JUDY WOODRUFF: Good evening.

I'm Judy Woodruff.

On the "NewsHour" tonight: ending America's longest war.

The U.S.-Taliban agreement that could end 18 years of fighting in Afghanistan.

Then: caucus countdown.

Amna Nawaz catches up with Nevada's Democratic voters just hours before they head to the polls.

JAMIE MARTINEZ, Mi Familia Vota: You're not informed person, then you're just letting that all pass you by.

You don't vote, you let stuff happen.

I don't want to let stuff happen.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Plus: Inside Venezuela -- the suffering children there endure as the country's economic freefall wears on.

DEYANIRA VIVAS, Teacher (through translator): I have had girls that have lower cognitive abilities and learning processes due to the lack of a proper diet.

They have fallen asleep in the kindergarten area, and I mean in a very deep sleep.

JUDY WOODRUFF: All that and more on tonight's "PBS NewsHour."

(BREAK) JUDY WOODRUFF: There is word tonight that Russia is trying to aid the presidential campaign of Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders, in addition to the reelection efforts of Donald Trump.

The Sanders team confirmed a Washington Post report today that U.S. intelligence officials briefed his campaign about Moscow's efforts.

In California this afternoon, the Vermont senator warned Russia to stay out of U.S. elections.

We will have more on Russia's efforts in this U.S. elections later in the program.

In the day's other news: There has been a potential breakthrough in the war in Afghanistan.

A week-long reduction in violence is now in effect.

If that holds, the U.S. and the Taliban will sign the first phase of a peace agreement on February 29 in Qatar, which could pave the way for a broader deal to end the 18-year-long war.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo released a statement saying -- quote -- "Challenges remain, but the progress made in Doha provides hope and represents a real opportunity."

We will take a closer look at Afghan peace prospects after the news summary.

The World Health Organization warned today that the window of opportunity to contain the international spread of the coronavirus is closing.

South Korea has become the latest front in the outbreak.

The country declared a health emergency, as cases there quadrupled to more than 200 infections over the past two days.

Officials closed schools and banned mass gatherings, including services at a church that most of the sick attended.

MAN (through translator): No one has entered the church since Tuesday.

We did disinfection work twice, on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Right now, all the disinfection work is complete, and no one is entering the church.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Meanwhile, in China, the number of new infections fell for another day.

Chinese officials have recorded over 75,000 cases, and more than 2,200 deaths so far.

At least 12 more deaths have been confirmed outside of mainland China.

In Northwestern Syria today, Syrian government-backed Russian warplanes targeted the last rebel-held areas.

Insurgents and government forces blasted heavy artillery in other parts of Idlib province as well.

Meanwhile, Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called for an end to the Syrian-backed offensive there to end the growing humanitarian crisis.

Iran held its parliamentary elections today, in what is seen as a referendum on the country's hard-line leadership.

Tehran banned 7,000 potential candidates from running, including many moderates and reformists.

That raised fears of a lower voter turnout.

In Tehran, those who did show up said they are feeling the strain from U.S. sanctions that sent Iran's economy into a recession.

MAHNAZ BOSTANI, First-Time Voter (through translator): It's the first time I am voting for a parliamentary candidate.

I know a young candidate that I think understands our pain very well.

They should create good jobs for us young people and make housing affordable.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Initial results are expected to be announced tomorrow.

Back in this country, the jury in the Harvey Weinstein New York rape trial is deadlocked on two of the most serious counts of predatory assault.

They carry a maximum sentence of life in prison.

The jurors have reached a unanimous verdict on the other three charges, but those verdicts have not been made public yet.

The judge ordered the jurors to resume deliberations on Monday to try to reach a unanimous verdict on all the charges.

Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg today offered to lift nondisclosure agreements for three women who worked for his media business information company.

The women allege that he made inappropriate comments to them.

The move comes after one of his rivals, Senator Elizabeth Warren, fiercely criticized the confidentiality agreements at the last Democratic debate.

Wells Fargo agreed today to pay $3 billion to settle criminal and civil probes into its sales practices.

It's part of a settlement with the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The company acknowledged that its employees opened millions of unauthorized bank accounts in an effort to meet unrealistic sales goals.

And stocks were down sharply on Wall Street today, over fears about the economic impact of the coronavirus.

The Dow Jones industrial average dropped 227 points to close at 28992.

The Nasdaq fell 174 points, and the S&P 500 shed 35.

Still to come on the "NewsHour": the breakthrough cease-fire deal that could end America's longest war; where Nevada's Democratic voters stand just hours before caucusing begins; and much more.

We return now to our top story.

The agreement announced today by the United States and the Taliban could put an end to the war that America has been fighting in Afghanistan for more than 18 years.

Nick Schifrin joins us now with more details - - Nick.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Judy, the peace deal actually begins with a kind of test, a seven-day test to reduce violence.

That's what was announced today.

And if that succeeds, next Saturday in Doha, the U.S. and the Taliban will sign a peace deal designed to end the U.S.' war in Afghanistan.

For more on this, we turn to Barnett Rubin.

During the Obama administration, he was an adviser at the State Department, and helped design their plan to engage with the Taliban.

He's now the associate director of the Center on International Cooperation at New York University.

Barney Rubin, thank you very much.

Welcome back to the "NewsHour."

You have been involved in previous attempts, multiple previous attempts, to try to bring peace to the Taliban.

How serious is this moment?

BARNETT RUBIN, Former State Department official: This is the most serious attempt so far, because the U.S. and Taliban are actually going to sign an agreement which has a road map to a fuller agreement, including negotiations among Afghans.

