Melanie H (3:38)

But the tenuous nature of the truce is on full display right now, with Iran's parliamentary speaker claiming that multiple points of the deal have been violated. And White House Press Secretary Carrion Levitt telling reporters that Iran's public announcement is about the agreement cannot be trusted.

White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt (3:55)

The Iranians originally put forward a 10 point plan that was fundamentally unserious, unacceptable and completely discarded. It was literally thrown in the garbage by President Trump and his negotiating team. The regime acknowledged reality to the negotiating team. They put forward a more reasonable and entirely different and condensed plan to the President and his team. President Trump and the team determined the new modified plan was a workable basis on which to negotiate and to align it with our own 15 point proposal. The President's red lines, namely the end of Iranian enrichment in Iran, have not changed and the idea that President Trump would ever accept an Iranian wish list as a deal is completely absurd.

Melanie H (4:42)

The White House, however, providing no details on what is actually being negotiated or agreed to behind closed doors moments ago. Vice President Vance speaking to reporters on his way back to Washington from Hungary, also addressing some of the confusion.

Matt Bradley (4:56)

There are three different 10 point proposals at least that I've seen floating around. The first 10 point proposal was something that was submitted and we think frankly was probably written by ChatGPT. That was submitted to Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. That immediately went in the garbage and was rejected. There was a second 10 point proposal that was much more reasonable that was based on some back and forth between us, between the Pakistanis and between the Iranians. That is the 10 point proposal that the President was referencing in his truth yesterday. And then frankly, I've seen a third 10 point proposal that's even more maximalist than the first 10 point proposal that's been floating around various social media channels.

Melanie H (5:32)

Iran today announcing it was suspending traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, accusing Israel of violating their end of the agreement after the Israeli military launched another series of attacks on Hezbollah, Iran's proxy in Lebanon. As for the status of the vital waterway for global oil markets, here's some of what level Levitt told my colleague Gabe Gutierrez

Craig Melvin (5:55)

State media is saying that Iran has now closed off the Strait of Hormuz today in response to Israeli attacks on Lebanon. What's the White House response to that?

White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt (6:03)

The president was made aware of those reports before I came to the podium. That is completely unacceptable. And again, this is a case of what they're saying publicly is different.

Melanie H (6:12)

Privately.

White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt (6:13)

We have seen an uptick of traffic in the Strait today. And I will reiterate the President's expectation and demand that the Strait of Hormuz is reopened immediately, quickly and safely. That is his expectation. It has been relayed to him privately that that is what's taking place and these reports publicly are false.

Melanie H (6:32)

Additionally, it doesn't appear that the ceasefire has actually resulted in the cessation of firing. And Qatar's Defense Ministry says it was targeted today by seven missiles and drones launched from Iran and Kuwait, saying a number of petroleum facilities and its energy ministry were attacked by Iranian drones. The breakneck pace of developments coming today as Pakistan is planning to host diplomatic talks in Islamabad later this week with the US And Iranian negotiators. The White House saying today Vice President Vance will lead the US Delegation along with special envoy Steve Wolkoff and the President's son, Jonathan in law Jared Kushner. Joining me now is our team of reporters from all around the world. NBC News White House correspondent Monica Elba. NBC News chief international correspondent Keir Simmons is in Saudi Arabia. NBC News international correspondent Matt Bradley is in Tel Aviv. Also with me are NBC News senior national security correspondent Courtney Kuby and NBC News business and economy reporter Ali Kanal. Thank you all so much for joining us on an incredibly busy news day. Monica, I want to start with you though, at the White Is there any more clarity on what was agreed to as part of this cease fire deal?

Monica Alba (7:44)

It seems, Mel, that the only agreement here really is to take a bit of a pause to try to establish the possibility of diplomatic talks. But the actual fine points of what might be in this agreement, in these proposals, in this framework is not being revealed. The United States side of it, and you saw the vice president talk about this, is not putting out what the exact plan that is under discussion actually is. We only know that there are certain points in there from what has been floated publicly that the White House is pushing back on, including what it could mean for the potential presence of U.S. service members in the region, what it could mean for the potential of sanctions that could be eased against Iran. And really in terms of some of the most critical areas of disagreement, what the actual future of how the Strait of Hormuz will be handled, how that is going to be addressed. And it is just simply unclear right now whether any of that has actually been agreed to. You did hear the vice president sort of indicate that maybe on a couple of points there has been some indication there could be cooperation, but there is still a just very tenuous sense even from the White House today that these talks could fall apart, that there could be a real issue with trying to solidify or shape up some of the ones that again are just going to be extremely thorny, that either from the Iranian perspective they will not accept or that the US Won't accept.

