Will the $1.8 Billion Fund Have a Second Life and How the AI Industry Is Shaping the Midterms

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: Here's the Scoop (NBC News)

Episode: "Will the $1.8 Billion Fund Have a Second Life and How the AI Industry Is Shaping the Midterms"
Date: August 4, 2026
Host: Yazan Vesugin

---

Episode Overview

This episode explores two central topics:

1. The political fate of the Justice Department’s controversial $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund,” connected to the nomination of Todd Blanche as Attorney General.
2. The rapidly growing influence of artificial intelligence (AI) industry money in the 2026 midterm elections, including the local and national policy battles it is shaping.

Conversations feature in-depth analysis from NBC’s Capitol Hill correspondent Ryan Nobles, national politics reporter Ben Kamasar, and senior correspondent Tom Costello, who also discusses the implications of a SpaceX rocket hitting the moon.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The $1.8 Billion "Anti-Weaponization" Fund and Todd Blanche’s Confirmation

Background & Political Drama

• Todd Blanche is up for Attorney General confirmation. The process was stalled due to concerns about a $1.8 billion fund that could have allowed taxpayer payouts to January 6th rioters ([00:13], [02:10]).
• Senate Republicans John Cornyn and Thom Tillis demanded written guarantees that Blanche would officially end this fund.

The Deal and Its Uncertainty

• Blanche provided the demanded written assurance, officially rescinding the fund ([02:49]).
  • "John Cornyn and John Tillis... wanted to get to yes. They were begging the administration, Todd Blanche, and the Department of Justice to give them some sort of piece of paper that would make them feel comfortable that they could vote yes. And that's exactly what we saw play out here." — Ryan Nobles [02:49]
• Despite these assurances, there is skepticism the fund could be revived or replaced after confirmation.
  • "Within the language of the executive order, there's certainly wiggle room... at any point... he could tomorrow or the day after... write a new memo that says, well, actually we've taken a second look... now we've decided that this fund needs to be resurrected." — Ryan Nobles [04:35–05:58]

The Limits of the Compromise

• True elimination would require an act of Congress, which isn't happening due to insufficient votes and GOP alignment with Trump.
  • "The only way that this was truly going to be completely killed was if Congress passed a law... there weren't enough votes to do that." — Ryan Nobles [06:01]
• While the fund is harder to reinstate, it isn’t really “dead.”
  • "It does create roadblocks that didn't currently exist... but it by no means kills it indefinitely." — Ryan Nobles [06:01]

Other Barriers to Confirmation

• Past controversies, like Blanche’s handling of Jeffrey Epstein survivor advocacy, are unlikely to derail confirmation ([07:16]).
  • "You'd have to find four Republican nos outside of Tillis and Cornyn on the floor to effectively kill this... I just don't see it happening. I think he's on a fast track to confirmation." — Ryan Nobles [07:16]

---

2. The AI Industry's Role in the 2026 Midterms

Overview of AI-Driven Political Spending

• AI PACs and advocacy groups are spending heavily in key races, but most of their ads focus on local bread-and-butter issues (jobs, taxes), not directly on AI policies ([12:26]).
  • "These groups... aren't spending on these ads about the issue of AI. They're following this trend... that's basically just hit the bread and butter issues that matter to the electorate." — Ben Kamasar [12:26]

Major Players and Policy Goals

• Two main AI lobbying camps:
  • OpenAI-aligned: Pushing for a single national regulatory framework to avoid a patchwork of state laws ([13:10]).
  • Anthropic-aligned (Claude, etc.): More open to state-by-state laws and some restrictions ([13:10]).
  • Both are spending on both Republican and Democratic races to capture friendly candidates. Their main aim: shape foundational rules for AI regulation after the election.

Data Centers: The Local Battle

• Building AI data centers is a flashpoint in swing districts, notably Michigan's 7th ([14:20]).
  • Local candidate William Lawrence has built his campaign on opposing massive AI data centers due to fears of rising energy bills and falling property values.
  • "This anti-data center push... is the galvanizing force here for the voters... polling is showing that people are super pissed off about this." — Ben Kamasar [14:59]
• A recent Gallup poll found ~70% of Americans do not want to live near a data center ([14:20]).

