and the parties primetime star.
Amna: For insights into the
larger implications of tucker
Carlson's access to the January
sixth footage, and what the year
of war in Ukraine can tell us
about the future direction of
that conflict and the world,
we turn to the analysis of
brooks and Capehart.
That's New York Times columnist
David brooks and Jonathan
Capehart, associate editor for
the Washington post.
Good to see you both.
Let's pick up where Lisa left
off.
This idea that speaker Mccarthy
has handed over these hours of
security footage to tucker
Carlsen.
There are those who argue, let
everyone see everything and make
up their own mind.
Is there validity?
Jonathan: Sure, simply because
the speaker has given all of
this footage to code -- to
tucker Carlson.
If you're going to give it to
him, give it to everybody.
So that they can look at it.
But I don't need to see 44,000
hours worth of footage.
I watched our government being
attacked by supporters of the
former president, live, on
television, in real time over
several hours.
I don't know what are -- what
tucker Carlson is going to do
with the footage and how he is
going to presented on his show,
but whatever it is and however
he doesn't and whenever he does
it will be a disservice to his
viewers, a disservice to this
country.
Amna: We don't know what he is
going to do with it.
I am baffled by this idea that
it seemed that Republicans
wanted to get as far away from
January 6 as they could.
This goes like they are
resurrecting it.
Why talk about it?
David: Marjorie Taylor Greene
was ecstatic over this.
This is clearly what they wanted
in exchange for voting for Kevin
Mccarthy.
I guess their argument is the
people on the committee were not
friends to Donald Trump.
Somebody who is more friendly to
Donald Trump should have a whack
at it.
You want to pick the tucker
Carlson, --
Jonathan: I will laugh.
David: In general, as long as
they predict the procedures of
this, the capitol security, as
long as you don't release those,
having any public official,
giving everything to it one news
organization?
That is just bizarre and against
the rules of what we do.
If you give it to one news
organization, it should be --
off the record, it is not done.
You give it to the public.
Amna: Are you worried about how
they will use it?
David: Yeah, I worry everything
talk -- everything about tucker
touches.
I think the conspiracy theories
are out there.
It is hard to imagine them
building another mountain of
nonsense on top of the existing
mountain of nonsense that comes
out.
Amna: We will be waiting and
watching and talking about it
more.
That is one of the issues
dividing Americans.
We asked in our latest pbs
newshour marist NPR Paul in
number of other issues that
Americans have varying officials
-- opinions on.
We asked you, and you pointed to
the same question, which is on
the question of U.S. Support for
Ukraine.
When you take a look at those
numbers, we asked people what
they thought about the level of
support.
42% of people said we are
providing the right amount of
support.
The third of people who said we
are providing too much support,
that did stick out to me.
Republicans feel there is too
much support from the U.S. Going
to Ukraine.
Why did that stand out to you?
Jonathan: Because of what we
have been hearing from the
Republican house majority.
Marjorie Taylor Greene and
others and Kevin Mccarthy
talking about maybe we are
giving too much support.
The fact that 47% of Republicans
say it is too much and 4% of
trump voters -- 54% of trump
voters say it is too much, that
says after the president
releases his budget, or when the
president goes to congress for
more funding, that we will start
to see this friction we have
only been talking about in
theory play out in public.
From the administration's
perspective, that daylight is
not helpful.
What the president has been
banking on is a unified front,
within the American government
for Ukraine, and among the
alliance.
If that phrase within the united
States, the fear is that could
impact the alliance.
Amna: What do those numbers say
to you?
David: It is fascinating, there
was a poll that had similar
numbers two hours.
40% of Republicans said we are
giving too much.
Radically different policy
agendas.
Ron Desantis went on fox and
friends, and he danced between
the two, edging a little bit.
What you are seeing is a party
bitterly divided over something
of real substance.
The primaries will just reveal
that over and over.
Amna: As we mark one year since
the Russian invasion of Ukraine
this week, a one we should
remind people many thought would
not last, but a matter of days.
We saw what both of you had to
say year ago.
Here is a snippet of what you
were saying a year ago when it
came to the war in Ukraine.
>> We were blessed to live for
many years in this era of rules.
