GEOFF BENNETT: Good evening.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On the "News Hour" tonight: An appeals# court throws out Preside.. half-billion-dollar fine in his civil fraud case.

GEOFF BENNETT: The director of# national intelligence slashes her## agency's work force and budget, including# an office to track election interference.

AMNA NAWAZ: And we sit down with Canada's foreign## minister to discuss tariffs and the# uncertain future of U.S. relations.

ANITA ANAND, Canadian Foreign# Minister: The question of how## a security guarantee or guarantees will# be implemented needs to be fleshed out.

(BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ:## Welcome to the ".. A New York appeals court today dismissed# a $500 milli.. President Donald Trump and his companies# for overvaluing their properties and## financial statements.

in the ruling,# the judges upheld the fraud judgment,## but said -- quote -- "The half-a-billion# dollars to the state of New York is an## excessive fine that violates the Eighth# Amendment of the United States Constitution."

GEOFF BENNETT: The case centers on# allegations that Mr. Trump misled## banks and insurers by inflating or# deflating the value of his assets## when it suited him and exaggerated# his net worth by billions of dollars.

New York State Attorney General Letitia# James says she plans to appeal the ruling.

For more on the impact of the decision,# I spoke earlier with former federal## prosecutor Jessica Roth, currently a# professor at Cardozo School of Law.

Jessica Roth, thanks for being# with us.

We appreciate it.

JESSICA ROTH, Yeshiva University# Cardozo School of Law: It's my pleasure.

GEOFF BENNETT: So this was a lengthy ruling,# more tha.. of contention among the judges and how did# their differing opinions shape the outcome?

JESSICA ROTH: Yes, so this was a complicated# split decision.

As you noted, it's over 300 pages,## and we have three opinions.

And the reasoning# of the judges divided two, two and one.

There was one point of commonality among# all the justices.

And that was that the## trial court's order could not stand as it was# written.

But beyond there, we had disagreement## among the justices.

The effect of the decision# of the Appellate Division today is to affirm the## judgment, the verdict against Trump, his sons,# their business associates and their businesses,## finding them liable under New York's civil# fraud law of engaging in persistent fraud.

Two of the justices thought that actually# that finding was supported by the record## and was appropriate under the law.

Two# other justices thought that the record## was problematic and that there were# errors in the conduct of the trial## and would have sent the case back# to the trial court for a new trial.

But those two additional judges who thought# there were problems in the trial decided to## sign on to the judgment of the first# two judge's justices in order to get## the case up to the New York Court of Appeals, the# highest court of New York, for a final decision.

And the effect of those two justices# joining essentially in the decision of## the first two justices is that we now# have a majority effectively affirming## the verdict of liability against# Trump and the other defendants.

GEOFF BENNETT: OK.

So if the appeals court upheld .. nearly half-billion-dollar penalty?

Because,# in theory, fines deter wrongdoing by imposing## financial consequences that outweigh the# potential gains.

And that was the point of## imposing this $500 million fine in the# first place on the Trump Organization.

JESSICA ROTH: So even the two justices who# would have affirmed the finding of liability## based on the record here thought# that the penalty imposed by the## trial court was excessive and# that in fact it violated the## U.S. and New York State Constitution's# protections against excessive fines.

They said that it was just vastly disproportionate# to any harm caused by the defendants.

So although## they would affirm the finding of liability, that# there was a pattern of fraud, they thought that## the remedy for that in terms of the amount# of the penalty or disgorgement of profits,## that that -- or ill-gotten gains,# as articulated by the trial court,## that that was just vastly excessive, so# much so that it was unconstitutional.

But notably the justices who were prepared to# affirm the finding of liability said that the## other remedies imposed by the trial court that# were injunctive in nature, barring the defendants## from holding corporate offices, from making# applications to borrow funds, for example, and## also imposing a monitor, an independent monitor# on the businesses, that those could be affirmed.

So the financial penalties, the# disgorgement, they thought was excessive,## but the other injunctive relief, they# said was actually appropriately tailored## to address the findings of misconduct and# to curb potential wrongdoing in the future.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, we are all certainly getting# a legal education today as a result of all this.

The president crowed about this ruling# in a post on his social media site,## calling it a total victory.# Is that how you see it?

JESSICA ROTH: I don't see it as a total victory# for the president, because, as I said, the## effect of the ruling is to affirm the finding of# liability.

And two of the justices were prepared## to say and did say in their opinion they thought# that the factual record strongly supported the## finding of persistent fraud by the president, his# sons, his associates, and his business entities.

So I don't think it is a total victory for# the president.

He's still going to have to## go to the New York Court of Appeals to get# that finding of liability overturned if that## is the eventual outcome in this case, so not a# total victory for the president, but, that said,## I would say it's a significant# loss for the attorney general.

GEOFF BENNETT: And, as we mentioned,# the attorney general, Letitia James,## says she will appeal the ruling.

At the same time, President Trump's justice# has launched multiple invest.. part of a broader pattern of retribution against# his perceived political enemies.

What are the## implications of that dynamic, and how might it# affect the likelihood of her appeal succeeding?

JESSICA ROTH: That's very hard to say# how all of those factors will weigh into## the Court of Appeals' deliberations on this# appeal.

I mean, they're going to be looking## at the record here of what happened below# and should not be taking into account the## political machinations on either side, sort of# outside of what transpired in the courtroom.

That said, sort of the politics of this actually# made its way into the opinions here to a certain## extent.

