GEOFF BENNETT: Good evening.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On the "NewsHour" tonight: The International Criminal Court issues arrest warrants for Israeli and Hamas leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

GEOFF BENNETT: Iran's president and foreign minister are killed in a helicopter crash, raising questions about the future leadership of the country.

MAN (through translator): It will definitely bring the resistance in Iran a big step forward.

This was a big blow for Khamenei, for the dictatorship in Iran.

AMNA NAWAZ: And the prosecution rests its case in former President Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial.

(BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: Welcome to the "NewsHour."

In an unprecedented announcement: The International Criminal Court today said it was seeking warrants to arrest not only the leaders of Hamas, but also the elected leadership of Israel, on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

GEOFF BENNETT: President Biden called it outrageous, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called it a -- quote -- "blood libel."

But prosecutor Karim Khan defended his decision.

Nick Schifrin starts our coverage.

KARIM KHAN, Prosecutor, International Criminal Court: My office charges Netanyahu and Gallant as co-perpetrators.

NICK SCHIFRIN: From The Hague today, devastating and divisive allegations by International Criminal Court prosecutor Karim Khan, accusing Israel of -- quote -- "intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population" and -- quote -- "starvation of civilians" as a method of warfare and requesting arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

KARIM KHAN: These individuals, through a common plan, have systematically deprived the civilian population of Gaza of objects indispensable to human survival.

NICK SCHIFRIN: At the same time, the ICC also seeks arrest warrants for Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar and military branch leader Mohammed Deif on the right, both of whom are hiding in Gaza, and political bureau head Ismail Haniyeh, who lives openly in Qatar, for killing more than 1,200 and kidnapping more than 250 on October 7.

KARIM KHAN: There are reasonable grounds to believe that these three Hamas leaders are criminally responsible for the killing of Israeli civilians in attacks perpetrated by Hamas and other armed groups on the 7th of October 2023.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Israeli and U.S. officials argued the ICC had no jurisdiction, especially during ongoing domestic Israeli investigations.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the announcement and Khan himself outrageous.

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, Israeli Prime Minister: Through this incendiary decision, Mr. Khan takes his place among the great antisemites in modern times.

He now stands alongside those infamous German judges who donned their robes and upheld laws that denied the Jewish people their most basic rights and enabled the Nazis to perpetrate the worst crime in history.

NICK SCHIFRIN: The announcement united usually fractious Israeli politicians.

More than 100 lawmakers condemned the ICC, as did opposition leader Yair Lapid.

YAIR LAPID, Former Israeli Prime Minister (through translator): It's unforgivable.

We have and we are managing a just war.

And it needs to be clear that we won't stay silent over it.

NICK SCHIFRIN: President Biden also called the announcement outrageous and said: "There is no equivalence, none, between Israel and Hamas."

Hamas also condemned -- quote -- "the attempts by the ICC's public prosecutor to equate the victim with the executioner."

A panel of judges will now decide whether to issue the warrants that Khan requested today.

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Nick Schifrin.

GEOFF BENNETT: We're going to get two perspectives on this now.

Adil Haque is a professor of law at Rutgers Law School.

And Yuval Shany is the chair of international law at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

He's also a former chair of the U.N. Human Rights Committee.

Thank you both for being with us.

Adil Haque, we will start with you.

How significant is this move by the chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court to seek arrest warrants for top leaders from both Israel and Hamas?

And what might the practical impact of this be, given that Israel's government doesn't recognize the ICC?

ADIL HAQUE, Rutgers University: So, the significance is tremendous.

We have the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court bringing extremely serious charges against both the leaders of Hamas and the leaders of the Israeli military and the political establishment.

And there are really a variety of crimes, ranging from, in the case of Hamas, murder, rape, torture, taking of hostages, and, on the Israeli side, the use of starvation as a method of warfare, the killing of civilians, and the crime against humanity of extermination.

Indeed, both the leaders of Hamas and the leaders of Israel have been charged with crimes against humanity, as well as war crimes.

So these are incredibly serious allegations, extremely serious crimes.

And so the fact that they are being charged in an independent and objective manner, an even-handed manner by the prosecutor is of enormous significance.

The practical significance may be limited.

Even if arrest warrants are issued by the pretrial chamber, it may be very, very difficult to execute them.

But they're significant in two other ways.

The first is the expressive value of affirming the rights and the dignity of the victims of crimes committed by both sides of this terrible conflict.

And the other is to hopefully catalyze a political process that bring the conflict to a close and hopefully create accountability for the many victims on both sides.

GEOFF BENNETT: Yuval Shany, what about that?

And what's been the reaction in Israel?

And do you think this move by the ICC might change the way Israel is carrying out its war in Gaza?

YUVAL SHANY, Hebrew University of Jerusalem: Well, thank you.

I tend to agree with Adil that this is quite a dramatic development.

I would note that the prosecutor did -- although the charges are quite significant and broad, ultimately, they deal with a relatively narrow set of facts.

So, with Hamas, it's really dealing with the murders that took place on October 7, the taking of hostages, and the mistreatment of hostages.

And on the Israeli side, it has to do with the policy regarding humanitarian aid, which has been characterized, like Adil said, as a form of a policy of starvation.

The reaction in Israel has been, as one can imagine, extremely negative.

The very idea that Hamas -- the Israeli leadership is being put on a similar level to the Hamas leadership has been regarded here as a form of insult.