Focus on Local Governance

• Despite presidential access to Big Tech, many zoning and moratorium decisions are hyper-local; thus, AI money is flooding state and local races ([17:02]).
  • "When you're talking about these local fights over where to build a data center, ultimately state and local legislation... are going to be a lot of the ones that decide a lot of this." — Ben Kamasar [17:02]

Notable Big Spender

• Elon Musk has reportedly reactivated his America PAC, planning $100–$120 million for conservative voter turnout in key states ([18:09]).

---

3. SpaceX Rocket Booster to Crash into the Moon

The Event

• At 2:34am ET, a discarded SpaceX rocket from a 2025 mission will accidentally crash into the moon at 5,400 mph, creating a new crater ([21:13]):
  • "This Booster rocket... is going to slam into the moon at 5,400 miles per hour. I mean, that is as fast as a bullet flies out of the end of a rifle." — Tom Costello [21:13]

Scientific Opportunity

• NASA hopes telescopes can analyze the resulting debris plume, potentially revealing more about the moon’s sub-surface—valuable for future plans to build a massive lunar base ([23:11]).
  • "The plan... is to build a massive space base on the moon... We're talking potentially 100 square kilometers." — Tom Costello [23:11]
  • Scientists are keen to know about deep water ice and soil composition for infrastructure planning.

Growing Problem: Space Junk

• Over 130 million pieces of debris orbit Earth, posing risks to astronauts, satellites, and eventually people on the ground ([24:24–26:07]).
  • "Every time we came back, we hit space junk and cracked our windows." — Tom Costello, quoting astronaut Steve Robinson [00:00]/[25:26]
  • Human casualties are a growing possibility, though most debris currently falls into the ocean.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Political Promises:
  "It took a long time to get there. And President Trump tried to derail it two or three different times, but eventually they came up with language that basically says that this fund no longer exists, it can't be resurrected." — Ryan Nobles [02:49]

• Cynicism About Bureaucracy:
  "At any point, just because he writes this thing today saying this is no longer a thing, he could tomorrow or the day after... write a new memo that says... now we've decided that this fund needs to be resurrected." — Ryan Nobles [05:58]

• On AI Data Centers' Unpopularity:
  "Polling is showing that people are super pissed off about this... they think it's the kind of issue that actually could help a progressive... reach swing voters." — Ben Kamasar [14:59]

• Space Debris and Danger:
  "Steve Robinson, the former astronaut, just told me two weeks ago, he was on multiple shuttle missions, and he said, you know, every time we came back, we hit space junk and cracked our windows." — Tom Costello [00:00]/[25:26]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [00:13] — Introduction of topics and Senate Judiciary Committee actions on the anti-weaponization fund
• [02:49] — Ryan Nobles on the negotiation over the fund's rescinding
• [04:35] — Legal and executive order ambiguity regarding fund resurrection
• [06:42] — Epstein survivors and other potential nomination roadblocks
• [10:13] — AI as a campaign issue in Michigan and elsewhere
• [12:26] — How AI groups are spending, focus on local issues
• [13:10] — National vs. state-level AI regulation camps
• [14:59] — Data centers and local backlash
• [17:02] — Why AI groups care about local policymaking
• [18:09] — Elon Musk’s Super PAC spending
• [21:13] — SpaceX rocket crash into the moon — science and context
• [24:24] — The expanding space junk threat
• [26:07] — Potential harm to people and property from space debris

---

Conclusion

Today’s episode highlights how unresolved legal and political ambiguities can prolong controversies like the anti-weaponization fund, showing the limits of executive promises without Congressional backing. Simultaneously, the AI sector’s entrance into US politics is steering both party primaries and local debates—especially where data center projects impact daily life. Finally, as a SpaceX rocket unintentionally barrels toward the moon, looming questions persist about the dangers of space debris and what lunar accidents might teach scientists prepping for humans’ next leap.