A number of the justices had some choice# words about statements by the attorney general## when she was running for office, effectively sort# of pledging to take on Trump and investigate him,## and suggesting that those were unwise words# and sort of injected a certain amount of## concern into the case, but not to the point,# at least according to most of the justices,## that that would be an independent# reason for setting aside the verdict.

But that's certainly a dynamic# sort of atmospherically, if not## legally, in the case as it goes forward.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, in a separate matter,# Jessica, a federal judge today said that## President Trump's former personal lawyer# Alina Habba is not legally serving as## the acting U.S. attorney for New Jersey.# So, as best as we know, what happens now?

JESSICA ROTH: Well, now that's going to go up# on appeal as well.

That is something on which## the Third Circuit for the -- the U.S.# Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit,## which has jurisdiction over New# Jersey, is going to weigh in on.

And they will make a determination about whether# the trial court is correct that legally Ms. Habba## is not authorized to serve as the U.S. attorney.# And then I wouldn't be surprised if that went to## the Third Circuit en banc after a panel rules, and# eventually up to the United States Supreme Court.

And New Jersey is not the only jurisdiction# in which we have seen the president engage in## these sort of machinations to make sure that# his hand-chosen individuals and appointees## serve in these functions, when they# have not been accepted by the United## States Senate or by the judges of the district.

GEOFF BENNETT: Jessica Roth, former federal# prosecutor and professor at Cardozo School,## thanks again for being with us.

We appreciate it.

JESSICA ROTH: It's my pleasure.

AMNA NAWAZ:## We start the day's headlines with the# latest show of federal force on the## streets of Washington, D.C., this# time from President Trump himself.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the# United States: We're not playing## games.

We're going to make it .. AMNA NAWAZ: The commander in chief# met with law enforcement and National## Guard troops this afternoon, thanking# them for their efforts patrolling the## nation's capital.

Trump claims that# the city is overrun with crime.

His## administration launched a federal response# in the Democratic-led city last week.

That's led to hundreds of federal agents and# National Guard soldiers on the streets.

That## is despite statistics that show that# crime is largely down in the city.

Turning to the Middle East, Israeli Prime# Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said today that## Israel will rejoin talks with Hamas to# release all hostages from Gaza and end## the war.

Meeting today with army officers and# Cabinet ministers near the border with Gaza,## Netanyahu also said he would finalize plans# to take over Gaza City.

The Israeli military## has begun urging evacuations of the area and# has called up tens of thousands of reservists.

Meantime, in Tel Aviv,## thousands of protesters rallied# to support the families of the## hostages and pushed for an end to the# war.

Such protests have become more## frequent amid growing frustration over the# handling of the war, while, in Gaza today,## hospital officials say Israeli strikes killed# at least 36 Palestinians across the territory.

Russia launched a rare attack# on Western Ukraine overnight,## adding further uncertainty to recent efforts at# ending the conflict.

The barrage of more than## 600 drones and missiles was one of the biggest# of the war, striking a U.S.-owned electronics## plant among other targets.

At least one# person was killed and 15 others injured.

Today, Russian President Vladimir Putin# and his Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov## met with top Indian officials.# Speaking to reporters afterwards,## Lavrov once again insisted that Russia play a# role in any security guarantees for Ukraine.

SERGEY LAVROV, Russian Foreign Minister# (through translator): The aim pursued by## the so-called coalition of the willing is# to shift focus from elimination of the root## causes of the conflict and achieving# a sustainable settlement to providing## security guarantees for Ukraine without# participation of the Russian Federation.## This is so obvious to everyone that I do# hope this plot, this adventure will fail.

AMNA NAWAZ: For his part, Ukrainian President# Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Russia's overnight## attacks are just the latest sign that# Moscow is trying to avoid peace talks.

U.S. and European officials released a rough# outline today of the trade agreement they## informally struck last month, though some details# remain unfinished.

According to a joint statement,## the U.S. will maintain its 15# percent tariffs on most goods## arriving from E.U.

member countries.# However, the rate for autos will stay## at 27.5 percent, pending further moves by# Europe to lower tariffs on American goods.

Both sides called the deal a first step# that will be expanded over time.

The details## laid out today are seen as a political# commitment and are not legally binding.

California's state legislature is upping the ante# in the growing national debate over redistricting.## Lawmakers in Sacramento are moving closer to# passing a new congressional map that aims to## net five seats for Democrats in next year's# midterm elections.

The map is meant to counter## the one passed by the Texas House yesterday,# which would help Republicans win five seats.

California Democrats say they# feel obligated to push back,## while Republicans insist the# redistricting hurts voters.

STATE REP. MARC BERMAN (D-CA): We don't# want this fight, and we didn't choose this## fight.

But with our democracy on the line, we# cannot and will not run away from this fight.

STATE REP. JAMES GALLAGHER (R-CA): You# move forward fighting fire with fire,## what happens?

You burn it# all down.

And in this case,## it affects our most fundamental# American principle, representation.

AMNA NAWAZ: California's lawmakers don't# have final say, though.

If passed, it would## go to voters in November for approval.

That is# not the case in Texas, where the state Senate## is expected to approve its new map tonight,# which Governor Greg Abbott would then sign.

The Supreme Court is letting the Trump# administration cut nearly $800 million in## research funding from the National Institutes# of Health.

The cuts were part of a government## push to rid such agencies of diversity, equity# and inclusion efforts, or DEI.

Advocacy groups## say the slashing of hundreds of NIH grants will# -- quote -- "hurt public health and human life."

