April 15, 2024 - PBS NewsHour full episode

GEOFF BENNETT: Good evening.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz, in Kyiv, Ukraine.

On the "NewsHour" tonight: Allies urge restraint in Israel's response to Iran's unprecedented weekend attack.

GEOFF BENNETT: History is made, as former President Trump's criminal trial for making alleged hush money payments to an adult film actress gets under way in New York.

AMNA NAWAZ: And our exclusive interview with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the war with Russia and the uncertainty around U.S. aid.

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, Ukrainian President (through translator): I can tell you, frankly, without this support, we will have no chance of winning.

(BREAK) GEOFF BENNETT: Welcome to the "NewsHour."

Tensions remain high in the Middle East as we wait to see if Israel responds to Iran's barrage of drones and missiles over the weekend.

President Biden said, while the U.S. commitment to Israel is unwavering, the administration's would not support a retaliatory strike.

AMNA NAWAZ: That's right, Geoff.

And another country hoping for more U.S. support is Ukraine.

I spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky about that, about its war with Russia and much more.

But, first, we begin in the Middle East, where a region is on edge.

Nick Schifrin has our report.

NICK SCHIFRIN: At the site of the first ever Iranian missile strike on Israeli territory today, Israel's top general warned Iran, payback was coming.

LT. GEN. HERZI HALEVI, Chief of Staff, Israeli Defense Forces (through translator): As we look forward, we weigh our steps.

And this launch of so many missiles, cruise missiles and drones onto the territory of the state of Israel will be met with a response.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Iran's unprecedented attack of more than 300 drones and missiles lit up the sky Saturday night and Sunday morning across the country.

World leaders quickly rallied to Israel's defense.

But following U.S. officials urging Israel not to respond to Iran militarily, today, a unified European message of restraint.

French President Emmanuel Macron: EMMANUEL MACRON, French President (through translator): We are going to try to convince Israel that we should not respond by escalating.

NICK SCHIFRIN: German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock: ANNALENA BAERBOCK, German Foreign Minister (through translator): Israel has won thanks to its strong air defenses.

This defensive victory must now be insured diplomatically.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And British Foreign Secretary David Cameron: DAVID CAMERON, British Foreign Secretary: So our hope is that there won't be a retaliatory response.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Israel says it blocked Iran's ballistic missiles thanks in part to its air defense system Arrow 3 built to counter Iranian threats.

They also got lucky.

Two U.S. officials confirmed that half of Iran's more than 100 ballistic missiles failed in flight.

Israel's success was also the product of a defensive coalition.

When the strikes from Iran and Iranian-backed proxies in Iraq, Syria and Yemen began, the U.S. had already made agreements with Arab states, including Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

The U.S. military says it shot down more than 80 Iranian drones.

Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant hopes that sets a diplomatic precedent.

YOAV GALLANT, Israeli Defense Minister (through translator): We have an opportunity to establish a strategic alliance against this grave threat by Iran, which is threatening to mount nuclear explosives on these missiles, which could be an extremely grave threat.

DANA STROUL, Washington Institute for Near East Policy: What we have seen is proof of concept that, when the security and strategic concerns of our partners align, they can absolutely work together.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Dana Stroul is the research director and a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and the former deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East.

She says the shoot-downs were successful because of regional coordination that, until this, weekend was untested.

DANA STROUL: What we saw on Saturday night was proof of concept that all of this hard work, the investment in compatible radars, the investments to share classified military information in real time and the confidence-building that it took to create this regional security architecture actually works.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Iran's attack on Israel was in response to an Israeli airstrike earlier this month on Iran's consulate in Damascus that killed several top commanders.

VALI NASR, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University: They got what they wanted from the psychological and economic impact of the whole world being on edge last week.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Vali Nasr is a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.

He says, even though the attacks failed militarily, Iran hopes they prevent future Israeli attacks.

VALI NASR: Iran's hope is that what happened last week will make everybody, particularly Europeans and Americans, think we don't want to be there and be there again in a week.

So that would put pressure on Israel.

And that pressures exactly the kind of deterrence that Iran was looking for.

So it's mainly political gain, rather military gain.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But, right now, while the world urges restraint, the decision of what to do next is Israel's.

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Nick Schifrin.

GEOFF BENNETT: In the day's other headlines: The ship that caused last month's Baltimore bridge collapse had electrical issues before setting off.

That's according to the Associated Press.

The news comes just hours after media outlets reported the FBI has opened a criminal probe into why the cargo ship Dali crashed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge.

Aerial footage showed people on board the vessel this morning.

The FBI confirmed its agents were carrying out a court-approved search, but would not elaborate.

The bodies of three workers killed in the collapse have been recovered.

Three others are presumed dead.

The weapons supervisor on the set of the movie "Rust" was sentenced to 18 months in prison today.

In March, a court in New Mexico found Hannah Gutierrez Reed guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

She was accused of loading a live round into a gun that actor Alec Baldwin was using that accidentally killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins in 2021.

Baldwin's own involuntary manslaughter trial is set to start in July.

The U.S. Supreme Court is allowing a Louisiana police officer to move forward with a lawsuit against a Black Lives Matter activist.

Civil rights groups warn the case threatens the right to protest.

