geoff: good evening. i'm geoff bennett. amna: 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: history is made as former president trump's criminal trial for making alleged hush money payments to an adult film actress gets underway in new york.

amna: and, our exclusive interview with ukrainian president volodymyr zelensky, on the war with russia and the uncertainty around united states aid >> i can tell you frankly, without this support, we'll have no chance of winning. ♪ >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by. the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. and friends of the newshour, including leonard and norma, and julie and peter foundation. >> you don't need vision to do most things in life. yes, i'm legally blind and yes,

i'm responsible for the user interface. data visualization. if i can understand it quickly, anyone can. it's exciting to be part of a team driving technology forward. i think that is the most rewarding thing. people who know, know bdo. >> certified financial planner professionals are proud to support pbs newshour. committed to acting in their clients best interest. >> two retiring executives turned their focus to greyhounds, giving former race dogs a chance to live. a raymond james financial advisor gets to know you, your purpose and the way you give back. life well planned. >> the william and flora hewlett foundation. advancing ideas and supporting institutions to promote a better world at hewlett.org.

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. geoff: 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 would not support a retaliatory strike. amna: that's right, geoff. and one other country hoping for more u.s. support is ukraine.

i spoke with ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy to talk about that, its war with russia, and much more. but first, we start in the mideast, where the region is on edge. nick schifrin has our report. nick: at the sight of the first ever iranian missile strike on a -- israeli territory, israel's top general warned iran payback was coming. >> as we look forward, we weigh our steps and this launch of so many missiles and drones onto the territory of israel will be met with a response. nick: iran's unprecedented attack of more than 300 drones and missiles lit up the sky saturday night and sunday morning are us the country. world leaders rallied to israel's defense but following u.s. officials urging israel not to respond militarily, a year -- a unified european message of restraint. >> we will try to convince

israel we should not respond by escalating. nick: the german foreign minister. >> israel has strong air defenses. this victory must be insured diplomatically. nick: and the british former sect -- foreign secretary. >> we don't want a retaliatory response. nick: israel said it blocked ballistic missiles thanks in part to its air defense system built to counter iranian threats. they got lucky. two officials from the u.s. confirmed more than half of iran's ballistic missiles failed in flight. israel's success was part of a coalition. when the strikes began, the u.s. already made agreements with arab states including jordan and saudi arabia. the u.s. military shot down more than 80 iranian drones. the israeli defense minister

hopes that sets a precedent. >> we have an opportunity to establish a strategic alliance against this threat, threatening to mount nuclear explosives on the missiles, which could be a grave threat. >> we have seen proof of concept that when the security and strategic concerns a line, they can absolutely work together. nick: dana is the research director and a senior fellow at the washington institute of new reit -- near east policy. she says the shootdown's were successful because of regional coordination that until this weekend was untested. >> what we saw was proof of concept that all of this hard work, the investment incompatible radar, the investment to share classified military information in real time and the confidence building it took to create this regional security architecture, actually works. nick: iran's attack was in

response to an israeli airstrike on iran's consulate in damascus that killed several top commanders. >> they got what they wanted with the psychological impact of the world being on edge. nick: this professor at johns hopkins says even though the attacks failed militarily, iran hopes they prevent future israeli attacks. >> iran hopes what happened last week will make everybody, europeans and americans, think we don't want to be there again in a week. that would put pressure on israel and the pressure is the kind of deterrent iran was looking for. it is mainly political rather than military gain. nick: while the world urges restraint, the decision is israel's. i'm nick schifrin. ♪

geoff: 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 onboard the vessel this morning. the fbi confirmed its agents were carrying out a court-approved search, but wouldn't elaborate. the bodies of three workers, killed in the collapse, have been recovered. 3 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 actor alec baldwin was using that accidentally killed cinematographer halyna hutchins in 2021.

