AMNA NAWAZ: Good evening.

I'm Amna Nawaz.

GEOFF BENNETT: And I'm Geoff Bennett.

On the "News Hour" tonight: A federal prosecutor agrees to drop charges against New York City's mayor, complying with the Justice Department order that sparked mass resignations and accusations of a quid pro quo.

AMNA NAWAZ: Then: J.D.

VANCE, Vice President of the United States: If you're running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you.

AMNA NAWAZ: Vice President J.D.

Vance lectures European allies on democracy at a summit largely meant to focus on the security of Ukraine.

GEOFF BENNETT: And David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart give their takes on the week's headlines, from Elon Musk's expanding influence to the White House targeting the Associated Press.

(BREAK) GEOFF BENNETT: Welcome to the "News Hour."

A wave of resignations is shaking up the U.S. Justice Department after the Trump administration gave orders to drop the corruption case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams.

So far, at least seven officials have quit, and Adams is facing increasingly loud calls to step down.

AMNA NAWAZ: The exodus began yesterday with one of New York's top federal prosecutors, and it's already being dubbed the Thursday afternoon massacre, recalling the famous Saturday Night Massacre during the Watergate scandal.

William Brangham begins our coverage.

ERIC ADAMS (D), Mayor of New York: Throughout this entire ordeal... WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Today, New York City Mayor Eric Adams was playing defense.

ERIC ADAMS: I had to endure for something I didn't do.

I didn't do anything wrong.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Including a P.R.

blitz on FOX News.

All the while, the U.S. Department of Justice is in upheaval over the fate of the corruption case it brought against the mayor.

Yesterday, six DOJ officials resigned after refusing an order from the department in Washington to dismiss the case.

Acting U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, Danielle Sassoon, a Republican who clerked for the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, started the exodus.

Writing to Trump's new Attorney General Pam Bondi, Sassoon accused Mayor Adams and officials in the DOJ of what amounted to a quid pro quo, that Adams would aid Trump's immigration enforcement if the DOJ dropped his case.

Sassoon excoriated that alleged offer, writing -- quote -- "It is a breathtaking and dangerous precedent to reward Adams' opportunistic and shifting commitments on immigration and other policy matters with dismissal of a criminal indictment."

Yesterday, Mayor Adams met with Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, and sat beside him on FOX News this morning as he denied Sassoon's claims.

ERIC ADAMS: That's quid pro quo.

That's a crime.

MAN: That is quid pro quo.

ERIC ADAMS: She took her three -- she -- it took her three weeks to report in front of her a criminal action?

Come on, this is silly.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: But then Homan implied that, if Adams didn't help with immigration... TOM HOMAN, White House Border Czar: I will be in his office, up his butt, saying, where the hell is the agreement we came to?

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Acting U.S. Deputy Attorney General and former Trump lawyer Emil Bove, who ordered the dismissal, rejected the assertion that there was any quid pro quo.

In a response to Sassoon, he wrote that she -- quote -- "lost sight of her oath" and should not -- quote - - "interpret the Constitution in a manner inconsistent with the policies of a democratically elected president."

Adams had pleaded not guilty last year to federal charges of accepting bribes and illegal campaign contributions from Turkish nationals.

Now a flurry of Democrats are calling on Adams to step down and calling on New York Governor Democrat Kathy Hochul to remove him from office, which she'd have the authority to do.

For DOJ officials, the so-called Thursday afternoon massacre continued today.

Hagan Scotten, the line prosecutor who handled the Adams case, quit with a defiant message to Bove, refusing his motion to dismiss the case.

Scotten wrote: "I expect you will eventually find someone who is enough of a fool or enough of a coward to file your motion, but it was never going to be me."

Reportedly, Bove was able to find a DOJ lawyer willing to sign the motion this afternoon.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm William Brangham.

AMNA NAWAZ: Joining me now to discuss the upheaval within the Department of Justice is Jessica Roth, former federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York and a professor at the Cardozo School of Law.

Jessica, welcome back to the "News Hour."

Let's just pick up where William left off there.

It looks like the Department of Justice has found someone who is willing to move forward with dismissing the charges against Mayor Adams.

So what happens now.

Is a judge required to accept that dismissal?

JESSICA ROTH, Former Federal Prosecutor: No, the judge is not required to accept the dismissal, certainly not right away.

The governing rule of criminal procedure requires leave of court to dismiss an indictment on a prosecutor's motion.

And so that suggests that the court is not meant to be a rubber stamp here.

But there's very limited authority and precedent for a court actually denying leave to dismiss.

The court has the authority to hold a hearing to inquire into the reasons for the dismissal and to make sure they're not improper and that they're in the public interest.

And I expect, especially given the record set forth in Danielle Sassoon's letter, that the court would have such a searching hearing here.

But if the court were to find that the reasons were improper, it's really not clear what would happen then, because if the court were to deny leave, but the DOJ still doesn't want to move forward with the prosecution, who would prosecute the case?

It's not clear that the court has authority to appoint a special prosecutor or somebody else to carry out this prosecution that DOJ is saying it does not want to carry forward.

AMNA NAWAZ: Let me ask you about another part of that letter Danielle Sassoon sent to the attorney general, Pam Bondi, in which she's saying Mayor Adams' lawyers are essentially asking the DOJ for what amounted to a quid pro quo, arguing his case should be dropped so he can carry out President Trump's immigration agenda.

Is that what it looked like to you here, a quid pro quo?

I mean, where is the legal bar or burden of proof there?

JESSICA ROTH: Well, at a minimum, it looked like an extraordinary abuse of prosecutorial power.