The court was split 5-4, with Chief# Justice John Roberts siding with the## court's three liberal justices in# wanting to keep the funds in place.

Hurricane Erin is slowly beginning to# turn away from the U.S. East Coast,## but not before lashing the shoreline with strong# winds and dangerous waves.

The Category 2 storm## is forecast to gradually weaken over the next# couple of days as it moves away from the U.S.## and Canada and turns farther out to sea.# It has remained hundreds of miles offshore,## but the massive hurricane has sent huge# ocean swells and violent surf crashing## into piers and spilling over dunes# along North Carolina's Outer Banks.

Meanwhile, officials further north in New# York are warning people to avoid the water.

BRUCE BLAKEMAN (R), Nassau County, New York,# Executive: The ocean is rough.

We have waves## that are expected to be between 10 and 15# feet, which are very large.

So that is why,## out of an abundance the caution, we will not# allow people on the beach or in the water today.

AMNA NAWAZ: All beaches remain closed to# swimming today in New York City and on Long## Island.

Many more have been shut from New Jersey# to Maryland and Delaware.

Even in Massachusetts,## waves were expected to reach 10 feet, with# high surf advisories through Saturday.

The State Department says it's reviewing the# records of more than 55 million foreigners## who hold valid U.S. visas for potential# violations.

According to the Associated Press,## the department says it carries out --# quote -- "continuous vetting" with an## eye towards overstays, criminal activities, and# providing support to a terrorist organization.

In the meantime, the nation's immigrant population## dropped for the first time in decades.# According to the Pew Research Center,## the foreign-born population fell by nearly# 1.5 million between January and June.

Just## under 52 million immigrants, the vast# majority here legally, live in the U.S.

The decline follows an unprecedented spike in## illegal immigration, with a record 14# million people living in the U.S. in 2023.

Public tours of the White House have reportedly# been canceled for the foreseeable future due to## President Trump's plans to build a ballroom# on the grounds.

The administration canceled## tours scheduled for next month and is no longer# taking bookings past September.

That's according## to multiple congressional offices who# arrange such visits for constituents.

An estimated half-a-million people take that# tour each year.

The White House says the $200## million ballroom project will begin next month,# though no specific start time has been announced.

On Wall Street today, stocks slipped# ahead of a closely watched speech by## Fed Chair Jerome Powell tomorrow.

The Dow# Jones industrial average gave back about## 150 points.

The Nasdaq fell around 70 points.# The S&P 500 fell for a fifth straight session.

And Dr. James Dobson has passed# away at the age of 89.

A therapist,## presidential adviser, evangelical broadcast# personality and conservative activist,## his public stances on contentious# political issues won him fans and foes.

Correspondent Lisa Desjardins looks# back on his life in public view.

DR. JAMES DOBSON, FOUNDER, Focus# on the Family: Mr. President,## you have had a busy day,.. LISA DESJARDINS: From the Oval# Office to broadcast airwaves,## James Dobson helped shepherd the# rise of the modern religious right.

DR. JAMES DOBSON: You do not# need anger to control children.

LISA DESJARDINS: He rose in the early '70s, a# Ph.D. in child development offering parenting## advice who soon founded the group Focus on the# Family.

That would grow into a media empire,## a pioneering blend of politics and religion,## at its peak reaching 220 million# people around the globe each day.

Dobson lobbied both presidents and the public## with his view of biblical and# traditional family values... DR. JAMES DOBSON: We receive here at Focus on# the Family something on the order of 200,000## to 250,000 letters and phone calls a month.

So# we have a feel for what's going on out there.

LISA DESJARDINS: ... and was especially strident# when it came to abortion and gay marriage.

DR. JAMES DOBSON: Because they both attack the## family, both weaken the family,# undermine it and compromise it.

LISA DESJARDINS: Dobson's views# on LGBTQ individuals were extreme,## pushing gay conversion therapy, an idea# debunked by medical professionals as harmful.

He took those fights to the courts, co-founding# the conservative legal organization that became## the Alliance Defending Freedom.

In 2004,# President George W. Bush earned Dobson's## first explicit endorsement, triggering a# new era of influence with his listeners.

DR. JAMES DOBSON: I beg you to go to# the polls on November the 8th.

Please## don't even think about sitting out this election.

LISA DESJARDINS: Leading to his# significant 2016 endorsement of## Donald Trump, breaking with# other evangelical leaders.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the# United States: James Dobson... (CHEERING) DONALD TRUMP: ... great man, great guy.

LISA DESJARDINS: He told the# Christian Broadcasting Network: DR. JAMES DOBSON: Couldn't be# more pleased with him.

Now,## he's not a perfect man, but I'm not either.

LISA DESJARDINS: Dobson is survived by his# wife, children and grandchildren.

He was 89.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Lisa Desjardins.

AMNA NAWAZ: Still to come on the "News Hour":## taking stock of housing in the U.S. as the# president proposes cuts to rental assistance;## why the federal government is considering# taking a stake in chipmaker Intel.

The Trump administration announced# yesterday that the Office of the## Director of National Intelligence,# or ODNI, would have its staff cut## by 40 percent for a cost savings, they# say, of more than $700 million a year.

Tulsi Gabbard, the director# of national intelligence,## said -- quote -- "Over the last 20 years,# ODNI has become bloated and inefficient,## and the intelligence community# is rife with abuse of power,## unauthorized leaks of classified intelligence,# and politicized weaponization of intelligence."

The ODNI was created after the# September 11 attacks to better## coordinate the 17 separate intelligence agencies.