So this is the first time that I can say we're really starting a peace process.

NICK SCHIFRIN: So, on the road to that peace process, on the road to the road map, there is what was announced today, officially a one-week reduction in violence.

This requires the Taliban to reduce violence.

Do we know if the Taliban are serious about reducing violence all across the country?

BARNETT RUBIN: It requires both sides to reduce violence, actually.

And, apparently, they are serious about it.

But we will see and test their -- both their compliance and their ability to enforce such a measure over all of their fighters throughout the country.

But they negotiated over this long and hard over the specific terms.

It's actually -- it's not just an agreement to reduce violence.

It's a -- I understand there is a fairly complex technical agreement that was worked out by military experts on both sides.

And that implies that they are committed to it.

But we will see if they're capable of carrying it out.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And the complexity is in part because there might be other violence in the country not created or not sparked by the Taliban, and the U.S. and Taliban have created a kind of communications channel so that the U.S. can check if any of the violence is the Taliban's, as opposed to ISIS, for example.

Do you believe that channel will work?

And how serious could spoilers be, people coming in and trying to spoil this seven days of reduced violence?

BARNETT RUBIN: Well, I'm not really aware of how that channel will work.

But I think both sides have an interest in making it work.

As you mentioned, the Islamic State is active in Afghanistan as well, and they're not included in this.

And they are opposed by the United States, the Afghanistan government and the Taliban.

And, of course, there are a variety of armed criminal groups and so on.

Plus, the reduction in violence, it's not a full cease-fire.

It doesn't -- it covers attacks on large units, but it doesn't cover every small skirmish that might take place.

I doubt that the Taliban would be able to control all of those.

So, really, it will require some -- there certainly will be some incidents of violence.

We will have to make a political judgment whether the Taliban has made a good-faith effort to comply and whether they're capable of doing so.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And the political judgment, of course, will be both from the Americans and the Afghans.

And if it succeeds over the next week, we are expecting a peace deal to be signed by the United States and the Taliban.

The first priority for the U.S. has always been renouncing terrorism.

There have been relationships between the Taliban and al-Qaida in the past.

Do you believe the Taliban are serious about ensuring that al-Qaida can have no safe haven in Afghanistan?

BARNETT RUBIN: I think that they're serious about assuring that al-Qaida will not be able to attack any other country from Afghanistan.

I think it's a little bit more ambiguous as to whether they will allow some al-Qaida people to stay there.

But the Taliban know that if al-Qaida is active in Afghanistan, while they are sharing power or in power -- or sharing power as part of a political settlement -- then the country will once again become an international pariah, it will not receive the aid that it needs as the poorest country in Asia and one of the poorest countries in the world.

To take -- to gain power in Afghanistan without foreign assistance is only most worthless because of the poverty of the country.

NICK SCHIFRIN: The next step in this peace deal is talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government.

Tentatively is scheduled for Oslo, perhaps March 10.

One of the steps is the Afghan government needing to release Taliban prisoners.

Could that issue derail those inter-Afghanistan talks before they even begin?

BARNETT RUBIN: It could certainly delay them, because the U.S. negotiator, Zalmay Khalilzad, agreed to release of those prisoners, which the U.S. doesn't control, in discussions with the Taliban.

And that means the Afghan government now has considerable leverage to extract some further concessions, which it would be crazy not to use.

So, I would actually expect that there will be some delays, in addition to which it simply is not logistically possible to process the release of 5,000 prisoners in 10 days.

So, at most, the process we will get started.

But I think the African government will probably make certain demands before it carries out its part of that agreement.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And, Barney Rubin, I have only got 30 seconds left.

Quick last question.

President Ghani declared victory.

His main rival, Abdullah Abdullah, said that he actually won and that he created his own government.

Is there an Afghan government enough organized - - organized enough to actually lead these talks?

BARNETT RUBIN: The talks will be led on the non-Taliban side by a delegation representing all the political forces that support the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, government and nongovernmental.

NICK SCHIFRIN: All right, Barney Rubin, we will have to leave it there.

Thank you very much, Barney Rubin, longtime Afghan watcher from New York.

Thank you.

BARNETT RUBIN: Thank you, Nick.

JUDY WOODRUFF: As we reported earlier, Senator Bernie Sanders confirmed that his campaign was told by U.S. intelligence officials that Russia plans to disrupt the Democratic primary.

But President Trump pushed back on the intelligence community's assessment of Russian interference in his campaign, and he accused Democrats of starting rumors.

The president's remarks come on the heels of multiple reports that U.S. intelligence officials told congressional lawmakers last week that Russia is actively trying to help the president get reelected.

Yamiche Alcindor takes it from there.

YAMICHE ALCINDOR: For more, I'm joined by Laura Rosenberger, the director of the Alliance for Securing Democracy, a program that tracks Russian influence operations.

She was also a foreign policy adviser to Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, and she served in the State Department during the Obama and George W. Bush administrations.

Thanks so much, Laura, for being here.

What more do we know about the efforts against the United States, and what's changed since 2016?

LAURA ROSENBERGER, Director, Alliance for Securing Democracy: Yes, so the efforts that we see in the reports about, you know, trying to help President Trump in his reelection bid and interfering in the Democratic primary are actually very consistent with the same things we saw in 2016.

The intelligence community assessed at that time that Russia had three goals.

And what we see now is very consistent with that, trying to divide Americans from one another, trying the weaken their faith in our institutions and particularly our democratic processes, and to boost President Trump, who, again, in the 2016 election, the intelligence community assessed that Russia had developed a preference for.