Whether it was exactly a quid pro quo or not, what's very clear in the initial memo for Mr. Bove directing the dismissal is that the reason for the dismissal had nothing to do with the merits of the case and was instead intended to leave Mayor Adams unfettered to pursue the president's immigration agenda.

And it said that the charges could be reinstated at a future date, very clearly leaving hanging over Mayor Adams' head the threat of re-indictment if in fact he did not comply with the president's immigration agenda and fell out of favor with the administration.

So, at a minimum, it's clearly improper and an abuse of the prosecutorial function.

AMNA NAWAZ: And, Jessica, for context here, we should point out we spoke to you just three days ago, when it first came up that federal prosecutors may move to drop this case.

And since then, we saw this wave of resignations, these refusals to dismiss the case.

I just want to get your reaction to how quickly things escalated here.

Have you ever seen anything like that in the Department of Justice?

JESSICA ROTH: No, this is an absolutely unprecedented situation.

And I think what we have seen is an extraordinary display of integrity and courage from the prosecutors in the Southern District of New York who refused to comply with an order with which they could not comply in good conscience, and also from the lawyers at the Department of Justice Public Integrity Section in Washington, D.C., who similarly refused to sign the order when the acting deputy attorney general transferred the case to them when the Southern District refused.

So this is an extraordinary moment of upheaval within the Department of Justice, where we see a standoff between the new leadership and the professional ranks of prosecutors who have been trained in a certain tradition of prosecutorial norms.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jessica Roth, former federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York, professor at Cardozo School of Law, always good to see you.

Thank you for your time.

JESSICA ROTH: My pleasure.

GEOFF BENNETT: Courtrooms across the country are hearing challenges to President Trump and Elon Musk's efforts to shrink the federal government.

White House correspondent Laura Barron-Lopez is here with the latest as the administration defends itself in five separate cases.

So, Laura, bring us up to speed.

How did the courts rule in some of these hearings today?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: There were nonstop court actions today, Geoff.

So, to start off, one federal judge extended a restraining order against DOGE -- that's that Department of Government Efficiency led by Elon Musk -- barring them from accessing Treasury payment systems.

So that restraining order is extended.

There was another lawsuit where the Consumer Financial Bureau essentially was told that they don't have to delete.

It was trying to prevent their full-on dismantling, which is being done by Elon Musk and other Trump administration officials.

And the judge said that no CFPB employees could be fired.

And another case brought by eight fired inspectors general, the judge said that they would not issue any emergency action to reinstate those inspectors general, and that that case is going to be ongoing.

Then, in a case challenging Elon Musk and DOGE's entire operation, another federal judge asked for more specifics and said that they would rule at a later date.

All of that is happening, Geoff, as DOGE is growing its numbers.

I was told by a source familiar with the situation that billionaire Joseph Gebbia, the Airbnb co-founder, is joining the efforts at DOGE with Elon Musk.

And he was at the Office of Personnel Management today being onboarded.

GEOFF BENNETT: And the administration is still moving forward with these firings across different government agencies.

How expansive is this?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: They're incredibly expansive.

Last night into today, we saw an increase in the number of firings that are coming and targeting primarily probationary employees, people working in government for less than one to two years.

We're estimating that more than 200,000 employees could be impacted.

So, when you look at it by the numbers, that's more than 5,000 at the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control, more than 1,000 at the Veterans Affairs, more than 100 and -- 1,200 at the Energy Department and more than 3,000 at the U.S. Forest Service.

And when it comes to those being terminated at the CDC, one of our sources told "News Hour"s Murrey Jacobson that at least a hundred members of the Epidemic Intelligence Service are expected to be terminated very shortly.

Those are disease detectives.

If you watched "Contagion," Geoff, Kate Winslet's character was a member of that EIS service.

And then, when it comes to the Energy Department cuts, some of those cuts are within the nuclear Security Administration.

So a number of people consider this very risky and wide across the board.

GEOFF BENNETT: Laura Barron-Lopez, thanks so much for that update.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: We start the day's other headlines with new information on the deadly collision between an American Airlines jet and an Army helicopter in Washington, D.C., last month.

Federal investigators now say the Black Hawk crew may have missed a key instruction by air traffic control seconds before the crash.

The plane was coming in for a landing at Reagan National Airport when the collision occurred.

All 67 people on board both aircraft were killed.

NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy said today that air traffic control instructed the helicopter to pass behind the jet as they were getting closer.

JENNIFER HOMENDY, Chair, National Transportation Safety Board: The portion of the transmission that stated "Pass behind the" may not have been received by the Black Hawk crew.

Transmission was stepped on by a point-eight second mic key from the Black Hawk.

The Black Hawk was keying the mic to communicate with ATC.

GEOFF BENNETT: Homendy also said investigators believe the crew were wearing night-vision goggles, and they're looking into whether altitude readings inside the helicopter's cockpit were inaccurate at the time of the collision.

A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to lift its funding freeze on foreign aid and has given officials a five-day deadline to prove they are doing so.

The order late last night was the first to challenge the freeze.

It cited the financial impact that the cutoff of payments is having worldwide.

President Trump ordered the 90-day freeze last month to allow officials time to determine which groups would keep getting federal funds.

The judge in his ruling said officials have not offered any explanation for why a blanket suspension was a rational precursor to reviewing programs.

In the Middle East, Hamas announced the names of the three Israeli hostages it intends to release tomorrow in the latest exchange of the fragile cease-fire.

They are Israeli-American Sagui Dekel-Chen, Israeli-Argentinean Iair Horn, and Israeli-Russian Alexander Sasha Troufanov.

They are expected to be exchanged for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners.

Hamas threatened earlier this week to delay the hostage release, saying that Israel had violated some of the terms of the cease-fire, but the group later agreed to move forward as planned.