To help explain the changes being# made to the intelligence community,## we turn now to Sue Gordon.

She had a# decades-long career at the CIA and was## the principal deputy director of national# intelligence at the ODNI from 2017 to 2019.

Sue Gordon, welcome back to the "News Hour."

So a 40 percent staff cut, what's your reaction# to that?

What kind of impact will that have?

SUE GORDON, Former U.S. Principal# Deputy of National Intelligence: Well,## one, thanks for havi..

When I looked at what's been released, I kind# of had the reaction of, there's some good,## there's some bad, and there's some# dangerous.

So I think the good is,## any organization that's 20 years old,# particularly a staff organization,## you ought to look at it to make sure that it# hasn't grown beyond what it was intended to do.

So I think some of the things I see in there# are well-placed, just make sure that they're as## efficiently done and whether they still need to be# done at the ODNI now 20 years after its formation.

I think what is potentially bad# is, I see no definition of what## the ODNI is going to do.

Like, what's# its mission?

When it was first formed,## it was really to do policy and oversight and# to align the community.

In the middle years,## it was to integrate intelligence, so you had# the best of all the agencies in the product.

And in the years that I was there, we were# trying to do more leadership using the budget## to make sure that we could invest across# the community in artificial intelligence## and make a move to China.

Well, what# is this ODNI going to be?

And if you## don't know what it's going to be and# you're going to cut it by that much,## you run the risk of damaging the foundation of# what you're going to need to support policy.

And the dangerous piece is, I'm pretty on the# record here, I think the predicate for this, that## the intelligence community has become malfeasant# in some way or corrupt or abuse or politicized,## I find that to be completely inconsistent# with my 30-plus years of experience.

And,## more, some of the things they# talk about of aligning it to## a particular view of what the policy# is, is antithetical to intelligence.

And the dangerous piece is,# you actually make it worse.

AMNA NAWAZ: Well, let me ask you a little bit more# about that, because one of the core justifications## that Director Gabbard laid out was what she says,# this effort to return to ODNI's core mission,## as she put it, to provide objective and# unbiased intelligence to the president.

She cited specifically the weaponization of# intelligence.

And she also referenced the## intelligence community's assessment# that Russia interfered in the 2016## election with the goal of trying# to help then-candidate Trump win,## which Gabbard says was false.# So what's your reaction to that?

SUE GORDON: Well, I think -- I think that's# a statement being made by this administration## that supports a view that they'd like to have.# I think this has been reviewed over and over.## The assessment itself has been validated# not only by DCI Ratcliffe's own relook at## that assessment, that, though it# did find some tradecraft issues,## it did say that the conclusions that Russian# intended to influence our election was valid.

Then the Senate Select Committee on# Intelligence, on which Marco Rubio sat,## had an extensive view that again validated the# Durham report, validated it.

And so I just think## that the information that the administration is# putting out to try and counter it, and, far worse,## the actions they're taking against some really# talented officers in that name, it's dangerous.

But let's just put it in context.

The# people who are trying to align the## intelligence meaning to a particular# view seem to be this administration.## But the issue is, intelligence is the one# discipline that is policy-independent.

What you want intelligence to do is to have# as many views as you can to put down what## is perceived to be the best known collective# information so that the policymaker can decide## on a policy with a really clear view.

When# you start using intelligence and shaping it## to be ahead of time only supportive of policy,# you undermine its value in national security.

AMNA NAWAZ: And we should note there's a number## of specific centers and agencies# being eliminated.. Related to the note earlier you made, there's# one called the Foreign Malign Influence Center## that looks at foreign interference in# American democratic processes.

But,## Sue, can I ask you to step back for# just a moment and kind of assess... SUE GORDON: Sure.

intelligence agencies, because he's# publicly disagreed with them at times.

What is your assessment, based on# your time in government service,## of how President Trump is using the# intelligence that he's being briefed on?

SUE GORDON: Yes, I think one of the# things that people should know is,## intelligence is almost always inconvenient.

I remember walking into a different president's# office and sharing some information, and he said,## you have just stolen some of my decision space,# because the policy is the policy.

Sometimes,## you walk in the door and you# have inconvenient information.

An example, Russia has no intention# of seeking peace right now in Ukraine,## that's inconvenient information that I# would expect this intelligence community,## if it had that, would present the president,## or that the intelligence community finds that Iran# is not imminent in developing a nuclear weapon.

And the president's saying that's wrong.

He can# do whatever he wants with policy.

But it becomes## dangerous when you try and shape the intelligence# to fit the policy you want, because you eliminate## its value to you.

Intelligence is about seeing# what is not what you prefer, and you want it to## be able to walk in, say inconvenient things,# so that it helps the decisions be better.

And I think you can look at the record and# see that, going back to the president's## first administration, where I served, and# now accelerating, and now accelerating the## actions to shape the community so it doesn't# do anything (INAUDIBLE) is a destructive turn.

And it's destructive for the president in# terms of the decisions he wants to make.

AMNA NAWAZ: Sue Gordon, former# intelligence official joining us tonight.

Sue, thank you for your# time.

Good to speak with you.

SUE GORDON: Great to see you again.

GEOFF BENNETT: The housing market showed signs# of life in July with existing home sales up## 2 percent from the month before, offering a bit# of momentum to a market that's been struggling.## The national median sales price inched up just 0.2# percent in July from a year earlier to $422,400,## marking the 25th consecutive month# of year-over-year price increases,## and sales edged up 0.8 percent# compared with July of last year.

