pbs newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by. >> for 25 years, consumer cellular has been offering no contract wireless plans designed to help people do more of what they like. our u.s.-based customer service team can help find a plan that it's you. for more visit consumer cellular.tv. >> and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions and friends of the newshour including kathy and paul anderson and camilla and george smith. >> the john s and james l night donation fostering informed, engaged communities. >> this program was made possible by the court ration for public broadcasting and by contributions to ur pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> i'm nicole ellis in for stephanie sy with newshour west. we'll return to the full program after the latest headlines. a new heatwave is scorching the pacific northwest of the united states as the east coast finally gets relief. forecasts called for highs of 100 degrees in eastern washington state and oregon today. oregon's governor declared an emergency. seattle headed into the 90's. meanwhile, rising humidity again slowed the spread of the oak fire burning near yosemite national park. it is now 26% contained. the heaviest rainfall in more than a century flooded the st. los area today. some sections got more than 11 inches in a matter of hours. the resulting flash floods submerged roads and threatened homes. one person was killed. the deluge followed a period of extended drought. the u.s. senate is set to pass a bipartisan bill worth $280 billion to boost the semi-conductor industry. today, senators agreed to limit debate and take a final vote later this week. at the same time general motors blamed shortages of computer chips and parts for a 40% drop in profits, since a year ago. a major maker of generic opioids has announced a tentative settlement with 2500 state and local governments, as well as native american tribes over its role in the opioid epidemic. teva pharmaceuticals, based in israel, produced more prescription opioids than johnson and johnson and purdue pharma at the height of the epidemic. the deal is worth almost $4.3 billion. russia says it will officially withdraw from the international space station. the country's space chief says moscow will focus on building its own orbiting outpost instead. today's announcement had been expected, with tensions running high over the war in ukraine. >> as you know, we are working within the framework of inteational cooperation on the international space station. of course, we will fulfill all our obligations to our partner, but the decision to leave after 2024 has been taken. nicole: we will take a closer look at the implications of all this, later in the program. today the european union agreed to ration natural gas this winter. the decision comes a day after russian energy giant gazprom cut the gas flow through the nord stream 1 pipeline to 20 percent capacity. germany's economic minister said the eu bloc will not bow to pressure. >> we have now seen it very clearly that the strategy is to keep the price high in europe and to let the political price get higher and higher and thus to divide europe and also to split off solidarity with ukraine. this council today has sent a strong, decisive signal. europe will not be divided. nicole: the draft eu legislation calls for voluntary reductions of natural gas usage by 15% from august through march. pope francis held a huge outdoor mass in canada a day after apologizing for the mistreatment of generations of indigenous school children. an estimated 50,000 people turned out in edmonton, alberta. the pope praised the indigenous tradition of showing respect for elders, but made no further mention of his apology. conspiracy theorist alex jones went on trial today for lying about the sandy hook schoo massacre in connecticut in 2012. the attack left 20 children and six adults dead but jones claimed it was a hoax to increase gun control. the trial will decide how much he pays in damages to one of the families. jones and his infowars program are based in texas. president biden's physician now says his covid symptoms are almost resolved. meanwhile, new research concludes that the pandemic likely began at a live animal market in wuhan,hina and not at a government lab in the same city. the findings appear in the journal "science". in economic news, consumer confidence in july was the lowest in a year and a-half amid worries about inflation. and new home sales in june hit their lowest in more than 2 years driven by rising mortgage rates. the republican divide widens as donald trump and mike pence continue separate appeals to supporters a planned visit to taiwan by house speaker nancy pelosi raises questions in the u-s and china the future of the international space station is in doubt after russia announces it will withdraw. and much more. >> this is the pbs newshour from wbt a studios in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. judy: the federal reserve is expected to raise interest rates again by three quarters of a point tomorrow. fed chair jay powell has made it clear he wants to substantially curb the rate of inflation,. but there are some concerns the fed could overreact and end up tipping the economy into a recession. the latest warning signs: new home sales were down for the fifth time this year and consumer confidence slid for the third month in a row. economist paul krugman has been writing about this in the new york times and he joins me now. >> they are going to do -- it will be a huge surprise if they do not do a 0.75% increase. i'm a monetary dove most of the time. i think they do need to do this. i think they needed to do the hikes they have done so far because although inflation is a global phenomenon and most of the inflation we are seeing is something we are sharing with the rest of the world, it was clear the u.s. economy was overheated. we were just running too hot at the beginning of this year and the fed needed to cool things down. the important question is what they do going forward. i'm going to be more interested in what they say. they are going up by 75 basis points, but are they going to show a willingness to start to maybe ease off on further rate hikes in the light of data? there is a lot of short-term data that suggests inflation is coming down substantially. also a lot of data suggesting that the economy is akening substantially. the question really is going to be, is the fed going to signal a willingness to maybe start to loosen up? >> you are more concerned about the signals they are going to send tomorrow and what happens down the road. how worried are you that what they do could tip us into a recession? >> it is a very real possibility. what the fed is going to do is cool things down, slow the economy down, flatten the slope without tipping it to the point where the economy goes into a plunge that is unnecessary, that is deeper than is necessary to cool the inflation. we are not talking about precision fine tuning of the economy. tomorrow's meeting is going to take place at almost the worst possible time. there's going to be a lot of data coming in the next few weeks. everybody in my circle is very anxious to see it and a lot more to come. the fed is being obliged to take a major decision really very much in the dark. the chance of getting it wrong is very high. not because the people at the fed are bad, but because it is a very difficult job under these conditions. >> explained to us why we should be more worried about recession than we already are about inflation. people are suffering right now with higher prices. >> it is clearly unacceptable. inflation needs to be brought down. there is not much question now that the fed will do enough to bring inflation under control. the markets believe that. if you look at expectations of what inflation is going to be over the next year, they have gone from 7% a few months ago to a little over 2% now. the markets are really convinced that the fed is going to do whatever it takes to bring inflation under control so now the risk is that they do more than it takes. -- it is not a question of whether inflation is ok and recession is bad, but inflation is something we know they are going to deal with. the question is are they sufficiently sensitive to the risk of overdoing and causing an unnecessary session -- unnecessary recession? >> why is recession a bigger worry for you? >> recession means people lose jobs. it means higher cost of living. your salary does not stretch as far. in terms of the actual losses, losses from inflation are real, although the ones that hurt the most are the things over which e fed has no control, like the price of oil. but the losses of having productive workers not bei allowed to produce because the economy is depressed, the output, the stuff we could have been producing that we don't because factories have been shut down, businesses have been shut down, those are huge economic costs. we really don't want to incur those. inflation is a bad thing, but the great depression was a really, really bad thing. you really don't want a recession if you can avoid it. >> you wrote a column the other day acknowledging you were wrong focus -- forecasting in that you did not expect inflation was going to be as bad as it has been. when you think about whether the fed could overreact, how do you square those things? >> the fed was wrong, too. there was not a lot of air between my views about the future of inflation in early 2021 and those of the fed. the world is a complicated place and if you never make a mistake you are not taking enough risks. the fed was concerned to avoid mistakes it has made in the past when it has been much too tight and they failed to see -- there are some things that are nobody's fault except vladimir putin's. but the u.s. economy got overheated to a greater degree than they or i expected. the point is that they have reacted to that. the fed has tightened a lot. even more important, markets have priced in the fact the fed is going to tighten and will continue to tighten more. some mortgage rates, probably the most important place, what the fed does affects real people 's lives largely through mortgage rates. which affect constructio employment, and so on through the econy. mortgage rates have soared this year. the fed has already reacted to that mistake and has tried to undo the damage and at this point the problem is will they do too much? >> finally, as people watch this, what should they take away in terms of your view of how worried you are about a serious recession? >> i