California's strongest storm system this season dropped up to six inches of rain and sent flash floods and mud down the burned hillsides of Los Angeles.

Cascades of muddy water rushed across roads, leaving behind debris and sludge.

The floods even swept an L.A. Fire Department vehicle into the ocean.

One person was in the car, who escaped with only minor injuries.

Further north, the same system caused whiteout conditions in Oregon.

At least 10 people there were injured in a 100-car pile-up, and forecasters say another polar vortex will send temperatures plummeting across huge parts of the nation next week.

In Missouri, an 86-year-old white man pleaded guilty today in the nonfatal shooting of a young Black man who had rung his doorbell by mistake.

Andrew Lester had been due to stand trial next week on charges of first-degree assault and armed criminal action.

Instead, he pleaded guilty to second-degree assault and faces up to seven years in prison.

Ralph Yarl was in court today to hear the plea.

He was 16 years old when he mistakenly ended up at Lester's house after mixing up the streets where he was due to pick up his twin siblings.

The shooting renewed questions about America's relationship with guns and race.

Yarl has since graduated from high school, earning a National Merit Award for Academics.

On Wall Street today, stocks ended mixed after an otherwise strong week.

The Dow Jones industrial average slipped 165 points, or about a third of 1 percent.

The Nasdaq posted a decent gain, adding roughly 80 points.

The S&P 500 ended virtually flat.

And it was a day of brotherly love on this Valentine's Day for the Super Bowl champion Philadelphia Eagles.

Tens of thousands of fans lined the streets to cheer on their beloved birds as they paraded across downtown, hoisting the Vince Lombardi Trophy.

MAN: Say it with me, E-A-G-L-E-S, Eagles!

GEOFF BENNETT: And with that final rallying cry from the famous Rocky steps and in front of a sea of Kelly green, the Super Bowl underdogs celebrated being top dog for the second time in the team's history.

They beat the Kansas City Chiefs this past Sunday 40-22.

Still to come on the "News Hour": the E.U.

's foreign policy chief on the future of Ukraine amid shifting U.S. support; constitutional scholar Ilya Shapiro considers President Trump's expanded view of executive authority; and Jane Austen fans around the world honor the British novelist's legacy 250 years after her birth.

AMNA NAWAZ: Today in Munich, Vice President J.D.

Vance met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and with German political leaders, including the head of the far right AfD party.

GEOFF BENNETT: That latter meeting came after Vance spoke at the Munich Security Conference.

It's usually focused on Western adversaries.

Vance instead critiqued America's European allies.

Nick Schifrin is in Munich again for us tonight.

NICK SCHIFRIN: In front of a mostly European audience anxious for reassurance, today, Vice President Vance delivered a scolding.

J.D.

VANCE, Vice President of the United States: What I worry about is the threat from within, the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values.

NICK SCHIFRIN: World leaders were hoping for clarity on the administration's plans for Ukraine.

Instead, Vance expressed implicit support for right-wing parties, including Germany's AfD, whose leader he met this afternoon and who's been endorsed by Elon Musk.

J.D.

VANCE: If American democracy can survive 10 years of Greta Thunberg's scolding, you guys can survive a few months of Elon Musk.

What no democracy, American, German or European, will survive is telling millions of voters that their thoughts and concerns, their aspirations, their pleas for relief are invalid or unworthy of even being considered.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Vance portrayed Europe as silencing critical and conservative voices, including by recently throwing out Romanian elections over Russian misinformation.

J.D.

VANCE: If you're running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But in a new Wall Street Journal interview, Vance embraced Europe's position on Ukraine, that the West could increase sanctions on Moscow and even deploy U.S. troops inside Ukraine to reach peace.

J.D.

VANCE: Good afternoon, everybody.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And, hours later, Vance met with Ukraine's delegation in a meeting that a senior Ukrainian official described to "PBS News Hour" as -- quote -- "very good."

J.D.

VANCE: We want to achieve a durable, lasting peace, not the kind of peace that's going to have Eastern Europe in conflict just a couple years down the road.

NICK SCHIFRIN: European leaders tell "PBS News Hour" they're confused by what they consider mixed U.S. messages on Ukraine, including those repeated today by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during a visit to Poland.

PETE HEGSETH, U.S. Defense Secretary: The reality that returning to 2014 as borders as part of a negotiated settlement is unlikely.

The reality of U.S. troops in Ukraine is unlikely.

The reality of Ukraine membership in NATO as a part of a negotiated settlement unlikely.

NICK SCHIFRIN: German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius: BORIS PISTORIUS, German Defense Minister (through translator): I think this was careless, and I think it was a mistake.

In my view, it would have been much better to talk about Ukraine's possible NATO membership and possible territorial changes at the negotiating table first, and then with Ukraine present, and not with them already having Putin's price hanging over them.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And European leaders continue to doubt that peace with Putin is possible.

URSULA VON DER LEYEN, President, European Commission: President Putin says he's willing to meet, but on what terms?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, Ukrainian President: I had good conversation with the President Trump.

We had some phone calls.

And he had a phone call with Putin.

And he said to me, I think that he, Putin -- that he wants to stop the war.

I said to him that he is a liar.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Zelenskyy added today that Ukraine would need real security guarantees in order to make any cease-fire durable.

He said that the U.S. needed to be part of those security guarantees.

But, Amna, today, a State Department spokesman said -- quote -- "We expect European partners to take the lead in establishing a durable security framework and look forward to their proposals."

AMNA NAWAZ: So, Nick, tell us about the mood in the room during Vice President Vance's speech and also what you're hearing from attendees tonight.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Well, President Trump this afternoon called Vance's speech -- quote -- "brilliant."

