Skip to main content

tv   PBS News Hour  PBS  June 16, 2022 3:00pm-4:00pm PDT

3:00 pm
♪ judy: good evening. i'm dy woodruff. on the newshour tonight, pressuring the vice president. the committee investigating the january 6th attack on the u.s. capitol spells out how former president trump repeatedly pressured mike pence to overturn the 2020 election. then, definitely amazon -- death in the amazon. a brazilian sherman confesses to the murder of a journalist and an indigenous rights activist whose work aimed to expose environmental threats to the region. and, the end of roe. how decades of work by anti-abortion activists has laid the ground work for the expected supreme court decision that would roll back reproductive rights. >> the anti-abortion movement was bringing these cases to create this instability and then using the same instability that
3:01 pm
the movement had created as a sign that roe needed to be reversed. judy: all that and more on tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by -- >> fidelity dedicated advisors are here to help you create a wealth plan. a plan with tax sensitive investing strategies. planning focused on tomorrow, while you focus on today. that's the planning effect from fidelity. >> the kendeda fund, committed to advancing restorative justice and meaningful worthrough investments in transform it -- and transformative leaders. carnegie corporation of new
3:02 pm
york, supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement, and the advancement of international peace and security at and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. ♪ >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. judy: the congressional committee investigating the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol held its third public hearing this afternoon. the focus was on the re of former vice president mike pence during the counting of the electoral
3:03 pm
college votes, and the public campaign, led by former president trump and his allies, to pressure pence to throw out the results. while much of hearing established the facts of january 6th and the days leading up to it, retired judge michael luttig, who had advised pence, testified about the very real threat he says still exists. >> almost two years after that fateful day, in january, 2021, that still, donald trump and his allies and supporters are a clear and present danger to american democracy. judy: the committee's chairman, democrat bennie thompson, explained how pence understood his role on january 6th, his efforts to withstand the pressure, and the potential danger he faced.
3:04 pm
>> donald trump wanted mike pence to do something no other vice president has ever done. the former president wanted pence to reject the votes and either declare trump the winner, or send the votes back to the states to be counted again. mike pence said no. he resisted the press -- resisted theressure. he knew it was illegal. he knew it was wrong. we are fortunate for mr. pence's courage on january 6. our democracy came dangerously close to catastrophe. that courage put him in tremendous danger. when mike pence made it clear that he would not give into donald trump's scheme, donald trump turned the mob on him. a mob that was chanting "hang mike pence." a mob that had dealt -- built
3:05 pm
the gallows outside the capitol. thks in part to mike pence, our democracy withstood donald trump's scheme, and the violence of january 6. but the danger hanot receded. judy: newshour congressional correspondent lisa desjardins and our new white house correspondent laura barron-lopez have been watching the hearing today. and they join me now. laura, welcome to you to the newshour. we are so glad to have you working with us. i'm going to start with you. so much of today's testimony was around a man named john eastman, law professor, who in those days, became a close advisor to then president trump, with this theory that then-president mike president had to overturn the election results. tell us how that picture was flushed out today. laura: today, we heard from greg jacob who was former counsel to
3:06 pm
vice president pence at the time, as well as judge michael louis dig. eastman was a clerk of luttig. both of them testified that eastman's theory was not legal, not constitutional, and that it also had no historical precedent. despite all of that, eastman continued to push this theory that, and hislan, that pence could overturn the election results by simply rejecting the slate of electors sent to congress by the stes. what we heard from jacob today in testimony was that in his conversations with eastman, eastman acknowledged either tacitly or directly that his plan was not legal. let's watch. >> he said, absolutely. al gore did not have the basis to do it in 2000, kamala harris should not be able to do it in 2024. but i think you should do it today. when i pressed him on the point,
3:07 pm
i said, john, if the vice president did what you are asking him to do, we will loon 9-0 in the -- lose 9-0 in the supreme court. he initially started saying, i think you would only lose 7-2. after further discussion, acknowledged well, you are right, we would lose 9-0. laura: despite all of those acknowledgments from eastman that jacob recounted, eastman continued to push pence's team whh jacob was part of, as well as the vice president himself, to go forward with this plan. and what the committee showed us today in the testimony from jacob as well as from mark short, chief of staff to vice president pence which they had taped deposition from, was both jacob and short talked about what eastman did in the lead up to january 6. on january 5, eastman met with jacob in the white house
3:08 pm
complex, not far from where i'm standing now. and eastman directly ask jacob, -- asked jacob, we need pence to reject the electors. later on in the day, because it became clear to eastman that pence was not going to do that and was refusing to go along with this plan, eastman again asked pence's team, trying to convince them another way. if you don't want to reject the electors, will you simply send the electors back to the state, so that way they can send new ones to congress? again, pence's team refused all of this. the big take away here is after these repeated attempts in the days -- the day right before january 6, president trump, still on january 6, launched a very public pressure campaign for pence to go forward with this plan. judy: and then, lisa, we get to january 6. we learn new details today about what exactly happened that day,