baldwin's own involuntary manslaughter trial begins in july. the supreme court is allowing a louisiana policeman 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. >> today, from this mobilisation, all of our presence, it sends a clear message we are sending to the belligerents. we are making a solemn appeal out of respect for international humanitarian rights and for the protection of the civil population. geoff: macron added that the funds will go towards 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. worshippers at christ the good shepherd church in sydney were able to overpower the attacker. there were no life-threatening injuries. outside the church, police in riot gear worked to subdue crowds who had gathered at the scene. >> a number of houses have been damaged, they've broken into in 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 their clergy people. geoff: monday night's attack comes after a separate stabbing incident this weekend at a mall in sydney killed six people. -- that killed six people. p10 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 37,735. the nasdaq lost 290 points. the s&p 500 gave back 61. today, of course, is tax day, the deadline for filing 2023 returns. the white house today said 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. their tax rate was 23.7%. 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 2 hours and 6 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 tax policies proposed by 2024 presidential candidates biden and trump. and tamara keith and amy walter break down the latest political headlines

♪ >> this is the pbs newshour, from w eta studios in washington and in the west, from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. amna: we sat down with president zelensky earlier today here in kyiv, to discuss the challenges he's facing on multiple fronts. right now there have been critical shortages of munitions and manpower. russia is ramping up its attacks and there is uncertainty around the future of usaid. on the heels of iran's attack on israel, zelensky says it's clear this is not just a critical time for his nation, but for the world. president zelenskyy, welcome. thanks for hosting us here. >> thank you so much for coming. amna: you condemned iran's attack on israel 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? >> first, i believe this is a signal to all the leaders of the world. surely, france, jordan, the u.k. and the u.s. have responded in support of the protection of israel and this is a serious defense shield for israel, which is important. israel by itself wouldn't be able to protect against such a powerful strike. here, definitely, they used air defense and aviation, many things that ukraine is lacking. this is a demonstration of allies not on paper, but in the air. not on paper, but on the ground, in action. this is an important signal to everyone. ukraine defends its sky by itself. definitely, we have allies who supply us with 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: you are saying it sent a signal to see the allies come together, the u.s. and u.k. and france and jordan along with israel, repelling hundreds of drones and missiles launched on israel that day. and in your address you said the whole world saw what the real defense is, the whole world saw israel was not alone in this defense. do you think the same message is being sent to the world about ukraine? >> i will give you one example. a simple example. a power plant, electricity in the kyiv region depends on it. 11 missiles were headed towards it. we took down the first seven. four destroyed the plant because we had zero missiles. we ran out of missiles. when someone says our allies can't provide weapons, or they can't be in ukraine because that would be perceived as engaging

nato in war, after yesterday's attack i want to ask, is israel part of nato or not? here is the answer. israel is not a nato country. nato allies have been defending israel. they showed the iranian forces israel was not alone. this is a lesson. this is a response to anyone on any continent who says you need to assist ukraine carefully. amna: you said if the u.s. congress doesn't approve the aid it is currently considering, which is some $60 billion held up by republican lawmakers, you said if that doesn't move forward, ukraine will lose the war. if the aid does not move forward, how long do your troops have? is it a matter of weeks or months? could they sustain a spring russian offensive? >> i can tell you 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 one to 10. can we hold our ground? no. with these statistics they will be pushing us back every day. to defend 100% of what is in our control, we need to go from one to compare numbers. 10 to 10. amna: does the $60 billion potentially, does that help essentially strengthen your defenses or does it help you actually break the russian defenses? what is the plan to use the aid in a way that could actually change the dynamics of the war? >> it is a lot to preserve ourselves. it is difficult for us. we are fighting a large army. they don't care about their soldiers lives. they aren't training them. but there is a lot of them. they have an unlimited number of people and a lot of shells. they used thousands of drones against us. tell me, 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 300 kilometers. it could be over 400, 500 kilometers depending on how deep they are targeting. how can we destroy those? the plan is simple. it is very clear. it exists. there is a specific weapon we need to advance. there is 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: mr. president, 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 from russians -- russians from territory, some say. it would help you preserve and

protect where you are now. if it is 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? >> we don't think it will be easier for us. we are fighting. we aren't thinking about next year. we are thinking about tomorrow. our goals are much more about real life. we need to live tomorrow. what is going to happen next year? 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 will happen in the u.s. congress? they might make a decision and i hope they are listening and will make a decision in the near days or weeks but not longer, and a positive decision. but we don't know what is going to happen. we are just saying, at least give and you will receive some sort -- some percentage of what russia is using against you. how can you have aircraft 1-30,