And I imagine that Israel is not going to cooperate with these proceedings going forward.

It has also been commented that this is -- at least by the opposition, that this is a diplomatic failure by the government that it has led us to such a low place.

Will it affect the war?

In the short run,probably not, because Israel has changed its policy with regard to humanitarian aid.

And now the declared policy is allegedly flooding the Gaza Strip with aid.

But I do believe that, beyond the very short-term range, this could be another impetus for Israel to bring the war to an end, because it does appear to be in a state of a tailspin, where the legal front and the diplomatic fronts are basically complicated -- are becoming more and more complicated every week that passes by.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, in a statement, President Biden called the application for arrest warrants against Israeli leaders, he called them outrageous.

And Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in a separate statement, said the U.S. fundamentally rejects the call for arrest warrants and he says it could jeopardize diplomacy for a cease-fire or a hostage deal between Israel and Hamas.

Adil Haque, how do you assess the U.S. response and the U.S. position here?

ADIL HAQUE: So the U.S. response has been disappointing.

One striking feature of it is that I have not yet seen any defense of Israeli policy on the merits.

The objections are to a supposed equivalence that's being drawn between Israeli leaders and Hamas leaders or objections based on jurisdiction or process or propriety, but nothing really on the merits, nothing saying that the Israeli leaders are not guilty as charged.

On this point of equivalence, it's important to understand that international law does not compare individuals with each other.

It compares each individual's conduct with their legal obligations.

So the standard is not, is one side better or worse than the other?

The standard is the law.

Is each side complying with its legal obligations?

And, certainly, according to the prosecutor, neither side is complying with its legal obligations.

And so both have to be charged and brought to justice.

GEOFF BENNETT: Yuval Shany, the ICC's chief prosecutor had faced significant pressure from Washington for months to avoid bringing arrest warrants against top Israeli leaders in particular.

And yet they moved forward anyway.

What do you think accounts for the timing?

And what is the overall impact on the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, his political standing?

YUVAL SHANY: Well, his political standing, may be again for the short time -- for the short time, we will see some rallying around the flag.

And there has been already more than 100 Parliament members in Israel out of 120 have signed a statement which condemns the proceedings.

But I think, in the long run, it does increase the perception of Netanyahu as a political liability on the state of Israel.

And Netanyahu, who has ran for many campaigns on the basis of his diplomatic skills.

I think may be running out of road in this regard.

GEOFF BENNETT: Yuval Shany and Adil Haque, we thank you both for your insights.

We appreciate it.

YUVAL SHANY: Thank you very much.

AMNA NAWAZ: In the day's other headlines: The container ship that caused the deadly bridge collapse in Baltimore has finally returned to port.

This morning, the Dali made the slow 2.5-mile journey back to land escorted by tugboats.

Its bow is still covered in damaged containers, steel and concrete.

Port officials said today they're getting closer to fully reopening the channel.

JONATHAN DANIELS, Executive Director, Maryland Port Administration: So, as far as the depth and the draft that's necessary to bring the larger vessels in, that depth is there.

We just don't have the width.

There's still material, there's still bridge sections that are in place.

But as the Army Corps and the unified command has indicated, they're looking at the end of May.

AMNA NAWAZ: In the meantime, shipping company officials are working on allowing the ship's 21 crew members to disembark.

They'd stayed on board for maintenance and to help investigators determine what led to the crash.

Wind and hail battered large parts of Oklahoma and Kansas last night, as the latest bout of severe weather sweeps through the region.

Nearly 20 homes were damaged in Western Oklahoma.

Officials say two people were injured.

The National Weather Service said they received 13 tornado reports across three states.

The risk of severe storms is expected to continue into early Tuesday.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin is vowing to keep the flow of weapons moving to Ukraine as Russia intensifies its attacks on the country's Northeastern region of Kharkiv.

Austin spoke this morning to a virtual meeting of some 50 defense leaders from Europe and around the world.

He promised that weapons would keep coming week after week.

LLOYD AUSTIN, U.S. Secretary of Defense: We are again delivering urgently needed assistance to Ukraine and the security assistance that we are now rushing to Ukraine will make a difference in this fight.

The United States remains determined to do our part.

AMNA NAWAZ: Secretary Austin's comments come as Ukraine's President Zelenskyy expressed frustration over the pace of Western military support.

Speaking to Reuters News Agency, he said that for, every one big step forward, there are two steps back.

A British court has ruled that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange can challenge his extradition to the U.S. His lawyers had argued that his free speech rights would not be protected if he was sent here to face trial.

Supporters outside the court celebrated the decision.

The Australian activist has been indicted on 17 espionage charges over the publication of classified U.S. military documents.

His wife, Stella, called for U.S. authorities to drop the charges.

STELLA ASSANGE, Wife of Julian Assange: As a family, we are relieved, but how long can this go on?

The United States should read the situation and drop this case now.

Now is the moment to do it.

AMNA NAWAZ: Assange has spent the last five years in a British prison after seeking refuge in the Ecuadorian Embassy in Central London in 2012.

Also in the U.K., a public inquiry has concluded that a decades-old blood transfusion scandal was not an accident.

It finds that Britain's National Health Service knowingly exposed tens of thousands of patients to HIV and hepatitis-tainted blood from the 1970s to the early 1990s, then tried to cover it up.

An estimated 3,000 people are known to have died.

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak apologized to the victims and their families today.