And so I think that what we really see is very much a continuation of the same intentions.

We see a little bit of a difference in tactics.

Some of the big, broad-scale kind of automated bot-driven manipulation is something we don't see as much anymore.

But we still see a lot of effort to use social media to divide Americans from one another, to drive particular conspiratorial narratives, and in particular to undermine Americans' trust and faith in our institutions.

YAMICHE ALCINDOR: You mentioned that social media companies are trying to better protect themselves.

How ready is the United States with Russia's evolving tactics?

LAURA ROSENBERGER: Well, I think we have certainly seen steps by the social media companies since 2016.

We have seen steps by the government since 2016.

The problem is, it all falls short.

These are the kinds of issues where coordination is actually completely essential to carrying out the kinds of sophisticated efforts to systematically detect these operations.

And that requires very clear coordination mechanisms within the government, between the government and the private sector, and within the private sector.

And while we have seen progress on each of those, they remain largely informal.

They remain largely ad hoc.

And, frankly, as we have seen with the president's actions to fire that acting DNI, you know, in light of these reports, that -- his role is really to coordinate the intelligence community's work.

And, you know, that is exactly a move in the wrong direction from what we actually need to be having more of.

YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Now, the Washington Post is reporting that there are intelligence officials who believe that Russia is trying to interfere in the election by trying to get Bernie Sanders to win the Democratic primary.

He released a statement.

I want to read part of it.

He said, in part: "I don't care, frankly, who Putin wants to be president.

My message to Putin is clear.

Stay out of American election, and, as president, I will make sure you do."

How do you think Bernie Sanders and the Democratic primary is factoring into Russia's larger plans?

LAURA ROSENBERGER: Well, first of all, I just want to say, I think that's a really important statement from Senator Sanders, I mean, very clear message to Vladimir Putin that weighing in on American elections is not something that will be tolerated by him and by the American people.

And so I think that's a really important statement.

For me, it's about dividing Democrats from one another, potentially suppressing ultimate turnout for the nominee, and really actually, again, just making us doubt the very processes that elections are meant to be about.

YAMICHE ALCINDOR: And the president has called reports that the intelligence community believes Russia is meddling in the 2020 election as rumors spread by Democrats.

What impact could it have if the president is seen as politicizing the intelligence community, and not -- and also undermining the intelligence community?

What impact could that have?

LAURA ROSENBERGER: When we look back at sort of what's been done over the past few years on these issues, my own view is that one of the greatest hindrances to doing more to actually counter foreign interference has been the politicization of this issue.

And so I think it's deeply damaging and leaves our country vulnerable to attack.

YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Thank you so much for joining us, Laura Rosenberger.

LAURA ROSENBERGER: Thank you so much, Yamiche.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Stay with us.

Coming up on the "NewsHour": Mark Shields and David Brooks break down the contentious race among the Democratic presidential hopefuls; Inside Venezuela, a look at the lives of children there as their country collapses; and Major League Baseball under fire for its handling of the largest cheating scandal in years.

The Nevada Democratic presidential caucuses take place, tomorrow, but the action is already under way, with a massive number of voters who've already turned out early.

As Amna Nawaz reports, it is the first contest with a diverse population that more closely resembles the demographics of the Democratic Party.

JAMIE MARTINEZ, Mi Familia Vota: My name is Jamie.

And we're just making sure everyone's up to date with their voter registration.

AMNA NAWAZ: For a few hours, every few weeks... JAMIE MARTINEZ: Hello.

How's your afternoon going?

Are you registered to vote?

We're just making sure everyone's up to date with their voter registration.

AMNA NAWAZ: ... 17-year-old Jamie Martinez takes to the streets of East Las Vegas, registering new voters before Saturday's crucial caucuses.

JAMIE MARTINEZ: I think voting is so important, mostly because there was people before us that weren't able to vote.

Also, it lets you be involved.

AMNA NAWAZ: Martinez has been working with Mi Familia Vota since September to mobilize the state's Latino community, get them to flex their political muscle, and make sure the candidates are focused on their issues.

Cecia Alvarado is the group's Nevada state director.

CECIA ALVARADO, State Director, Mi Familia Vota: Immigration continues to always be the number one issue.

But Latinos also care about health care.

They care about the environment.

They care about the effects of climate change.

And the effects of climate change are affecting our community the most.

AMNA NAWAZ: Statewide in Nevada, Latinos today comprise 29 percent of the population.

African-Americans 10 percent, and Asian Americans nearly 9 percent.

Democratic candidates know the numbers and are now fighting for those votes.

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA), Presidential Candidate: Dream big!

AUDIENCE: Fight on!

AMNA NAWAZ: In North Las Vegas, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren rallies a room of supporters, criticizing former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's stop and frisk policy and its effect on communities of color.

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN: But, boy, what to do about all those Latinos and African-Americans that got slammed over the hoods, for doing what?

Walking while black?

AMNA NAWAZ: On the campus of University of Nevada, Las Vegas, former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg sits down with the Black Law Students Association.

Caleb Green is a UNLV grad, now an attorney in Las Vegas.

CALEB GREEN, Nevada Voter: So a lot of the top issues for me are environment, what are we going to do as far as the climate, and making those changes, the economy, as well as immigration.

AMNA NAWAZ: In Chinatown, former Vice President Joe Biden courts voters at an Asian American Pacific Islander event.

JOSEPH BIDEN (D), Presidential Candidate: We have been able to cherry-pick the best from every single continent and culture, because the people who come are the people who are resilient.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jie Bu is here to try and figure out who he will support.