Listeners come away informed on the intersections of law, technology, political strategy, and the very tangible consequences for both local communities and the future of space travel.

Transcript

[Tom Costello]

Steve Robinson, the former astronaut, just told me two weeks ago he was on multiple shuttle missions and he said, you know, every time we came back, we hit space junk and cracked our windows.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Hi, everybody and welcome to here's the scoop from NBC News. I'm Yazan Vesugin. So today on the show, we're talking about space junk and this rogue rocket booster that is barreling towards the moon at more than 5,000 miles an hour. It's gonna crash into the moon overnight. I'm going to speak to NBC News senior correspondent Tom Costello who covers aviation and space for us. Plus, we're talking about money in politics amidst this midterm election season. And all month we're going to be taking a deep dive into kind of new money in politics. Today we want to focus on artificial intelligence and groups that are advocating for AI across this country. Up first, though. So today the Senate Judiciary Committee voted along party lines to advance Todd Blanche's confirmation as attorney general. This has been up in the air for the past few weeks. Last week we talked about how the vote was held up because of two Republican senators, John Cornyn of Texas, Thom Tillis of North Carolina. They wanted written guarantees from Blanche that he was killing the Justice Department's $1.8 billion anti weaponization fund. This fund was set up after President Trump dropped his lawsuit against the IRS and could have given taxpayer funded payouts to January 6th rioters. Well, on Sunday, Blanche did put it in writing, but is it smooth sailing now for him when it comes to the confirmation or will other Senate Republicans block it? And is the anti weaponization fund truly dead for this? I want to bring in NBC News chief Capitol Hill correspondent Ryan Nobles, who took his vacation and is now back. But I did actually mistakenly text him still on his vacation. So apologies for that.

[Ryan Nobles]

I think it says something. Yes, the very first NBC responsibility I have after my vacation is spending time with you. So that shows you where my friend is.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Well, welcome back. So I ran through this whole back and forth that was happening with Cornyn and Tillis. We know Todd Blanche has now signed this order rescinding the anti weaponization fund this weekend. And, and Cornyn mentioned it today, given

[Ben Kamasar]

this agreement with Mr. Blanch, I expect the department to live up to this

[Ryan Nobles]

in future litigation and I will vote

[Ben Kamasar]

to advance him out of the committee today.

[Yazan Vesugin]

So what did this agreement actually say and why was it enough for Cornyn and Tillis?

[Ryan Nobles]

Well, I think you remember, Yaz, I don't know, two or three weeks ago I predicted to you this exact outcome Right. That John Cornyn and John Tillis were putting up a fight, but they wanted to get to yes. They were begging the administration, Todd Blanche, and the Department of Justice to give them some sort of piece of paper that would make them feel comfortable that they could vote yes. And that's exactly what we saw play out here. It took a long time to get there. And President Trump tried to derail it two or three different times, but eventually they came up with language that basically says that this fund no longer exists, it can't be resurrected. And that was enough for Tom Tillis and John Cornyn to vote yes. I'm sure that's enough for 51 Republicans to vote yes. And my guess is by the end of the week, he'll be the next Attorney general. But I do think, just judging by the way that President Trump continues to talk about the weaponization fund, the idea that this puts the nail in the coffin on this exercise, I think is a very, very kind of Pollyannish view of all of this.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Okay, so you're referring to what the President has said repeatedly now, which is. And I'm paraphrasing here, listen, I think this is a good thing. I think these folks should be reimbursed and so on and so forth.

[Ryan Nobles]

Right.

[Yazan Vesugin]

He is still supportive of this anti weaponization fund. And the critics of what Blanche stated and signed on Sunday would say the way in which this was worded leaves the door open for him to potentially resurrect some sort of thing that would act as potentially this. This fund, this anti weaponization fund, but not be named this anti weaponization fund. Can you kind of walk us through that and how it is that could feasibly happen?