Melanie H (9:05)

MEL well, speaking of things that are not clear, there's been so much back and forth over Iran's ten point plan. President Trump called it workable, but apparently according to Vance, there's been a couple different ones floating around. Is it clear to you, Monica, exactly what the points are, that the US And Iran are actually negotiating here?

Monica Alba (9:22)

And remember that back when Steve Wycoff was the one who did confirm that there was a multipoint plan that had been sent back and forth through intermediaries. That's basically what we know about it. We know that this plan exists, but we have never seen it from the US Side of things. What's on the screen right now has been publicized from Iran's Supreme National Security Council and they point out some of these things that again, they are likely non starters for the US including full compensation for damages in Iran, the removal of all sanctions. It does seem some will be eased, but probably not all of them. The release of all frozen Iranian assets, and again, that whole debate over the acceptance of nuclear enrichment which President Trump has indicated and the White House has indicated is not something that he's going to accept.

Melanie H (10:06)

MEL yes, such a key sticking point. Vice President Vance is leading the US Delegation for talks in Islamabad. The vice president, though notably was opposed to the US Strikes in Iran. So what do you make of his role in this diplomatic effort?

Monica Alba (10:20)

This has been such a fascinating dynamic to watch, exactly for those personal reasons that you just point out where he has long been opposed to these kinds of extended foreign entanglements. Privately we know that that is what he told the President. He was the one who was most against this potential action, but then ultimately said to him he would get on board with whatever the president decided. And now he is the one who it seems is going to be brought into the negotiations in a role that we haven't seen him play. Typically, usually you would see Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner involved in these kind of nitty gritty discussions about trying to see if there can be progress on the diplomatic path. But the fact that he is going to be going to Pakistan, that he is going to be the highest ranking US Official to visit there in years, is a very, very significant one because it also carries the risk of whether there isn't any progress that can be achieved there, of looking like he was involved in something that ultimately failed, which we know politically just raises all sorts of questions about what that could mean for his future as a potential 2028 presidential candidate. So just a lot of different layers and a complexity to all of this at home and overseas, no doubt.

Melanie H (11:27)

Monica Alba, thank you. I want to turn now to Keir Simmons, who's overseas for us. Iran is saying that the Strait of Hormuz is closed and claiming that the causes of the cease fire proposal were violated. But what are you hearing and what is the status of the cease fire?

Keir Simmons (11:46)

Well, I think it's confusion. You heard the vice president suggest that it's kind of understandable confusion, and that's probably, probably right. Certainly. We spoke just in the past hour to a former IRGC commander in Tehran about the perspective from there, and he was suggesting that the Iranian regime is prepared to negotiate, that it does consider the points that it put forward as a starting point, if you like, and that it doesn't expect to win all of those. You know, there are so many that would be so advantageous to the Iranian regime that they would be happy, you might think, with just some of them, for example, sanctions being lifted or having more control over the Strait of Hormuz or even and it's just impossible to imagine that the U.S. would agree to this. But even, you know, U.S. personnel, U.S. military being removed from the Arab world, where I am now, I'm now in Saudi Arabia. But on the other hand, he did say that these attacks in Lebanon, which I think you'll talk to Matt a bit more about in a moment, that they are really a red line for Iran and that perhaps even the talks won't take place, that they would call them off if that continues. So, I mean, it is a delicate tightrope war right now, I think, on both sides, not least because in Iran there will be different factions with different views about how far the Iranians should compromise. And then, of course, just to finish that, there are the US Allies and partners in this region. I'm in Saudi Arabia, in a part of Saudi Arabia where, where they have been bombarded. Bahrain is just across the water there in The Gulf, again, they've been bombarded. And it was real frustration in the Arab world that there were more attacks today even after this cease fire was called.

Melanie H (13:37)

Well, part of Iran's initial 10 point plan includes Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz. What would be the implications for the region if Iran is able to control toll vessels passing through the strait?