RISHI SUNAK, British Prime Minister: This is a day of shame for the British state.

Today's report shows a decades-long moral failure at the heart of our national life.

At every level, the people and institutions in which we place our trust failed in the most harrowing and devastating way.

AMNA NAWAZ: Sunak also said that the details of a $12 billion compensation package for victims will be announced on Tuesday.

The chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or FDIC, is resigning.

Martin Gruenberg is currently serving his second term as head of the bank regulator.

He has come under fire in recent months after an external review found evidence of a toxic workplace culture, including reports of employee mistreatment and sexual harassment.

In a statement, Gruenberg said that -- quote - - "In light of recent events, I'm prepared to step down from my responsibilities once a successor is confirmed."

On Wall Street today, stocks drifted to a mixed close in a quiet trading day.

The Dow Jones industrial average slipped 196 points to close back below 40000.

The Nasdaq rose 108 points to notch a new closing high.

The S&P 500 added four points.

And a Wall Street-related passing of note.

Ivan Boesky has died.

A central figure to the insider trading scandals of the 1980s, he was also the basis for the Michael Douglas character Gordon Gekko in the film "Wall Street."

Boesky made his fortune betting on corporate takeover targets, often with the help of illegally obtained information.

As part of a plea deal, he worked with authorities to bring others to justice, including the so-called junk bond king, Michael Milken.

Boesky was 87 years old.

Still to come on the "NewsHour": major questions surface about the future of artificial intelligence as tech firms showcase new products; Tamara Keith and Amy Walter break down the latest political headlines; and we get an inside look at a career retrospective of critically acclaimed artist Lorraine O'Grady.

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and the country's foreign minister were found and confirmed dead today hours after their helicopter crashed in fog, leaving the Islamic Republic without two key leaders as extraordinary tensions grip the wider Middle East.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say in the Shiite theocracy, quickly named a little-known vice president as caretaker until the new election and insisted the government was in control.

But the deaths marked yet another blow to a country beset by pressures at home and abroad.

Special correspondent Reza Sayah in Tehran has the latest.

REZA SAYAH: It was a crash felt across the Middle East.

In Iran's mountainous northwest, a dense fog thinned out this morning, revealing the helicopter's mangled tail and shards of debris wedged between the trees.

After an hours-long search, rescue teams found no survivors.

Among the eight people on board, Iran's hard-line President and the supreme leader's protege, Ebrahim Raisi, as well as the country's foreign minister, Hossein Amirabdollahian, two of Iran's most senior figures killed.

MAN (through translator): This is a serious incident for all of us.

REZA SAYAH: A stunning loss that threatens instability.

But, today, the country's newly appointed caretaker, First Vice President Mohammad Mokhber, delivered a message of reassurance.

MOHAMMAD MOKHBER, Interim Iranian President (through translator): The country will continue moving forward under this leadership.

Everyone should continue on with their roles, despite this incident.

In no way will this tragic incident interfere with the government and running of our country.

REZA SAYAH: Raisi was viewed as a regime loyalist, rewarded by Iran's supreme leader with numerous promotions, and finally a presidential candidacy in 2017.

That year, Raisi lost.

Four years later, he won after a carefully choreographed election campaign.

Raisi's government cracked down on internal unrest after the death of Mahsa Amini sparked mass protests in 2022.

Raisi won the 2021 presidential elections with the lowest voter turnout in four decades.

He was clearly not a popular figure.

Even so, many believe his carefully engineered political rise was not going to end at the presidency.

Many believe he was being groomed to replace Iran's aging supreme leader.

With his death, the most important question now may not be who Iran's next president will be, but who Iran's next supreme leader will be.

In Tehran today, hundreds of Raisi supporters gathered in the streets to mourn.

MOHAMMAD BEHESHTI, Tehran Resident (through translator): We were shocked that we lost such a character, a character that made Iran proud and humiliated the enemies.

REZA SAYAH: Outside Iran's borders, a very different sentiment.

In Berlin, Iranians living in exile showed little sorrow.

MOHAMMADREZA SHARAFATI, Iranian Exile (through translator): We are very, very happy.

And we hope that we -- as soon as possible, we will take our country back.

REZA SAYAH: Raisi and his convoy had been flying back from Azerbaijan late Sunday, where, hours before the crash, he met with leaders and visited a dam construction site.

Flying conditions were poor, but officials did not immediately say what caused the Bell helicopter to go down.

U.S. State Department officials blamed Iran for flying the helicopter carrying the president in bad weather.

MATTHEW MILLER, State Department Spokesman: Ultimately, it's the Iranian government that is responsible for the decision to fly a 45-year-old helicopter in what was described as poor weather conditions, not any other actor.

REZA SAYAH: Acting President Mokhber spoke by phone today with leaders of Russia and Turkey, and condolences poured in from countries around the world.

Officials in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq announced a mourning period to span the next three days.

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Reza Sayah in Tehran.

AMNA NAWAZ: And to break down what this means for Iran's future and how it impacts foreign policy at this crucial juncture, we turn now to Suzanne Maloney.

She's vice president and director of foreign policy at the Brookings Institution.

That's a Washington, D.C., think tank.

Welcome.

Thanks for being here.

SUZANNE MALONEY, Saban Center for Middle East Policy, Brookings Institution: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: Let's begin with this helicopter crash.

Is there any reason to believe that this was anything other than an accident, that this could have been foul play?