The unnamed officer accuses DeRay McKesson of negligence after he was struck by an object during a 2016 protest in Baton Rouge.

At issue is whether McKesson can be held liable for the injuries as the protest organizer.

In a separate ruling, the justices decided to allow Idaho to enforce a ban on gender-affirming care for trans youth.

The order lets the state put in place a 2023 law that means doctors could face up to 10 years in prison if they provide hormones, puberty blockers or such services to minors.

Opponents have warned that the law could increase suicide rates among teens.

International donors today pledged more than $2.1 billion in aid for Sudan.

The promise of support came during a conference in Paris led by French President Emmanuel Macron.

And it comes on the one-year anniversary of a war that has pushed the country to the brink of famine.

EMMANUEL MACRON, French President (through translator): Today, from this mobilization, all of our presence, it sends a clear message to the belligerents.

We are making a solemn appeal out of respect for international humanitarian rights and for the protection of the civil population.

Macron added that the funds will go toward food, water, medicine and other urgent needs, but did not provide any specifics.

Police in Australia have arrested a 15-year-old boy after a bishop and several churchgoers were stabbed during a church service.

Worshipers at Christ The Good Shepherd Church in Sydney were able to overpower the attacker.

There were no life-threatening injuries.

Outside the church, police and riot gear worked to subdue crowds who had gathered at the scene.

ANDREW HOLLAND, Acting Assistant Commissioner, New South Wales, Australia: A number of houses have been damaged.

They're breaking into a number of houses to gain weapons to throw at the police.

They're throwing weapons and items at the church itself.

It was obviously people who wanted to get access to the young person who has caused the injuries to the clergy people.

GEOFF BENNETT: Monday's attack comes after a separate stabbing incident this weekend at a mall in Sydney that killed six people.

Tesla is laying off more than 10 percent of its global work force in a bid to cut costs.

That's about 14,000 employees.

The electric vehicle maker posted dismal first-quarter sales amid growing competition.

Price cuts also failed to lure buyers.

Tesla shares have lost about a third of their value so far this year.

On Wall Street today, worries over tensions in the Middle East offset a strong reading on retail sales.

The Dow Jones industrial average dropped 248 points to close at 37735.

The Nasdaq lost 290 points.

The S&P 500 gave back 61.

And today, of course, is Tax Day, the deadline for filing 2023 returns.

The White House today said that President Biden and the first lady filed theirs jointly.

They made nearly $620,000 last year.

The Bidens paid $146,629 in federal income tax.

And their tax rate was 23.7 percent.

And some 30,000 runners laced up this morning to conquer a classic, the Boston Marathon.

The course takes athletes through small New England towns and culminates in the heart of Boston's Back Bay.

Ethiopia's Sisay Lemma crossed the finish line first in just over two hours and six minutes.

On the women's side, Hellen Obiri of Kenya defended her title with a time of two hours and 22 minutes.

Still to come on the "NewsHour": Ukraine's President Zelenskyy on his urgent need for equipment and ammunition in his ongoing battle against Russia; on this Tax Day, a comparison of the policies proposed by 2024 presidential candidates Biden and Trump; and Tamara Keith and Amy Walter break down the latest political headlines.

AMNA NAWAZ: We sat down with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy earlier today here in Kyiv to discuss the multiple challenges he's facing on multiple fronts.

Right now, they have critical shortages of both munitions and manpower.

Russia is ramping up its attacks.

And, of course, there's uncertainty around the future of U.S. aid.

On the heels of Iran's attack on Israel, Zelenskyy says it shows it's not just a critical time for his nation, but for the world.

President Zelenskyy, welcome to the "NewsHour."

Thank you for hosting us here.

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, Ukrainian President: Thank you so much for coming.

AMNA NAWAZ: I want to ask you about Iran's attack on Israel, because you condemned that attack immediately.

You said it should serve as what you call the wake-up call to the free world.

Who do you think needs that wake-up call, and what kind of action do you hope that elicits?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): First, I believe this is a signal to all the leaders of the world.

Surely, France, Jordan, the U.K., the U.S. have responded and supported the protection of Israel, and this is a serious defense shield for Israel, which is very important.

Israel, by itself, wouldn't be able to protect against such a numerous, powerful strike.

And, here, definitely, they used air defense and aviation, many things that, frankly speaking, Ukraine is lacking.

But this is a demonstration of allies not on paper, but in the air, not on paper, but on the ground, in action.

And this is an important signal to everyone.

I mean, Ukraine defends its sky by itself.

Definitely, we have allies who supplies with this or that equipment, and we do have a deficit.

But the most important thing is that Israel was not defending by itself.

There was the protection of allies.

If not for that protection, today, we would have bloodshed and much more death.

AMNA NAWAZ: You're saying it's sent a signal to see the allies come together, the U.S. and U.K. and France and Jordan, along with Israel, repelling many hundred drones and missiles that were launched on Israel that day.

In your joint address to the nation last night, you said the whole world saw what real defense is.

The whole world saw that Israel was not alone in this defense.

Do you think that the same message is being sent to the world about Ukraine?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): I will give you one example, a very simple example, the Trypilska power plant.

Electricity in the Kyiv region depends on it.

Eleven missiles were headed towards it.

The first seven, we took down.

Four destroyed Trypilska.

Why?

Because we had zero missiles.

We ran out of all missiles.