[Ryan Nobles]

Well, let's first take a step back and recognize that all of this is a moving target. Right. None of it is codified into law. So you need to think of it like an executive order. It's the Department of Justice saying, we're going to take advantage of this statute, which is a fund that's designed to provide restitution for people who've been wronged by the government. In kind of a general sense, we're going to carve out a section of it to specifically give to folks that we feel have been wronged by the Department of Justice under the Biden administration. And members of Congress were angry about that. So they said, you need to end this. They said they'd end it. Then they said, well, you need to write something down that says that you're going to end it. And so they did that. But you're right, within the language of the executive order, there's certainly wiggle room there. There's language in there that says, you know, that essentially says if something comes up, if we learn new information, if there's some sort of specific thing that makes us think, feel as though someone is entitled to retribution, we'll seek avenues to do that. But when this is not something that's codified into law, it's a very loosey goosey situation. At any point, just because he writes this thing today saying this is no longer a thing, he could tomorrow or the day after, three days after he's confirmed as Attorney General, write a new memo that says, well, actually we've taken a second look at this and now we've decided that this fund needs to be resurrected.

[Tom Costello]

The only one.

[Yazan Vesugin]

But it has a different name.

[Ryan Nobles]

Have a different name. Right, exactly. And, you know, maybe it'll have, you know, some sort of different language, it'll pull from some different fund. But the only way that this was truly going to be completely killed was if Congress passed a law that says, you can't do this specific thing. There weren't enough votes to do that. There are too many Republican supporters of President Trump. Republican leadership in both the Senate and the House, none of them wanted to take on President Trump. So this was the best that John Cornyn and Thom Tillis could hope for in this current environment. I will say this, Yaz, it does create roadblocks that didn't currently exist for some of these folks to actually get paid out as a result of it. But it by no means kills it indefinitely.

[Yazan Vesugin]

You know, I'm hearing from you, you're pretty confident that Blanche is actually gonna be confirmed and he's gonna be the next Attorney General of the United States. There is, though, another issue that is outstanding. It hasn't just been this anti weaponization fund. It is the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's abuse. Right. Who have been speaking repeatedly on the Hill. And they are critical of the way in which then Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche handled the release of the Epstein files. So could that potentially be a roadblock for him as this thing makes it to the full Senate?

[Ryan Nobles]

I mean, the short answer is no. You know, there hasn't been another senator outside of Cornyn Antilles that has publicly voiced opposition to him, that there have been some that have been coy about how they're gonna vote, but there's nobody that said, no, I'm not gonna vote. And there's no one that has specifically said because of his handling of the Epstein files. I don't feel comfortable confirming him as attorney general. He had to deal with some Epstein related stuff in the confirmation process. Thom Tillis basically said, I'm not gonna vote yes unless you meet with Epstein survivors. He met with Epstein survivors. That meeting was widely thought to be a disaster by the folks that reported it out. That didn't seem to matter to Tillis. Tillis looked the other way and is gonna vot. You'd have to find four Republican nos outside of Tillis and Cornyn on the floor to effectively kill this. And that's with Mitch McConnell potentially not being available to vote. So I just don't see it happening. I think he's on a fast track to confirmation. I think he'll be the attorney general by the end of the week.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Brian Nobles, welcome back.

[Ryan Nobles]

We're doing it, Yaz.

[Yazan Vesugin]

All right, coming up, AI connected groups are spending big on the midterms. We're going to follow the money and help make sense of what policies these groups are actually pushing for. And while you're listening to the ads, just do us a favor. Send your favorite episode of here's the Scoop to a friend. Tell them why they should be listening to the show. It is a great way for us to find new listeners. We'll see you on the other side. For moi, Clawde, you can talk.

[Tom Costello]

I've always had the gift of gab, Nancy. But now you can understand with pretty Litter, the odor neutralizing long lasting health indicating kitty litter. That's simply the most luxurious way to bury my poopies and my pee pees.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Pretty Litter was developed with veterinarians.