That's all according to a new report out# today by the National Association of Realtors.

Joining us now to break down the# numbers is Daryl Fairweather,## chief economist for the# real estate company Redfin.

Daryl, thanks for being with us.

DARYL FAIRWEATHER, Chief Economist,# Redfin: Thank .. GEOFF BENNETT: So what's your read on# today's report?

Does the bump in sa.. suggest the market is turning a corner# or is this just a temporary rebound?

DARYL FAIRWEATHER: It's nice to see# that there's been some improvement in## home sales.

I think that's reflective# of there being more inventory on the## market.

Buyers have more to choose from,# which allows for more sales to happen.

But this improvement is coming from a# near record low.

We are still deep in## the hole when it comes to home# sales, and we're going to need## to see a lot more home sales in order# for this to feel like a healthy market.

GEOFF BENNETT: And we're also seeing# some big regional differences,## prices falling sharply in the West and# parts of the South.

They are rising in## the Midwest and Northeast.# What explains that divide?

DARYL FAIRWEATHER: It has to do# with the amount of homes for sale.

There are many more sellers than there are# buyers in the South and in parts of the West,## which is allowing buyers to have more# negotiating power and they're getting## better deals on prices.

In the Midwest and the# Northeast, however, there has -- there was not## a construction boom during the pandemic.# There's much more limited inventory there.

So, buyers have to play on sellers' terms, and# they have to accept these higher valuations.

GEOFF BENNETT: And let's talk about mortgage# rates, because mortgage rates dipped slightly## in July, but they remain far above the# historic lows we saw during the pandemic.

To what extent is the lock-in effect still shaping# the market, people really refusing to put their## homes in the market and move because they have# benefited from historically low mortgage rates?

DARYL FAIRWEATHER: One reason we're not seeing# price cuts happening more often is because home## sellers feel like it's not worth it for them# to sell if they can't get a high enough price.

They have these record low mortgage rates,# which means they're not paying very much in## their monthly mortgage payment.

And# if they were to sell and buy again,## they would have to buy at these higher rates# and pay a lot more money, which means that## they are looking for a lot more money when# it comes to the offers that they're getting.

And if they don't get enough in terms of the# offer, they will just take their home off the## market and not sell.

So that's putting a floor# on how low prices can drop.

Mortgage rates are## so much higher now.

Normally, we would expect# prices to fall by more to compensate that,## but sellers are being stubborn# when it comes to their prices.

GEOFF BENNETT: And what's your# outlook for mortgage rates?

Is## there room for a more substantial decline?

DARYL FAIRWEATHER: It really depends on# what we see happen in the economy.

If we## see more inflation -- we saw a bit hotter# inflation in producer prices this last## week.

So that's one reason that rates might# stay high, but also we're seeing a weakening## job market with fewer jobs created.

And that# might be one reason to expect rates to fall.

It has a lot to do with how tariffs end# up impacting the overall economy.

If the## tariffs result in higher inflation,# then the Federal Reserve will have## to keep interest rates high.

But if# it results in fewer jobs created,## then the Fed would have to step in and cut# rates in order to simulate the economy.

But we don't really know what's going to happen.## It's still early days in terms of# seeing the effects of the tariffs.## Maybe the effects won't really be that# large at all.

We just don't know yet.

GEOFF BENNETT: Yes, good point.

Yes, the data about first-time buyers r.. just 28 percent of sales in July, down# from 30 percent in June.

A decade ago,## the average first-time buyer was# 31 years old.

Now it's closer to 38## years old.

What does that say about the# barriers that young buyers are facing?

DARYL FAIRWEATHER: Young buyers are often# borrowing a substantial amount in order## to afford their home, whereas existing# homeowners, they are usually selling their## homes.

They get some proceeds from that# they can put towards their next home.

So## they aren't taking on as big of mortgages# as potentially first-time homebuyers are.

So that mortgage rate increase is hitting# first-time homebuyers a lot harder than## it is existing homebuyers.

And that's why we're# seeing a lot of first-time homebuyers just decide## to keep renting.

The rental market has been# pretty stable over the last couple of months.## It's starting to heat up a little bit, which# may be a sign of more rent increases to come.

But for the time being, if you're comparing, say,# a one-bedroom apartment to a one -bedroom condo,## it's going to be more affordable in the short run# to rent that apartment than it will be to buy it.

GEOFF BENNETT: Is there any realistic# path for this generation to enter the## housing market in significant numbers?

DARYL FAIRWEATHER: Yes, I think that# there are some reasons to be optimistic.

The Gen Z is a smaller generation than# millennials were.

Millennials are a bit## past peak homebuying age.

They're in their# late 30s, not their early 30s anymore.

So I## think there will be less competition from the# buy side in terms of buying homes.

And then,## on the sell side, Baby Boomers are getting# older.

They should be downsizing soon.

So that could create more inventory.

And# then another reason to be optimistic is## that many states have made it easier# to build more housing.

So the next## time we do see an increase in demand for# housing, hopefully, it will also come with## an increase in supply as builders jump in to# take advantage of increasing demand for homes.

GEOFF BENNETT: Daryl Fairweather, chief economist# at Redfin, great to speak with you.

Thank you.

DARYL FAIRWEATHER: Thank you.

KAROLINE LEAVITT, White House Press Secretary:## The president wants to put America's needs# first, both from a national security and economic## perspective.

And it's a creative idea that has# never been done before to ensure that we're both## reshoring these critical supply chains, while also# gaining something of it for the American taxpayer.