SUZANNE MALONEY: I think the most realistic explanation is one that is the most obvious.

It was very poor weather, based on some of the scenes from the rescue efforts.

This was -- there was fog, rain, and it was a helicopter that was quite old.

It's quite understandable that there are conspiracy theories.

Iranians have a tendency to interpret events in the light of their own history.

And, of course, in particular, the region has been aflame recently.

Iran recently struck Israel in an unprecedented attack.

And the Israeli response was quite mild.

And so, given the past history of Israeli assassinations on Iranian territory of nuclear scientists, I think it's not surprising that there are conspiracy theories within Iranians and around the region.

AMNA NAWAZ: Tell us more about Ebrahim Raisi.

We heard Reza Sayah report there, not a popular man.

But tell us about the role he played in leadership, how he was seen by the public.

SUZANNE MALONEY: Well, his most notable achievement was his role in the deaths of thousands of political prisoners back in 1988 who were sent to their deaths in sham trials over which Raisi and several other judges presided.

That seems to have cemented his rise through the judicial apparatus within Iran, which is typically not a path to power within the executive branch.

And yet Raisi was plucked from the judiciary, clearly being groomed for something greater by the Iran supreme leader.

He had close family connections to Iran's powerful religious establishment in Mashhad and had run Iran's largest religious shrine there.

And many considered him to be the most leading candidate for succession.

The supreme leader in Iran, who holds ultimate authority, is 85 years old and is expected to pass from the scene in coming years.

AMNA NAWAZ: And Raisi was a protege of Khomeini.

As you mentioned, he is 85 years old.

Succession talk is ramping up.

Is there a clear successor to Khamenei in Raisi's absence?

SUZANNE MALONEY: Well, the only other well-known candidate is actually Mojtaba Khamenei, who is the son of the current supreme leader and who is quite influential behind the scenes, but has never held a leadership role and has somewhat dubious clerical credentials.

And so, given that this is a system has inveighed against hereditary monarchy for the past 45 years, it would be quite controversial if Mojtaba becomes the only figure who is in contention to succeed his own father.

AMNA NAWAZ: This is a jarring moment for a nation to lose two leaders like this so suddenly at a time of enormous upheaval in the region, especially as we see Iran working through so many of its proxies at the moment.

Could the uncertainty of this moment have broader implications outside of Iran?

SUZANNE MALONEY: I think that it will have a big shock to the system.

The foreign minister who has killed, Hossein Amirabdollahian, was quite influential, well connected to the security bureaucracy and played a major role in Iran's coordination around its proxies across the region.

His loss will be felt.

And the regime, I think, will be on edge as they want to avoid any appearance of vulnerability.

They have got to stage-manage an electoral process among a population that has demonstrated very little interest in these heavily managed elections.

And they have got to ensure that they actually set the leadership up for a smooth transition with the expectation of a potential succession for the supreme leader.

AMNA NAWAZ: Do you see any future leader dramatically changing Iran's posture or its strategy in the region at the moment?

SUZANNE MALONEY: It's hard to imagine someone coming from within the system of the Islamic Republic who would make major changes at this point in time.

There have been periods of time in the history of the Islamic Republic in which there have been movements to try to promote gradual reform.

Those have all been completely shut down by those who control the security bureaucracy and the judiciary.

Raisi was a key figure in that repression, and he's likely to be replaced by someone who comes from a similar background.

AMNA NAWAZ: It's less than a minute left, but I have to ask you about what one gentleman said in Sayah's report there, that Raisi's death could somehow empower or embolden the resistance within Iran.

Do you see that happening?

SUZANNE MALONEY: I think it's an opportunity.

And Iranians have very few opportunities to both celebrate and potentially dream of something different for their country.

And so I look forward to seeing what may happen in Tehran and around the country over the course of the upcoming weeks.

AMNA NAWAZ: Suzanne Maloney of the Brookings Institution, thank you so much for joining us.

Appreciate your time.

SUZANNE MALONEY: Thank you.

GEOFF BENNETT: Cross-examination wrapped up today for Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's former lawyer and fixer who is also a central witness in the criminal hush money trial against a former president.

Mr. Trump's lead defense lawyer, Todd Blanche, portrayed Cohen as a serial liar and someone who was profited by turning against his former boss.

The prosecution has rested its case against the former president.

William Brangham was in court today and joins us now.

So, William, the cross-examination of Michael Cohen ended today, his fourth day on the stand.

How else did Mr. Trump's legal team try to undercut the man who is arguably the most important witness for the prosecution?

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Geoff, they did what they did a lot of last week as well, which is basically just point out all the ways that they could where Michael Cohen said one thing one time and then said the opposite another time.

They kept bringing up stories how Michael Cohen said once upon a time that Donald Trump had no knowledge of the Stormy Daniels hush money scheme and now claims that he did.

Todd Blanche again was saying that Michael Cohen is not motivated to be some truth-teller, as Cohen sometimes likes to portray himself, but is instead motivated by vengeance and greed.

He again brought up how Cohen has made millions of dollars off books and podcasts and things like that.

He's arguing that, if Trump is convicted, Cohen will make even more money on top of that.

He got Michael Cohen to admit that at one point he actually stole money from the Trump Organization.

And, again, all of these stories are just to reiterate to the jurors that Michael Cohen is not a trustworthy witness and that everything that's coming out of his mouth on the stand in front of you, jurors, cannot be believed.

