgers University: People ask me all the time if
I feel more Indian or more American.
When I was younger, if it were an Indian asking, I would say American.
And if it were an American, I would say Indian.
I did this because I was wanted to bother people.
I was unsettled, unhappy, irritable.
And my taking the opposite of whatever the questioner was, was a way of unsettling him
or her, making the person anxious about his own sense of home.
Now, when people ask me the question, I say, I am American.
So what happened?
I think I became a little bit less selfish.
I grew up in a family where there was a lot of physical illness.
As a child, I spent years in hospitals.
I grew up feeling desperate, having the sense that there was only a limited amount of happiness
in the world, and I had to grab whatever I could.
In my 30s, after decades of being hurt and angry, I decided, I can't go on like this.
I have to change.
I have to change in every possible way.
I remember, one Monday morning, I was in the elevator of my apartment building, and I was
going down, and a woman got in, and I asked her how she was doing.
"Not well," she said.
Mother of God, I thought, I have my own problems.
"What's the matter?"
I asked, because this was the polite thing to say.
"My son, he's a paranoid schizophrenic.
He's 13, and he thinks the IRS is after him.
I had to put him in the hospital yesterday."
Mostly, what I felt at that moment was annoyance.
This woman had a real problem and, in my heart of hearts, I just wanted to get back to thinking
about myself.
I asked her if she wanted me to go with her to the hospital.
I asked this because I had decided I would try to think a little bit less about myself
and a little bit more about others.
As I asked this, though, I thought, please God, please, say no.
"Yes," the woman said.
"Thank you.
That would be great."
Unexpectedly, I felt enormous relief.
It was as if space had opened up around.
Every time I have given help when I have felt I needed it myself, I have had the same sensation,
sometimes quickly, sometimes in a little bit.
But there is space around me, that I have more options than I think.
It is generosity which reminds us we're more than our problems.
What does belonging mean?
It means feeling safe.
It means feeling accepted.
It has nothing to do with what country you were born in or your parents were born in.
The easiest way to feel safe is to offer patience, offer help.
When we do this, we're forced to step out of ourselves, and we're we reminded that the
world is greater than our imagination.
JUDY WOODRUFF: On the "NewsHour" online right now: In light of the president's reportedly
incendiary remark about the countries of some immigrants, we have updated our timeline of
his history of comments that are race-related, dating back to 1973.
All that and more is on our Web site, PBS.org/NewsHour.
Later tonight on "Washington Week": Robert Costa will have more on how the president
has ignited a highly charged debate over race, over immigration and the state of the Republican
Party.
That's later tonight on "Washington Week."
Tomorrow's edition of "PBS NewsHour Weekend" looks at how the situation in Ukraine continues
to strain the U.S. relationship with Russia.
And that is the "NewsHour" for tonight.
I'm Judy Woodruff.
Have a great weekend.
Thank you, and good night.
Shields and Brooks on Trump’s ‘s***hole’ comments, ‘Fire and Fury’ fallout PBS NewsHour full episode, January 12, 2018 The Power of Putin - Documentary 2018, BBC Documentary Shields and Brooks on Russia revelations, Trump-Bannon rift The impact of President Donald Trump’s explicit insult, latest updates in the Russia probe "Obama out:" President Barack Obama's hilarious final White House correspondents' dinner speech PBS NewsHour full episode January 9, 2018 Indira Jaising Speaks To Arnab Goswami On #JudgesAtWar AMERICA AFTER CHARLESTON | Full Program | PBS They Claim It's The World's Toughest Watch

PBS NewsHour full episode January 12, 2018

Latest Posts