3:09 pm
to the vice president himself. lisa: that's right. the pressure campaign laura was talking about happening at the white house happened leading up to january 6 and what happened at the capitol. what the committee laid out today in terms of what happened january 6 speaks to president trump's intent. that is what they are trying to get across. they were directly connecting president trump's actions, the tweets he sent, and the timing on the day and what happened at the capitol. in particular, as the riot raged at the capitol, the committee said they have evidence the president was told the riot was happening, that staff around him were discussing him trying -- asking him to tweet out something to calm his followers. instead, here is what happened when chief of staff mark meadows took the news to the president, according to the committee that a riot was happening at the u.s. capitol. >> the testimony further establishes mr. meadows quickly
3:10 pm
informed the president, and that he did so before the president issued his 220 4 p.m. tweet criticizing vice president pence for not having "courage to do what needed to be done." here is what the president wrote in his 2:24 p.m. tweet, while the violence at the capitol was going on. and here's what the rioters thought. >> pence voted against trump. >> that is when we march on the capital. >> mike pence has betrayed the united states of america! mike pence has betrayed this president, and he has betrayed the people of the united states, and we will never, ever forget! lisa: the committee showed photos of what was happening with the vice president, depicting him going into the underground bunker. all of those steps taken, there he is on the phone, seeing the
3:11 pm
tweet from president trump, described as frustrated that the president was not taking other action to disperse the crowd. greg jacob, that laura spoke about earlier, was asked specifically his reaction to the news he saw today that the rioters were within 40 feet of him and the vice president. here's what he said. >> does it surprise you to see how close the mob was to the evacuation route you took? 40 feet is the distance from me to you, roughly. >> i could hear the din of the rioters in the building while we moved. but i don't think i was aware that they were as close as that. lisa: all of this showing that there was imminent danger to the vice president, and the case the committee is trained to make is that came from the white house. judy: we do know despite all of that, the vice president, the rest of the members of congress came back, and they did certify that night the vote count. laura, the pressure campaign
3:12 pm
continued the next day. laura: that's right. the very next day, john eastman called eric hirschman, white house attorney, and said there were other avenues the president, that his legal team could pursue to overturn the .tetistelonyon today, recounted that conversation here. >> eventually he said, orderly transition. i said good, john, now i will give you the best free legal advice you are ever giving -- getting in your life. get a great criminal offense lawyer, you are going to need it. and then i hung up on him. laura: what that testimony shows is also right after that, we are seeing this acknowledgment from eastman that the plan he was pursuing was not legal and he likely knew it was not legal, because then he emails a few days after january 6 rudy giuliani, the personal lawyer to the president, saying he would
3:13 pm
like to be put on the president's pardon list if possible. that was a revelation that came out today and the hearing that we had not previously seen. judy: finally, lisa, put some of this into the larger context in terms of what democrs are trying to do. lisa: when you speak with democrats on the committee and the staff and the two members on the committee, we know that they are building a case, they are raising questions, and some of them openly say they believe this former president should be indicted, should face criminal charges. that is audience number one, the department of justice. audience two is still the american public. i noticed something interesting today. this committee is trying to broadly reach out and hit different areas of interest for the american public. for example, when we talked about rig jacob and the moment where he was in the bunker when they were fleeing the mob, interesting question came up from the democrats on this
3:14 pm
committee. they asked him about him turning to prayer in that moment. here is what he said he was thinking about as the riot was raging not far from them. >> my faith really sustained me through it. down in the secure location, i pulled out my bible and read through it. and just took great comfort. daniel six is where i went. he refuses an order from the king that he canno follow. and he does his duty. consistent with his oath to god. i felt that that is what had played out that day. lisa: daniel six, many people will know, that is daniel in the lion's den. this is a genuine, personal reflection from this man, but also it does have some political connotations. a very large part of president
3:15 pm
trump's base includes people who are fervently religious, strong christian believers, and hear what the committee was saying is that this christian idea was held by the vice president at the time. and here is someone who believes that former president trump was acting in the opposite, ungodly way. there are a lot of dynamics at play committee is thinking about. judy: a lot of dynamics and a sobering day. lisa desjardins, lorber on lopez, we thank you both. let's turn now to a member of the panel investigating january 6 attack. he is representative adam of california. he is one of seven democrats on the committee and i spoke with him moments ago. congressman schiff, thank you so much for joining us. what do you think today's hearing mainly accomplished? rep. schiff: i think it showed the american people that after trump lost the election, after he lost in the courts, he and others cooked up this scheme to
3:16 pm