[Ben Kamasar]

It helps me monitor potential health problems

[Yazan Vesugin]

just by changing color.

[Tom Costello]

Go to prettylitter.com today. Pretty litter, not just a pretty litter.

[Yazan Vesugin]

I hear a lot from people that there are days where it's hard to read a single news story. Forget actually being caught up, but I host a podcast that can fix that. It's called the Seven. Seven stories every weekday by 7am Eastern. And here's the other thing. It's short. Less than 10 minutes in fact. I'm Hannah. I'm Hannah Jewell. The Seven podcast will turn around your morning and get you caught up. Check it out and follow the seven wherever you listen to podcasts. And we are back with here's the Scoop from NBC News. So Arizona, Kansas, Missouri, Washington, and here's a big one, Michigan. They are all holding primaries today in Michigan's 7th district. One candidate has made artificial intelligence a major part of his pitch to voters.

[Tom Costello]

I'm Will Lawrence and Tech billionaires want to turn this whole field into a

[Ryan Nobles]

massive data center that'll jack up our

[Tom Costello]

energy bills and ruin our home values.

[Yazan Vesugin]

They put that in. It's going to. But this isn't the only race where the data center debate has played a major role. And AI related groups are raising hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on races across this country. So for the next few weeks, we are going to be taking a look at money in the midterms and especially these new players that are getting involved, who they're supporting, how they're doing it, and then what policy outcomes they're actually going for. So we're starting today with artificial intelligence. So I want to bring to NBC News national politics reporter Ben Kamasar, who has been digging into this. Hi, Ben.

[Tom Costello]

Hey, how are you?

[Yazan Vesugin]

I'm good. I want to kind of start with a broad snapshot of, of money in this year's midterm elections. How is it stacking up against years prior? And is there kind of an overall theme that you have been seeing as you've been digging into this?

[Ben Kamasar]

Yeah, I mean, I think it just depends on how you look at this. From the super macro level, you're seeing Republican outside groups, Republican leaning outside groups are significantly better funded so far than the Democratic ones. But you have a lot of questions on what they're going to do with that money. So at the very macro level, President Trump's affiliate super PAC has been raising hundreds of millions of dollars, but hasn't spent a dime yet. And so we're really interested what they're going to do with that money. And then you have some of these other groups in these special interest fields, AI, crypto, the pro Israel pacs, et cetera. And they're also raising a ton of money, but they're starting to spend it to a degree. And I think what I'm, I'm kind of interested in is how many of these general election debates will have tens of millions of dollars of money from AI, from crypto, from all these special interests just raining down on them outside of the partisan spending we're used to.

[Yazan Vesugin]

So let's focus in on AI because that's what we want to target today. How are they spending their money in order to advance interests in artificial intelligence? And what type of candidates are they targeting?

[Ben Kamasar]

Yeah, no, it's a great question. And so I think the first thing that you would, you know, the first thing to say about this is that these groups, these AI groups aren't spending on these ads about the issue of AI. They're following this trend that we've seen from a lot of special interests that's basically just hit the bread and butter issues that matter to the electorate. So if these groups are playing in Democratic races, we hear a lot about ICE and immigration and taxes and things like that that galvanize the Democratic base. If they're playing in Republic primaries, you'll hear more about the Republican issue set. You're not really, for the most part, having this battle about AI policy up front in the. In the view of the voter, but that's what's happening below the circuit.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Are they going for more Republicans or Democrats or are they supporting more?

[Ben Kamasar]

So right now it's this interesting thing. Basically there are these. In AI, there are these two umbrella groups. One is from the, you know, it's a little loose, but the open AI universe, if you will. And then they're really pushing this national framework. Their argument is that there should not be state by state AI regulations. There should just be one piece of national AI regulation and have that work across the country. They argue that that's the best way to not stifle innovation. Then you have this other group that's more supported by the anthropic for those of you that use Claude. And so those people are more open to restrictions on sort of these state by state levels. And so that's where these two power centers have been raising a ton of money and starting to slowly but surely come into these races. But they're doing it on both sides because ultimately they're trying to make sure that candidates that support their vision are the ones that are, you know, on the ballot for voters to choose in November. Whether they'll start to play in the fall. Whether they'll go harder for Republicans or harder for Democrats remains to be seen because they're still fighting these fights on who will actually be on the ballot and first place. And they're doing that with both parties.