When someone says that our allies cannot provide us with this or that weapon or they cannot be in Ukraine with this or that force, because that would be perceived as if Ukraine is engaging NATO in the war, well, after yesterday's attack, I want to ask you a question, is Israel part of NATO or not?

Here is the answer.

Israel is not a NATO country.

The NATO allies, including NATO countries, have been defending Israel.

They showed the Iranian forces that Israel was not alone.

And this is a lesson.

This is a response to anyone on any continent who says you need to assist Ukraine very carefully so you don't engage NATO countries in the war.

AMNA NAWAZ: You have said that, if the U.S. Congress does not approve the aid that it's currently considering, which is some $60 billion that's been held up by Republican lawmakers, you said, if that doesn't move forward, Ukraine will lose the war.

If that aid does not move forward, how long do your troops have?

Is this a matter of weeks or months?

I mean, could they sustain a spring Russian offensive?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): I can tell you, frankly, without this support, we will have no chance of winning.

You need to be much stronger than your enemy.

Today, our artillery shell ratio is 1-10.

Can we hold our ground?

No.

In any case, with these statistics, they will be pushing us back every day.

To defend 100 percent of what's in our control, we would need to go from one to comparing numbers, 10-10.

AMNA NAWAZ: But does that $60 billion, potentially, does that help you to essentially strengthen your defensive strategy, or does it help you to actually break through Russian defenses?

I mean, what is the plan to use that aid in a way that could actually change the dynamics of the war right now?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): It's a lot to preserve ourselves.

It's very difficult for us.

We are fighting against a large army.

They don't care about their soldiers' lives.

They're not training them.

They're not as trained as our soldiers.

But there's a lot of them.

They have an unlimited number of people and a lot of shells.

They use thousands of drones against us.

Tell me, please, how can you fight against these thousands if you don't have weapons to take them down?

They have aircraft taking off from Crimea and engaging us at a distance of over 300 kilometers.

It could be over 300, 400, 500 kilometers, depending on how deep they're targeting from Crimea.

How can we destroy those?

The plan is very simple.

It's very clear.

It exists.

There is a specific weapon that we need to advance.

There's a specific weapon to defend the skies.

This plan exists.

Besides, all the partners have it in their hands.

This is the plan for what we really need.

AMNA NAWAZ: Mr. President, as you know, there are those who say, look, the U.S. and the West armed Ukraine, trained Ukraine for a counteroffensive that was largely seen as a failure because you were unable to dislodge Russians from territory, and they don't believe additional aid would actually allow you to break through Russian defenses.

It would, as you say, help you to preserve, to protect where things are right now.

If it's this hard to get aid through the U.S. Congress right now, what leads you to believe it would be any easier next year, especially if Mr. Trump was reelected as president?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): We don't think it will be easier for us.

We're fighting.

We're not thinking about next year.

We're thinking about tomorrow.

Our goals are much more about real life.

We need to live tomorrow.

What's going to happen next year?

Well, frankly, speaking, nobody knows because we don't understand what support Ukraine will have.

What other explosions and wars might be happening in the world?

What's going to happen in the U.S. Congress?

They might make a decision.

And I hope they are listening to us, and will make a decision in the nearest days or weeks, but not longer, to make a positive decision.

But we don't know what's going to happen.

We're just saying, at least give us and you will receive some share of the air fleet, some percentage of what Russia is using against you.

But how can you have aircrafts 1-30, artillery 1-10?

How can you wage a war against Russia like this?

We're not asking for missiles for 2,000 or 3,000 kilometers, nothing like that.

And nobody is asking for 500 aircraft or 300, like Russia.

In fact, Russia is using 300 aircraft just in the territory of Ukraine.

AMNA NAWAZ: Mr. President, as you know, Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson has said that he is likely to move forward this week to approve aid for Israel, but it's not yet clear if aid for Ukraine will be part of that effort or not.

What... VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY: It's strange.

AMNA NAWAZ: What -- why is that strange to you?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): Well, it means that this is not about security.

It's pure politics, and it's a disgrace for the world and a disgrace for democracy.

For those who only speak of democracy, it's just talk.

AMNA NAWAZ: Why is it a disgrace?

Why do you use that word?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): Well, if the Congress will divide this assistance after everything that happened, will divide into Israeli and Ukrainian, then it means that this is a matter of elections in the United States.

It's a matter of pure politics that now, when the whole world is saying, how could Iran strike Israel?

So now we need to support only Israel and forget what is happening in Ukraine.

This is pure politics.

Nobody cares how many people are dying in Ukraine every day.

They only care about their approval ratings.

That's what it's all about.

They're forgetting that dead people don't care about ratings.

If Ukraine falls and there's a war on other NATO member countries, and there will be a war, and then the U.S. soldiers will be defending and dying.

That's what it's going to be.

People in Congress need to think twice about pushing these political matters with regards to support in Ukraine and vote to support all of the countries whose lives depend on it.

AMNA NAWAZ: Have you spoken directly to House Speaker Mike Johnson?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): Two times.

I talked to him last year.

I was visiting the United States.

Specifically, I had a meeting with the speaker, with the president, with the Congress.

Then we had a meeting behind closed doors.

They all agreed 100 percent, those who were at that meeting.

They were saying, there will be support, believe us, by the end of the year.