try to get the vice president to overturn the election, to violate his constitutional duty, and they put this massive pressure on him to do so. the president whipped up his supporters to the point of violence on january 6, putting the life of his own vice president, someone who had been loyal and dutiful to him for four years, put his life in danger. vice president pence did his job. he upheld his constitutional duty. and we are fortunate he did. it was yet another plot by the president to try to interfere with a peaceful transfer of power for the first time in our history. judy: to the extent one of the principal goals of the committee is to tie the president directly to the attack on the capital, do you think you have done that? rep. schiff: i think we have certainly. in terms of the pressure against the vice president and how that manifests itself in violee on the six, we played those clips of protesters, insurrectionists,
3:17 pm
outside the capital, talking about why they were marching on the capitol, and the violence they were going to do, chanting "hang mike pence." this is what motivated the crowd, even amit this mayhem, the president eding out that pens had lacked the courage to do the right thing. instead of telling people to disperse and go home, the president merely talked -- at the end of the day, talked about how much he loved these people that had ascended up on them all that day. i think we demonstrated quite graphically the president's role in instigating that violence directed at his own vice president. judy: i'm asking in part because last week, republican congressman, jim banks, who as you know had been chosen by the house minority leader to serve on the committee, but then was rejected, he told the newshour that what the committee has been doing so far, in his words, is
3:18 pm
selectively editing interviews and videos. this was before today's hearing. but he said at that point, there has been no evidence the president directed the attack. he quoted the president as saying at the rally, on january 6, telling people "to patriotically and peacefully make your voice heard." rep. schiff: you look at the footage of that rally, and you see how the president is inciting that crowd. it does not look anything like peaceful, and of course, as we will display in later hearings, we will see what the president was doing during that violence and what he was not doing. as the vice chair of our committee already indicated in terms of future hearings, that the president seemed to be pleased by what he was seeing. mr. banks opposed the formation of an independent commission to look into these events. now he is complaining that we have select committee doing so. we have interviewed over 1000
3:19 pm
people, so we are not able to publish all of that testimony. ultimately, we will. judy: congressman banks and other republicans, i know you know this, they are now charging that the committee has been caught altering evidence. he pointed out, he said the committee "doctored and altered text messages" between jim jordan and mark meadows, the former president's chief of staff. i wonder what he was referring to, a text message you made public a few months ago, between jordan and meadows, and the tuse -we was a portion used rather than the entire message which took it out of context. rep. schiff: i think that was debunked months ago, when he first made that argument we displayed with the full messages were. these are pretty weak arguments against the compelling evidence that we have been showing. he does not really have an aner to this volume of testimony and video evidence
3:20 pm
that displayed the president's role in the scheme. if that is the best he can do, if that is the best the republicans can do from the sidelines, it is pretty weak indie. judy: the chair of the commite, late this afternoon, congressman bennie thompson, told reporters the committee has now extended an invitation to ginni thomas, the wife of the supreme court justice, clarence thomas, to come and talk with the committee. when was that invitation -- when did that go out, and has she responded? rep. schiff: that invitation went out quite recently. what i understand, and this is just public reporting, is that she indicated publicly, you would know better than i, that she was receptive to speaking to the committee. i only have that from public sources, and can't confirm that myself. we hope she will come in. we certainly have a number of areas we would like to cover with her. any witness that has knowledge
3:21 pm
about this plot to overturn the election or was in contact with those working on that plot, we want to talk to. judy: there has been reporting she was in regular contact with john eastman, the former president's legal advisor who was of course -- his name came up a lot today. is that what you want to speak with her about? rep. siff: there are a number of things we want to speak with her about. predominantly, that came up during the course of our discovery of documents, in part, some of those that mr. eastman tried to withhold from the committee. the federal judge in california, i believe some of the documents provided to our committee, could not be protected by any privilege because the judge found they indicated a criminal plot, likely violating multiple laws involving both mr. eastman and donald trump. judy: do you have evidence that she was in contact with, on any kind of basis, john eastman, to
3:22 pm
discuss this plot that you are describing? rep. schiff: at this point, i'm not prepared to go into ything the documents or other evidence might say or suggest. it is one of the reasons we want to bring her into talk, and hopefully we will be able to do that soon. judy: are there other individuals the committee is reaching out to still at this hour, hoping to have them come testify? rep. schiff: absolutely. at the end of the hearing today, chairman thompson made an appeal to -- appeal again to people who have had evidence who are weighing to come in to let the committee know. indeed, we continue to do interviews, we continue to do depositions, because frankly, one lead leads to another. there are often questions we want to go bac to witness for further clarification. that investigative process continues. judy: congressman adam schiff who is a member of the house select committee on january 6, thank you so much. rep. schiff: thank you.