AMNA NAWAZ: That was White House Press Secretary# Karoline Leavitt explaining why the president is## weighing taking a 10 percent stake in computer# chipmaker Intel.

If approved, it would mark one## of the largest U.S. government interventions in# a private company since the auto bailout of 2008.

It's the latest in a series of actions# by the administration to take direct## financial interest in American businesses.

Joining me now to discuss this is Peter# Harrell from the Carnegie Endowment for## International Peace.

He's a former White House# economic adviser in the Biden administration.

Peter, welcome to the "News# Hour."

Thanks for joining us.

PETER HARRELL, Carnegie Endowment for# International Peace: Thanks for having me on.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, before we get# to the bigger picture here,## I just want to ask you# about Intel specifically.

If this deal goes through, the U.S. becomes the# largest shareholder in Intel.

In your view,## is it a good idea for the# government to take this move,## to essentially pick and put a thumb on the# scale among the many chipmakers in America?

PETER HARRELL: Well, I think it would be# fair to count me as skeptical that this## is the right way either to save Intel or to# help build U.S. semiconductor manufacturing.

I think there is bipartisan support.# We worked on it when I was in the Biden## administration to going back to Trump's# first term.

There is bipartisan support## in Washington for the idea that we need to be# building more leading-edge semiconductor chips## here in the United States.

That's why we have# had the CHIPS program to provide incentives for## reshoring semiconductor manufacturing# going back for five or six years now.

What's different is whether taking a 10# percent stake in the company is really## the most effective way to do that.

I don't# really see how taking 10 percent of Intel## is either going to help turn Intel# around or help this reshoring agenda.

AMNA NAWAZ: Are there questions around the# legality of this move as well?

I mean, back during## the financial crisis of 2008, it was Congress# that authorized specific bailouts for specific## auto companies and banks.

That's not the case# this time.

Is this legal for the president to do?

PETER HARRELL: No, I think# there are questions about## legally how they are going to structure this.

So, if we look back, back in 2022,# so three or four years ago now,## Congress appropriated money for the CHIPS Act.# The CHIPS Act had actually preceded getting money.## Congress appropriated money.

And then the Commerce# Department went through a period of giving grants,## which are clearly authorized by the CHIPS# Act, to a range of companies, including Intel,## including a company called TSMC, which is a# Taiwanese company, including Samsung and others,## to give those companies incentives to# build semiconductors here in the U.S. And the reason that the government didn't# take ownership in those companies then was## really twofold.

First, there's a question# about whether it's legal.

But, second,## these are companies -- these are not -- this is# not a bailout situation.

These are companies that## had been making chips very profitably overseas,# and the government wants them to do it here.

And had the government said, we're going to take# equity in you if you come to the United States,## the companies just would have said, thanks,# but no thanks.

We're fine manufacturing in## Taiwan and Singapore and Korea and places# like that.

So I don't think that taking## equity is really about -- very helpful# to getting the companies to onshore.

Now, Intel is a little bit different because Intel# over the last couple of years has had some serious## technological problems, some serious business# problems.

Again, we still have to get through,## is this really legal?

And I think it would be# helpful for the Trump administration to spell out## its legal rationale, because it was definitely# not originally contemplated in the CHIPS Act.

AMNA NAWAZ: So put this into some larger# context for us here.

If this deal goes through,## and that is still an if, it would# just be the latest example of the## Trump administration essentially taking# a cut from different American companies.

They're sharing in profits from Nvidia and# AMD sales of computer chips to China.

It's## taken a share in U.S. Steel as part of a# deal that would approve its merger with## Nippon Steel.

Bigger picture here,# Peter, what do you see going on?

PETER HARRELL: I mean, this is very# different from what we have seen in## the U.S. over at least the sort of 80# years since the end of World War II.

As you alluded to, there is some history# in the context of financial crises or other## kinds of crises the government taking some# stake in companies as part of a bailout.

We## saw that during the financial crisis.

We also# saw it some during the COVID pandemic in 2020,## where some of the COVID relief# the government enacted was tied## to the government getting some stakes in# companies that were getting bailed out.

But these have traditionally been short term# stakes, the government saying, we will take a## stake to get you through the tough times and then# we're going to sell it off.

This is much more of a## scenario where the president is saying he# wants the government to own stakes, not## just in companies that are failing, but in a whole# bunch of companies on a kind of open-ended basis,## very different from the way the U.S. has operated# on our economic model over the last 80 years.

And I think it's going to raise a bunch# of questions about, are the -- is the## government really going to be the right# shareholder to help these companies succeed?## Is the government going to start showing# favoritism to these companies over companies## that it doesn't own?

What are the kind# of political requirements that are## going to be put on companies that the# government is taking an ownership in?

Because this is just not a business model that# has been the way the U.S. government and the## private sector have interacted in kind of the# modern era that we have all lived through.

AMNA NAWAZ: Peter Harrell from the# Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,## thank you so much for joining us.

PETER HARRELL: Thanks for having me.

GEOFF BENNETT: Canada's Foreign Minister# Anita Anand visited Washington today to## meet with Secretary of State Marco Rubio,# as President Trump spoke with Canadian## Prime Minister Mark Carney about the two# countries' ongoing trade negotiations.

The U.S.-Canada relationship, for# decades a symbol of stability,## has been rockier under President Trump, who# has joked about making Canada the 51st state.

