AMNA NAWAZ: 2026 is expected to be an# eventful year, both at home and abroad.

For more on what's ahead and to# look at this past week of news,## we turn now to the analysis of# Brooks and Capehart.

That is New## York Times columnist David Brooks# and Jonathan Capehart of MS NOW.

Great to see you both.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Happy new year.

AMNA NAWAZ: Happy new year.

DAVID BROOKS: Same.. AMNA NAWAZ: All right, let's# kick this of.. the ongoing Russian war in Ukraine.

We# have seen a lot of headlines this.. and I need to start there because that war# is about to mark four years in February.

We saw the new year begin with a massive# Russian drone barrage in Ukraine,## hundreds of strikes in that country.

We# saw President Zelenskyy and President## Trump meet at Mar-a-Lago last weekend,# say there's progress on a peace plan.

This week, we saw special envoy Steve# Witkoff continue to hold calls with## Zelenskyy and other European officials.# And in his own New Year's address,## Zelenskyy said that the peace# plan is 90 percent ready.

So, David, when you take all# of this and you look ahead,## do you see progress being made?

Is# 2026 the year that the war ends?

DAVID BROOKS: Possibly, but# I'm -- color me skeptical.

I mean, this is the year we will find out# whether the international community can## respond with -- effectively when one nation# tries to conquer another.

And, unfortunately,## what the Trump administration has done recently# has been pressuring Zelenskyy to make concessions,## slow-walking the weapons we have been providing# for them, putting him in a tough position.

He makes some concessions.

And then,# in theory, we give him, in turn,## security guarantees.

And it's supposed# to be like Article 5 of the NATO treaty,## security guarantees of some# number of years, 15 or 20 or 30.

AMNA NAWAZ: Article 5, an attack# on one is an attack on all.

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, attack on -- if the -- if Putin# attacks Ukraine, then we'r.. AMNA NAWAZ: Right.

DAVID BROOKS: Th.. troops or airports -- or airplanes, well, I'd# ask you to talk to people who've done business## with Donald Trump before, because he will# break that.

That is a purposeless guarantee.

And Putin didn't like the way NATO was stretching# eastward anyway.

Why would he accept Ukraine## to have an effective NATO guarantee?

He will# not accept this.

One of the things that it's## reminding people of is, at the end of the Clinton# term, the second Clinton term, he really wanted## to have a peace with Israel and Palestine,# which was absolutely the right thing to do.

But Yasser Arafat was never interested# because he didn't think Israel was a country.## Vladimir Putin does not think Ukraine is# a country.

And so you can't argue people## into a peace they do not want to have.

So I'm# extremely dubious that this is going to work.

AMNA NAWAZ: Jonathan, are you any more# optimistic about what's ahead in this year?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: No, especially picking# up on something David just talked about,## that you said at the very beginning# about the international community## being able to help Ukraine, or I can't# remember exactly what you thought.

But I immediately wrote down, how does the# international community, and particularly the## Europeans, how do they respond to all of this# and come to Ukraine's aid without an effective## partner in the United States, without an effective# partner in the president of the United States?

To David's point, Donald Trump, President Trump,# is not the most reliable negotiator.

If he tells## you at 9:00 that this is the deal, by 9:15,# it could be something completely different.## And so, in the end, I will be keeping my eye on# whether the Europeans can stand on their own,## and on their own in a way that can effectively# help Ukraine without any kind of solid## commitments or assistance from the United States.

AMNA NAWAZ: When you step back and# look at this war for just a moment,## because there's been a lot of questions about# to whom President Trump has been listening,## right -- he changes his tack based on# the last phone call he had, it appears,## sometimes, and also the amount of influence that# President Putin clearly has over the process.

Is there credit to be given to# the White House here, David,## at least for keeping talks going, for keeping# some kind of process on some sort of rails?

Is## that something they should be given credit for?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I think they# really want peace.

I think Trump## genuinely wants peace.

And I think he's# obtuse about who Vladimir Putin is.

I think, as we saw in the Oval# Office months and months ago,## he's morally uninvolved in the# stakes of this contest.

Like,## Zelenskyy is a democratically elected leader# whose country was invaded.

And he just doesn't## seem like there's one side that's kind# of on the side of right in this war.

But I do think they have tried hard.

I do think# all the envoys, Jared Kushner, all these guys,## Witkoff, all these people who've been# there are probably sincerely motivated.## I just don't think you can have# peace with Vladimir Putin.

And so,## to me, it's a characterological# misdiagnosis of who this person is.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: I just wonder if President# Trump really wants peace or surrender,## or is there a distinction?

Does he# see a distinction between the two?

AMNA NAWAZ: In terms of what# Ukraine is willing to concede to?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Right, or -- no, what he wants.

I mean, David just said, they're really# pushing hard for peace.

And, sure,## but at what cost?

Does it require# -- would peace require surrender## on Ukraine's part of territory already# taken by Putin, taken by the Russians... AMNA NAWAZ: Yes.

JONATHAN CAPEHAR.. Ukraine would have to take in# order for there to be peace?

AMNA NAWAZ: They say the plan's 90 percent# there.

We will see in the weeks and months ahead.

I do want to turn to some of the political# pressures President Trump has been managing## here at home as well, because he did issue# his first two vetoes of his second term this## week.

Both are bills, we should point out,# that passed Congress unanimously.

One was## funding a clean water pipeline in Colorado,# the other protected tribal land in Florida.