We had a conversation with the speaker over the phone, and he told me that he fully supports Ukraine receiving the support.

He said, yes, of course, he supported to give -- to keep defending aid.

This package, decision of Congress to Ukraine, it's very -- very important, and et cetera.

And what is very important?

That those period, I also spoke with congressmen, a lot of them, many times, and all of them said to me that, yes, Ukraine will get.

The question is, in days or some weeks, after that, months, months, and et cetera.

And one important moment.

The last one, when I spoke with a team of congressmen, they said, maybe it will be not cheap money.

Maybe it will be -- I mean, this... AMNA NAWAZ: Structured as a loan.

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY: Yes, loan, loans, yes, yes.

I said... AMNA NAWAZ: Yes.

And you are open to that?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY: I said, it doesn't matter for us for today.

We wanted another way to get this money last year, but, for today, it doesn't matter.

We need to survive, and we need to defend our people, and that's why your decision, the ball is on your field.

Yes, please, just make decision.

AMNA NAWAZ: What about the role of former President Trump in all of this?

Because it is an election year, he has enormous influence over the Republican Party, where opposition to this aid lies.

He's previously criticized U.S. aid to Ukraine.

Do you believe that the former president is standing in the way of you getting the aid that you say you need?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): I'm very careful about this, because voices from inside the circle from someone during the elections, I think it's all a big question whether it's true or not.

I will believe that the United States will not stop their support and we will be allies, and that the policy of the president, if the president changes -- that's for the Americans to decide, but the policy of the president will not change, at least as it relates to Ukraine.

That's important to us.

AMNA NAWAZ: Mr. President, Russia has a population advantage.

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY: Yes.

AMNA NAWAZ: They clearly have an artillery advantage.

Russia right now has you outmanned, outgunned, and they believe they can outlast you and Western attention.

Is it time to think about negotiating a settlement?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): We have offered the peace formula to the world.

Currently, there are already first steps with specifics.

In mid-June, there will be a peace summit in Switzerland, and, there, we will prepare and elaborate on a plan to end this war.

This summit will take place without Russia, for Russia not to block this plan.

Currently, Russia wants to destroy us all.

Currently, Russia wants no negotiations.

That is why the initiative should come from Ukraine, the country that wants to end this war in a fair peace.

AMNA NAWAZ: But given the conditions right now, given the challenges that you face, the uncertainty of foreign aid, advancing Russian forces, your own critical shortages, a major mobilization shortage, and a shifting global landscape in which you worry Ukraine is moving further down the agenda, some would say those are impossible odds to overcome.

If you don't start to negotiate now, won't conditions just get worse?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY: I'm ready to negotiate now with you or with such people who really want peace, you understand?

AMNA NAWAZ: Not with Russia?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY: But -- yes, but he doesn't want, especially Putin.

All their narratives, the documents from our intelligence, what they discuss about, we have it from our intelligence.

We have it from the United States.

They know everything the same.

So we understand that he's not ready for any negotiations.

He doesn't want.

He's not interested.

For him, this is not victory.

He needs victory.

And, for him, victory is to destroy Ukraine.

(through translator): So, how would you like us to talk to a person who's willing to kill you, simply kill you?

He's saying either you're a part of Russia or we will destroy you all.

There are voices coming from the West saying that we are afraid.

What's going to happen to Russia if Russia loses?

So, are they not afraid that we are dying here every day?

But they're very afraid that there will be some sort of a danger, some sort of a migration crisis?

What's going to happen?

Maybe China will be very strong.

And if Russia will panic and have a revolution, then China will capture part of the territory of Russia, et cetera.

So everyone is afraid.

God forbid China will be strong.

God forbid there would be no Putin and there will be many countries.

What's going to happen to Russia's nuclear weapons?

As of now, the West controls the nuclear weapons.

So that's what I'm talking about, all those voices, all those messages.

All of this is the disgrace that I was talking about.

AMNA NAWAZ: You have said that this is not just a fight for Ukraine's future, but for democracy's future.

That also includes the future of your own children, right, your daughter, Oleksandra, your son.

Kyrylo is his name?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY: Kyrylo.

AMNA NAWAZ: He's now 11 years old?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY: Yes.

AMNA NAWAZ: I know you're separated from them, but when you do speak to them, what do they ask you about this war?

And what do you tell them?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): I sometimes look at our children, and not only my own children, but the children of those families at war and those children currently in Ukraine.

I think they know all the answers.

And, frankly speaking, if they would be answering your questions today, who knows?

Maybe they would be wiser.

They're very grown up.

They have been through a lot.

They understand everything and they know everything.

When they ask questions, they still ask in a childlike way.

It's not a question of when this war is going to end.

They understand that it depends on many factors, and it's not a question of whether Ukraine will be able to withstand this fight.

They know it depends on many things, but Ukraine will definitely withstand.

They are very strong.

I'd say they're much more confident than some of our partners.

And, sometimes, they ask the question: "When can we live together again, dad?"

AMNA NAWAZ: Do your children ever worry that you might not survive this war?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY (through translator): I think they worry.

They worry a lot.

Well, it's war.

What else can I say?

I think words don't matter as much.

You need to hug them tight.

For children, words aren't important.

It's important for them to feel you're there, not over the phone, but in person.