Now, Cohen himself under all of this cross-examination reiterated what he has said all along, which is, yes, I lied at one point for Michael -- for Donald Trump because I was loyal to him and I was under his sway, but I'm not anymore and now I'm telling the truth.

GEOFF BENNETT: So when it was the Trump legal teams turned to present their case, it called as a witness the attorney Robert Costello, who tried to further undercut Michael Cohen's credibility.

What did Mr. Costello have to say on the witness stand?

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Costello is a former federal prosecutor, now a lawyer in private practice.

And back in 2018, after Michael Cohen's offices and hotel room and apartment were raided by the FBI with regards to a different investigation, Costello offered himself to Cohen as a legal adviser.

And, again, this was back during the time when Michael Cohen was still saying that Donald Trump had no knowledge of the Stormy Daniels affair.

And Cohen says that Costello, to him, felt like he was part of a pressure campaign by Rudy Giuliani, who Costello is very close with, and by Donald Trump to make sure that Michael Cohen never changed that story.

On the stand today, Costello said: When I first met Michael Cohen, he said, I have nothing on Donald Trump to offer any authorities.

Donald Trump knew nothing about the Stormy Daniels business.

He said that the Michael Cohen was somewhat manic and near-suicidal, and he rejected any notion that he had been trying to pressure Cohen to change his story.

Costello's testimony was something of a last-minute addition, and he was truly a cantankerous and feisty witness.

At several times today, he expressed verbal displeasure with judge's comments, with the judge sustaining certain objections.

And, at one point, the judge was so perturbed by how Costello was behaving that he cleared the courtroom and basically gave Costello a tongue-lashing, saying, when you are in my courtroom, you will not behave this way.

You will uphold a certain level of decorum.

You will not be giving me any side-eye.

And, if this keeps going, there are going to be repercussions here.

The jury was brought back in, and Costello finished his testimony.

He will still be on the stand for more cross-examination tomorrow, though.

GEOFF BENNETT: So, in the less than 30 seconds we have left, William, walk us through the timing for the rest of this trial.

Expected to wrap up as early as next week?

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: That was the plan originally that we would be done this week, but the judge did not want to have a circumstance where, this week, jury got to hear the closing arguments from both sides and then sat basically with that information for the entire Memorial Day weekend.

So he said, because Costello's testimony ran a little bit long, we're going to push all of this off and have closing arguments Tuesday after Memorial Day.

GEOFF BENNETT: All right, that is William Brangham again in New York City for us tonight.

William, thank you.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Thanks, Geoff.

AMNA NAWAZ: Rapid advancements in artificial intelligence continue as companies roll out new products sparking both wonder and concern.

Over the past week, OpenAI unveiled its next generation chatbot, or ChatGPT-4o.

The new A.I.

assistant can respond to voice, text and visual commands in real time, as in this presentation when engineers asked it to tell a bedtime story.

A.I.

VOICE: Oh, a bedtime story about robots and love?

I got you covered.

Gather round, Barret.

Once upon a time... MAN: I really want maximal emotion, like maximal expressiveness, much more than you were doing before.

A.I.

VOICE: Understood.

Let's amplify the drama.

Once upon a time... WOMAN: Can you do this in a robotic voice now?

A.I.

VOICE: Initiating dramatic robotic voice.

(LAUGHTER) (APPLAUSE) A.I.

VOICE: Once upon a time.

AMNA NAWAZ: OpenAI actually paused the use of that particular virtual voice after some pointed out its similarity to the robot voiced by Scarlett Johansson in the movie "Her."

SCARLETT JOHANSSON, Actress: Good morning, Theodore.

JOAQUIN PHOENIX, Actor: Good morning.

SCARLETT JOHANSSON: You have a meeting in five minutes.

You wanted to try getting out of bed?

JOAQUIN PHOENIX: You're too funny.

SCARLETT JOHANSSON: OK, good.

I'm funny.

I want to learn everything about everything.

AMNA NAWAZ: Google also unveiled a new A.I.-powered search function this week.

For more on that and all these developments, were joined by Nilay Patel, editor in chief of The Verge and host of the "Decoder" podcast.

So, Nilay, let's just start with Google, the most visited Web site in the world.

It's making major changes to how billions of people search the Web.

Users will now see an A.I.-generated answer for their search.

How big a deal is that?

NILAY PATEL, Editor in Chief, The Verge: It's a momentous change for how the Web works today.

A lot of Web sites that you visit are driven by the need for Google traffic.

It's up to 30 percent or more of most big Web sites' traffic comes from Google.

So when Google starts keeping more of that traffic for itself, that's going to change the economics of putting content on the Web.

It might shift some of that content to platforms like TikTok and YouTube and Instagram.

And it will certainly shake up how the Web is organized and structured, because, instead of getting links from Google, publishers might try to gain their way into those A.I.

previews.

And I think Google has a big question to answer around what the incentive to put new content on the web is, if it's just going to synthesize that content and present it to people searching for free.

I talked to Google CEO Sundar Pichai about this.

He said it's a paradigm shift.

There's going to be changes that he believes the Web will endure.

AMNA NAWAZ: You described the reaction to the news of this new search from people who actually make Web sites as fundamentally apocalyptic.

Why?

NILAY PATEL: Yes, I mean, the Web has reached a steady state over the past 25, 30 years, where people put up Web sites, Google indexes those Web sites.

We allow Google to do that because that's what's considered fair use.