artillery 1-10? how can we wage a war like this? we are not asking for missiles for 3000 kilometers. nobody is asking for 500 or 300 aircraft like russia. russia is using 300 aircraft just in ukraine. amna: as you know, the republican house speaker mike johnson has said he is likely to move forward this week to approve aid for israel, but it is unclear if aid for ukraine will be part of that effort or not. amna: it -- >> it is strange. amna: why is it strange? >> it means this is not about security. it is pure politics and it is a disgrace for the world and a disgrace for democracy. those who only speak of democracy, it is just talk. amna: why is it a disgrace? why do you use that word? >> if congress will deny the

assistance after everything will happen, and it will divide into israeli and ukrainian, it means this is a matter of elections in the united states. the world is saying how could iran strike israel, so now we need to support only israel and forget you train? -- ukraine? this is pure politics. nobody cares how many people are dying in ukraine every day. they only care about approve all ratings. that is what it is about. they are forgetting dead people don't care about ratings. if ukraine falls on their is a war in other nato member countries, and there will be a war, u.s. soldiers will be defending and dying. that is what it is going to be. people in congress need to think twice about pushing political matters with regards to support in ukraine and vote to support all of the countries whose lives depend on it. amna: have you spoken directly to house speaker johnson? >> twice. i talked to him last year. i visited the united states,

specifically i had a meeting with the speaker, the president and congress. and we had a meeting behind closed doors. they agreed 100%, those at the meeting. they said 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 he fully supports ukraine receiving this support. he said yes, of course he supported giving aid, this package. and this is very important. what is very important? a lot of them said to me, ukraine will get. the question is, in days, weeks? after that, months, etc. one important moment, when i spoke with a team of congressman, they said maybe it

will be not cheap money. maybe it will be structured as a loan. amna: you are open to that? >> i said it doesn't matter for us. 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 is why the ball is on your field. please, just make a decision. amna: what about the role of former president trump? it is an election year. he has enormous influence over the republican party were opposition to this and lies. he has criticized u.s. aid to ukraine. do you believe the former president is standing in the way of you getting the aid you seek? >> i'm very careful about this because voices from inside the circle, someone during the elections, i think it is a big

question of whether it is true or not. i will believe the united states will not stop support and we will be allies and the policy of the president, if the president changes, that is for the americans to decide what the policy of the president will not change as it relates to ukraine. that is important to us. amna: russia has a population advantage. 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? >> we have offered the peace formula to the world. currently, there are first steps with specifics. in june there will be a peace summit in switzerland and we will prepare and elaborate on the plan to end the war. the summit will take place without russia, for russia not to block the 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 the war in a fair piece. amna: given the conditions, the challenges you face, uncertainty of foreign aid, advancing russian forces, your critical shortages, a major mobilization shortage and a shift in global landscape in which you and ukraine are moving further down the agenda, some would say those are impossible odds to overcome. if you don't start to negotiate now humble will conditions get worse? >> i'm ready to negotiate now with people who really want peace. amna: not with russia. >> he doesn't want. especially potent. -- putin. the documents from our intelligence, what they discuss about, we have it from our

intelligence, from the united states. they know everything. so we understand he is not ready for any negotiations. he doesn't want, he is not interested. for him, this is not victory. he needs victory and for him, victory is to destroy ukraine. how would you like us to talk to a person who is willing to kill you, simply kill you? he is saying either you are part of russia or we will destroy you while. -- you all. there are voices from the west saying we are afraid. what will happen if russia loses? are they not afraid we are dying here every day? are they afraid there will be some sort of migration crisis? what will happen? maybe china will be very strong and differentiable panic and have a revolution, china will capture part of the territory of russia. so everyone is afraid. god forbid china would be strong. god forbid there would be no