JIE BU, Nevada Voter: What he has done for the country before as the vice president.

And, however, you know, given the situation right now, I think I'm not decided who I'm going to vote for.

AMNA NAWAZ: Meanwhile, multiple candidates made sure to show up and show support for another key voting bloc.

PROTESTER: Who's got the power?

PROTESTERS: We got the power!

AMNA NAWAZ: Members of the powerful Culinary Workers Union, some of whom were picketing this week as part of a labor dispute.

But looming over Nevada's caucuses is the long shadow of Iowa, where confusion over a new caucus app resulted in chaos.

Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez promised a different ending in Nevada.

What do you say to voters who saw what happened in Iowa and are worried a similar thing could happen here?

THOMAS PEREZ, Chairman, Democratic National Committee: We have gone to school on Iowa, and we have a great team of folks.

We are continuing to make sure that everyone's prepared for Saturday.

And I'm really proud of our team.

We have got all hands on deck.

AMNA NAWAZ: But there are some firsts that could complicate the process.

The state's using a new caucus calculator to tally results pre-loaded onto iPads and distributed to volunteers.

Over the last week, Nevada Democrats have hosted over 50 training sessions like this to prepare precinct chairs and site leads, like Ann Germaine.

ANN GERMAINE, Caucus Volunteer: I'm a little apprehensive.

I certainly have questions, which is wonderful that they have these trainings for me to come to, because I do want to be well-informed and I want to know what I'm doing and help the process.

AMNA NAWAZ: This new system was put into place after the state scrapped plans to use the same app Iowa used.

Also for the first time, the state will be rolling in results from four days of early voting.

MICHIKO SMITH-MEMAPAN, Nevada Voter: We have been in line for about 20 minutes.

I think it's been going pretty smooth so far.

AMNA NAWAZ: Nearly 75,000 people stood in line to vote early this year.

Compare that to 2016, when a total of 85,000 people turned up to caucus.

Bryan Ozambela is a first-time voter who cast his ballot early for Bernie Sanders.

BRYAN OZAMBELA, Nevada Voter: I feel comfortable that my vote will be represented.

Even if my candidate doesn't win, I still feel like everything that I have been through and the way that the process has been so far is very fair.

AMNA NAWAZ: Also among those early voters was Jamie Martinez.

Now, why did you decide to vote early, instead of taking part in the caucuses?

JAMIE MARTINEZ: Mostly because I couldn't wait.

AMNA NAWAZ: The sun is setting in Las Vegas, but Martinez scours the lot, making sure she doesn't miss a single potential voter.

JAMIE MARTINEZ: When you're not informed, you're just letting stuff, like, happen.

You don't vote, you let stuff happen.

And I don't want to let stuff happen.

JUDY WOODRUFF: That's our Amna Nawaz reporting from Las Vegas.

Thank you.

And that brings us to the analysis of Shields and Brooks.

That is syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks.

Hello to you both.

So, as we heard from Amna, activity revving up in Nevada.

The caucuses are tomorrow, David.

Where does this race stand right now, this Democratic race?

We are two days out, plus a little from the debate of Wednesday night, and about to face the third contest.

What do you see?

DAVID BROOKS: Well, Bernie Sanders had an awesome week.

He's -- the polls have him up 13 in Nevada, which is very impressive for a multicandidate race.

And then, in the debate, it's not that he did anything different.

He does what he does.

But almost every other candidate, in my view, took a step backwards.

Klobuchar and Mayor Pete had their little feud, which I think diminished each of them.

Bloomberg had his nuclear meltdown.

And Warren, who performed very well in the debate, performed very well on behalf of Bernie Sanders, because she basically adopts the exact same narrative that's already his, and then attacks everybody else on the basis of that narrative.

But I don't think she's helping himself (sic).

I think she's acting as an extremely effective surrogate for Bernie Sanders.

So, I just think his grip on the path to the nomination is much tighter than it was.

JUDY WOODRUFF: So, Bernie Sanders in the strongest position right now?

MARK SHIELDS: I hate to agree with David.

(LAUGHTER) MARK SHIELDS: But his assessment overall is very good.

Michael Bloomberg wasn't the Michael Bloomberg we have been told about on television, we have been seeing on television, who was Barack Obama's best friend, and always being praised by Barack Obama, and had saved New York City, and brought health care to hundreds of thousands, and was the one guy who could go toe to toe with Donald Trump, and Donald Trump was spooked about it.

He couldn't go toe to toe with Elizabeth Warren.

I mean, she absolutely dominated him.

She dominated the stage.

I'm not sure she won the crowd, but she certainly was the dominant figure in that debate.

Bernie Sanders, the front-runner, that you think people would go after, really escaped almost unscathed.

And it was just -- it was truly amazing.

I think it was a damaging experience for Bloomberg.

Whether it was devastating will be determined in the next debate.

I think the next debate really becomes important for him.

He was counseled that these questions were going to come up.

They knew from day one.

And whether it was peevishness, arrogance, dismissiveness, whatever, condescension, he just refused to come up with an answer that was plausible and convincing and believable.

DAVID BROOKS: Yes.

Partly, it's practice.

He doesn't even do media interviews particularly well, and so -- and he's been guarded from this.

And all the other candidates have been playing this game for a year now.

JUDY WOODRUFF: This was their ninth to debate.

DAVID BROOKS: Yes.

And when you're up on a debate stage, you're not thinking.

You're repeating something you said 50 times before.

And so he didn't have any practice.

He didn't have any of that.

What strikes me also about the party -- first, Sanders tells a very clear narrative, corporations screwing us.