But, Amna, the speech landed like a lead balloon in the room, because, again, Europeans have been dealing with mixed messages on Ukraine all week from the Trump administration.

And they're hoping that the Trump administration treats them, treats Europe -- Ukraine as partners in trying to pursue peace, rather than going above Europe and Ukraine's head and speaking directly to Moscow.

That said, though, Amna, two senior European officials told me tonight that actually the speech was better than it could have been, that they preferred a scolding over a negative speech about Ukraine or even a speech in which the U.S. was announcing some kind of troop withdrawal from Europe.

But it's not just Europeans who are worried about Ukraine's policy.

Apparently, today, the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Roger Wicker, who's here today, called Hegseth's speech in Brussels a -- quote - - "rookie mistake, the kind of thing Tucker Carlson could have written," and Carlson is a -- quote -- "fool," as what Wicker said.

Ukraine's defenders continue to say Russia is not serious about peace.

And they have a case in point today that a Russian drone hit a radiation shield that protects the Chernobyl nuclear power plant.

Now, earlier today, I talked about all of this, Ukraine, as well as Vance's speech, with Europe's top diplomat, Kaja Kallas.

Kaja Kallas, thanks very much.

Welcome back to the "News Hour."

I appreciate it.

KAJA KALLAS, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, European Commission: Good to be here.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Last week, European officials came to Washington and were reassured, I'm told, by senior Trump administration officials about Ukraine.

Earlier this week, you and other senior European officials met with Vice President Vance in Paris and I'm told were reassured about the administration's focus on Ukraine.

But this week, we also heard from the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, questioning whether Ukraine could ever get back occupied territory and essentially taking NATO off the table.

What's the impact of the mixed messages from the United States?

KAJA KALLAS: Well, the new administration is starting.

And, of course, we are building up a relationship with the new administration as well.

I mean, I have had good calls, a good call with Marco Rubio as well, who was also very assuring on Ukraine.

So, of course, we have to figure out the messages, what is right.

But this conference is a good place.

We have a lot of meetings with representatives to understand what are the ideas really of United States regarding Ukraine.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But can Europe actually make plans for Ukraine, can you and the United States work on a strategy for Ukraine when you getting these mixed messages?

KAJA KALLAS: Well, we have the strategy in place.

I mean, for us it's very clear.

It is to put the pressure on Russia to really stop this war.

When President Trump says that I just want the killing to stop, it's easy if Putin would stop bombing Ukraine.

This night, we heard that they were bombing the nuclear station.

So, clearly, Putin doesn't want peace.

So the pressure, the political, economical pressure should be on him, so that he realizes that he can't win and realizes it's a mistake to be there.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But President Trump also said this yesterday in the Oval Office -- quote -- "Yes, I do believe Putin wants peace" and -- quote -- "I trust him" on this subject.

What's your response to his statement?

KAJA KALLAS: Well, maybe he doesn't know Putin as well as we do.

So, well, Putin is not really keeping his promises, if you think about we have had such quick fixes, deals like Minsk II, Minsk II, and all... NICK SCHIFRIN: The previous acts of diplomacy between Russia and Ukraine that Europeans sponsored.

KAJA KALLAS: Yes, yes, previous cease-fire - - cease-fire agreements that were only necessary for Putin and Russia to get their act together more and attack in a bigger scale.

So I think the history proves that.

And that's why they only understand the language of strength.

And we have to be really strong and firm that you can't win here, because, if the United States is worried about China, if we can't get Russia right, we can't get China right either, because they are carefully watching how this goes.

NICK SCHIFRIN: One of the possibilities when it comes to a possible cease-fire in Ukraine, if we were to get to that, would be for European troops to deploy inside Ukraine.

In your conversations with European leaders, are they willing to consider that, even if, as Hegseth said this week, that the United States wouldn't protect them under Article V?

KAJA KALLAS: First, we have to understand that there's no peace.

In order to have peacekeeping troops, you need to have peace.

But, again, Putin doesn't want peace.

And that is a big problem that we need to address right now.

And, of course, if there is a peace, then we need to discuss, what are the security guarantees?

Yesterday, we heard the defense secretary of Ukraine saying that U.S. gave us promises in the Budapest Memorandum, give up your nuclear weapons and we will defend you when Russia attacks.

And where are you now?

So he was really very vocal in saying that you have not kept the promises you have gave - - you gave us.

So, right now, if we talk about security guarantees, then they really need to be credible.

What are the security guarantees that would really deter Russia from attacking again?

NICK SCHIFRIN: You and von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, have both said publicly in the last couple of days that any kind of tariffs would essentially create conflict between the United States and Europe that is unnecessary.

Do you think the United States imposing tariffs on Europe would prevent Europe from working with the United States on Ukraine?

KAJA KALLAS: No, we have different cooperation points.

So it's clear that there are no winners in trade wars.

The consumers are the biggest losers, because the prices rise due to this.

So I hope that these things are settled between the United States and Europe, OK?

If there is trade imbalance, then, of course, we can see what we can do about this.

But starting a trade war, I don't think it's a good thing, because who is laughing on the side is China.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And, finally, we have been talking about this.

Most of the security conference is focused on this.

But the vice president, J.D.

Vance, gave a speech today in which he said that the greatest threat that faces -- that Europe faces is from within.

And he said -- quote -- "There is no security if you're afraid of the voices, the opinions, and the conscience that guide your own people.

If you're running in fear from your own voters, there's nothing America can do for you."

Is Europe afraid of the voices, opinions, and conscience of its own people?

KAJA KALLAS: Well, freedom of opinion, freedom of press is one of the fundamental values that the European Union stands for.