AMNA NAWAZ: President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy, thank you so much for hosting us here and for your time, sir.

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY: Thank you so much.

Thank you that you are here.

AMNA NAWAZ: Well, the streets here tonight in rainy Kyiv are quiet and largely empty with a curfew still in place.

But, as President Zelenskyy and I left that interview and walked through the halls of the presidential complex, he remembered back to the days when Russian forces advanced and tried to take this very city in those early days of their full-scale invasion back in 2022.

He said that was before he knew how long the war would last, before tens of thousands of Ukrainians had been killed, and before the future of his nation was this uncertain.

All of that, the president told me, now feels like a lifetime ago -- Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: Hmm.

And, Amna, you and our team have been on the ground there for some several days now.

Tell us what else you're working on.

AMNA NAWAZ: Geoff, in the days ahead, we're going to make a trip to the city of Kharkiv in the northeast.

That's a city that has been relentlessly pummeled by Russian forces.

We're going to talk to some residents there, talk to them about how they have been adapting to life under that assault and also what they can do to protect themselves.

We're also taking a closer look at Ukraine's energy and critical infrastructure, which has also been targeted in a way that we haven't seen before by Russian forces, with much more aggression and much more precision than we have seen at any other point in the war.

We're also going to be talking to some young Ukrainians here.

President Zelenskyy has just lowered the draft age from 27 to 25.

Many more thousands of young Ukrainians could be called to join this fight.

We're going to talk to them to get their take as well -- Geoff.

GEOFF BENNETT: Amna Nawaz in Kyiv tonight.

Amna, thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: Former President Donald Trump's first criminal trial started today in New York City.

It's the first of four criminal indictments that Mr. Trump is facing.

It's an historic moment, the first criminal trial of any former president.

He faces 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up an alleged extramarital affair that surfaced during his 2016 campaign.

Mr. Trump today cast himself as under attack, calling the trial a -- quote - - "political persecution."

Joining us now from New York is our William Brangham, who's been covering the former president's legal cases.

So, William, jury selection started this afternoon, but only after a good deal of sparring over various motions.

Walk us through exactly what happened.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Geoff, the day started out with a lot of conversation about the gag order that was placed on Donald Trump by this judge, Juan Merchan, and whether or not Trump violated it today or over this past weekend.

I mean, it's important to remember there's - - I cannot think of a criminal defendant in recent American legal history who has so aggressively and sometimes violently gone after the judges and prosecutors who are overseeing the cases that he is in the middle of.

And in this case, Donald Trump has gone after Judge Merchan, and particularly his adult daughter, quite a bit.

He has argued that because she worked for a Democratic organization that thus the judge should recuse himself from this case.

That is not happening, but the judge put a gag order on Trump back in March, expanded it last week.

But, still, today, Donald Trump was posting videos where one of his supporters was going after the judge's wife.

Over the weekend, Donald Trump at a rally was going after one of the key witnesses in this case, Michael Cohen, his former lawyer.

And the prosecutors argue that, Donald Trump, you are clearly violating this gag order, and they want the judge to issue some penalties, perhaps $1,000 per violation, whether that's a social media posting or something he says aloud in front of a camera.

The judge has said, in about 10 days, he will hold a hearing to go over those allegations.

GEOFF BENNETT: And there was additional debate today, William, over what testimony the jury should be able to hear.

What was decided on that front?

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: That's right, Geoff.

There -- the jury will not hear anything about the dozens of women who allege that Donald Trump sexually harassed or sexually assaulted them over the years.

Prosecutors wanted to introduce that, and the judge in this case said, no, that that was hearsay and gossip and he wasn't going to allow that.

The jury will hear a good deal of testimony about what is known as this catch-and-kill scheme.

And that is the mechanism where the publisher of "The National Enquirer" and Michael Cohen and allegedly Donald Trump had built this system so that, if people came forward backed during the 2016 campaign and made allegations about Donald Trump, that they would pay those people, basically catch their story and kill them, and so that they would not go forward and not get out into the public.

None of those are being charged in this case.

The Stormy Daniels hush money allegations are the only things at issue here.

But the prosecutors want to set up this -- that there was a recurring pattern of Trump and his associates to build a mechanism to squash cases like that.

So the jury will hear a good deal about former Playboy model Karen McDougal who, during the 2016 campaign, came forward to say: I have had a relationship with Donald Trump in the past.

And the jury will hear something about that.

GEOFF BENNETT: And, William, close to 100 people were asked to be jurors in this case, as I understand it.

Given the historic nature of it, all of the attention surrounding it, how do they go about finding the final 12?

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Right.

Legal analysts argue that this is one of the most critical parts of any case, is deciding, who are those people that will sit in the jury box and hear this evidence?

The judge, as judges often do, has argued, he's going to go about it the old-fashioned way.

He's going to ask everyone if they can be impartial, if they can put their biases aside, listen to the evidence and make a judgment on this.

Today, though, there were 94, 96 people who were brought in as potential jurors.

And the judge has all along said, if anyone basically argues that they cannot listen to this evidence and be impartial, that I'm just going to let them go.

Shockingly, 50 people raised their hands today and said, I cannot listen to this evidence for whatever reason.

They did not give any reason for this.

And so they have all been excused.