think we are probably not headed for anything remotely like what we went through after the 2008 financial crisis. for one thing the fed is not stupid. things are not out of control. there don't appearo be really huge structural weaknesses. it does not look like the banking sector is going to collapse. many consumers have some cushion of savings. we are probably talking about something at worst -- i'm showing my age because this does not seem like long ago, but the 2001 recession after the.com bubble burst. even a mild recession means millions of people's lives are disrupted, so catastrophe, no, but some pain is a real possibility. judy: we appreciate it. thank you. former president donald trump returned to washington d.c. today for the first time since leaving office to deliver a speech. this comes as the former president has hinted at a 2024 presidential campaign announcement, and on the heels of a primetime hearing by the january 6 select congressional committee last week that accused him of violating his oath of office on january 6. william brangham has more. >> judy, the former president's speech featured a familiar, dark litany. over 90 minutes of criticisms of president biden, the democrats, and the state of the country as he sees it today. trump also repeated the lie that he won the 2020 election. >> i ran the first time and i won, then i ran a second time and i did much better, we got millions and millions more votes. and you know what? that is going to be the story for a long time. what a disgrace it was. we may just have to do it again. >> hours before that and less than a mile away, his former vice president mike pence spoke at another conference. pence said the republican party needs to be looking forward. >> so i don't know that our movement is that divided. i don't know that the president and i differ on issues. but we may differ on focus. i truly do believe that elections are about the future. >> to assess these two messages, and what republican voters want , we turn to sarah longwell. she's a longtime republican strategist who has spent this summer leading many focus groups with republicans across the country. she is also the founder of the republican accountability project, a political action committee that works to defe candidates who have repeated trump's election lies. very good to have you on the news hour. we just heard from president trump and in his speech today he arranged across a whole squawk -- swath of issues. what are the top issues for public and voters? >> it is these kitchen table issues. it is gas prices, inflation. to some degree it is also immigration. but those are the things and it is not just republican voters. the economy is the dominant issue i hear from voters across the political spectrum. but one of the things voters are less interested in is a lot of the relitigation of 2020 and donald's grievance. even with republican voters who tend to agree with him or did suspect there was something fishy about the 2020 election, they do want to be looking forward. i think donald trump runs the risk of that message getting old. i have done nine focus groups since the january 6 hearings and one of the things that has changed from prior to the hearings is gop voters are starting to worry he is not as electable as potentially some other candidates might be. it is not that the january 6 hearings have broken through is that they are seeping in. republican voters are very interested in winning. they want to be looking forward as mike pence said, however unfortunately, they are not looking forward to candidates like him. as far as voters are concerned mike pence is the establishment. they use very negative terminology to talk about him. they call him a rino, they call him a traitor. they are more interested in candidates that are in trump's mold. they describe it as the america first wing of the party. someone like ron desantis who they see as a trump fighter but without the baggage, tends to be more where they are headed. >> i want to circle back to the january 6 hearings because those of us in washington have been paying a lot of attention. they have been getting some pretty decent ratings. but the sense we have always gotten is that the conservative media has in some ways downplayed them, has denigrated the hearings as nothing to see here. you were describing how the just of those hearings has been creeping out or leaking out. what is the sense you are hearing from voters about that? what did they thinkbout january 6 and trump's role on that day? >> they tend to not ame donald trump and they very badly want to move on from the conversation around january 6. they believe it reflects poorly on them and on the republican party. they would much rather be talking about all the things they don't like about democrats. what is interesting about the hearings, they don't like the hearings. they descred them as a dog and pony show, a witchhunt. at the same time, because the heings have been so effective, they have put republicans on defense and while the right-wing media ecosystem, they don't carry the hearings, they excoriate the hearings, they have been forced to engage in the hearings. the right-wing media ecosystems where republicans are going to defend themselves by what the committee is putting forward, as a