[Yazan Vesugin]

So you talked about some of the big issues and regulation obviously is one of them. State by state regulation versus federal regulation. There's also the issue of data centers, which we've talked about on this show. I interviewed New York Governor Kathy Hochul about that. I just mentioned as I was coming to Michigan 7. It's been a big topic there. Amongst the Democratic candidates, William Lawrence, Matt Mazdam and Bridget Brink, there is a Gallup poll showing that something like 70% or so of Americans do not want to live near an AI data center. How are these PACs navigating the backlash to the building of these data Centers and what are candidates doing to come out for or against them?

[Ben Kamasar]

Yeah, I mean I think this example in Michigan is really relevant. This is on the ballot today, right? It's Michigan's seventh district. It's this fascinating progressive versus establishment dividend. And I've talked to a lot of the folks who are supporting the progressive. Can I talk to everybody in this race? But the ones who are supporting the progressive candidate are saying if he wins it's not going to be about, you know, your typical progressive left versus center left issues. This isn't going to look like the Senate race. That is kind of more of that cookcutter. They really think that this anti data center push from William Lawrence, this Democrat in Michigan is the galvanizing force here for the voters. They think it's the kind of thing that can cut across the lines and, and they think it's something that you know, whether you're moderate, whether you're more left, whether you're more right, that to your point the polling is showing that people are super pissed off about this and it's a why they think he might win. And to your point question about sort of what happens in the fall, I think it is going to be fascinating to see, right, because you could see a situation where some of these AI groups spend heavily against William Lawrence in the fall because they see him as an existential threat. But the Lawrence people say hey, this is the kind of issue that actually could help a progressive who you know, conventional wisdom would say would be hard, have a harder time reaching swing voters actually cut through some of the noise in the fall.

[Yazan Vesugin]

So you know, I think back to the President's inauguration, Ben and behind him was leaders from Meta OpenAI, Google. They have been now courting the President for quite some time. Many of them today are meeting at the White House with officials to talk about voluntary government safety testing in artificial intelligence after their AI tools breached other companies systems. So if, if the kind of leaders of these top tech companies, AI companies already have a strong foothold with this administration and with this president, why is it so important to get buy in from these local lawmakers?

[Ben Kamasar]

Well, I think you know a lot of this stuff is, is happening at the local level, right. When you're thinking about statewide moratoriums to being discussed at the state level on these data centers. When you're thinking about, you know, the federal government can do a lot here that could be helpful to the AI companies certainly can be hurtful to them. We saw the whole flap with that new anthropic model mythos 5, I believe it was called. Right. And how it went down and, you know, for a while and then came back. Right. So there's obviously a lot, a lot of to be done for these groups and currying favor to the administration. But when you're talking about these, like, local fights over where to build a data center, ultimately the state and local legislation, legislators are going to be a lot of the ones that decide a lot of this. And that's why you're seeing a lot of attention on these races. You know, both, you know, not just federal, you know, congressional races. People will sway. But also I would imagine folks are going to start paying more attention and paying more money into these local, more local fights because that's the kind of, you know, arcane zoning rule that may actually be the difference between a gigantic project or not.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Ben Kamasar, Fascinating stuff. Thank you.

[Ben Kamasar]

Thank you.

[Yazan Vesugin]

By the way, speaking of money in the midterms and I, Elon Musk is set to be one of the biggest spenders again this season. He's reportedly restarted his Super PAC America pack and is planning to spend, get this, between 100 and $120 million on Conservative voter turnout and a handful of states. But tonight, the SpaceX CEO might have his eyes set even further afield. We're going to take a very quick break. And when we are back, what happens when a discarded SpaceX rocket slams right into the moon? That's next. Soft for your tushy. It's made by Angels Soft and strong. Budget friendly. The choice is simple.