We may be ending that era and
reentering an era of great power
rivalries as we saw in the 17th
century, 15th-century.
>> We are seeing right there the
battle between democracy and
autocracy, and having democracy
when is not assured, especially
because democracy here in the
United States is the weakest it
has been in memory.
Amna: It is nice to have you
both here in person rather than
your home studios.
Do you still see it the same
way?
Does democracy stand a better
chance today?
Jonathan: Yes.
Arguably yes.
At that moment, we were not sure
whether Ukraine, president
zelenskyy, no one had any kind
of expectation of him or of the
country.
We were disabused of that within
days.
The fact that we are here
entering year two is
extraordinary.
It says a lot about president
zelenskyy.
It says a lot about the
Ukrainian -- more about the
Ukrainian people.
Their willingness to fight for
their country.
Men and women, anyone.
Remember in those early
pictures, people learning how to
shoot guns because they were
going to defend themselves
against the Russians.
That fight between democracy and
autocracy is still there.
We could be facing a situation
where that battle will become
more fraught as Russia gets more
desperate.
Amna: What about you, are we
deeper into this new era?
David: We are.
It is hard to overestimate how
big of a deal this war has been.
When you think about the events
of the last year, it has been
earthshaking.
First, the humanitarian crisis
has just been overwhelming.
Second, the western alliance has
been reformed.
American influence in the world
has expanded.
Military strategies have been
changed by the war.
There has been a global
decoupling of our economies.
Russia and China have come
together.
These are all big events that
have been set off by this war.
And I think basically, the
contradictions have become
focused.
We in the west, including Japan
and other countries, the
democracy loving countries, have
been strengthened and hardened
by the people of Ukraine.
But even this week the Russians
and Chinese are getting closer
together.
It looks like a global power
struggle between people who want
to respect human dignity, and
people who, not so much.
Amna: China's entry into this
war, that change the direction
of the war?
David: For sure.
One thinks of the Korean war.
That was a war started by a
Russian dictator.
They had some success but they
thought the U.S. Would never get
involved.
It turned out not to be.
The U.S. Got involved, pushed
them back, got the Chinese
involved, the Chinese altered
the course of the war for a
little while, then we pushed
them back.
It was a deadlock.
We signed an armistice that
people thought was temporary,
turned out to do not temporary.
As people look to the future of
Ukraine and the possibility of
negotiated settlement, I think a
lot will determine what happens
the spring.
Then we can start to think about
how can we get through?
Negotiated peace we are not
there.
I'm sure Putin is hoping China
will alter the war.
Amna: Americans have felt the
effect of the war to some
degree.
Certainly reshaping of the
global energy market, but knock
on effects of all of that.
And bearing witness through the
reporting, like Nick schifrin
has been doing.
But it is not necessarily the
same for Ukrainians or even
Europeans who are feeling it
more immediately.
You think the longer this goes
on we see a decline in support,
and what does that mean for the
future?
Jonathan: Unfortunately, because
of our oceans and most of the
American people have no real
skin in the game, it is easy for
us to go from the euphoria of
cheering on an underdog, too,
this has been going on a while,
I'm going to think about other
things.
But we in this business, we
cannot be a part of that
process.
We have to keep telling the
stories, we have to keep doing
the reporting, we have to keep
explaining why this is
important.
This just isn't because Russia
invaded Ukraine.
There are bigger issues here
that David pointed out.
If China does provide lethal aid
to Russia, how does the Biden
administration hold back on
those f-16's that president
zelenskyy has been asking for?
If this truly is a battle
between democracy and autocracy,
at some point, democracy will
have to rear up on its hind legs
and smacked down autocracy, and
we could see that after we see
what happens with the spring
offensive.
Amna: You see this stretching
another year?
David: For sure.
But ics holding still -- but I
see the west holding still.
I was in Dublin and I'm waiting
to get my passport checked,
there is a loud Irish lady
running the line, and she says,
clear way, clear way, and she
has this Ukrainian family.
She said, these people are going
first, these are the most
important people in the world
right now, and we all bow and
shake hands.
That Irish lady, on her own,
will help the western alliance
stay.
Amna: I think we can all buy
into that idea.
Thank you so much.
♪♪