3:23 pm
judy: to further understand today's hearing i am joined by journalist garrett graff, author of "watergate: a new history." and ned foley, who directs ohio state university's election law program and is the former solicitor general of ohio. we welcome both of you to the program. ned, i am going to start with you. what stood out to you today? we have been discussing fo several minutes what happened at today's hearing. what stood out to you? ned: great to be with you. you played the clip that made the strongest impression on me. that was the moment where rig jacob -- greg jacob said that eastman essentially confessed he would not want a democratic vice president like al gore, kamala harris, to have this power. that is just a confession of how partisan this whole enterprise
3:24 pm
was. and i think that put the exclamation point of how wrongful this was for our country. judy: and garrett, this in question, and especially as someone who has spent so much time studying watergate. including the watergate hearings. what struck you about today? garrett: today was just a stunningly historic hearing in american democracy. and what i think really stood out to me, too echo and rephrase what ned was saying, is that it is absolutely crazy we had a congressional hearing today, largely focused on debunking the very obviously wrong idea that the vice president of the united states has a chance in our electoral system to choose a different president than the people. that came through in judge
3:25 pm
luttig's testimony, in jacob's testimony, the basic common sense rejected the president's argument, rejected john eastman's argument, and yet they pushed forward with it. one of the things that stood out to me in this hearing and the last couple of hearings has been how isolated the president really was in these final weeks. that president trump's most senior aides, vice president pence's most senior aides, all told him he was wrong, and that he was doing something that was illegal and unconstitutional, and against the very basic tenants of american democracy. and yet, he persisted. judy: it's clear, ned foley, the former vice president, mike pence, was at the center of so much of today. you were telling us this afternoon that you still have questions about how mike pence handled all of this. garrett: -- ned: yes.
3:26 pm
he did the right thing on january 6. there is no doubt about that. he rejected president trump's attempt to abuse the process in the way we were talking about. but i still have questions about the timeline between when the electoral college voted in mid-december, then the days and weeks leading up to january 6. some people may remember, senator mitch mcconnell acknowledged president biden's victory right after the electoral college voted. and said that was the time for closure. because all of the lawsuits were over by then, under the constitution, when the electoral college votes, that is really the end of the process. all congress does is count the votes. i can't help but imagine how december into early january might have unfolded if vice president pence had given a concession speech analogous to what senator mcconnell did, acknowledging that president biden -- president-elect biden
3:27 pm
had won by that point. i'm glad he did the right thing on january 6. but i still have questions about mid-december to early january. judy: garrett, do you have similar questions? garrett: i do. one of the things that really did stand out in the hearing today is the extent to which mike pence really investigated the claims from eastman, went through a listing tour to try to understand whether he had this power and what we now understand from the hring and the testimony is that it was soundly rejected by all of his aides, his leadership, and we also heard today, even calls from former speaker paul ryan two pce's office to say hey, micah knows he can't do this, right? judy: just picking up on that,
3:28 pm
ned foley, as garrett graff is saying, there was an effort on the part of the vice president to ask about the arguments being made to him. as if he wanted to be sure he understood what the choices were, if there was a choice. garrett: i think that's right. i think it is important to focus on two different parts of this. one part which was the primary focus of today's hearing was this idea that the vice president, as a single individual, could control the outcome. and again, it sounds like vice president pence's immediately, instinctively rejected that, as well he should have. again, we would not want any vice president to do that in any circumstance. that is where the reference to florida 2000 in bush versus gore is useful. because, that was a single state, very close,, and even in that conch -- in that context,
3:29 pm