And so the people who made it through that initial vetting process have been going through this 42-question questionnaire that asks basic things about where they live, their level of education, the kind of work that they do, but also asks things like, what kind of media do you listen to?

Have you ever been to a Trump rally?

Have you ever belonged to an organization that was anti-Trump?

Are you a member of QAnon or Antifa?

Things like that that try to get at whether or not they might have a clear political bias in all of this.

I mean, one of the very tricky parts that jurors -- that the prosecution and the defense have to be on guard for is anyone that might in that process not be totally honest and who they themselves may want to be on this jury, but because they have already made up their mind, and so that they want to either prosecute or exonerate Donald Trump.

So that's something that they're all going to be watching for.

Jury selection, they did not pick any jurors today.

Could be another couple of weeks before a jury is seated.

GEOFF BENNETT: That is William Brangham in New York City for us tonight.

William, thank you.

So, as we have said, it is Tax Day, and millions of people are filing last-minute.

What many people may not know is that the clock is ticking on some potentially big changes due in a year that will be decided by the outcome of the 2024 presidential election.

Lisa Desjardins has a closer look at what's at stake.

LISA DESJARDINS: Back in 2017, then-President Donald Trump and the Republican-led Congress enacted sweeping reform, cutting taxes across the board for most individuals and corporations.

But most of those tax cuts are set to expire next year.

That means whoever wins the November election will directly confront whether to extend those cuts or let taxes go up to earlier levels.

Trump and President Joe Biden share some common ground here.

Both would keep cuts in place for households making under $400,000 annually, but they have very different visions beyond that.

Trump would keep all individual and corporate cuts.

President Biden would like to raise the corporate rate from 21 to 28 percent, and Biden's plan would bump up high-income earners from 37 percent to 39.6 percent.

Richard Rubin from The Wall Street Journal tracks this, and he joins me now.

Richard, no one better to help us through this.

And can you set the table here?

These plans mean that, for most of us, there would be no change if either president gets what they want.

But can you help us understand that income group and why politically both candidates want to protect it?

RICHARD RUBIN, The Wall Street Journal: I mean, people don't like to pay more, right?

So people are wanting to keep the tax rates they're used to, right?

These tax cuts have been in place since 2017, and most of us don't really think about comparing what we might pay in 2026 to what we paid in 2016.

It's really about what you're paying now versus what you might pay next year or the year after.

And so both parties, particularly President Biden, is really trying to reassure taxpayers that, for middle-class households, people make -- and anyone making under $400,000, that that's not where he wants to raise taxes.

And so that is really kind of the -- leaving the core of this debate at people making more than that, which is maybe 3 percent of people, but there's a lot of money up there.

LISA DESJARDINS: All right, let's talk about those differences here.

This is a lot of money we're talking about, ultimately, all of these tax cuts, $6 trillion in revenue or so.

President Biden, he wants to raise on higher-income earners and on corporations.

Why does he argue that that's a good idea?

RICHARD RUBIN: He says, look, there's a couple of issues he's trying to address.

He's trying to address budget deficits.

He's trying to address new programs on things like childcare and paid leave that he wants to put in place, restore the expanded child tax credit that was in place in 2021.

And he's looking for ways to pay for those things.

And his argument is that it's more fair, better to take money from those people at the top, and that the 2017 tax cuts were too tilted toward those people.

And so that's really his argument, is that you can achieve a lot of those aims by just taxing people at the very top.

LISA DESJARDINS: Now to former President Trump.

You and I both know, covering Congress, that there is an anti-debt movement that just is seething right now among Republicans on Capitol Hill.

But, nonetheless, they are still pro-tax cut.

And those things don't actually work together.

How does former President Trump argue that we should continue these tax cuts in full, despite the rising tidal wave of red ink?

RICHARD RUBIN: So, they make two points.

One is to look at the economic growth that happened in 2018 and 2019 after these tax cuts were put in place.

They were enacted in late 2017, and 2018 and 2019 were strong years for the economy, in terms of wages, in terms of just the overall growth and investment that we saw.

Now, you can't attribute all of that to the tax cuts, but probably some of it.

The other point that they will argue for is that the issue on debt and deficits is spending, not taxes.

Now, they're really both sides -- two sides of the same coin.

The deficits are the difference between how much we collect as a government and how much we spend.

But they argue that the real focus should be on the spending side and that economic damage comes if you raise taxes.

And so that's -- those are those core philosophies that we have heard from the two parties for many years now, and you're going to hear that throughout the campaign, and then, depending on who wins, you will hear that again throughout 2025 as they're there debating what to do about these tax cuts and this big $6 trillion difference between where the two parties are.

LISA DESJARDINS: Did I hear you correctly that there's mixed evidence on what tax cuts do for the economy?

RICHARD RUBIN: Yes, I think it really depends.

I think there are some tax cuts that economists would say in general can spur some growth.

So some of the pieces of the 2017 tax cut that made it easier and more profitable for companies to invest had some growth effects.

Other things don't necessarily have big growth effects.

In general, when you hear someone claiming that tax cuts have some sort of outsized effect on growth, take that with a grain of salt.

There are -- taxes matter, but maybe not as much as you might think is one way of thinking about that.

LISA DESJARDINS: Something else we should talk about in this realm is the child tax credit.

An estimated 16 million low-income families would really get a boost from that.