That's just a very clear narrative.

Everybody gets it.

It resonates with a lot of people.

I don't think anybody else on that stage has narrative that's quite that clear.

And so the power -- like, Trump had a very clear narrative.

Those cultural elites, they are ruining life for us.

And having that very compelling, clear narrative is a great advantage.

The second thing that struck me is Democrats growing up in where the party is now have the mental equipment to go after a billionaire.

It's like baked into the belief system of the party.

They do not have the mental equipment and categories to go after a socialist.

And what struck me is that they don't really quite know how to take down Sanders.

And so they let him go.

MARK SHIELDS: Yes.

And it absolutely eludes me.

For the first time, Judy, the Affordable Care Act, according to the Kaiser Foundation Poll, is now at 55 percent approval.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Approval.

MARK SHIELDS: Approval.

This is -- so -- and Donald Trump -- under Donald Trump, for the first time in 10 years, fewer Americans have health care than had it the year before.

And that was true the year before that.

So, under Donald Trump, Americans have lost health care.

The Affordable Care Act has guaranteed it, and it's popular.

And here the Democrats are talking about just willy-nilly just getting rid of it.

It makes absolutely no sense.

JUDY WOODRUFF: To go to Medicare for all.

MARK SHIELDS: The Republicans are on the total defensive on this issue.

It's an issue that works for Democrats.

It's an issue that voters deeply care about.

And, you know, there they are.

As far as the point about Bernie Sanders, he is -- the default mode of Bernie Sanders is angry.

He's the angriest front-runner I have ever seen.

He's the unhappy warrior.

And I don't know how long that's going the wear.

It wouldn't wear long in the carpool.

I don't know how long it is going to wear on the campaign trail.

DAVID BROOKS: It's worked for Trump.

(CROSSTALK) JUDY WOODRUFF: It's bought him this far.

MARK SHIELDS: It has brought him this far.

But it's a never retreat, never concede strategy.

And the Bernie bros who abuse anybody on Twitter or anyplace else who dares to criticize the Sanders campaign in any form, you know, maybe they're Russian bots.

That was one of the more bizarre lines of the evening.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, speaking of Bernie Sanders and the Russians, today, David, late today, we learned that -- first a news report and then Sanders confirmed it -- that his campaign has been -- he's been briefed by intelligence officials about the Russians trying to help his campaign.

So, now we know it's not just President Trump.

It's one of the Democrats.

DAVID BROOKS: Yes.

It happens to be a fact that the two campaigns the Russian are trying to help are the two campaigns that are -- might end up with the nominations.

I remain a little skeptical of how effective the Russians are at getting people to -- persuading people to change their mind on a certain candidate.

There is no magic formula for that.

We try here every week, and it doesn't work.

(LAUGHTER) DAVID BROOKS: And so -- and so I'm not sure the Russians are really effectively changing a lot of votes.

I really wish the intelligence agencies would tell us explicitly what they're doing.

Like, they say they're undermining institutions, undermining trust, spreading conspiracy theories.

I'd love to be able to know, as a consumer of social media and all the rest, what do I look out for?

What do I do?

How can I tell?

I think they haven't -- they have been too vague about what actually is happening and what countermeasures we, as individuals, can take.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Yes, they talk about taking disinformation and repeating it and repeating it through social media.

So that's one of the things.

MARK SHIELDS: One of the things we could do as a people is just pass what the House has passed, which is simply that any campaign that is approached by a foreign power, foreign source to help it, to be involved in any way, has to report it.

There's a responsibility.

That's died in the Republican Senate.

That's been killed by Mitch McConnell.

But, no, I really -- I really think that, Judy, it's unthinkable, if you really just take the sense of, the president of the United States is told that a foreign country is interfering and trying to change the most -- the sacrament of democracy, which is our public voting, the secret ballot, and they are trying to tamper with it and tamper with the results.

And what is his reaction?

Fury at the foreign power?

Anger?

Let's get them?

No.

Who divulged this?

An admiral, a decorated admiral, who took this, as a public servant, and an honored his constitutional and statutory responsibility to inform the Congress of the United States.

I mean, that's just unthinkable, what's going on.

JUDY WOODRUFF: You're contrasting the president's reaction to this to Bernie Sanders, who announced today and rejected... MARK SHIELDS: Yes.

Bernie Sanders, to his credit, I mean, having honeymooned in Moscow in 1988... (LAUGHTER) MARK SHIELDS: I mean, you got to explain that someday, Bernie -- the trip to Nicaragua in '85.

But, I mean, he's -- he came and said, no way.

I mean, you stay out, Putin.

And if I'm president, I will make absolutely sure.

I don't want your help and you shouldn't be involved or whatever.

That was a strong statement, the kind you would expect from any political leader in this country of either party, and that the president United States refuses to give.

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, and then appoint somebody as head of the -- or acting head of the national intelligence -- or intelligence service, someone with no experience, who is politicizing that relationship even more.

So... MARK SHIELDS: Yes.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, the other thing -- many things to ask you about, but one thing I do want to touch on is, this was the week the president's longtime friend Roger Stone was sentenced to prison by a federal judge here in Washington, more than three years.

Remains to be seen whether the president's going to pardon his sentence.

But what the president did do this week was pardon or commute the sentences of 11 individuals who seem to all have some connection, David, with the Trump White House.

What do we make of this?

I mean, this is -- the president's within his power, his rights to do this, but what do you make of it?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes.

I mean, the naked politicization of this is - - again is the -- Trump is, as some have predicted, really is unleashed by impeachment.