you would not want vice president more to say, i'm going to decide myself. as we were sang before, you have to put today's hearing together with monday's. what monday told us is that former attorney general barr said this whole predicate was nonsense. the campaign advisor said the same thing. the idea that this theory would be used when there was no predicate at all is even more outrageous. given it was baseless from the beginning, why didn't the vice president come forward early and say, there is no role for me as vice president, and in my role as a candidate, for reelection, i should acknowledge our ticket lost. judy: garrett, back to the question, the central point we are told, one of the central points the committee very much wants to make, and that is to draw -- to offer evidence that president trump directed the
3:30 pm
attack on the capital. are you seeing that evidence so far in these hearings? ned: what we are seeing, hearing two hearing, is the building of a very strong case that donald trump knew what he was doing was wrong, was being told what he was doing was wrong, and yet, continued to build this multifaceted pressure campaign against the institutions that protected the election, whether that is the justice department, whether that is the state election officials, or whether that is vice president pence certifying the electoral vote. and there, i do think -- you asked about watergate. i do think there is a distinction that we should draw here between richard nixon's crimes, which were many and terrible and came out through
3:31 pm
the result of those watergate hearings in the summer of 1973, but were fundamentally all abuses of power and crimes against the american people. abuses of civil liberty, abuses of executive power. donald trump's crimes here very clearly target the heart of american democracy. that, to me, is a different order of magnitude of severity. and it is one that the committee is making a very strong aument that this is one of the most serious crimes we have ever seen committed in the united states. and in fact, judge luttig today, one of the most conservative voices in the judicial establishment, made the case thatad donald trump succeeded, it would have been the nation's first and most severe constitutional crisis in its history. judy: we certainly took notes when we heard that. garrett graff, ned foley, thank you both.
3:32 pm
we want to remind that the next january 6 committee hearing is scheduled for this coming tuesday, june 21. it will begin at 1:00 p.m. eastern and we will again have live coverage here on pbs on television and online. ♪ judy: in the days other news, a new selloff hit wall stree after a one-day respite. amid growing fears that interest rate hikes will spark a recession. the dow jones industrial average lost. percent it closed at 29,927. average year rates at 30 year
3:33 pm
points -- 30 year rates jumped to 5.8%. the biggest increase in 35 years. president biden says he does not believe a recession is inevitable. he tells the associated press he is optimistic, but he says that "people are really, really down after two years of pandemic, economic shakeups, and now soaring gas prices." he says republican claims that pandemic spending fueled inflation is "bizarre. leaders of some of europe's largest countries visited kyiv in a show of support for ukraine. the heads of france, germany, italy, and romania met with ukraine's president, the little mare zelenskyy, and they pledged -- the to mare zelenskyy and they pledged to help. >> we will do everything so that ukraine can choose its destiny, on its own, because it's for ukraine and its leaders, its
3:34 pm
representatives and its people to decide for themselves. judy: germany's chancellor said european powers have no intention to pressure ukraine to trade land for peace with russia. the world health organization reports covid-19 deaths around the globe are rising after falling for five straight weeks. the human health agency said there were notable increases in the astern pacific last week. average daily deaths in the united states have risen 14% in the last two weeks. in this country, the white suspect in the buffalo, new york supermarket killings appeared in federal court on hate crime charges. payton gendron allegedly killed 10 blackictims. he did not enter alea today. the judge urged prosecutors to decide quickly whether they will seek the death penalty. bipartisan talks on n legislation have run into trouble in the u.s. senate. texas republican john cornyn said today that he's through with negotiating, for now.
3:35 pm
the talks on fleshing out a framework have bogged down, partlyver pushing for red flag laws to take guns away from people deemed dangerous. the senate voted today to expand benefits for military veterans exposed to toxic burn pits in iraq and afghanistan. the bill extends health care and disability coverage for 10 years after discharge from the service and makes it easier to qualify. there was broad bipartisan support for the measure. afterward, montana senator jon tester called it a great day. >> we send our folks off to war, they get exposed to all sorts of garbage, toxins and they come back home and they are fine. but then they get sick years later. and we owe it to them to make sure that they areaken care of, because of their exposures to toxins. and that's what we accomplished today. judy: the bill projects spending $280 billion over 10 years.