[Tom Costello]

A roll that feels like paradise and always at a heavenly prize.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Angel soft. Angel soft. Soft and strong. So it's simple. Pick up a pack today. Angel Soft. Soft and strong.

[Tom Costello]

Simple.

[Ryan Nobles]

Nothing beats tradition like weekly game nights at Mom's house. And Tostitos crafted with Masa made the traditional way, starting with whole corn kernels

[Tom Costello]

with flavors worth gathering around like a

[Ryan Nobles]

hint of lime and Mexican street corn

[Tom Costello]

and no artificial colors, flavors or preservatives. That's the Tostitos way. Bring Tostitos to your next game night and you'll be winning.

[Ryan Nobles]

Either way, Tostitos tradition matters.

[Yazan Vesugin]

I really love the Start Today app.

[Ben Kamasar]

They care about how I feel.

[Yazan Vesugin]

It's the staff on the app. It's the connections you make.

[Ben Kamasar]

Without good mental and physical health, you have nothing.

[Yazan Vesugin]

It tells me how to cook to keep myself healthy.

[Ben Kamasar]

I look at my app and I'm

[Ryan Nobles]

like, wow, I didn't know I did 7,000 steps today.

[Tom Costello]

Start Today meets you where you are. Download the Start Today wellness App now

[Yazan Vesugin]

on your Apple or Android device terms

[Tom Costello]

apply C app for details.

[Yazan Vesugin]

And we are back with here's the scoop from NBC News. So at 2:34am Eastern Time on Wednesday morning, an unmanned discarded SpaceX rocket booster is expected to collide with the moon, kicking up this massive cloud of lunar dust. Now, to be clear, this was not intentional, but it's happening. So NASA wants to use this moment to learn more about what the moon is actually made of. And it has got me wondering, should we worry that there is just floating space junk crashing into the moon? So for more on this, I wanna bring in NBC News senior correspondent Tom Costello, who covers all things aviation and space. Hi, Tom.

[Tom Costello]

Hey there. I get the cool stuff.

[Yazan Vesugin]

In other words, as always, you always get the cool stuff. What is happening tonight?

[Tom Costello]

2:34am Eastern Time. I'm sure you'll be up watching. Yes, and we'll find out if the moon is made of cheese. We know it's not because of course, we've landed astronauts on the moon, we've landed rovers on the moon. But to your point, this was an accident. This really wasn't supposed to happen. This wasn't planned. But because it is going to happen, because this Booster rocket from SpaceX, which is from a mission that launched in January 2025 to deliver robotic probes or rovers to the moon. Now that booster rocket which has been kind of floating in space for the last 18 months, it's going to slam into the moon at 5,400 miles per hour. I mean, that is as fast as a bullet flies out of the end of a rifle. And when it does that, it is going to create a massive crater. But also we expect a huge plume that's going to rise up off of the lunar surface. And that plume is going to have, we expect, dust and dirt. Now what exactly will be the composition of that dust and dirt? We don't know. But more to the point, more importantly, the astronomers, the NASA experts aren't sure. They have a pretty good feel for what the moon is comprised of because we have lunar samples from the Apollo days, but that's all a pretty superficial or a surface scoop of dust. Now, we think that we're going to get a much deeper sample. The trouble is we don't have anything or NASA doesn't have any experiments on the moon to immediately sample that or to grab it in your, you know, there's not an atmosphere, of course, above the lunar surface, but in its air, quote unquote, there's nothing to sample that. So they have to rely on telescopes and photographic evidence and try to analyze it that way.

[Yazan Vesugin]

So NASA is targeting a mission to the moon in the next two years, and they want to build a base there.

[Tom Costello]

Right?

[Yazan Vesugin]

Right. So what could they gain to learn from what is beneath the moon's surface?