His behavior has really shifted in the last month in all sorts of ways, much more attack on the institutions of our society.

I happen to -- the only person I know -- and I don't know him at all well -- is Michael Milken among those who've been pardoned.

And I thought the pardon was legitimate in that case.

This is a guy who had his Wall Street problems in the '80s, prosecuted by Rudy Giuliani.

But as far as I can see, the Milken Institute is out in California.

He's really dedicated last 20 or 30 years to serving the public, running a think tank, trying to spread ideas.

And so in the case of somebody like that, who really spends decades in public service after whatever he did years ago, a pardon doesn't seem like the worst thing in the world.

JUDY WOODRUFF: How do you see this?

MARK SHIELDS: Well, I think we owe a certain tribute to Joni Ernst and to Rob Portman and Susan Collins, who told us that the president would be chastened and changed by that simmering experience of going through the impeachment.

He is.

He's unbridled.

He's unfettered.

He has only around him enablers now.

There is nobody to hold him back.

There's no Kelly or Mattis or anybody else there to say, no, Mr. President, argue another point of view.

And what they have in common, I guess, white-collar crime, fraud, tax deception, and ability to give money to Republican causes.

I mean, it's - - there is almost a self-identification with many of these cases, because the president has not gone uncharged on some of these actions or similar actions.

And so it's -- I really think that it's not a question of -- I don't know Michael Milken.

But he certainly did change American finance while he was there.

JUDY WOODRUFF: The junk -- they called him the junk bond king.

DAVID BROOKS: It should be said, I mean, just to get back to Roger Stone, we're all made in the image of God, but it's hard to think of somebody whose public career has shown fewer redeeming qualities.

And the president has surrounded himself with reasonably shady characters.

And Roger Stone is almost epically shady.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And this is the third individual who was considered close to the president who -- sent off to prison, at a time when - - there's a lot of focus on what the president can do.

Again, he has the power to commute sentences, to pardon people.

And we remember, at the end of the Bill Clinton administration, there was a flurry of pardons.

(CROSSTALK) MARK SHIELDS: Usually, it's on the way out, Judy.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Right.

MARK SHIELDS: There's just one thing about the Democrats that I just want to -- that kind of fits in here.

And that is, the Democrats, I think, after that debate, are in danger of fragmenting and fracturing themselves.

And I think there's a page in American history, the Revolutionary War.

The revolutionists sought the active alliance with Charles XVI of -- the king of France -- Louis XVI and Charles III in Spain, monarchies, to help them.

I mean, but one -- they had a single objective, and that was to defeat the king of England, to get independence.

JUDY WOODRUFF: The monarch.

MARK SHIELDS: The monarch.

The Democrats better say -- they better come together in a hell of a hurry, because their sole purpose in 2020 is to defeat the monarch, to defeat Donald Trump.

And I just -- I think the danger of fracturing is severe.

JUDY WOODRUFF: We hear you.

MARK SHIELDS: OK. JUDY WOODRUFF: Mark Shields, David Brooks, thank you.

MARK SHIELDS: Thank you.

JUDY WOODRUFF: We continue now with our series Inside Venezuela.

The once-wealthy South American country is now in economic freefall.

Tonight, we explore what that crisis means for the millions of children, who are facing hunger, disease, and violence.

With support from the Pulitzer Center, special correspondent Marcia Biggs reports on what it means to be a child today in Venezuela.

MARCIA BIGGS: Six-year-old Winston should be in school.

Instead, he and his older brother Jose are helping their father with what is now daily work, sifting through the trash at this garbage dump in Maracaibo, a major city in Western Venezuela.

Jose Gutierrez says he used to sell coffee and cigarettes on the street, but because of hyperinflation projected this year to be as high as 500,000 percent, he kept losing money.

So now, he spends his days searching for plastic to sell so he can buy food for his family.

JOSE GUTIERREZ, Trash Picker (through translator): Before, people could work and buy rice and flour with the salary.

There was cash in the street.

There was money to be made.

Now it's the opposite.

There's no money to make on the street.

MARCIA BIGGS: Many neighborhoods in Venezuela have always been poor, but people here say they got by with help from the government.

In the last couple years, they say things have changed.

Gutierrez says the free box of food from the government only comes once a month, and only lasts the family around two days.

In a nearby slum, Edward and his brother tell me they forgo school every day to go to the dump to look for food.

What did you find in the trash?

"I found a piece of cake," 12-year-old Edward tells me, "but it didn't sit well.

I had a stomachache for a week."

He says the food he got that time was bad, but that, most of the time, the food is good, so he keeps going back to the same place where they throw the rubbish to get food.

In their slum, we saw signs of malnutrition everywhere, distended bellies from a lack of protein, stunted growth, diarrhea, as well as preventable diseases, like scabies.

Children across Venezuela are facing a crisis from every angle, food, health, education, and violence, leading to fears of a lost generation and a bleak future for the country.

One immediate impact?

Classrooms across Venezuela are emptying out, as families leave or decide they can't afford the transportation, the uniforms, or enough food to send their children to school.

And those who remain are often too hungry to learn.

DEYANIRA VIVAS, Teacher (through translator): (through translator): I have had girls that have lower cognitive abilities and learning processes due to the lack of a proper diet.

They have fallen asleep in the kindergarten area, and I mean in a very deep sleep.

MARCIA BIGGS: Teachers are also leaving.

Venezuela has lost as much as 40 percent of its 370,000 teachers in the last three years.

At this school in Maracaibo, we sat down with two teachers who remain, 55-year-old Deyanira Vivas and 37-year-old Emalu Duran.