3:36 pm
that's less than the house of representatives wanted, but today, speaker nancy posi promised quick action on the senate version. the city of billings, montana got its drinking water plant back online today as flooding along the yellowstone river began receding. the flood danger had closed the plant yesterday. it also closed yellowstone nationalark, but officials say they hope to reopen the park's southern half, including old faithful geyser next week. cosmetics maker revlon has filed for federal bankruptcy protection after 90 years in business. the company was hit hard during the pandemic and barely escaped bankruptcy in late 2020. for decades, revlon set industry trends, including the first cosmetic ads that featured a black model. and a women's pro basketball legend, sue bird, confirmed today that she's retiring after this season. bird has won 4 wnba titles with
3:37 pm
the seattle storm and been an all-star 12 times. she is also a 5-time olympic gold medalist for the united states. at 41, she is the oldest player in the league. still to come on the newshour, the murder of a journalist and an indigenous rights actist in the amazon raises questions about criminal connections. and how decades of work by anti-abortion activists could culimate in the reversal of roe v. wade. >> this is the pbs newshour -- >> this is the pbs newshour from weta studios in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. judy: the desperate search for an indigenous rights advocate and renowned journalist in a remote area of the amazon, in brazil, has apparently come to a grim conclusion. bruno pereira and dom phillips, a briton, disappeared 10 days ago. now, there are murder suspects
3:38 pm
in custody, and there are still more questions than answers. stephanie sy reports. reporter: after a 10 day search that many criticized for being too little, too late, there is little question thathe two men were murdered. authorities say a suspect confessed and led police to the crime scene. >> excavations have been carried out at the site. we move onto a new stage, identifying these human remains. >> bruno pereira had worked for the government as an indigenous -- work that led to death threats. don phillips was an award-winning freelanced journalist and 10 year of brazil who focused on his -- focused his reporting on those same communities. they were travelin together in an immense swath of indigenous territory lying at the border with colombia and peru.
3:39 pm
it is a hotbed for criminal activity and violence. they were doing interviews with patrol teams who are supposed to crackdown on illegal fishing and hunting. reporting that david biller, a friend and colleague of don phillips, says may have put a target on his back. >> this obviously earned him some enemies and the main line of investigation right now for the police is that they're killing was connected to this ilgal fishing network. reporter: indigenous rights group who had been holding protests since their disappearance expressed outrage and heartbreak. >> it weighs heavy on our hearts and our people because the one who put his life at the disposal and in defense of these peoples lives in our territories is god. reporter: brazil's president had already been under fire for policies critics say favored opening more of the amazon resour extraction, at the
3:40 pm
expense of indigenous and environmental concerns. his reaction to the men's plate showed indifference. >> both of them decided to enter a region completely inhospitable and isolated without security, and the problem happened. that english man was not liked in the region. he should have focused on taking care of himself. reporter: under president bolsonaro, deforestation and fires in the amazon have reached their highest levels. dom phillips had challenged the president during a press conference in 2019 that aired on brazilian television. >> the new deforestation's have shown a scary increase. how does the president want to show to the world of the government is really concerned about the preservation of the amazon? >> you first have to understand the amazon is brazil's. not yours. no country in the world has the morality to speak about the amazon. reporter: but rain forest does matter to the globe. and that is what don phillips
3:41 pm
and bruno pereira were highlighting in their journalism, cut short by murder. for more on all of this we are joined by andrew downey, an journalist -- a journalist and author who has focused on latin america and who knew don phillips well. thank you for joining the newshour. my deepest sympathies to you on this day, learning this tragic news. what was your reaction to hearing about his fate? andrew: to be perfectly honest, it is something we were expecting for a few days. there was no reason for him to go missing. he was with indigenous expert bruno pereira who knew the area very well. i'm friends with them, they said, we knew there was something wrong because there was one stretch of the river they had to come out and the fact that they did not arrive, we knew something there -- we knew there was something amiss. it is something that we have
3:42 pm
been sadly expecting. stephanie: i'm sure it is still a very sad day for you and for his family. can you talk more about dom's mission as a journalist, while he was in brazil, what was the nature of his reporting? andrew: he was in the amazon to report a book. he had focused on nature and environment. he was writing a book called "how to save the amazon." he was going there to report about sustainable development and examine what kind of projects worked, in terms of making the people who live there healthier and happier and wealthier. and obviously preserving the forest. and what projects have been going on were not working. that was the main focus of the book. stephanie: what about this very vast territory bordering peru? it is not known to be a particularly safe place. andrew: it is very densely forested. you have seen a lot of drug
3:43 pm