putin. what will happen to russia's nuclear weapons? as of now, the west controls nuclear weapons so that is what i'm talking about. all of those voices, all of those messages come all of ts is the disgrace i was talking about. amna: you have said this is not just a fight for ukraine's future but for democracy's future. that includes the future of your own children, your daughter, your son. he is now 11 years old. i know you are separated from them but when you do speak to them, what do they ask you about this for and -- this war and what you tell them? >> i sometimes look at our children, not only my own but the children of those families at war and the children currently in ukraine. i think they know all the answers and frankly, if they would be answering your questions today, who knows? maybe they would be wiser. they are 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 is not a question of when the war will end. they understand it depends on many factors and it is not a question of whether you are and will be able to withstand this fight. they know it depends on many things but ukraine will definitely withstand. they are very strong. i would say they are much more confident than some of our partners. sometimes they ask, when can we live together again, dad? amna: do your children ever worry you might not survive the war? >> 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 is important for them to feel you are there, not over the phone but in person. amna: president volodymyr zelenskyy, thank you for your time, sir. >> thank you very much. thank you that you are here. amna: the streets tonight in kyiv tonight are quiet and empty, with a curfew still in place. but as president zelensky and i left the interview and walked through the halls of the residential complex, he remembered back to the days when russian forces tried to take this same city in the early days of their fullscale invasion in 2022. he said that that was before he knew how long the war would last, before tens of thousands of ukrainians had been killed. before the future of his nation was this uncertain. all of that, the president told me, feels like a lifetime ago. geoff? geoff: you and our team have been on the ground for several days now. tell us what else you are working on. amna: we will be making a trip to the city of kharkiv, which

has been relentlessly pummeled by russian forces. we will talk to residents about how they have been adapting to life under that assault and what they can do to protect themselves. we are taking a closer look at ukraine's critical infrastructure and energy, which has been targeted in a way we haven't seen before by russian forces, which much -- with much more aggression and precision than we have seen it any other point. we will talk to young ukrainians. president zelenskyy lowered the draft age from 27 to 25. many thousands of young ukrainians could be called to join the fight. we will talk to them to get their take. geoff: thank you. ♪ geoff: former president donald

trump's first criminal trial started today in new york city. it's the first of four criminal indictments 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 cast himself as under attack, calling the trial a quote, "political persecution." joining us now from new york is our william brangham, who has been covering the former president's legal cases. william, jury selection started this afternoon but only after a good deal of sparring over various motions. walk us through what happened. >> the day started with a lot of conversation about the gag order placed on donald trump by the judge and whether trump violated it today over -- or over the past we can. remember, i cannot think of a

criminal defendant in recent legal history who has so aggressively and sometimes violently gone after the judges and prosecutors overseeing the cases that he is in the middle of. in this case, donald has gone after the judge, particularly his adult daughter, quite a bit. he argued because she worked for a democratic organization, the judge should recuse himself from the case. that is not happening but the judge put a gag order on trump in march, expanded it last week but still, today donald trump was hosting -- posting videos were one of his supporters went after the judges wife. at a rally, donald trump went after one of the key witnesses, michael cohen's former lawyer. prosecutors argue that trump is violating the gag order and the judge may want to issue penalties, perhaps $1000 per violation, whether that is a social media posting or

something he says in front of a camera. the judge says he will hold a hearing to go over the allegations. geoff: there was additional debate over what testimony the jury should be able to hear. what was decided? >> the jury will not hear anything about the dozens of women who allege donald trump sexually harassed or sexually assaulted them over the years. prosecutors wanted to introduce that and the judge said no, that was hearsay and gossip and he wouldn't allow that. the jury will hear a good deal of testimony about what is known as his catch and kill scheme, the mechanism where the publisher of the national enquirer and michael cohen and allegedly donald trump built a system so if people came forward during the 2016 campaign and made allegations about donald trump, they would pay those people, catch their story and kill them so they would not go

forward and not get into the public. none of those are being charged in this case. the stormy daniels hush money allegations are the only thing it issue. but prosecutors want to set up that there was a recurring pattern of trump and his associates to build a mechanism to squash cases. the jury will hear about a former playboy model 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: close to 100 people were asked to be jurors in the case. given the historic nature of it and all of the attention, how do they go about finding the final 12? >> legal analyst argued this is one of the most critical parts of any case, deciding who are those people that will sit in the jury box and hear the evidence? the judge, as judges often do,

argued he will go about it the old-fashioned way. he will ask everyone if they can put their biases aside and be impartial, listen to the evidence and make a judgment area today, there were 94, 96 people brought into the -- brought in as potential jurors. the judge said if anybody cannot listen to the evidence and be impartial, i'm going to let them go. shockingly, 50 people raised their hands and said i cannot listen to the evidence for whatever reason. they didn't give any reason for this. they have been excused. the people who made it through the initial vetting process have been going this 42 question questionnaire that asks things about where they live, their level of education, what kind of work they do and things like what kind of media do you listen to? have you ever been to a trump rally? have you ever belong to an organization that was antitrust? are you a member of qanon or