And then, in return, Google sends traffic to Web sites.

And it's a huge portion of traffic for a lot of the Web sites on the Internet is Google search traffic.

If Google starts to keep that traffic for themselves, then a lot of businesses will fail.

AMNA NAWAZ: OK, what about this new chatbot that ChatGPT -- that OpenAI just revealed?

We saw a brief demo of that.

Is this basically the model for how all of us are going to be interacting with our tech one day?

NILAY PATEL: It's the vision.

Google unveiled something that's very similar to called Project Astra, this idea that you have a multimodal search interface, where you have got your phone in your hand, your phone is looking at things with its camera.

It's talking to you about what it sees.

You can ask it questions.

It has a personality.

OpenAI is really leaning into the personality factor here.

What we haven't seen is a huge leap in terms of accuracy.

So, because the chatbots are very good at language, that you can build these products that are very convincing, right?

They can talk to you that have these personalities, they can emote in different ways, they can do different kinds of image generation.

They can recognize videos of broken toys in your home and tell you how to fix them.

The flip side of it is language and intelligence aren't 100 percent correlated, maybe not at all correlated.

And so you're seeing this gap of the demos where you ask it questions and it's very confident in what it tells you.

But, sometimes, it's wrong.

And I think that's actually the thing that's going to hold these kinds of products back from widespread adoption is they have got to get better at being accurate.

I think we're seeing incredible advances in facility with language and we're seeing a pretty steady state in terms of actual intelligence.

AMNA NAWAZ: Meanwhile, Microsoft, we should mention, is also going to make its own big A.I.

announcement this week.

What do we expect to hear from them?

NILAY PATEL: So, today, Microsoft unveiled a new line of A.I.

P.C.s, Copilot P.C.s That's what they're branding them as.

They have got a new chip in them which they claim will be faster than the chip in Apple's MacBook Air that has been a benchmark for the industry for a very long time.

And they're rolling out a new version of Windows.

And it has a bunch of A.I.

features built into it for consumers, including one called Recall, which is fascinating, where the operating system or Windows basically watches along with you.

As you use your computer, you can ask it questions.

As you're playing games, it can talk to you about what it's seeing on the screen in the game.

You can ask it questions for help in the games.

As you're using the applications on your P.C., you can ask it for help, it can drive your P.C.

for you.

This is a big vision for in -- computing.

It's been the dream for a long time.

You will have an intelligent agent on your computer that is actually helping you use that computer.

Microsoft took the first steps of that today with the Copilot P.C.s.

It seems very compelling.

I have a lot of questions about privacy and security, and where all that data is going, and who's tracking, and who has access to it.

Microsoft says it's all being done locally on the P.C., but I really want to test this stuff out and make sure that that's actually true.

AMNA NAWAZ: You mentioned privacy, security concerns, also accuracy concerns with some of the other A.I.

functions.

I guess the question is, how much insight do you have as someone who covers this into where all of those concerns rank, in terms of how quickly some of these tech firms are pushing out new products?

Is that a shared concern?

NILAY PATEL: I don't think that concern ranks nearly highly enough.

I think what you're seeing here is an extraordinary battle -- extraordinary battle between a bunch of big tech companies who feel the competitive pressure for the first time in a long time from OpenAI, from one another, and they're racing these products out to capture market share, so they don't get left behind.

In just a few weeks, Apple's going to roll out a bunch of A.I.

features in the new version of iOS for the iPhone, and we will see them partner with a Google or an OpenAI for some of the features in a way that might cut against some of their privacy promises.

We have to see what they claim, and that that is all because of the pressure that this is a paradigm shift on the order of mobile, on the order of social networking.

And if you get left behind, you're going to lose a ton of market share.

AMNA NAWAZ: That is Nilay Patel, editor in chief of The Verge and host of the "Decoder" podcast.

Thank you so much for being with us.

NILAY PATEL: Thanks for having me.

GEOFF BENNETT: As Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial nears its conclusion, high-profile Republican supporters continue to make appearances to the New York City courthouse to show their support for the former president.

Is this the new litmus test for GOP candidates?

One of the questions for our Politics Monday team.

That's Amy Walter of The Cook Political Report With Amy Walter and Tamara Keith of NPR.

Great to see you both.

So let's start there, Tam, with this stream of GOP elected leaders who have been making this pilgrimage to this New York City courthouse to speak out in support of Donald Trump.

What should we make of this?

These leaders, these elected leaders, say that they're there to speak on behalf of Mr. Trump because he can't speak on his own behalf because of his gag order.

TAMARA KEITH, National Public Radio: And they are delivering the message that the former president wants to have delivered, a message that, both with their presence and with their words is saying, this trial isn't serious.

This trial is a witch-hunt or a Democratic prosecutor run amok.

By making that pilgrimage up there, often dressed in the Trump uniform, they are standing behind him quite literally and signaling certainly to Republican base voters, it's OK. You don't need to worry about this thing no matter how it turns out.

This is fine.

Don't worry.

GEOFF BENNETT: And, Amy, Speaker Mike Johnson's appearance is notable, I think, given the constitutional heft of his office.

And by being there, he is effectively leveraging his speakership and all of the symbolic weight and significance that carries against the justice system.

AMY WALTER, The Cook Political Report: Yes, although I would argue, Geoff, that really what he's trying to do by going there and showing his support is actually trying to keep his own job.

We know the role that Donald Trump can play in keeping the fractious Republican Party together.