Keir Simmons (13:51)

They're not going to like it. I mean, to be honest, it's frankly unacceptable to governments like Saudi Arabia, many of these, these Gulf governments. And I do think that there are signs that they, that that's not the way that it will play out. And just as an example, it's worth remembering that Saudi Arabia, for example, has oil deals with China and China has a lot of leverage over Iran. And so the idea that, that, that oil for China might have to be paid for the matter, pay the Iranians in order to have that transported to Asia, that, that seems difficult to comprehend, honestly. But I think that just illustrates another point here, which is that we haven't talked very much about the China's role, Beijing's role in all of this, but certainly it's been suggested in the last 24 hours that Beijing did have a role in putting pressure on Iran and that I think is significant in terms of the balance of power in this region. Maybe just a small shift, but an important one.

Melanie H (14:53)

Yeah, care, thank you so much for all of that really important perspective. Matt, I want to turn to you and I want to start by playing something that Vice President Vance said today about Israel's attacks on Lebanon. Let's play it and we'll talk about it on the other side.

Matt Bradley (15:06)

I think the Iranians thought that the cease fire included Lebanon and it just didn't. We never made that promise. We never indicated that was going to be the case. What we said is that the ceasefire would be focused on Iran and the ceasefire would be focused on America's allies, both Israel and the Gulf Arab states. Now, that said, the Israelis, as I understand it, again, I'm supposed to get a fuller report when I get on the plane, have actually offered to be frankly to check themselves a little bit in Lebanon because they want to make sure that our negotiation is successful.

Melanie H (15:39)

Matt, what is the mood like in Tel Aviv right now and what more do we know about Israel's involvement in this cease fire deal coming together?

Matt (15:49)

Well, I would say the Tel Aviv mood is really great right now. We're starting to see everybody really going back onto the streets. I'm not going to lie to you. The streets have more or less been filled with people for the past month. I mean, this was a major disaster for Israelis, but there were people going about their business and increasingly so in the last couple of weeks. But now we're hearing from the Israeli government that more and more security restrictions are going to start to lift. More and more planes are going to start going in and out of Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport. So things here really are starting to get back to normal. And there is quite a bit of optimism around what we're seeing here now as far as this negotiations are concerned, as far as the diplomacy is concerned, the Israeli government is clearly very worried about the progress of this cease fire. And the issue of Lebanon, as we've been discussing this whole time, is a very vexing one and one that really, really does threaten to undermine everything that's been done so far in terms of securing some sort of region wide peace. Now, the Israelis have said for weeks that they are determined to destroy Hezbollah once and for all. Hezbollah, of course, its main benefactor is Iran. Hezbollah is Iran's cat's paw against Israel. And as such, they are tethered together ideologically, politically, diplomatically. It's the Israelis who have been trying to say we are trying to decouple Lebanon and Hezbollah from Iran so that we can negotiate and make something like peace with Iran while at the same time continuing our offensive against Hezbollah that is about to cause major problems and already has for the progress and the future of this negotiated truce.

Melanie H (17:24)

Matt, thank you so much. We appreciate all of your reporting and analysis. I want to turn to Courtney, who's here on set with me. Courtney, Secretary Hegses declared victory today. So does the Pentagon view this war as over?

Courtney Kuby (17:36)

It sure sounded like it today. And I mean, the two biggest indicators were the comments that we were getting out of Secretary Hegseth today talking about it being, you know, over and talking about the tremendous victory here. But I was also really struck by the amount of detail that we got on the battle damage that the US has inflicted on Iran's conventional military by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Dan Kaine. You know, for the last five plus weeks we've been asking for these kinds of stats and the answer is always we're not going to talk about it during the conflict. We don't want to let Iran know that we know what we've, what we've hid and, and we have an idea of the battle damage. And today he rattled off a number of statistics. To me, that is one of the biggest indicators that that's where they think this is going is potentially the end. But the reality is, even the statistics they gave prove that one, the number one objective, military objective that President Trump spoke about that very first night this started and that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs talked about today at that briefing, that is to destroy Iran's ballistic missile and drone capabilities. What is very clear is they've not done that, and that is not because they haven't taken out a tremendous amount of that capability, but it's an almost impossible mission. You know, they have also destroyed much of their ability to produce new missiles

Andrea Mitchell (18:46)

and produce new drones.

Courtney Kuby (18:47)

But the idea that they have completely destroyed those two capabilities, it's just not true.

Melanie H (18:51)

And speaking of impossible, difficult missions, I do want to play something that Hegseth said about Iran's enriched uranium.

Pete Hegseth (18:58)

And so right now, it's buried, and we're watching it. We know exactly what they have, and they know that, and they will either give it to us, which the President has laid out, they'll give it to us voluntarily. We'll get it, we'll take it. We'll take it out, or if we have to do something else ourselves, like we did Midnight Hammer or something like that, we reserve that opportunity.