antifa? things that might get at whether they have a clear political bias in all of this. one of the tricky parts that jurors, that the prosecution and the defense have to be on guard for is anyone that might, in the process, not be totally honest and who might want to be on the jury, but because they have made up their minds, they want to either prosecute or exonerate donald trump. that is something that they will be watching for. they didn't pick any jurors today. could be another couple weeks before the jury is seated. geoff: thank you, william. ♪ geoff: as we have said, it is tax day, and millions of people are filing last minute. what many 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 election. lisa desjardins has a closer look at what's at stake. lisa: 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%, and biden's plan would bump up high income earners from 37% to 39.6%. 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? >> i mean, people don't like to pay more, right? so people are wanting to keep the tax rates they're used to. 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 from 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 leaving the core of this debate at people making

more than that, which is, you know, maybe 3% of people, but there's a lot of money up there. lisa: 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. so president biden, he wants to raise on higher income earners and corporations. why does he argue that that's a good idea? >> he says, look, there's a couple 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 he'd leave that -- that he wants to put in place. they 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 towards 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: 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? >> 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 are enacted in 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. you can't attribute all of that to the tax cuts, but probably some of it. the other point that they'll argue for is that the issue on debt and deficits is spending, not taxes. now they're really both two sides of the same coin. there's 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 those are those core philosophies that we've heard from the two parties for many years now, and you're going to hear that throughout the campaign and then depending on wins, you will hear that again throughout debating what to do 2025, about these tax cuts? and this big, you know, $6 trillion difference between where the two these are. lisa: did i hear you correctly that there is mixed evidence on what tax cut to do for the economy? >> i think you know, 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: something else we should talk about in this room is the child tax credit and 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? >> 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 you know this big what happens when you're , dealing with something much larger in 2025? lisa: the irs says they are

struggling for resources and they can't collect all the taxes they think are out there. what is the state of the agency? >> i think just like the tax rates, it depends on what happens in this election. they got the act in 2022 and congress took back $21 billion so the irs is going ahead with its plans to expand customer service, beefing up enforcement but that takes a while to hire and train and audit. it is really about whether they will run out of expansion money sooner than they planned. the next president will have decisions to make about how much further we take the expansion of the irs, whether to keep putting more money in their or start paring back the expansion the democratic congress put in place. lisa: all right, richard rubin of the wall street journal and friend of anyone who wants to understand taxes. thank you for

joining us. >> thank you. ♪ geoff: from the conflict in the middle east to mr. 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. good to see you both. there has been some news as we have been on the air about u.s. foreign aid, house speaker mike johnson shared with house republican colleagues in a private meeting his plan to put on the floor the foreign aid package after months of delay. he is calling for separate votes on aid to ukraine, aid to israel and aid to taiwan and a fourth vote on the forced sale of tiktok. is this something the white house can get behind? >> the white house said before johnson presented the plan, this is not the fastest way to get something to the president's

desk that would help israel and ukraine. because the senate has already passed a bill from a bill that includes all of these things together and the way thiworks is if the house is able, and that is a big if, if the house is able to pass these bills separately it would go to the senate, where they would have to pass the bills separately. it is unclear that the senate can pass those bills separately. the white house argument, as it has been for months, is that whatever, but please, let's do this package we have been asking for. i think since august? it has been a long time. geoff: today donald trump became the first former president ever to stand trial for alleged criminal wrongdoing. we have seen how he has used court appearances to really boost his political standing. he has used them as campaign appearances. does this change -- will persuade-enable independent voters see them differently?