And, in fact, he was pretty much responsible for making sure that Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene's call to oust Mike Johnson failed.

He put out on TRUTH Social that she's really great and everything, but now's the time for us to come together.

Don't vote to oust the speaker.

But he had a very important note at the very end of that missive where he said, we may -- at some point, it may -- very well may be the case that he needs to be ousted.

That is not now.

So, ultimately, if you're Mike Johnson, you know that literally every day your ability to keep your job depends on getting the support of the former president.

GEOFF BENNETT: And, at the same time, the so-called big lie about the 2020 election has now become this big litmus test for Republicans.

And it's expanded to their willingness to accept the results of the 2024 election.

Congressman -- rather, Senator Marco Rubio, said to be a Trump V.P.

hopeful, was on "Meet the Press" yesterday, and he wouldn't accept or wouldn't commit to accepting the 2024 results.

KRISTEN WELKER, Moderator, "Meet the Press": Will you accept the election results of 2024 no matter what happens, Senator?

SEN. MARCO RUBIO (R-FL): No matter what happens?

No, if it's an unfair election, I think it's going to be contested by either side.

KRISTEN WELKER: No matter who wins?

Senator, no matter who wins?

SEN. MARCO RUBIO: Well, why don't you -- I think you're asking the wrong person.

The Democrats are the ones that have opposed every Republican victory since 2000, every single one.

GEOFF BENNETT: And he's not the only one.

Senator Tim Scott would also not commit to accepting the results of the 2024 election.

This has very much become party orthodoxy now.

TAMARA KEITH: And this is very similar to language that many Republicans, including Mike Pence, landed on after the 2020 election and before January 6, where they didn't want to go all the way as far as Trump is going and say that the election was stolen, but they wanted to say, well, you should look into it.

And what they're saying here is, well, we will support the results if it's a fair election.

But it's worth noting that former President Trump really only thinks an election is fair if he wins.

And I will just remind you that, after 2016, he won, and then he claimed that there was election - - there was voter fraud in California and New Hampshire because he didn't win those states.

So he is someone who has a very lengthy, proven track record of denying election results.

And now you have Republicans out there, mainstream Republicans, creating sort of a permission structure, saying that, if it's fair, then maybe I will support the results.

They're not willing to commit in advance.

And that creates a permission structure for mainstream Republican voters to say, well, if they're OK with this, then I can be OK with this.

GEOFF BENNETT: And, Amy, we know how damaging this denialism is for our democracy.

How does it play politically?

I mean, is there political utility in Republicans rallying around this issue?

What does it do for moderate Republicans or independent voters, who are going to be the swing deciders in this election?

AMY WALTER: When you see folks like Marco Rubio or those other candidates you discussed going on TV and answering questions like this, they really aren't speaking to voters.

They're speaking to an audience of one.

And that is Donald Trump.

Many of them are essentially in tryouts to be the vice president.

What we know about this president, it's always been the case, but I think it has even ratcheted up in the most recent time period, that he looks for loyalty above all else, and especially in his vice president, the person who will be with him if he gets back to the White House.

He wants to make sure that, no matter what, this person is going to stand with him.

And I think we're going to see similar loyalty tests all the way down to any office that would get filled by a political appointee, should Donald Trump win election to a second term.

GEOFF BENNETT: Let's talk about the debates, because I think that news broke last Wednesday.

It was after we had a chance to speak with you both last Monday.

We have got the first scheduled debate now just six weeks away.

It's going to happen in June on CNN.

The rival campaigns have skirted around the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Tam, what's the risk/reward calculus for both sides here, having this debate in a studio, no audience?

TAMARA KEITH: So both Trump and his team and Biden and his team think that his opponent cannot stand there for 90 minutes and conduct a debate without embarrassing themselves, falling asleep, slurring their words.

You name it, they think that their opponents are incapable of going into a debate.

So that is part of the calculus on both sides.

What I will say is that, on the Biden side, I have spoken to people close to the Biden campaign.

They really believe, and they have been saying this for months, that people are not focused on this campaign.

And so when Trump said any time, anywhere, they said, let's do it in June, because we want people to start paying attention to the choice and being aware of the stakes in the election.

That's the theory that the Biden campaign is operating under, is that their numbers will improve if people realize that, yes, in fact, Joe Biden and Donald Trump are the candidates.

And so they're trying to jump ahead of the conventions, which would be a traditional time when people would become more aware of the election.

GEOFF BENNETT: Amy, how do you see it?

And is June too early for a debate that will matter?

AMY WALTER: I think that if you're the Biden campaign, as Tam pointed out, it's not too early.

You need to shake this race up.

I think, if anything, what -- the decision by the Biden campaign to accept this debate suggests that they know that they are running behind, or at least not in the position they want to be for an incumbent president.

They need to turn this election from one that's a referendum on Biden to one that's a choice between Biden and Trump.

The risk, of course, is that either it doesn't work, and now it's June, the numbers don't move very much, and the president goes into his convention a few weeks later with an even more depressed and anxious base of voters, and Trump is able to go into his convention with a lot of wind at his back.

So there is, I think, a very big risk for Biden here that it doesn't go as planned.

But if the Biden campaign, as Tam pointed out, their entire theory of the case is that this has to be made clear that it is a choice, that choice has to be put in front of voters as quickly as possible and as often as possible.

GEOFF BENNETT: All right, Amy Walter and Tamara Keith, thank you both, as always.