But Anand said today's conversation with Rubio## was positive, and spoke to Nick# Schifrin, who's here with me now.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Geoff, we discussed# the trade negotiation that you just## mentioned after President Trump earlier# this month raised tariffs on Canada on## goods that are not covered by USMCA,# the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.

We talked about Haiti, where the# U.S. and Canada are trying to develop## a new path forward to try and bring# stability.

But we began with Ukraine,## where Anand believes recent diplomacy# represents a new opportunity for peace.

ANITA ANAND, Canadian Foreign Minister: The# meeting of the European leaders on Monday## with President Trump does present a# renewed approach to seeking peace.

Our chiefs of defense staff are meeting, including# Canada's, Jennie Carignan, and that is the work## that the military leaders are doing right# now.

So, yes, this is a different moment.

NICK SCHIFRIN: So, as you# point out, President Trump## has made positive statements this week about# guaranteeing Ukraine's long-term securi..

Earlier this year, he was much# more skeptical.

At this point,## do you believe the U.S. will help deliver# the kind of security guarantee that Ukraine## says it needs?

Or will it be minimal, as Vice# President Vance publicly suggested last night?

ANITA ANAND: The question of how# a security guarantee or guarantees## will be implemented needs to be fleshed# out.

There needs to be meat on the bones.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And do you think the# United States at this point is committed?

ANITA ANAND: From the words that we# heard on Monday and then certainly in## my conversations thereafter, I believe that# we will all be at the table in that regard.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Let me talk about the# larger U.S.-Canada relationship.

Of## course, most Canadians still offended,## angered by President Trump's 51st state# comments mostly earlier this year.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United# States: I think Canada is going to be## a very serious contender to be our 51st state.

NICK SCHIFRIN: When it comes# to the military, Prime Minister## Carney announced a review of Canada's $27# billion deal to buy more than 80 F-35s,## suggesting that, after an initial delivery,# he might look to other countries' planes.

Are you withholding that agreement because# something in the U.S.-Canada relationship is## leading you to think, ah, I can't trust the# United States when it comes to the F-35s?

ANITA ANAND: So it's somewhat inaccurate# to simply move directly into the F-35 issue## without taking a step back to say,# what is this relationship all about?

In every relationship, there are hills and# there are valleys.

And what we are doing as## diplomats and as countries is to see through the# valleys to ensure that we walk this road together.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Do you describe today as a valley?

ANITA ANAND: Today was# definitely a positive moment.## My conversation with Secretary Rubio# was, I will say, collaborative,## cooperative, focused on areas that we will# continue to dialogue and work together.

NICK SCHIFRIN: With all due respect,## let me ask the question again.

Will.. ANITA ANAND: Canada's commitment to the F-35# deal has been very well-thought-out and very## well-reasoned and will continue to ensure that# the Canadian armed forces are well-equipped.

And, certainly, interoperability is one of the# most important aspects of that acquisition.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Let me ask about the larger# trade relationship right now.

Of course,## earlier this month, on the August 1 deadline,# President Trump raised some tariff rates from## 25 to 35 percent, although there# are a lot of exceptions to that.

But is the Canadian government today# committed to making a trade deal with## the U.S. even if there is a blanket# tariff on all goods indefinitely?

Or## are you holding out?

Will you refuse a deal# until you can remove some of those tariffs?

ANITA ANAND: We need to take a step back,# because we have the USMCA that is in place## that governs approximately 75 percent# of the trade between our two countries.

NICK SCHIFRIN: The president# raised tariffs on non-USMCA goods.

ANITA ANAND: And when I say 75 percent or more of## the goods that are traded between our two# countries, that's a significant percentage.

And the trade relationship, therefore, is# stronger than is often depicted.

I will say,## though, that steel and aluminum in Canada,# for example, are being hit very hard, as are## other sectors.

The auto sector is another one.# Lumber is another one.

So, yes, we have concerns.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And you mentioned USMCA.# Next year, there will be a renegotiation... ANITA ANAND: A review.

NICK SCHIFRIN: ..... NICK SCHIFRIN: OK.

But does that me.. ANITA ANAND: Of course we would like# to have the USMCA govern all sectors,## the way it has been since it# was put into place in 2018.

But are we going to sign on to a deal that# isn't the best possible deal for Canadians,## Canadian workers, Canadian businesses?

That's not# the approach that Prime Minister Carney is taking.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Let me move to the Middle# East.

Canada and other countries have vowed## to recognize Palestine next month# during the U.N. General Assembly.

Today, the U.S. ambassador to Israel,# Mike Huckabee, made this argument,## that your move takes Palestinians --# quote -- "further away from a state"## and your announcement was part of the reason# that Hamas dug in at the negotiating table.## Do you believe in any way that your# announcement has somehow backfired?

ANITA ANAND: Canada's intention to recognize# Palestine is based on our view that,## in order to maintain a two-state# solution as a viable policy outcome,## countries need to step forward and declare# their intention to recognize Palestine.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And is it conditional?

ANITA ANAND: And that is not a.. the security of either party# in the two-state solution.

And I have been having weekly calls with the# Palestinian Authority to ensure that they have## a road map forward for the commitments that they# made relating to democratization in Palestine,## demilitarization in Palestine, ensuring# that there is a viable Palestinian state.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Is your announcement# at all conditional on steps either## the P.A.

will take in the next couple of# weeks before the U.N. General Assembly## or in fact Israel might take when it# comes to the cease-fire negotiations?