They say 250 students are enrolled in this girls school up to grade six, but only around 60 actually attend.

Why aren't they coming to school?

DEYANIRA VIVAS (through translator): Because of the reality we're living in.

Many aren't coming because they aren't getting enough to eat.

And how do we know?

Because the parents have told us.

They say, teacher, I'm sorry, but I can't bring my daughter in today because I don't have a way to get her to school.

Many times, we go on foot, and the girls haven't eaten yet.

EMALU DURAN, Teacher (through translator): For example, I'm also a parent, but my child is not here today.

She is in the fifth grade.

MARCIA BIGGS: Your own daughter isn't coming to school here?

Why?

EMALU DURAN (through translator): She's not coming because we live very far from here.

And, sometimes, there is no breakfast, so I don't bring her in like that.

MARCIA BIGGS: So, I was going to ask the question, what is the future for a child in Venezuela?

But now I learn that you have three children in Venezuela.

So, what is their future?

EMALU DURAN (through translator): I don't see a future.

MARCIA BIGGS: One organization trying to combat the hunger crisis and much more is Caracas Mi Convive, loosely translated as Caracas Living Together, which sponsors community-run food banks like this one in a slum of Caracas.

Each day, children line up for a hot meal, just one of thousands of food banks that have sprung up across the country in the past few years.

Santiago Garcia of Mi Convive says they're not even close to meeting the need, but it's a crucial first step.

SANTIAGO GARCIA, Caracas Mi Convive: The children that do not eat are the children that cannot develop Their full potential, right?

During the first years of development, It's fundamental for little kids to have enough food to develop all their brain functions and to be able to learn, to develop good social interactions.

So, the problems that we're having right now in Venezuela with the food are one of the biggest setbacks that we have for fetal development.

So what do we have here?

MARCIA BIGGS: We went back to Mi Convive's office, where Santiago showed us some drawings made by kids in the community aged 7 to 10.

They were first asked to draw anything they wanted.

The drawings were bright and colorful, idyllic images from the imagination of a child.

SANTIAGO GARCIA: And we asked them to draw the thing they didn't like about the place in which they lived.

And here, well, you have a house, of course, but you have a gun here.

This is a rifle, a AR-15.

It really surprised me that the kid knew the brand of the rifle.

I didn't know that, for example.

MARCIA BIGGS: Venezuela has become one of the most dangerous countries in the world, and Santiago says this combination of a lack of food and education, and pervasive violence, mean children often end up with only bad options.

SANTIAGO GARCIA: What will happen in 10 or 12 years with the little kids that grew up in this situation?

When you're living in a crisis, you are constantly living on the precipice right now, like, if you don't have any food to eat tomorrow, your priority is finding that food now.

And, well, the fastest way to obtain that food for tomorrow is probably joining a gang.

MARCIA BIGGS: And that's exactly what many do, including 23-year-old Orlando Antonio.

Today, he works in an upscale Bakery in Caracas, thanks to Santiago's help.

But he grew up a world away, in one of the toughest slums in Caracas.

He never graduated from high school.

Did most of the kids that you ran around with stay in school?

ORLANDO ANTONIO, Former Gang Member (through translator): No, they also dropped out.

Some of them are dead now.

From my group, there's only three or four left.

Most of them were killed.

MARCIA BIGGS: How?

Why were they killed?

ORLANDO ANTONIO (through translator): Because they were wanted by the police, and when they find someone they're looking for, they kill them.

MARCIA BIGGS: In 2015, the Venezuelan government responded to rising violence with a policy known as Mano Dura, or Heavy Hand, sending special police units into violent areas to crack down on gangs.

It's credited that policy with decreasing violence.

But, last year, the United Nations released a damning report on the extrajudicial killings of young men by these special units.

ORLANDO ANTONIO (through translator): Every time I came down the street, the police officers mistreated me, they hit me.

And I grew up thinking about that, thinking about what they'd done to me, and how I could get revenge.

MARCIA BIGGS: So what made you want to leave that life?

ORLANDO ANTONIO (through translator): My mom.

MARCIA BIGGS: Your mom.

ORLANDO ANTONIO (through translator): My mom.

MARCIA BIGGS: Why?

What about your mom?

ORLANDO ANTONIO (through translator): She was so worried about me.

You could see it in her face.

She was even losing weight.

MARCIA BIGGS: But many more do not make it out.

In a village outside of Caracas, another mother, Zuleica Perez, makes an extra cup of coffee every morning and gingerly places it next to the photo of her son Jose.

ZULEICA PEREZ, Mother (through translator): It's a way to keep his memory alive, and I feel good about this.

I feel like he's present, like he's here drinking his coffee.

MARCIA BIGGS: In January of last year, she says Jose was at his home when special forces burst in, demanding information about a car theft.

Within moments, he was dead, shot in the chest.

There was no official statement, but Zuleica says this video was posted on Facebook by police officers claiming that Jose was part of an armed band that had fired on them first.

That video was later taken down, and reportedly came from another earlier incident not involving her son.

But Zuleica says she then received another video, this one clearly depicting her son sitting unarmed and begging for his life.

ZULEICA PEREZ (through translator): Maybe that's what breaks my heart.

What was my son thinking about in those last minutes, knowing he had no way out, and without having done anything?

MARCIA BIGGS: Jose left behind his mother, his two brothers, and a 9-year-old daughter, Valentina, who Zuleica says likes to visit her dad at the cemetery.

ZULEICA PEREZ (through translator): We never thought this tragedy would happen to us.