There is a bipartisan framework potentially, but it hasn't gone that far.

Is there a chance of Congress passing that this year?

What do you think?

RICHARD RUBIN: So there's this bipartisan bill that came out of the House that would expand the child tax credit, not as large as it was in 2021 or as large as Biden wants, but would really be a boost for those low-income families, particularly with multiple children.

Right now, that looks really stalled in the Senate.

And, if anything, we should take from that a lesson about how difficult 2025 will be.

This is something that is a bipartisan bill that got 357 votes in the House.

Nothing gets 357 votes in the House.

And it's jammed up in the Senate, with Republicans saying they want changes.

So if something that's got that much agreement in the House can't get through the Senate, and it's this big, $78 billion, what happens when you're dealing with something much larger in 2025?

LISA DESJARDINS: In our final moments here, I want to ask you about the IRS in general,.

They say they're still struggling for resources and that they can't really collect all the taxes that they think are out there.

What's the state of the agency right now?

RICHARD RUBIN: So, the agency, I think just like the tax rates, really depends on what happens in this election.

They got that $80 billion in the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022.

Congress has now taken back about $21 billion of that.

So the IRS is going ahead with its plans.

It's expanded customer service.

It's beefing up enforcement, but that takes a while to hire and train and audit.

And then it's really about whether we're going to run out of that expansion money sooner than they had planned.

So, this next Congress, this next president will have some decisions to make about how much further to take that expansion in the IRS, whether to keep putting more money in there or whether to start paring back some of the expansion that President Biden and the Democratic Congress put in place.

LISA DESJARDINS: All right, Richard Rubin of The Wall Street Journal and friend of anyone who wants to understand taxes, thank you for joining us.

RICHARD RUBIN: Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: From the conflict in the Middle East to Donald Trump's first day in court as a criminal defendant, let's discuss the political implications with Amy Walter of The Cook Political Report With Amy Walter and Tamara Keith of NPR.

It's good to see you both.

So there's been some news as we have been on the air about U.S. foreign aid.

House Speaker Mike Johnson shared with his House Republican colleagues in a private meeting his plan to put on the floor this foreign aid package after months of delay.

He's calling for separate votes, Tam, on aid to Ukraine, aid to Israel, aid to Taiwan, and then a fourth vote on this forced sale of TikTok.

Is this something that the White House can get behind?

TAMARA KEITH, National Public Radio: What the White House said today even before Johnson presented this plan to his members was, this is not the fastest way to actually get something to the president's desk that would help Israel and would help Ukraine, because the Senate has already passed a bill.

It is a bill that includes all of these things together.

And the way this works is, if the House is able -- and that's still a big if -- if the House is able to pass these bills separately, then it would go to the Senate, where they would have to pass those bills separately.

And it's not clear that the Senate can pass those bills separately.

So the White House argument, as it has been for months, is, yes, fine, whatever, but please just let's do this package that we have been asking for, I think, since August?

It's been a long time.

GEOFF BENNETT: That's right, since the fall, at least.

AMY WALTER, The Cook Political Report: Yes.

GEOFF BENNETT: So Donald Trump today became the first former president ever to stand trial for alleged criminal wrongdoing.

Amy, we have seen how he has used these court appearances to really boost his political standing.

AMY WALTER: Right.

GEOFF BENNETT: He's used them as campaign appearances.

Does this change now?

I mean, will persuadable independent voters see him differently now that this trial is actually under way?

AMY WALTER: Well, this is the $1 billion question.

I don't even know what number to put on it.

It is this idea -- the idea, of course, that a former president is on trial, who is now the presumptive nominee, would seem to be a problem for that candidate in a general election, when voters start paying attention.

The question for the Biden campaign as well is, how much do we lean into this?

And, right now, it seems to me that the answer is, we're really not going to.

We're going to let it sort of speak for itself, these photos and sketches of Trump sitting in court, and also use the opportunity with Trump in court to press our advantage as the incumbent president.

The president is going to Pennsylvania for these next couple of days.

We're going to hear a lot about not Trump's trials, but about the economy.

And it seems to me that the Biden campaign's challenge right now is not so much highlighting what they already know to be weaknesses of Trump's, but really trying to make smaller Trump's advantage on this issue of inflation and the economy.

And whether that works or not is a big question.

I talked to at least one Democrat who thinks, yes, it's fine to have this split screen, but, at some point, Democrats, the Biden campaign, need to tell voters why these matter.

Just allowing the pictures to go out and the way that the media describes it isn't enough.

Democrats need to control some part of this narrative.

GEOFF BENNETT: Tam, to Amy's point of this perceived split screen, President Biden was in Scranton today talking about Trump's tax plan, how it would benefit the wealthiest Americans.

Does the campaign, does the White House feel like they need to lean in a bit more?

TAMARA KEITH: They -- when you try to ask them about Trump's trials, run in the other direction.

They don't want to lean in on this at all, because they have some challenges in place.

One is that Trump is calling these Biden's trials, this is Biden's trial.

President Biden has absolutely nothing to do with this.

This is a state case.

This is not a federal case.

And President Biden has made it clear he does not want to interfere in any sort of prosecutions or prosecutorial decisions.

However, because that is out there, because Trump makes these accusations, the Biden campaign and the Biden White House don't want to do anything to make it look like they are interfering in any way.