result, all these voters are very aware of the hearings which is not always the case. they are more engaged with them then you might be. -- then you might think. this is causing them to worry about trump's electability prospects. prior to january 6, we would get about half the group or more who said they wanted to see donald trump running in 2024. in the nine groups subsequently, there were four groups were zero people wanted him to run again. we did an analysis, and only 15% of respondents wanted to see trump run again. that is a big turnaround. we were quite surprised. i have been skeptical of the narrative that donald trump's grip on the gop is slipping because group after group still wanted to see him run in 24, but i have seen that start to wane in the wake of these hearings. >> it is interesting you say that, that they would hope that if they were the kingmakers themselves that trump would not run. we still do not know whether the former president is going to run. let's just say he does announce next week or two weeks from now that he is running. what is your sense from talking to those voters? did they say he is the guy now, we have to go with him? or let's say there is a contested primary. will they turn to a ron desantis or somebody like that? >> i cannot be certain. my guess is that donald trump has people also doing focus groups and polling and they are seeing the same softening in his support that i am. aside from his legal troubles my guess is why he is trying to jump in so early is to try to freeze out other candidates, to try to reignite people's interest in him. we have not seen ron desantis on the national stage. we have not seen people like mike pence or others who look like they are getting in, what is going to be like if they are going head-to-head with donald trump. in 2016 there was a crowded field candidates. donald trump did not need a majority, he just needed a plurality. even though his support maybe softening, he does have a hard base of supporters that are going to go with him and maybe only him. if you have other candidates splitting the vote and donald trump over there with his plurality of hard-core voters, that still gives him a leg up in winning the nomination. >> thanks so much for being here. >> thanks for having me. judy: the delivery of western precision rocket systems to ukraine has changed the dynamic of that war in that country, slowing russia's advance and lowering ukrainian casualties along the front lines. now, russia has increasingly resorted to using its own long range missiles to wreak havoc on cities deep inside ukrainian-controlled territory. from the mykolaiv region of southern ukraine, special correspondent simon ostrovsky and videogpher yegor troyanovsy report. >> for russia it seems no target is too small. this modest warehouse was hit in the early hours of july 21. no one was hurt, but food and drinks donated to the ukrainian military were completely wiped out. russia is destroying more significant targets as well. this is the aftermath of a july 17 strike which resulted in a mass casualty event that newshour can for the first time report. >> just look at these ruins. they are really extensive. this was hit purposely. >> i asked him in russian if the strike was precise. >> to about 50 centimeters. everything hit its target. >> he is the owner of a playground equipping factory that was located here. >> this factory and warehouse space was completely destroyed in a recent russian missile strike. the ukrainian military has told us this is a civilian target and there was no reason for russia to headed but we have seen evidence the ukrainian military did use this area as a base. and off camera one of the volunteers who helped clear bodies out from under the rubble told us he believes that up to 30 or 40 ukrainian soldiers and officers may have been killed he. >> there is an awful smell here. did anybody die? >> i cannot speak on that without permission. this is a sensitive question, you must understand. >> a soldier enlisted in a unit that had been supported from the space told newshour the true death toll may have been high as 50 people and that it is believed a cleaning woman who worked here supplied russia with the targeting information for the secret facility. it is not clear why ukrainian authorities suppressed news of this devastating strike, but it highlights the country's desperate need for air defense systems in addition to the missiles currently being provided. ukraine's first lady traveled to washington to urge the united states to deliver them. >> i'm asking for something i would never want to ask. i'm asking for weapons. weapons that would not be used to wage war on somebody else's land, but to protect one's home and the right to wake up alive in that home. i'm asking for air defense systems in order for rockets not to be killed -- >> it also led to this unusual appeal on social media the day after the >> the russians are paying our citizens who agree to help them target their strikes. i will pay $100 to anyone who helps find someone who is actually providing targeting information. good hunting. >> some people think there will be no responsibility when they just send coordinates to russians. he will just get his money. no, he will get criminal charges in the future. many people