And, as you see, we have a lot of elections going on all the time, a lot of very different groups and very vocal.

And I don't really agree with that criticism.

And I think, of course, we deal with our domestic problems on our own, but we need to cooperate on the big international worries that we have.

And this is, for example, the war in Ukraine.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Kaja Kallas, thank you very much.

KAJA KALLAS: Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: The first weeks of the Trump administration have brought dramatic changes to the shape, scope and function of the federal government.

Our new series On Democracy is taking a step back to look at big questions about the institutions, norms and laws that have shaped the country and the challenges they face today.

Ilya Shapiro is director of constitutional studies at the conservative-leaning Manhattan Institute and the author of "Lawless: The Miseducation of America's Elites."

Thanks for being here.

Appreciate it.

ILYA SHAPIRO, Manhattan Institute: Great to be with you.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, as we sit here and speak, we have got another case that is raising questions about the rule of law in this new Trump era.

At least seven prosecutors and officials have stepped down over the DOJ order to dismiss corruption charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams.

Danielle Sassoon, who was Manhattan's top federal prosecutor, she describes an explicit quid pro quo, whereby the Trump DOJ would dismiss the criminal charges against Adams in exchange for his support for President Trump's agenda.

What questions does all of this raise for you?

ILYA SHAPIRO: Well, I think it's a disagreement of political judgment between different prosecutors.

The U.S. attorney disagrees with what her superiors say.

The principals are denying that there's a quid pro quo, so we don't quite have evidence of that.

And Eric Adams, for the last year or so, has been moving in a direction to crack down on illegal immigration anyway.

So I don't know whether he'd be behaving differently in the first place.

But, ultimately, this is a judgment call.

And the U.S. attorneys, whether in the Southern District of New York, which sometimes thinks of itself as its own sovereign, Sovereign District, they sometimes call it, doesn't get to make that call at the end of the day.

And if the superiors decide that the underlying evidence is flimsy or the prosecution itself was politically motivated and doesn't serve the purposes of justice, that's their call to make.

And, ultimately, the voters will evaluate that.

GEOFF BENNETT: The deputy A.G. in his letter explaining why the case against Adams should be dropped, he cited the need for Adams to help with Donald Trump's immigration policy.

And then Adams and the immigration czar, Tom Homan, were on FOX News this morning.

And Homan said: "If he doesn't come through, I will be in his office up his butt saying, where the hell is the agreement we came to?"

I mean, hardly anything about this is subtle.

I mean, how is this not a breach of... ILYA SHAPIRO: I don't know if that agreement means the dropping of the prosecution.

It might be an agreement of, here's how we can help New York, because clearly there's a crisis, a law and order crisis in New York, and Adams wants to prolong his political career in some way.

The primary is coming up, what have you, and he wants to clean it up.

And so there's some agreement.

It may involve the quid pro quo that everyone's talking about, but it could just mean here's what I will do, open up Rikers, what have you, and we will send you federal funds or we will send you more law enforcement.

I don't know what the agreement might be.

But Adams wants to work with this administration on the illegal immigration problem.

GEOFF BENNETT: So, in your view, this is not, so far as we know, a fundamental breach of justice?

ILYA SHAPIRO: We don't have -- there's no evidence in the record, a prosecutor would say, to say that.

There are allegations, and you could make a case.

But on the face of what has come out, the dueling letters and what have you, this is just a disagreement on prosecutorial discretion.

GEOFF BENNETT: President Trump, the Trump administration, they have frozen domestic spending, frozen foreign aid without congressional approval.

They have dismantled USAID, threatened to dismantle the Education Department.

There are dispassionate observers who look at this and say that this is textbook executive overreach.

How do you see it?

ILYA SHAPIRO: Well, executive overreach is when you're creating new programs out of thin air, like Barack Obama with his pen and phone government with DACA or DAPA or all of these other things, or President Biden forgiving student loans that was blocked by the Supreme Court, said, I will do it another way, or vaccine mandates, all of these things that are creating new authorities that didn't exist.

Here, they're putting a pause on spending.

They're reorganizing the executive branch, which is within the executive's power.

GEOFF BENNETT: Why not go through Congress, as the framers intended?

He's got a pliant House Republican majority, a Senate majority as well.

And if you legislate this, the impact would be enduring.

Why not?

ILYA SHAPIRO: Well, it depends what the "this" is.

I do hope that the Trump administration goes to Congress and asks for restructuring of these various agencies and things like that, because if it's all done through executive action, then, as we see, you live by the executive action, you die by it, and the next Democratic president will just reverse it.

So it would take an act of Congress to eliminate the USAID or to eliminate the Department of Education, but reorganizing certain things, shifting funding priorities, auditing the accounting and the finances and things like that, that all is fully within the purvey of the government, including of DOGE.

GEOFF BENNETT: I want to ask you about Elon Musk, because President Trump, by all outward appearances, has given him a fairly broad mandate.

Any cause for concern about the lack of checks on Musk's actions and the fact that he is in many ways the arbiter of his own conflicts of interest, given his very lucrative government contracts?

ILYA SHAPIRO: Well, the conflict of interest is a political story.

I mean, if the administration takes political hits for having a lax conflict of interest policy for President Trump himself, for example, that's a judgment call for the voters to make, ultimately, in the midterms coming up and what have you.

Musk is a special government employee, which means he has authority to run this.

He has his tech gurus, these guys with spreadsheets and green eye shades and whatever else that are identifying money that looks like it's mismanaged, misspent.

Again, not saying Congress had spent that on this, but we're not going to do that.

That's not the case.

Whether it's discretion by the agency, they're looking at things that this administration might have different priorities.