And you have probably seen# there have been some lawmakers,## including Republican Colorado# Congresswoman Lauren Boebert,## who suggested that the vetoes could have been# some kind of political retaliation.

She was one## of the only Republicans to sign a petition that# forced a vote on releasing the Epstein files.

And a very strong Trump ally, a former elections# clerk official in Colorado, is still in prison## in her state, in Colorado, convicted of state# crime, so his federal pardon does not apply.

Jonathan, I will come to you first on# this.

Do you believe the president is## vetoing unrelated bills for political retribution?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Gee.

Yes.

(LAUGHTER) JONATHAN CAPEHART: Yes, I do.

From the reporting I saw, this -- the bill# that he vetoed, that water project, $555,000,## so not even a drop in the bucket of federal# spending.

But, also, let's not forget that## Congresswoman Boebert was that one member# of Congress back in November who was called## to the White House Situation Room and talked to# about her signature on that discharge petition.

She left and said, no, I'm still -- I'm not# removing my name, I'm still doing this.

So... AMNA NAWAZ: That was the petition# to release the Epstein files.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: To release -- yes, I'm# sorry.

Yes, to release.. AMNA NAWAZ: Yes.

Yes.

JONATHAN CAPEHAR.. could I not view that as retaliation?

How# could she not view that as retaliation,## even though she asked the question rhetorically?

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

DAVID BROOKS: One thing I like about# Dona.. (LAUGHTER) DAVID BROOKS: It's n.. In the other case, the Florida case,# it was extending rights to a tribe of## Native Americans whose name I will# now will not try to pronounce.

But## he said it out loud.

He said, this group of# people has opposed my immigration policies.

AMNA NAWAZ: Yes.

DAVID BROOKS: An.. And so it's not only retribution,# though.

It's the cash register.## How do you get people to give you money so you can# have Lee Greenwood perform at the Kennedy Center,## for example?

It's you give them, people# who give what you -- who do what you want,## you give them reward.

People who don't# do what you want, you punish them.

So you have to have the cards# and leverage.

So it's not only## retribution.

It's about leverage.

It's# about doing things not only in this regard,## but in all sorts of regards, that will# punish people who oppose Trump policies.

AMNA NAWAZ: Well, what about Congress' role?# These were unanimous bills in Congress.## Do you see Republicans moving# to override those vetoes, David?

DAVID BROOKS: Again, I have been waiting.

I# mean, we have seen some profiles in courage## microscopically around the Republican# Party, but not so much in Washington.

(LAUGHTER) DAVID BROOKS: There have been a few cases.

AMNA NAWAZ: Yes.

DAVID BROOKS: An.. are Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren# Boebert.

These are the hardcore.

Like,## they are out there doing what they want# to do.

And God bless them, I guess.

But I don't see this getting... AMNA NAWAZ: Jonathan?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Congres.. Trump took the oath of office.

So I don't see# Congress doing anything to roll this back.

And,## if they do, great, I would love for them to prove# me wrong, Speaker Johnson, if you're watching.

AMNA NAWAZ: Well, look, it's our first# time getting to sit down and chat in## 2026, which promises to be a very, very busy year.

I'm going to ask a very dangerous# question, which is whether either## of you care to look ahead and make a bit# of a prediction in terms of what's ahead## in terms of the big stories you think# we will be paying most attention to or## one we don't even see coming around the# corner just yet.

Who wants to go first?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Jump ball.

Go, David.

(LAUGHTER) DAVID BROOKS: No, you go first.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Oh, my wo.. Look, I am a perennial optimist.

We are# rolling into a midterm election year where## my optimism demands that I see a future where# Democrats retake the House, suddenly turn the## engine of the Article I powers of the House# back on with oversight and accountability,## that -- finally doing things to# not just rein in this president,## but to also exercise their powers# as a co-equal branch of government.

That is what I'm looking forward to# in this year.

And also I'm looking## forward to the American people making their# voices heard at the ballot box in November,## but throughout the weeks and months ahead# as things happen in their communities and## in their states that they like or don't like# and take to the streets and make sure that## people are watching and people know that they# either like or don't like what's happening.

AMNA NAWAZ: David?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I.. out what the A.I.

effect does on the labor# markets.

It'll be the ye.. why China is beating the world in industry# after industry and what are the effects of that.

I agree with Jonathan, the Democrats will# agree to take the House.

But I would say the## thing I'm most interested in and most excited# about is that 2025 was a pretty bad year for## those of us who sit around talking about# politics, but it was OK for the economy.## The last quarter three growth rate was 4.3# percent, but socially it was a very good year.

So we saw suicide deaths down.

We saw violent# crimes down.

We see opioid addiction down.## We see obesity down.

We see social isolation# down, social media use down.

So a lot of the## damage that happened to the fabric of# American society over the last 10 years,## people are beginning to respond, and# they're beginning to figure stuff out.

So longevity was going down.

Now longevity is# going back up again.

And so I think America## is socially healing.

And those are# the things you can extrapolate from,## because those trends are not just blips.

Those# trends, I think, are longstanding.

And we could## see 2026 as a year of more political# depression.

Don't get too cheered up.

(LAUGHTER) JONATHAN CAPEHART: No, I was going to say.

DAVID BROOKS: Bu.. AMNA NAWAZ: Here's to a little# more social healing for us all.

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

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Thanks, Amna.

DAVID BROOKS: Thank you.