want to help to find traders but they don't know how. >> but there are a lot of people who support russia and are helping russia target their weapons? >> not much people. even one traitor is a big problem. >> multiple devastating russian missile strikes against targets here in mykolaiv followed ukraine's announcement that it is preparing for a counteroffensive. the goal, to retake the nearby russian occupied city of kherson . these ukrainian positions in the mykolaiv region are several miles fm the russian forces that swept through ukraine's's -- ukraine's southeast. it is the only regional capital russia managed to capture since it launched its so-called special military operation against ukraine today. >> ukraine's top military brass say since the united states and other countries have supplied high precision missile systems, they have been able to stabilize the front line and slow the russian offensive. now they are preparing for a counterattack to attempt to retake some of the territories in southern ukraine that have been held by russia since the beginning of the full-scale war. >> ukraine has boasted that its new medium-range weaponry such as the american high mobility rocket system has limited russia's ability to supply is forward operating troops because it has made it possible to get ammunition dumps thawere previously out of reach. ukrainian troops in the theater of operations told newshour this has translated into fewer casualties on the front lines. >> after the high mark started ruining russian federation plans, they have less ammunition. the upshot is more injuries. >> britain, norway, and germany have said they will send a total of nine similar multiple rocket launchers known as the m270. further back from the front lines, it is a very different picture. russia h responded to ukraine's new capabilities by stepping up the use of its own long-range weapons to target ukrainian supply dumps and military bases in ukrainian cities. just in the last two weeks, russia has launched 129 missiles of various designs at the mykolaiv region alone. and over the weekend, ukraine's president condemned a russian missile strike on the port of odessa which took place just hours after moscow signed a deal to lift a blockade and allow grain exports from ukrainian ports. >> first of all we can talk about the kherson region. the occupiers tried to gain a foothold there. today's russian missile attack on odessa on report is a cynical one and it was also a blow to the political positions of russia itself. >> human rights watch described the southern kherson region occupied by russia as an abyss of fear and lawlessness. it documented incidents of torture, unlawful detentions, and forced disappearances. for this reason ukraine's president has urged his military to ramp up its counteroffensive in the south according to an advisor to the office of the president. >> the president is very clear with this. the city is for ukrainians. the occupation was very fast. these people are like hostages now. for russians to keep this area under occupation, it will allow them to make deeper roots. everything can be changed. that is why we are looking forward to this operation. reporter: ukraine predicts offensive operations will be difficult to wage in winter. it is urging allies to provide more weapons now before russia is able to solidify its substantial gains. judy: after the supreme court overturned roe v. wade, some lawmakers on capitol hill began work to shore up other rights that could come under scrutiny. democrats have been working to pass legislation that upholds protections for same-sex and interracial marriage. democratic senator from wisconsin tammy baldwin is leading the effort to get her republican colleagues on board. she joins me now. welcome back to the newshour. we are hearing people askthis is not same-sex marriage is not under threat right now. why is this legislation needed? sen. baldwin: i think it is under threat. not only did one of the justices encourage his colleagues to revisit the case a burger fell -- obergefel that created marriage equality, but the opinion put into question the legal reasoning that resulted in the ntraceptive access cases over time and more recently o'beirne fl -- obergefel. i know my constituents who are in marriages after they were made legal are very worried about the certainty that they can protect their families with the rights and responsibilities of a marriage certificate. judy: what does the landscape look like politically? you have 50 democrats, we assume they are all on board. you have five republicans it has been reported. so you have 55 votes? sen. baldwin: i have had many conversations and certainly i'm working with a team of folks including the five republicans who have voiced their support to reach out and identify others. i have had conversations with -- i have been given private assurances it will be supported if it comes for a vote but they are unwilling to go public first. we have to make sure we have the votes. maybe with a comfortable margin even beyond the 10. i have to mention as an aside, right now covid is the big enemy. we have several colleagues out with covid. we have to have everyone present in order to address this and several other critical issues where the votes will be really tight. judy: what are the arguments republicans are making about why they cannot support this and what are you saying back? sen. baldwin: there are several camps. you have the people who are going to support it who are either public or private about that. i keep saying if you support marriage equality you really want to provide the assurance that should obergefell be overturned, that we will still be able to recognize marriages using the full faith and credit of laws of the u.s. constitution. some do not feel like the threat is imminent and they are saying we should wait until a further point in time before securing these rights. i just have to say that providing the certainty is really important. the ability to protect your family through the legal means that a company marriage is critical to lks. lastly there are folks who oppose marriage equality and even though it is now the law of the land, have voiced that they want to stay consistent with that view even though obergefell is currently the law of the land. judy: how much difference is it making do you find when you speak with senators who are not sure they want to go along with this but they know someone or they have someone in their family who was involved in a same-sex marriage orprelationsh? sen. baldwin: i feel like in my conversations that is a very powerful issue. in the years since marriage equality became the law of the land, most of my colleagues probably now have a family member, a loved one, a neighbor, fellow congregants at their church, somebody they know, a coworker, staff member, who was impacted posively by marriage equality. i think it does really help my colleagues knowing they have to face their friends and neighbors after that vote. so i'm encouraged that we have seen such progress since these questions came before the congress in the last decades. and certainly throughout the american public, the acceptance of marriage equality, the belief that one ought to be able to marry and protect the person they love is i would say almost overwhelmingly supported. judy: we are watching this as it moves along. thank you. sen. baldwin: thank you. judy: house speaker nancy pelosi's plan to visit taiwan has created a stir in both beijing and washington. china has warned of serious consequences if pelosi visits the self-governing island nation that china claims as its own territory. if she goes through with her plans, pelosi would be the hight ranking us official to visit taiwan in over 25 years. at a time when us-china relations are on shaky ground, the white house is expressing concern. amna nawaz has the story. reporter: a city at a standstill as air raid sirens echoed through the empty streets of taipei. the drills were long-planned, preparing for a potential chinese invasion. but they come as taiwan also prepares for a potential visit from u.s. house speaker nancy pelosi. news met with a stern warning from chinese officials. >> suppose the u.s. side clings obstinately to its misconduct, china is bound to take resolute and powerful measures to safeguard its national sovereignty and territorial integrity. all consequences entailed from that should be completely borne by the united states. reporter: when asked about a possible pelosi visit last week, president biden was not supportive. >> the military thinks it's not a good idea right now, but i don't know what the status of it is. reporter: pelosi, a staunch china critic and vocal taiwan supporter, was asked about the president's remarks the following day. >> the inference to draw from your comment ithat my going there is problematic, i think what the president was saying is maybe the military was afraid our plane would get shot down or something like that by the chinese? reporter: to date, her office has not officially confirmed or denied a possible trip. communist china has never controlled democratic taiwan and considers it a breakaway province. beijing opposes official relations between taipei and washington. taiwan lies just 100 miles off the coast of china, and controls islands near the mainland. and since russia invaded ukraine in february, taiwan fears that china could follow suit. president biden has repeatedly said the u.s. would respond militarily if china attacked taiwan. >> are you willing to get involved militarily to defend taiwan if it comes to that? >> yes. >> you are? >> that's the commitment we made. reporter: but that goes further than existing u.s. policy. the taiwan relations act says america will enable taiwan to defend itself. this week's annual taiwanese military drills involving naval vessels, fighters jets, and overseen by president tsai ing-wen came as china has dialed up military activity around taiwan in chinese defense minister wei june fenghe pledged to crush any independent effort by taiwan. >> if someone forces a war on china, the pla will not flinch . reporter: should speaker pelosi visit, she would be the highest ranking us official to visit taiwan since 1997. judy: -- reporter: for more on this we get two views. susan shirk is the chair of the 21st century china center at university of california san diego. she was deputy assistant secretary of state for east asia and pacific affairs during the clinton administration. and daniel blumenthal is a resident fellow at the american enterprise institute. he