A tragedy can happen to anyone.

And in this country, tragedies happen.

But the important thing is, we don't know why.

MARCIA BIGGS: Back at the slum in Maracaibo, in the country's west, as we were wrapping up our day, we stumbled upon yet another scene of desperation, dozens of children lined up, empty bowls in hand, waiting for a food bank to open.

The food eventually arrived, rice and beans, paid for by an American donor, and handed out by his Venezuelan son.

Each child waited his or her turn, and then ate, one more meal for these children and a country in need.

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Marcia Biggs in Maracaibo, Venezuela.

JUDY WOODRUFF: At baseball spring training, the talk is usually about hopes for the season ahead.

John Yang reports that, as exhibition games get under way this weekend, the focus is on 2017, the year of one the game's biggest scandals.

JOHN YANG: Judy, that was the year the Houston Astros won the World Series and, investigators say, the year the team used an elaborate scheme to tell their batters in advance what pitches the opposition was about to throw to them.

Last month, baseball commissioner Rob Manfred punished the team, its field manager and its general manager, but didn't discipline any players or do anything with the team's World Series title.

And that has players on other teams speaking out.

AARON JUDGE, New York Yankees: I just don't think it holds any value.

You know, you cheated, and you didn't earn it.

That's how I feel is, it wasn't earned.

It wasn't earned the way of playing the game right and fighting until the end.

CODY BELLINGER, Los Angeles Dodgers: I thought Manfred's punishment was weak, giving them immunity.

I mean, these guys were cheating for three years.

JOHN YANG: A former Toronto Blue Jays pitcher who lost his job after a bad outing against the Astros in 2017 is even suing the team for unfair business practices.

Jeff Passan covers Major League Baseball for ESPN.

He joins us from the Astros training camp in West Palm Beach, Florida.

Jeff, it's been six weeks since the commissioner issued his report on the cheating scandal, handing down the punishment.

Why are the players still so angry about this, that they're still speaking out?

JEFF PASSAN, ESPN: You know, John, they're angry for a number of reasons.

First off, they feel that the Astros' apologies were hollow, that the contrition was fake, and that they're not really mad or sad or even feeling bad about the fact that they cheated.

And, beyond that, I think it's the fact that there has been a lack of punishment.

Now, you can argue that the Astros paying a $5 million fine or giving up some draft picks was good enough for the team.

You can argue that Jeff Luhnow, the general manager, and A.J.

Hinch, the manager, losing their jobs was punishment as well.

But the prayers got no suspensions whatsoever.

And between that and the World Series title not being stripped, the ire in players has been significant and rally has not abated at all.

JOHN YANG: Talk about that punishment.

The commissioner in his report said that this was a player-driven scheme, a player-driven plan.

So why were no players punished?

JEFF PASSAN: Yes, it's interesting that you have a player-driven scheme with zero punishment for the players, but that was really the reality, the catch-22 that Rob Manfred was facing here.

Back in September of 2017, when the Boston Red Sox had a light punishment for sending signals from their video room to an Apple Watch on their bench, the commissioner sent out a notice to all 30 teams saying that it is incumbent on you, as the general manager and the manager, to tell your players that discipline can happen.

That message was never relayed to Astros players.

And, accordingly, under labor law, the lack of notice for potential punishment is grounds for a case being thrown out via grievance.

JOHN YANG: So, now that the anger is here and evident, are there any indications that commissioner Manfred understands this, is getting this anger, and what can he do about it?

JEFF PASSAN: You know, his back is against the wall at this point, John, because so much of the animus is guided toward him from both players and fans.

And there is certainly the possibility that he could reverse his decision on stripping the Astros of the 2017 championship.

Now, it would go against what he has said publicly, which is that he doesn't want to start a slippery slope of rewriting history.

And it's understandable, considering baseball's history, in which the single season and all-time home run record holder, Barry Bonds, did so under the suspension of using steroids.

So if you take away the championship from the Astros in 2017, why aren't you going to take away the home run title from Barry Bonds?

That's not something Rob Manfred wants to do, but it's certainly something he has to be thinking about at this point and something that people in his inner circle have suggested he consider.

JOHN YANG: Exhibition games begin this weekend.

Could this anger and frustration spill out onto the playing field?

JEFF PASSAN: Yes, it's a possibility, certainly, and I have spoke within a number of players who said, we're looking forward to playing the Astros this year to try and mete out frontier justice by hitting them with a fastball.

But Rob Manfred has already pulled teams and players on alert, saying that, if you intentionally throw a baseball at a player, not just an Astros player, but any player, the discipline is going to be significantly higher than the typical three-to-six-game suspension.

Of course, this in itself angers players, because they understand, if they throw at Houston Astros batters, the suspensions they get for doing so will be longer than any of the Astros served for cheating during their World Series-winning season.

JOHN YANG: Ironic, indeed.

Jeff Passan of ESPN, thanks so much.

JEFF PASSAN: Thank you, John.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Interesting.

And on the "NewsHour" online right now, we took your questions about the novel coronavirus, including whether you should buy a mask to wear in public spaces.

You can watch William Brangham and Laura Santhanam answer your questions on our Web site.

That's PBS.org/NewsHour.

Up next on "Washington Week" on PBS: President Trump is fuming over intelligence reports of Russian election interference.

Robert Costa is joined by a roundtable of journalists to dissect it all.

And we will be back right here on Monday with a look at the results of the Nevada Democratic caucuses and what they mean for the presidential race.

That's the "NewsHour" for now.

I'm Judy Woodruff.

Have a great weekend.

Thank you, and good night.