[Tom Costello]

So the plan, NASA's plan is to build a massive space base on the moon. I mean, we're not talking like 1 square kilometer. We're talking potentially 100 square kilometers on the moon. Well, then if you're going to be drilling down into the moon and anchoring your various buildings, maybe, by the way, also a nuclear power generator on the moon, then you need to know how firmly you need to be anchoring everything in a position. Right. So that's kind of some of the hard information they're hoping to learn. And then also, you know, they learned when they slammed into the south pole with the rocket a number of years ago that there was water ice there that they might be able to tap. Okay, is there water ice buried deeply under any other part of the moon? So that will also be part of what they'd love to know. I mean, they've got a long wish list of what they would like to learn. The question is how much they'll be able to actually discern from photographic evidence and telescopes.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Speaking of litter and speaking of space, there's, I guess, what, 130 million or so pieces of space junk that are just floating around up there. Does that pose any risk either to the Earth, to space? I mean, should we be worried about space junk in general?

[Tom Costello]

I think the answer to all three questions is yes. But the 130 million pieces, and that's everything from a small paint chip to literally a piece of satellite and rocket debris. Most of it is orbiting in low Earth orbit, not around the moon. Low Earth orbit. And it gets worse every single day that we put another satellite up, whether that's SpaceX, whether that's Amazon, NASA, whether it's the Chinese. Every time we put another rocket up there, then we're adding to the clutter. Now, the risk is that that a piece could crash into another piece, or specifically that one satellite could degrade or be hit by a p of debris. Then that cascades, and then it hits another satellite and another and another and another, and pretty soon you've got a real catastrophe in orbit. Actually, Steve Robinson, the former astronaut, just told me two weeks ago, he was on multiple shuttle missions, and he said, you know, every time we came back, we hit space junk and cracked our windows.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Wow.

[Tom Costello]

I said, every time and he said, yes. But you may remember last November, the Chinese astronauts onboard their own space station, their space station was hit by debris and then they had to send up a replacement ship to get them back. The bottom line is the concern is it could hit a spaceship, as you suggested, it could hit a satellite. And much of what's up there is going to come back down to Earth. And it already is raining down. Most of it goes into the oceans. But, you know, we've had pieces actually fall into people's backyards already. And what are the. It seems almost inevitable that eventually it's going to come down on a city and potentially cause somebody serious injury or worse.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Okay, taking a turn then. Are you going to be watching tonight, tomorrow morning? Are you going to be watching in the morning?

[Tom Costello]

Yeah, I'll be watching the replay at 5 in the morning or maybe 6 in the morning. I've asked is there any chance we could see it from Earth with the naked eye? And the chances are very remote.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Okay.

[Tom Costello]

And also NASA is saying it may take a few days before we actually get any imagery back.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Okay. Tom Costello, thank you.

[Ben Kamasar]

You bet.

[Yazan Vesugin]

All right, that is gonna do it for us at here's the Scoop from NBC News. I'm Yasim Basugin. We'll be back tomorrow with whatever the day may bring. And if you like what you heard, subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. And you can also subscribe to our daily newsletter, the Inside Scoop. It is a deeper dive on the main stories of the day that comes out every weeknight straight to your inbox. You can sign up for the Inside Scoop as part of our paid [e-mail] we'll see you tomorrow.

[Ben Kamasar]

I'm Craig Melvin.

[Ryan Nobles]

Cheers. Cheers.

[Yazan Vesugin]

Cheers.

[Ryan Nobles]

I've always been a glass half full kind of guy, and now I'm talking

[Ben Kamasar]

to some people who look at the

[Tom Costello]

world that way, too.

[Ben Kamasar]

Some really fascinating folks who share their

[Ryan Nobles]

defining moments, their triumphs, their challenges. Their stories are funny and quite candid.

[Ben Kamasar]

So I hope you'll join me each week.

[Ryan Nobles]

And who knows, you might just come away with your own glass half Full.

[Tom Costello]

Search Glass Half Full with Craig Melton From Today on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.