ANITA ANAND: So, the announcement was predicated## on the work that the Palestinian# Authority said that .. NICK SCHIFRIN: And, finally, I know# that you and Secretary Rubio also## discussed Haiti today.

In fact, that was one# of the main points that you discussed today.

Is there a new road map or is there a new# vision for bringing security to Haiti?

ANITA ANAND: While we are both very grateful to# Kenya for leading the multicountry mission there,## there is a need to reexamine how stability can be# achieved in Port-au-Prince Haiti more generally.

Let's try to involve the United Nations.# Let's work on establishing a tangible presence## for the United Nations in Haiti so that we# can be delivering outcomes at scale.

And the## United Nations has that infrastructure# to do things like open bank accounts,## to set up offices, to have a place of employment# for people who can be working on the ground.

How do we ensure that this is# going to be a solution or at least## an option that stands the test of time?

NICK SCHIFRIN: Madam Foreign# Minister, thank you very much.

ANITA ANAND: Thank you very much.

AMNA NAWAZ:## They're called fantastic animals,## brightly colored wooden creatures inspired# by the world of Mexican magical realism.

Now giant versions of these animals are on# a tour across the U.S., celebrating Mexico's## rich cultural heritage and promoting diplomacy# during contentious times in U.S.-Mexico relations.

Senior arts correspondent Jeffrey Brown checked## them out in San Francisco for our# arts and culture series, Canvas.

JEFFREY BROWN: At around 20 feet# high, they are hard to miss,## brightly colored and intricately designed weighing# over 1,200 pounds each, alebrijes and nahuales,## so-called fantastic animals, that have# their roots in Oaxaca and Mexico City and## were on display at the Yerba Buena Gardens in San# Francisco when we saw them earlier this summer.

EFRAIN FUENTES, Woodcarver# (through translator): For us,## it represents our .. JEFFREY BROWN: Efrain Fuentes is# a third-generation woodcarver who## began carving as a young boy in Oaxaca.

EFRAIN FUENTES (through translator):# I learned from my father.

Now I teach## my kids.

They are all grown,# so they're fourth generation.

JEFFREY BROWN: He's the artist behind# one of the nahuales, the coyote,## crafting a smaller version,# then working with a specialized## workshop in Mexico City to make the# grander versions that are on tour.

EFRAIN FUENTES (through translator): We as# artisans made the pieces in a small format,## about 60 centimeters or so.

We carved and painted# it in a special way to eventually make them big.

JEFFREY BROWN: Indigenous artists like Fuentes# rely on cultural tourism to make ends meet.## This kind of exhibition is a rare chance for# their work to be seen on a monumental scale.

ROMAIN GRECO, Project Director, Alebrijes# and Nahuales: I wanted to pay credit and to## pay tribute to the roots of all this art,# which is a popular art, traditional art.

JEFFREY BROWN: Romain Greco, an# arts presenter and producer based## in Mexico City, helped bring the project to life.

ROMAIN GRECO: The craftspeople and these people,# which are artists in my point of view, are not## so much concerned about showing their work.

They# just want to sell their work and live on a daily## basis.

But I think that it's important for the# people to understand the richness of the work.

So, by blowing them, and we make people aware of# the artistic value of these pieces, putting them## at the site of everybody in the context of a urban# architecture.

I think they take all their power.

JEFFREY BROWN: So, it should be seen as a# traditional art form, but now made contemporary?

ROMAIN GRECO: Yes, exactly.# That's exactly what I want to do.

JEFFREY BROWN: Indeed, Carlomagno Pedro Martinez,# director of the Museum of Popular Art in Oaxaca,## who curated the exhibit, says it's important to# understand this work in terms of contemporary art.

CARLOMAGNO PEDRO MARTINEZ, Curator, Alebrijes and# Nahuales (through translator): There has always## been controversy if folk a.. but this art that is presented is# contemporary art, without a doubt,## and the people who are producing it# are artists with all the breadth of## the word.

This is contemporary art from# the indigenous communities of Oaxaca.

JEFFREY BROWN: Also important, he says,# bringing the art of indigenous artists## to a U.S. audience at this particularly# tense moment in U.S.-Mexican relations,## especially over tariffs and immigration,# including protests against ICE raids.

CARLOMAGNO PEDRO MARTINEZ (through translator):## Art is the universal language of humanity,# and amid political and.. that exist between our countries, art is# the beautiful face of humanity.

It is the## universal message that we humans give, and this is# where there is a fraternal bond between peoples.

JEFFREY BROWN: Romain Greco# describes it as soft power.

ROMAIN GRECO: It's very important to# use art as a diplomacy instrument,## because sometimes politics can be complicated and# can be tricky, but art is much more universal.

JEFFREY BROWN: Ken Bukowski is the chair of# the board of the Yerba Buena Conservancy,## which oversees the gardens.

For you, does it have an extra urgency now?

KEN BUKOWSKI, Chair, Yerba Buena Gardens# Conservancy: I think it has an extra urgency,## because it just is one more way# to show that level of respect,## where maybe people from Mexican ancestry aren't# getting their respect throughout the rest of the## country and with the politics going on now.

But,# here in San Francisco, we do value that history,## we do value that culture, and we want# to show that by showing this art.

JEFFREY BROWN: The eight-piece# sculptural installation has now## moved on to a national tour in# public spaces across the country,## Nevada and California this year,# moving farther east in 2026 and 2027.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm# Jeffrey Brown in San Francisco.

GEOFF BENNETT: And that's the "News# Hour" for tonight.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On behalf of the entire "News Hour"# team, thank you for ..