So that is a challenge.

But the other thing to think about is, yes, there is this split screen, but is it really a split screen, or are all screens focused on the Trump trial?

And if a president holds three rallies in Pennsylvania and nobody puts it on television or the front page of the paper, is it really happening?

And this is a challenge that President Biden has had for a very long time, which is, he sort of ran on being boring.

And he has succeeded.

The challenge, though, is that he isn't really getting much attention.

People aren't seeing him.

And when his biggest -- the biggest question voters have about him is, is he vital, is -- is he -- does he have what it takes to run a campaign and run -- be president again, he needs people to actually see him doing that?

GEOFF BENNETT: Meantime, President Biden and his senior advisers are highly concerned that an Israeli response to Iran's attack on Israel over the weekend could lead to a regional war with catastrophic consequences.

Looking at this purely through a political lens, Amy, does this take some of the pressure off of President Biden, at least as it relates to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, now that the focus, at least for right now, is on Iran?

AMY WALTER: It sure doesn't seem like it will.

I mean, the frustration that many within Biden's party have, those on the left, is all about Gaza.

And the situation there is not getting any better, whatever happens with Iran and the retaliation for that or the support that some may feel to Israel now that it's being attacked by Iran is not going to make up for what is happening in Gaza.

So I don't think that helps him there.

The other question is, if this does go into a broader Middle East conflict, this has implications not for just geopolitics and the danger there, but also what it means for Americans at home, higher gas prices going into an election year not particularly something that a sitting president wants to deal with.

And even these votes on the House bill, if they do come to pass, you're going to see once again that split within the Democratic Party between those who think Israel doesn't need much more, they have already gotten enough from us, and we need to put more humanitarian aid into Gaza, also sending a message.

Do we need to send a message that -- many Democrats are saying, to Netanyahu that it's not OK what he's doing?

And one way to send that message is to not give them more aid.

GEOFF BENNETT: Amy Walter and Tamara Keith, thanks to you both, as always.

TAMARA KEITH: You're welcome.

AMY WALTER: You're welcome.

GEOFF BENNETT: Yuval Noah Harari as a professor of history who is renowned for his broad and thought-provoking perspectives on human history.

Harari, who is the bestselling author of "Sapiens," recently released a new volume of this work called "Unstoppable Us" for younger readers.

Tonight, he shares his Brief But Spectacular take on what it means to be human.

YUVAL NOAH HARARI, Author, "Unstoppable Us": I think it's more difficult to write for kids than for adults.

When you write about complicated stuff,and you are actually not sure what you want to say, then, with adults, you can just cover yourself by talking with these very long, complicated sentences.

With kids, it doesn't work.

You need to speak very clearly.

And, for that, you really need to think deeply, to know, what do you actually want to say?

When I was a kid, I asked these big questions about life, I mean, what are we doing here, what is this all about?

And I think what struck me the most is not that the adults often had no answers, is that they were not concerned about the fact that they really don't understand the world.

In a way, I wrote "Unstoppable Us" to answer at least some of the questions that really bothered me when I was 10 or 12.

How did we get here?

If you look at any major human achievement, it is always based on large-scale cooperation.

You want to build pyramids, you want to fly to the moon, you want to create an atom bomb, you want to build a health care system, you always need thousands of people cooperating together.

And we are the only mammals that can do that.

How do we do that?

By inventing and believing fictional stories.

You can't do that with chimps.

Humans, unfortunately, are -- we are very smart, but, despite our wisdom, we keep doing some very stupid things.

We know that nuclear weapons could destroy the whole of human civilization.

We know that now artificial intelligence can escape our control, and yet we keep on producing it.

The three, I think, biggest challenges that face humankind today in the 21st century are ecological collapse, disruptive technologies like artificial intelligence and the threat of nuclear war.

The one thing everybody needs to know about A.I.

is that it's the first technology in history that can make decisions by itself and can create new ideas by itself.

It's often compared to previous technological breakthroughs like the printing press or the atom bomb.

It's completely different.

Printing presses could not decide what book to print.

Atom bombs could not decide by themselves which cities to destroy.

But A.I.

can do that.

The dedication of the book says that our ancestors made the world what it is, and we can now decide what it will become.

The main message of the book and also in the title, "Unstoppable Us," is that humans, all humans are the most powerful entity on the planet, and we should own it.

We should acknowledge our immense power, because only then we can also take responsibility for what we are doing with this power.

My name is Yuval Noah Harari, and this is my Brief But Spectacular take on what it means to be human.

GEOFF BENNETT: And you can find additional Brief But Spectacular episodes online at PBS.org/NewsHour/Brief.

And there's a lot more online, including a look at the strides made registering voters and strengthening election safeguards in the swing state of Michigan.

That's on our Web site, PBS.org/NewsHour.

AMNA NAWAZ: And join us back here tomorrow night for our next report from here in Ukraine, when we will take a closer look at Russia's intensifying attacks on Ukraine's energy systems, the impact that that's having on Ukrainian people and on the war.

And that is the "NewsHour" for tonight.

From Kyiv, I'm Amna Nawaz.

GEOFF BENNETT: And I'm Geoff Bennett.

For all of us here at the "PBS NewsHour," thanks for joining us and have a good evening.