trafficking going on in the area in the last few years. supplies coming over from peru, going back through the forest. it is also an area -- the amazon in general, there is a lot of pressure on these remote communities from illegal minors, illegal workers, illegal hunters and fishers. and one of the main avenues for police to investigate is the killers were illegal fishers. they had been collecting turtles and one of the biggest fish in the world, it grows up to three meters long. they had trouble beforfor illegal fishing. and there is some speculation that bruno knew about them, they saw bruno and dom doing the reporting, taking pictures, and that is what led to the clashes and the tragedy on june 5. stephanie: it has been suggested by critics that president bolsonaro essentially blamed dom
3:44 pm
and bruno after their disappearance. in fact, he called what they did a "on recommended adventure." what do you think of that characterization of dom as a journalist, do you feel like he was somebody who took on advised risks? andrew: no. what a said is unconscionable, blaming people who go to the amazon to do environmental reporting, blaming a guy who has dedicated his life, bruno pereira, to helping indigenous people. blaming th for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, it is unconscionable. he was not gung ho. you know gung ho reporters who get off on trying that. dom was not that kind of reporter. the thing that stood out to me about dom, he was much more of a listener than he was a talker. he was not somebody who got off on that kind of adrenaline. stephanie: talk about your thoughts on how the brazilian government responded once they learned of dom and bruno's
3:45 pm
disappearance in early june? andrew: the brazilian government was slow to respond. one of the memories of this will be the brazilian military and the hours after he went missing. saying we are prepared and ready to start a search, but we are waiting from orc -- waiting for orders from above. it took them a while for those orders to go through. that left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths. stephanie: do you think their deaths will have a chilling effect on environmental and indigenous journalism in the amazon? andrew: if there is anything you can say, maybe there is some good to come out of this, it might be the attention that has been focused on dom and bruno on the plight of indigenous people, on the illegal loggers, miners, hunters. maybe this will focus attention on -- and things will start to change. stephanie: andrew downey, a
3:46 pm
friend of don phillips, who was killed in the amazon along with bruno pereira, thank you so much for joining the newshour. andrew: thank you. ♪ judy: last month, a leaked draft opinion showed that the supreme court may soon overturn roe v. wade, the landmark 1973 case that provided a right to abortion across the country. that decision is not yet final, but as special correspondent cat wise reports, the work by abortion-rights opponents to arrive at this moment has been decades in the making. >> president george w. bush. reporter: go to president, vice president, and senators, james
3:47 pm
bob junior may be one of the most important conservative voices you have never heard of. from a quiet office in terre haute, indiana, population 60,000, the 74-year-old lawyer has had a hand in major conservative cases for years, including bush v gore, citizens united, in the decades long effort to overturn roe v. wade. >> my philosophy has been from the very beginning, i don't lose. unless i give up. reporter: he grew up here. the son and grandson of doctors, and remembers borrowing his father's medical books while still in high school. >> the one that fascinated me the most was a textbook. you got to see the entire -- all of the stages of development, very interesting drawings and information, etc., about how that occurred. and of course, as now, there is no dispute as far as biology is concerned, that the unborn is a human life from conception. reporter: he came to strongly
3:48 pm
oppose artion and thought he would end up in medicine. a college course in organic chemistry taught him otherwise. so he chose law, and in january of 1973 during his third year in law school, he learned of the decision that would change his life. >> roe v. wade had been handed down and they had found the constitutional right for abortion. of course, i was just shocked and devastated. reporter: he knew he wanted to overturn roe, but he did not know how. so he began to study the highest court in the land and how it came to overturn previs precedents. >> when students accounted violence at a previously all-white school -- reporter: he found a model in the civil rights movement, specifically in the naacp's efforts to overturn the separate but equal doctrine of plessy versus ferguson. the result of that effort, the 1954 ruling of brown versus forward -- brown versus board of education which ended decades of school segregation. >> i studied up on how they did
3:49 pm
it and i have seen this play out over and over again. when they overturned the precedent, it is invariably through a series of cases where they question, expla, distinguish, undermine, in other words, a president -- precedent until they are willing, because he cannot ma the supreme court do anything, until they are willing to overturn the precedent. and then they do. reporter: has general counsel for national right to life, he helped travel -- draft model state laws to restrict abortion and distribute them to lawmakers across the country. ree aofgr feeoudr restrictionsn abortions in pennsylvania. >> the supreme court has upheld a federal ban on a certain type of abortion. >> justices heard oral arguments yesterday in the first major abortion case under the trump administration. reporter: those laws sparked legal challenges. when those challenges came before the supreme court, they
3:50 pm