was senior director for china, taiwan, and mongolia . at the defense department during the george w. bush administration. you have said speaker pelosi should not go to taiwan. what are the risks? >> i am losing sleep about it. worrying that it might spark a military crisis that would threaten taiwan's 93 million people and could very well draw in u.s. forces. why is it so risky? because of the situation, the domestic situation in china right now is extremely tense. in the months leading up to when xi jinping hopes to get an unprecedented third term. and then the party elite was gathering, for the summer retreat. the risk is that a visit by speaker pelosi would be viewed as a humiliation of xi jinping's leadership, including by him himself. reporter: dan, do you share susan's concern? could this provoke some kind of response from china? it is unusual for president biden to cite the military in saying that's not why he believes it's a good idea right now. what do you make of that? >> it is unfortunate he made those comments. the house and senate are different branches o government. speaker pelosi has every right to visit and course esident biden should have been able to keep the option open which is to tell the truth to china which is he does not have any control. i do not agree, i think she should go. i believe she has to at this point. anything less than that would be -- would invite more intimidation, more bullying. the reason we have been having this debate is because xi jinping has been stepping up coercion of taiwan trying to imitate -- to intimidate us. reporter: if she does not go does it look like she is giving in to chinese intimidation? >> it would indicate we are being prudent and that sure, everyone wants to stand up against xi jinping's china now, but given the misjudgment xi himself as made, such as his draconian approached covid, cracking down on the private sector, aligning with russia, we cannot be confident he is going to behave in a prudent manner. he could really launch some kind of serious military response against taiwan. it is important for us to behave prudently. speaker pelosi should make clear this is her decision, not president biden's decision because there are going to be a lot of domestic political consequences in the united states. criticism from republicans and some democrats that biden is caving in to china just as we heard. i think she needs to take this on herself. she wants the democrats to do well in the midterm in 2024. -- and in 2024. don't say you are not going, simply say the timing is not right. >> given domestic pressure at home, given the unpredictability, is there a merit to postponing the trip? dan: there is no merit. if it was done now given what leaked out, no spin would fix the fact it would look like giving in to china's increased bullying. nothing could invite more intimidation, more interference into our own democratic processes then that sort of action. because it is such a bipartisan issue i think the speaker may be well served to take a lot of high-ranking republican -- there is great bipartisan support for this. china is trying to redefine one china policy and we cannot let them do that. this is completely consistent with a one china policy. every day it claims the waters around taiwan are its sovereign territory is a day it is coercing taiwan, violating commitments to us. the fundamental commitment is a peaceful resolution of the taiwan issue and it is violating that. we are not changing policy. speaker pelosi's visit would be consistent with years of precedent. reporter: are you confident her trip would not provoke escalation from china? dan: china is looking to escalate whether she goes or not. it would probably lead to china claiming the airspace over taiwan, doing this of that nature, flying over taiwan for the first time, that sort of thing. china is going to escalate, china's incremental creeping escalation, its undermining of taiwan's sovereignty, is going to continue whether she goes or not. if she goes we will be in a better position to stand up to this bullying. reporter: we will be following for sure. thank you both for your time. judy: as we reported earlier, russia announced that it plans to pull out of the international space station after the year 2024 when the current agreement is set to expire. this has raised concerns over what it could mean for the future of the station and for nasa of course. our science correspondent miles o'brien is here to answer our questions. so hello, miles do we think the russians are serious about this? >> it is hard to say. there's been an awful lot of bluster coming out of the russian space program since the invasion of ukraine. lots of trash talk, frankly, against nasa and the international space station. this time a new director of the russian space agency in with vladimir putin himself, saying that russia had decided to leave the space station partnership after 2024 and that we had a little more definitive feel to it, but it's worth pointing out that the contract for the entire space station does expire in 2024. nasa would like to keep it flying until so there might be a 2030. hint of reality and all of this because that's when the contract expires. reporter: so miles if this happens, if it's real, how would it technically