GEOFF BENNETT: There have been arguments, as you well know, that we are either in or that we're approaching a constitutional crisis.

I'd imagine you would disagree with that.

But what to you would signal a constitutional crisis?

What to you would signal that this democratic experiment is in peril?

ILYA SHAPIRO: Well, it's interesting that you say democratic experiment, because when the executive branch, when the bureaucracy does not implement the directives of the political leadership that's responsible to the voters, that's a problem.

I mean, a constitutional crisis is something like one branch going and doing things that are not within its authority that courts are telling it to stop and to do, ignoring court orders.

Trump has said he's not going to ignore court orders.

He's going to appeal them and he's taking it to the Supreme Court.

And, almost certainly, most of these things won't get to the Supreme Court.

Certain things, he might win on.

Certain things, he might lose on, but that's the process.

The American people are not buying this language that is simply an indication from the left that they don't like this restructuring of government, the new priorities, all of these certain things.

Fair enough.

That's a political argument to be had, but this is not any sort of a constitutional crisis.

GEOFF BENNETT: Ilya Shapiro with the Manhattan Institute, thanks for coming in.

ILYA SHAPIRO: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: For more on the ongoing challenge to constitutional guardrails and the United States' position the global stage, we turn to the analysis of Brooks and Capehart.

That is New York Times columnist David Brooks, and Jonathan Capehart, associate editor for The Washington Post.

Great to see you both.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Hey, Amna.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jonathan, kick us off here, and let's start overseas.

We saw the first major international summit since Mr. Trump returned to office in which the secretary of defense reversed U.S. policy on Ukraine before walking it back.

We saw Vice President Vance scolding our European allies.

And this is the same week that President Trump announced potential reciprocal tariffs on both our adversaries and our allies.

When you put all of this together, what does this say to you about America's place in the world right now?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: It says to me that America's place is shaky.

I think, from the eyes of allies, America can no longer be dependent on, that America -- they saw what America was like under Trump the first term.

Trump in the second term is Trump one, but on steroids, in the way he is operating around the world.

And so I think, for Europeans especially, at the Munich Security Conference, the global order that we have lived under for more than 70 years, the United States was an architect of it.

And the United States has been a guarantor of it.

And it has led to, generally speaking, peace and prosperity to the world that we live in now.

The Europeans look to the United States for leadership, but also for protection and as an ally.

And that, as we have seen with the speeches from the vice president, from the defense secretary, that's not the America that they're seeing in Munich.

AMNA NAWAZ: David, do you agree with that?

If you're a NATO ally, do you still see the U.S. as a reliable partner right now?

DAVID BROOKS: Pseudo-reliable.

While we are -- when you have Pete Hegseth negotiating and giving away the American and Western position or the Ukrainian position before you even sit down with Vladimir Putin, that's not even ideology.

That's just incompetence.

And so if you're a European, you would be alarmed at that.

But then you look back.

We have friends.

It's like any human being.

Countries have friends.

America was there for Europe in World War I, Woodrow Wilson.

Winston Churchill leaned on Franklin Roosevelt.

We leaned on the Europeans during the Cold War by basing missiles there, by basing bases there.

We have friendships.

When 9/11 happens, the Europeans are there for us.

And you rely on these friendships just as you would in life.

And the Trump administration does not have friendships.

They have bullying relationships.

And for J.D.

Vance to meet with the head of the AfD and not the prime minister of Germany is kind of appalling.

As one German said today, we Americans denazified Europe and Germany and now we're renazifying it.

So they have the right to be upset.

AMNA NAWAZ: Meanwhile, back here, we also saw this week a remarkable scene, Jonathan, in Washington, D.C., in the Oval Office, in which a private citizen, an unelected billionaire in Elon Musk, essentially just held court in the Oval Office with a number of reporters while President Trump sat silently by.

We're now seeing Mr. Musk and the DOGE teams kind of slashing and burning their way through the federal government work force.

We have seen lawsuits challenging his actions and the executive actions of the president as well.

And we have seen Vice President Vance say that he's not sure that the administration needs to comply with some of the court orders.

Senator Andy Kim said earlier to me that he believes we're very close to a constitutional crisis.

Do you agree with that?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Yes,simply because, when the vice president put that social media post out last Sunday, it was breathtaking in what he was saying.

I feel like that we should go back to "Schoolhouse Rock!"

and have that little bill come back out and tell us how government works.

The judiciary is not a subsidiary of the executive.

It is not beholden.

It is one of the three branches of government.

And if the judges come out and say, what you're doing is illegal or unconstitutional, there are other ways to get around that.

But what the president is doing and what Elon Musk is doing is -- I'm sorry -- what the vice president is doing in challenging the authority of the judiciary, that is what makes this the borderline Constitution.

Right now, we're going to the process thing.

Judges are putting injunctions and holds on things.

But what happens if there's a definitive ruling and Trump just decides, I don't care?

Then we will be in a crisis.

But, right now, we are edging there very quickly, I think.

AMNA NAWAZ: David, what do you make of that?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I think edging there.

I think the Supreme Court will rule pretty heavily against a lot of these Trump things.

If Trump defies the court, then we're in a crisis.

Now, I wouldn't call it a crisis.

I'd call it an institution of state failure.

I have lived in Washington a long time.

I have a lot of friends who serve in government in various locations, and some of them serve in national security, and they think about nuclear codes.

Some of them serve fighting sex trafficking.

Some of them try to boost democracy in Africa.

Some of them do biomedical research.

And I can't tell you how many conversations I have over the last three weeks of people who are traumatized, who describe a reign of terror in their agencies, but not only that, a reign of incompetence.