gave the court the chance to shift its legal reasoning on abortion, often resulting in more restrictions. reporter: we always knew, of course, that in every case, but the supreme court took up, where roe v. wade is being asked to be applied, that the validity, the legitimacy of roe v. wade is before the court, and it is just a matter of continng to present the cases until they are willing. reporter: just chipping away at it. >> just keep chipping. knocking on the door, is also the way i call it. reporter: that was by design, that was the point. they were bringinghese cases to create this instability, and then using the same instability they had created as a sign that roe needed to be reversed. reporter: mary zigler is a legal historian and the author of many books on abortion and the law, including the forthcoming "dollars for life: the antiabortion movement and the fall of the republican establishment." she is also a professor at the
3:51 pm
university of california davis. i thinko compare what the movement was doing to what the naacp -- naacp did is not giving credit for the full complexity of its strategy. the came a time when the movement leaders including bob, began to realize it was not enough to have the perfect test cases. it was not enough to have the best model legislation. you also needed to have the right people on the supreme court. >> years ago, the idea that we would focus our energies and our strategy on a supreme court strategy was met with a lot of scuffing. it seemed so hard. reporter: key to changing the supreme court were people like marjorie dan and felts are. she is head of susan b anthony pro-life america in arlington, virginia founded in 1990 two to alrnately end abortion in the united states, primarily by electing politicians who will pass laws and appoint judges to do that. >> the strategy worked.
3:52 pm
it was very simple. you can write it out in three sentences. but very hard. it takes bringing people together that don't always agree to do something really important that you don't have 100% chances of success. reporter: for decades, her group has worked diligently to defeat abortion-rights candidates, even if that meant opposing the republican in the race. > so that then in 2016 when we elected a president -- that we would have a senate to confirm those nominees. he did not know that we were going to get three, but getting three confirmations was the set up for finding the right case, and we are living with that now. reporter: the stars had to align in some sense. >> in a lot of little decisions that led to huge consequences. and i would say one of course was leader mcconnell deciding to hold up the merrick garland
3:53 pm
nominee and wait until the election to see what the senate would sustain after the election . if that nomination had gone through, we would not be sitting here now and having this conversation. reporter: will there be constitutional concerns and places -- reporter: she is not waiting for work -- just waiting for roe to be overturned, she is preparing, rking on a state-by-state approach to further restrict abortion access. >> i am working on a post row model abortion law, just like we have done over the years. reporter: james bopp is hping in that effort while also taking a moment to consider his legacy. >> it is a culmination of a life's work. personally, it will be a great and wonderful step for america. all of ouraw diss,imination or x discrimination, or the way we treat people with disabilities, is premised on the notion that every individual has inherent value, not relative value.
3:54 pm
it is the fountnhead of what makes america great. reporter: for legal historian mary zigler, the potential overturning of roe and all of the changes to our political system in courts required to make that happen is monumental. >> a post row america is not just a post row america, you think about what that means for a supreme court that is going to do lots of other things that are going to be explosive. what it means for a republican party that was transformed by the antiabortion movement. the world that was made by this quest are partially -- is one that people may not be comfortable with well beyond their views on abortion. reporter: but for the millions opposed to abortion, a potential victory to be savored for years to come. for the pbs newshour, i am cap wise in terre haute, indiana. judy: valuable reporting. on the newshour online right now, a look back at the legacy
3:55 pm
of a 19th century american doctor who pioneered some women's reproductive care, but also publicly opposed abortion. read more about what dr. mary jones' controversial legacy can and cannot teach us about the abortion debate today. that's at and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. join us on-line and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you, please stay safe and we'll see you soon. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.] >> major funding has been provided that for the pple -- major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by -- >> our u.s.-based customer service team can help find a plan that fits you. to learn more, visit >> the ford foundation, working with visionaries on the front lines of social change worldwide.
3:56 pm
and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. and friends of the newshour, including leonard and norma clore vine. and with the ongoing support of these institutions. and friends of the newshour. this program was made possible the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. ♪
3:57 pm
3:58 pm
3:59 pm
4:00 pm
hello, everyone, and welcome to amanpour and company. here's what's coming up. we are extremely focused on stepping up, providing more support and advanced weapons. >> but ukraine fears the supplies won't come fast enough as russian forces gain ground in the east. unpacking the challenges and potential consequences with retired u.s. army geral ben hodgins. then, from record rain and flooding to extreme heat. extreme weather grips countries around the world. but is the urge to address climate change fading? climb tolgs gavin submit joins me. >> if