>> this is the billion dollar question. the idea that a former president is on trial, who is now the presumptive nominee, who would seem to be -- that would seem to be a problem for the candidate and a general election when voters pay attention. the question for the biden campaign is, how much do we lean into this? right now, it seems to me the answer is we are not going to. we are going to let it speak for itself. the photos and sketches of trump sitting in court, and use the opportunity with trump in court to press our advantage as the incumbent president. the president is going to pennsylvania for the next couple days. we will hear a lot about not trump's trials but about the economy. it seems to me the bidens cap -- the biden campaign's challenge is not highlighting what they already know to be we mrs. of

trump, but really trying to make smaller trump's advantage of the issue of inflation and the economy. and whether that works are not is a big question. i talked to at least one democrat who thinks that yes, it is fine to have a split screen but at some point, democrats and the biden campaign need to tell voters why these matter. just allow pictures to go outcome of the way the media describes it, isn't enough. democrats need to control some part of the narrative. geoff: the point of the perceived split screen, president biden was talking about trump's tax plan and how it would benefit the wealthiest americans. does that campaign, does the white house feel they need to lean in more? >> when you try to ask them about trump's trial, run and the other direction. they don't want to lean in on

this. they have some challenges in place. one is that trump is calling these bidens trials, this is biden's trial. president biden has absolutely nothing to do with this. this is a state case, not a federal case. president biden has made it clear he doesn't want to interfere in prosecutorial decisions. but because that is out there, because trump makes these accusations, the biden campaign in the biden white house don't want to do anything to make it look like they are interfering in any way. the other thing to think about, there is a split screen but is it really a split screen or are all screens focused on the trump trial? if a president holds three rallies in pennsylvania and nobody puts it on television or the front page, is it really happening? this is a challenge president biden has had for a long time, which is that he ran on being boring. he has succeeded. the challenge is that he isn't

really getting much attention. people aren't seeing him. when the biggest question voters have about him he is, is he vital? does he have what it takes to run a campaign and be president again? he needs people to see him do it. geoff: president biden and his senior advisers are highly concerned that an israeli response to iran's attack on israel could lead to a regional war with catastrophic consequences. looking at this through a political lens, does this take some of the pressure off president biden as it relates to the humanitarian crisis in gaza? the focus for now is on iran. >> doesn't seem like it will. the frustration that many within biden's party have come of those on the left, is all about gaza and the situation is not getting any better. whatever happened with iran and the retaliation with that, or the support some may feel for

israel now that it is being attacked, is not going to make up for what is happening in gaza. i don't think that helps him. if this does go into a broader middle east conflict, this has implications not just for 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 a sitting president wants to deal with. even votes on the house floor, if they do come to pass, you will see once again that split within the democratic party from those who think israel doesn't need much more, they have gotten enough from us and we need to put more humanitarian aid into gaza, also sending a message that many democrats are saying to netanyahu, it is not ok what he is doing and one way to send that message is not giving them more aid. geoff: thank you so much.

♪ geoff: yuval noah harari is 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 gives his brief but spectacular take on what its means to be human. >> 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, it was 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, you

know, 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: you can find additional brief but spectacular episodes online at pbs.org/ newshour/brief. there is a lot more online, including a look at the strides made registering voters and improving election safeguards in the swing state of michigan that is on our website,

pbs.org/newshour. amna: and join us again tomorrow night, for our next report from here in ukraine. we will take a look at russia's intensifying attacks on ukraine's energy system. the impact that is having on the ukrainian people and the war. and that is the newshour for tonight. from kyiv, i'm amna nawaz. geoff: and i'm geoff bennett, for all of us here at the pbs newshour, thanks for joining us and have a good evening. >> major funding for the pbs newshour been provided by. ♪ >> on an american cruise line's journey, along the columbia and snake rivers, travelers retrace the route forged by lewis and clark more than 200 years ago. american cruise lines modern riverboats travel american landscapes to historic landmarks , where you can experience local customs and cuisine. american cruise lines, proud

sponsor of pbs newshour. >> certified financial planner professionals are proud to support pbs newshour. we are committed to acting in clients best interest. more information at let's make a plan.org. >> the kendeda fund. committed to restorative justice and meaningful work. more at kendedafund.org. supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation, committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. more information at macfound.or g. and with the ongoing support of these institutions. ♪ >> this program was made possible by the corporation for broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you.

thank you. ♪ >>

. ♪ hello, everyone. and welcome to "amanpour & co." here's what's coming up. arizona becomes a flash point for america's reproductive rights battle as a 160-year-old law bans almost all abortions. i'm joined by mary ziegler, an expert on the law, history, and politics of this