If you're around the nuclear codes, you take this stuff so seriously, and then you have got a bunch of 23-year-old kids from Harvard coming in there.

Nobody knows what information they have access to.

Nobody knows what their background checks is.

And so basically you see the sacred values of trying to be a good civil servant, you see that trampled.

And you see that trampled.

And so, to me, what's going on is not so much -- it's an institutional failure if you care about the future of government, you want a government that will get you food stamps and renew your passport, but mostly it's a form of psychological intimidation that is sweeping through agency after agency and making a government that is semi-functional.

AMNA NAWAZ: Can I just get both of you to briefly weigh in on this?

Because we're nearing one month into the Trump presidency.

Is it clear to you where the guardrails are, Jonathan?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: No.

No.

In a perfect world, Republicans on the Hill would be the guardrails, the rails.

They would do things like, I don't know, maybe not approve some of these unqualified people to the Cabinet.

But they haven't done it.

And in the case of Speaker Johnson, he's not a guardrail.

He's an enabler.

He's a true believer.

And so without that resistance from one of the branches of government, the executive is, I think, running roughshod.

AMNA NAWAZ: David, do you agree with that?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I think the courts will stand up.

Even the Trump appointees, they have very firm opinions about executive power.

They believe in the independent judiciary.

They believe in the - - that we have three branches of government.

I think that those guardrails will be there.

What I object to is, Donald Trump was elected mostly by working-class people who have real problems.

They have health disparities with the rest of us.

They have educational disparities.

They have workplace -- they live in communities that have -- where social capital is low.

Donald Trump was elected by those people.

You would think he'd care enough about them to do something on behalf of the people who elected him.

Instead, he's going after USAID.

He's going after any place he thinks there might be liberal people with college degrees.

And so what we're seeing is not populism.

What we're seeing is a sort of Ivy League right-wing nihilism.

And, to me, that is so disorienting and so shocking and so appalling that you can't even serve the legitimate needs of the people who put you in power.

They're totally off the board this last month.

AMNA NAWAZ: I need to point out also this week that we saw the Associated Press, which is one of the largest and oldest, most trusted sources of independent news gathering in the country, being barred from the Oval Office and from Air Force One, where the president often speaks at length at both of those places, for continuing to call the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of Mexico, not the Gulf of America, as President Trump unilaterally declared it after coming into office.

And I just want to get your take on this, Jonathan, because this is maybe not the first such attack we will see.

But what do you make of what journalists should be doing right now?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Well, one, the president is bullying the press corps.

And I think that the press corps needs to stand up to the president and remember there's only one profession that is protected in the Constitution, and that is the press.

And the press is vitally important for a democracy, because an informed citizenry is what is the foundation of our system of government, democracy.

And if the press doesn't stand up to the president, who will?

AMNA NAWAZ: David, got about 30 seconds left.

What's your take?

DAVID BROOKS: I'm a little less harsh on the Trump administration.

Listen, I lived through the end of the Biden administration, where there was almost no press access to the guy.

And so administrations manipulate the press.

That's part of the job.

And if they don't want to talk to the AP, fine.

The AP can do its own reporting.

And so I have lived through all these administrations.

And I think the deeper problem here -- and this is our business.

I hate to comment on the media, because I have spent my life in it.

But we have not represented enough Trump voices over the last 40 years, enough working-class voices over the last 40 years.

And so, if we had done that, maybe some of the hostility that's come our way wouldn't be there.

And so I'm appalled by what Trump is doing, but I understand sort of why he's doing it.

AMNA NAWAZ: Bigger conversation we will have for another time, I'm sure.

David Brooks, Jonathan Capehart, thank you to you both.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Thanks, Amna.

GEOFF BENNETT: On this Valentine's Day, if you're looking for love, may we suggest you go dancing?

After all, as the British romantic novelist Jane Austen wrote in her most popular work, "Pride and Prejudice," to be fond of dancing is a -- quote -- "certain step towards falling in love."

This year, Jane Austen fans are celebrating 250 years since her birth, and in her homeland of England, they're expecting a tourist boom, as special correspondent Malcolm Brabant reports for our arts and culture series, Canvas.

ACTOR: Mr. Darcy, allow me to present this young lady to you.

ACTOR: She is the most beautiful creature I have ever beheld.

ACTOR: She's not handsome enough to tend to me.

MALCOLM BRABANT: In this jubilee year, expect a resurgence of "Pride and Prejudice," widely considered to be Jane Austen's finest creation.

KATHRYN SUTHERLAND, University of Oxford: She's probably standing shoulder to shoulder with Shakespeare.

ACTRESS: The more I know of the world, the more I am convinced that I shall never see a man who might I can truly love.

KATHRYN SUTHERLAND: They are works packed with emotional intelligence of the kind we get from Shakespeare, in fact.

ACTRESS: You are the loveliest girls I ever set eyes on.

Can you not get them married Mrs. Dashwood?

KATHRYN SUTHERLAND: She also was a pioneer of the novel.

She developed the psychological novel.

MALCOLM BRABANT: Kathryn Sutherland is professor of bibliography and textual criticism at Oxford University and a leading authority on Jane Austen.

KATHRYN SUTHERLAND: She brought women into the novel in a probable and realistic way.

Her achievements were huge.

MALCOLM BRABANT: But Austen's genius wasn't properly recognized until long after her death.

Jane Austen's six novels only earned her the grand total of between $70,000 to $80,000 in today's money.

ACTRESS: Look at them, five of them without dowry.

What's to become of them?

ACTOR: Perhaps we shall drown some of them birth.

MALCOLM BRABANT: Her characters were consumed with the need to achieve financial security.

And yet Jane Austen herself died in relative poverty.