take place? would they simply disengage from the space station or what? >> it is not so simple. it's an extremely complex, intertwined connection to start like, loosening up four bolts and off go the russians. it would take several spacewalks a lot of the modules are very old, some of the oldest parts of the international space station and one of them incidentally, judy, the oldest was actually purchased by the u.s.. it's actually us property further complicating things. i suppose they could close the hatch and remove all the air from there. but the bottom line is, it's unclear at this point. judy: so if they are no longer present and part of the space station, what does that mean for what is left? >> well, there's technological interdependence and the russian side provides propulsion. it's what lofts the space station and keeps it from falling down. even though it's 250 miles above us in space, there is a little bit of wisp of an atmosphere there that actually puts a little drag on it and you need to boost it up every now and then. they've provided that with their freighters and with their space tug, which is aboard their side of the modules. the u.s. meanwhile, has produces all the electrical power so that would limit the ability of the russians to operate their modules on their own. they're very intertwined. judy: if if the russians were no longer taking part in this, what could the alternative be? what else could be used? reporter: well, spacex at northrop grumman, would chief -- which each have craft that fly to the international space station, are looking at ways to turn a dragon or a cygnus spacecraft into sort of a tanker with a little bit of extra fuel to provide all that propulsion. there's time to develop this because we're talking about after 2024 after all. i'm pretty confident they'll come up with a way. judy: what about the russians? where would this leave their space program if they left the space station? >> well, it's interesting, they really have no place to go. they're talking about building yet another space station. they say they have a piece that they're building on the ground, but the funding has been very limited. a lot of people say well, maybe they'll partner with the chinese but the thing about the chinese is their space station is in an orbital inclination or lane which the russians cannot physically get to from where they launch from. a little bit of orbital mechanics there but suffice to say they can't reach the chinese space station. and besides, the chinese have shown no interest in partnering with anybody. i think they are enjoying proving they are a space power on their own. judy: so in the meantime, though, miles as we wait for 2024, what about the relationship between americans and the russians? is there tension there and are there any safety issues? >> you know, it's interesting because at the bench level, so to speak, the cosmonauts, the astronauts, th engineers, it has been business as usual. the u.s. astronauts on board the space station, when told about this latest announcement said, you know, we're just doing what we do here every day. to my way of thinking that's the greatest accomplishment of this space station, that it brought these former cold war adversaries in space together to build this audacious space station. and now it just seems to be crumbling. and there are a lot of people inside nasa who are quite saddened by all this. judy: we can we can only imagine after all the effort that's go into this. very good to have you with us. thank you. >> you're welcome, judy. judy: and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you, please stay safe and we'll see you soo >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by. >> architect. beekeeper. mentor. a raymond james financial advisor taylor's advice to help you live your life. life well-planned. >> carnegie corporation of new york, supporting innovations and education, democratic engagement , d the advancement of international peace and security . the target foundation, committed to advancing racial equity and creating the change required to shift systems and accelerate equitable economic opportunity. with the ongoing support of these 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. is is the pbs newshour from weta studios in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. alejandra ramos: tonight on "the great american recipe"... this week, we want to keep the festivities going alejandra ramos: tonight on "the great american recipe"... by seeing what recipes you would make for one of life's special celebrations. dan, voice-ove i made this meal for my wife on our 30th wedding anniversary. it's gonna be really hard not to cry about this one. i'm gonna cry. i'm gonna cry. you shouldn't make me cry. no. now we're gonna tear up, too. you won her over with this dish, and then you're keeping her with this dish. i'm feeling the festive spirit. alejandra: what makes a great recipe? are they the dishes that are passed down to us through generations of home cooking? bambi, voice-over: i love to make my mom's honey turkey wings. alejandra: are they the ones that tell the story of who we are and where we're from? silvia, voice-over: i make mantecada. it's like a mexican muffin. tiffany: if this is what it feels like at your home--