TAMARA KEITH: You're welcome.

AMY WALTER: You're welcome.

AMNA NAWAZ: Some 50 years into her career and almost 90 years old, artist Lorraine O'Grady was recently honored with a prestigious Guggenheim Fellowship.

If that sounds like an honor delayed, much of O'Grady's career has played out with a slow burn.

With her first ever museum retrospective now at Wellesley College's Davis Museum, she looks back at her long path to acceptance in the art world.

Special correspondent Jared Bowen of GBH in Boston has the story for our arts and culture series, Canvas.

JARED BOWEN: In her work and in life, artist Lorraine O'Grady has long confronted a world of black and white, as in either/or thinking, as in her own art-making, but also in racism, including what she experienced working at the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the 1950s.

LORRAINE O'GRADY, Artist: Even though we were all intellectuals and they saw me as an intellectual, they could not imagine a Black intellectual or a Black female intellectual.

They had not seen it.

And that was because the Black middle class was being willfully ignored.

JARED BOWEN: But she would not be ignored and, over the next 20 years, she established her voice, covering the arts as a writer, translator and rock critic.

And then O'Grady decided to be seen.

In the 1970s and '80s, she became an artist herself, zeroing in on the New York art world by reinventing herself as a conceptual and performance artist.

LORRAINE O'GRADY: Those fields did not have a history.

And that meant that you could make a history.

You could make the present and the future.

JARED BOWEN: And make career-defining statements.

The art world of the time was deeply divided along racial lines.

So O'Grady called it out.

She invaded New York City art spaces under the guise of Mademoiselle Bourgeoise Noire, a fictional character O'Grady devised with a backstory, that she'd been crowned Miss Black Middle Class, complete with crown, sash, and a gown comprised of white gloves.

It was a vision that had come to O'Grady after many encounters with what she describes as the safe white art world.

LORRAINE O'GRADY: I said, oh, that's what that art was.

It was art with white gloves on.

This piece had two motivations, to kind of introduce myself as an artist and to answer the white art world.

NIKKI GREENE, Associate Professor of Art History, Wellesley College: She's an icon.

She is one of the most prominent contemporary conceptual artists that we have among us.

JARED BOWEN: Nikki Greene is an associate professor of art history at Wellesley College, O'Grady's alma mater.

On view now at the college's Davis Museum is her first ever retrospective, coming nearly half-a-century into the now 89-year-old artist's career.

NIKKI GREENE: Because of Lorraine's persistence over the last four decades, I think people have finally seen the light in many ways.

JARED BOWEN: Gallery after gallery reveals O'Grady's argument that the world is so much more than black and white.

Cross-pollination courses through her work, the trunk of a palm tree crowned by fir tree branches, a family album that features Egyptian Queen Nefertiti alongside the artist's sister Devonia, Harlem parade attendees suddenly framed as art.

So are they simply joyous bystanders or the subject of a portrait?

Is it a fir tree or palm tree, royalty or family?

The answer, as O'Grady has argued time and again, is Both/And, the name of this show.

NIKKI GREENE: She always had a sense of a kind of duality in her own personal heritage, being Black, but also having ancestry of European descent, being American, but living at home with parents who had very strong Jamaican accents.

JARED BOWEN: In 1982, O'Grady depicted her life in a one-day-only performance in Central Park.

Called Rivers, First Draft, or The Woman in Red, a figure emerges from her blended New England and Caribbean background.

LORRAINE O'GRADY: The key moment is when she sees a white stove and she realizes it's now or never and she begins to paint it her own color.

She paints it red.

It's me becoming an artist.

JARED BOWEN: For her project titled Art Is... O'Grady hired dancers and actors toting gild frames to join the annual Afro-American Day Parade in Harlem.

Mademoiselle Bourgeoise Noire was there, but the greater focus was on the community, where parade-goers joyously made themselves the art.

NIKKI GREENE: When one thinks of an ornate gold frame, often, they're thinking of precious, fine art, perhaps from the Renaissance or Baroque era.

So taking a gilded frame means you are the finest, most precious art as well.

JARED BOWEN: Less precious to O'Grady, The New York Times.

In one of her most famous series, she spent successive Sundays cutting out headlines, words and phrases, restructuring them into her own poetry.

NIKKI GREENE: We see it too in quilts.

I think that's probably one of the most beautiful examples, invisible examples of how this cutting and pasting and stitching can really create something on its own that's completely new and innovative.

JARED BOWEN: For O'Grady's latest work, she's gone back to the beginning, remembering statues of both Athena and Joan of Arc that adorned her Boston high school.

She commissioned her own suit of armor.

And in making this, she's also going back to her creative roots, fusing Renaissance armor with a Caribbean palm tree.

LORRAINE O'GRADY: I never know which part of my body is getting me into trouble and which part of my mind is getting me out of it.

So I said I need an image that's the opposite.

So I knew I needed -- I needed - - in the position of the body, I needed Europe.

In the position of the mind, I needed the Caribbean.

JARED BOWEN: For Lorraine O'Grady, the sum of her parts is as great as the whole, or, as she would put it, both/and.

For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm Jared Bowen in Wellesley, Massachusetts.

GEOFF BENNETT: And join us again here tomorrow night, when we will have our interview with late-night host Bill Maher.

And that is the "NewsHour" for tonight.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On behalf of the entire "NewsHour" team, thank you for joining us.