How ironic that she spawned an industry worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

Visitors are expected to flock to this house, where Austen succumbed to illness at the age of 41.

Richard Foster from Winchester College is preparing a commemorative exhibition.

RICHARD FOSTER, Winchester College: Three days before her death, she dictated a poem to her sister, Cassandra .

So even then she was well enough to carry on writing.

And it's a very funny poem.

MALCOLM BRABANT: Despite being impoverished and relatively obscure, Austen was buried in one of Europe's grandest cathedrals.

CANON ROLY RIEM, vice-dean, Winchester Cathedral: It's remarkable that Jane is buried in this cathedral because you wouldn't expect that to happen.

But she is here and she's a focus of an amazing worldwide devotion to her and her writings and all that she's left us.

MALCOLM BRABANT: Canon Roly Riem is vice-dean of Winchester Cathedral.

CANON ROLY RIEM: When we have had a book to remember her, the last big anniversary we have had, they wrote sometimes pages in it just saying how much Jane had changed their lives, the difference it made to their outlook or even their career.

LIZZIE DUNFORD, Director, Jane Austen's House: This house, Jane Austen's house, is hugely significant.

MALCOLM BRABANT: Thirty miles from Winchester is the village of Chawton that was a haven for the young writer.

Lizzie Dunford runs this 19th century time capsule.

LIZZIE DUNFORD: So it's a huge period of intense creativity that is made possible and enabled by the creative sanctuary, the security that this house gives.

So it has that intense literary significance.

MALCOLM BRABANT: And it's in the dining room that Austen's disciples gaze upon the wellspring of her creativity, the writing table.

LIZZIE DUNFORD: Austen described her novels as her darling children, as her children.

They come from this, from their nursery and their cradle, out into that wider world, and they're now read in every corner of the world.

MALCOLM BRABANT: Another stop on the Austen trail is Bath, where actress Lauren Falconer portrays the heroine of "Pride and Prejudice."

LAUREN FALCONER, Actress: Jane Austen is an incredible female writer and she was so ahead of her time in what she was writing.

I play Elizabeth Bennet, who is an obstinate, headstrong girl, but I also think Jane was very subtle in the ways that she was trying to make changes for women in her time period.

MALCOLM BRABANT: Each summer, thousands of aficionados flock to Bath for the annual Jane Austen Festival.

Tourist chief Catherine Davies says this year's event will be spectacular.

KATHRYN DAVIS, Managing Director, Visit West: I think it's an opportunity for people to dress up, to feel that they're part of history maybe, and with a backdrop like this that looks like a film set, what better place to do it in?

MALCOLM BRABANT: Actor Martin Williamson understands why, in these turbulent times, Austen devotees seek to escape into her world.

MARTIN WILLIAMSON, Actor: It seems gentler then, a much gentler time, not as complicated as it is living today.

But, of course, it was a very strict social structure, so if you were born at the bottom of the pile, there was no way you could really ascend like today.

Especially in places like the United States, you can make it.

You're encouraged.

MALCOLM BRABANT: For vlogger and podcast host Izzy Meakin, the jubilee festival will be the highlight of the year.

IZZY MEAKIN, Podcast Host, "What the Austen?

": You read her books and you can recognize people in your own life, so it doesn't matter that these were written 200-plus years ago.

You can still see people that you know.

You're like, wow, I know someone like that all or I can see myself in those characters.

I think that's the real -- a real testament to her writing and how incredible she was.

MALCOLM BRABANT: That enthusiasm is shared in Oxford University's august Bodleian Library, where Kathryn Sutherland examines Austen's only surviving manuscript of the novel she never finished.

KATHRYN SUTHERLAND: She seems to work very frugally.

As you will see, she writes onto small pieces of paper and she writes to the very limits of that paper, so she leaves very little space.

So her assumption is that this is a draft that's going to work first time.

MALCOLM BRABANT: The manuscript was bought at auction in 2011 for over a million dollars to preserve for the nation.

KATHRYN SUTHERLAND: Oh, it's magical.

It's absolutely magical just to think that Jane Austen touched this, that Jane Austen worked on this.

It's a very intimate experience.

A manuscript is like a writer's fingerprint, or it's like getting inside the laboratory and finding out how they create.

ACTRESS: Is he handsome?

ACTRESS: He's single.

ACTRESS: Oh, my goodness.

Everybody behave naturally.

ACTOR: Mr. Collins at your service.

MALCOLM BRABANT: Given she was ahead of her time, how would Jane Austen have navigated the 21st century's complex romantic minefields with all their permutations?

IZZY MEAKIN: I think sometimes it can seem like it's much more complicated now.

ZACK PINSENT, Costume Designer: Here's to you.

And here's to me.

May we never disagree.

But if we do, to hell with you.

And here's to me.

IZZY MEAKIN: But I think something that Jane Austen would really celebrate is the choices we have now, the freedom when it comes to love.

We can love how we want to and we can love who we want to.

MALCOLM BRABANT: After all, the lesson that Austen imparts is that the path to true love requires overcoming pride and prejudice.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Malcolm Brabant in Chawton, Hampshire.

GEOFF BENNETT: Be sure to watch "Washington Week With The Atlantic" tonight on PBS.

Moderator Jeffrey Goldberg and his panel discuss President Trump's plans for ending the war in Ukraine and the new power he has given Elon Musk.

AMNA NAWAZ: And on "PBS News Weekend": one woman's quest to explore the wrecks of slave ships lost centuries ago.

And that is the "News Hour" for tonight.

I'm Amna Nawaz.

GEOFF BENNETT: And I'm Geoff Bennett.

For all of us here at the "PBS News Hour," thanks for spending part of your evening with us.

Have a good weekend.