Melanie H (19:17)

And, Courtney, I know we've talked about this before, but remind us, what would it take for the US to actually take Iran's enriched uranium?

Courtney Kuby (19:25)

So, I mean, the reference to Midnight Hammer would indicate more big strikes, right? Trying to destroy the facilities with airstrikes. The idea of sending boots on the ground, though, I mean, the US Military has plans to go into all of those facilities and try to retrieve that uranium. But it is an enormous logistical undertaking. It would take potentially thousands of U.S. troops. If you're talking about these facilities that were struck during Midnight Hammer, many of them have to be dug out. It's not really clear the state of the uranium either. The IAEA believes that at least half, if not more, is at Isfahan. So it was badly damaged in those strikes. Is it possible that when the facility itself was collapsing down and these canisters were down 100 meters or whatever below, that they were punctured, that they may have been compromised? So you would need to have scientists there who would be able to ensure that there was not a leak of radiation. You would need to have people who would ensure that they're getting the right uranium and not the 20% enriched and then getting out, you know what, over 400 kilograms of uranium even in these canisters, which are about the size of a scuba tank, so very accessible to carry. But there's a lot of them. That's also a huge undertaking. And by the way, you're doing all of this while you're under fire, potentially by the Iranians. Unless this is some kind of a coordinated thing. It does hearken back to something that the US military did in Kazakhstan. It must have been 30 years ago now in the 1990s. In that case, it was with coordination of the government there and it still took a month to do.

Melanie H (20:52)

I think the other big question that everyone has right now is what, what happens if at the end of these two weeks there is no meaningful progress on these negotiations? Does that mean more military action?

Monica Alba (21:02)

Yeah.

Courtney Kuby (21:02)

And then I'll even add to that. What happens if the cease fire is not holding and if some of these earliest terms aren't holding. And the reality is the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs were very straightforward about how they are not moving any of the military at this point who have been sent into the region, tens of thousands of troops. They are still there. They're not going anywhere. I could see a possibility where they are all staying there for the next couple of weeks, maybe hopefully getting a little bit of rest because it's been a busy few weeks, but waiting to see what happens here and, and then, and then maintaining that possibility and that option to restart offensive operations.

Melanie H (21:36)

Courtney, thank you so much. I know you've been so busy, but we appreciate all the reporting and analysis. I want to turn to Ali because the business side of this has just been such an important storyline. So let's turn to the markets. How are the markets reacting to the cease fire and are they being overly optimistic given how fragile this deal seems to be?

Ali Kanal (21:54)

Well, if you take a look on your screen there, I mean, what a relief rally on Wall Street. The dow surging over 1300 points. The S&P 500 and NASDAQ both up nearly 3%. A big driver there. Oil prices which plunged today, the largest single day drop since 2020. Now, are markets getting ahead of themselves? Maybe. But I think investors are just reacting to the fact that this is the first positive piece of news that we've received around this war. So since it began six weeks ago, it was really important that the president focused on the Strait of Hormuz, that critical global choke point. You know, that that is really the focus here when we look ahead to the future of these negotiations. So that ultimately is what investors are reacting to and we'll see if these levels can hold.

Melanie H (22:42)

Well, as you mentioned, oil prices plunged today. But why is that when it's still not entirely clear whether the Strait of Hormuz is actually open.

Ali Kanal (22:51)

Yeah, it's interesting here. Markets seem to be pricing out that worst case scenario. So there was this concern that we could see a sustained shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz, which would trigger this global supply shock. We've already seen hints of that already. And if that escalated, you're talking about a real hit to global growth. Now this cease fire signals that they that may be avoided or at least partially eased and that's enough to send oil prices lower. But the disconnect here is that for many of these shipping companies, for the insurance agencies, very little has change from a practical standpoint. So ship traffic through the strait, if you take a look at some of that data, it's just a few ships, basically a trickle at this point. They're not resuming those normal operations. We heard from one major shipping company, Mayor Cirque, and they told us in a statement, quote, the cease fire may create transit opportunities, but it does not yet provide full maritime certainty. And we need to understand all potential conditions attached. At this point, we take a cautious approach and we are not making any changes, changes to specific services. So markets are really moving on expectations. We don't have that reality matching just quite yet.

Melanie H (24:01)

And we'll see how long it takes for gas prices to actually come down. Ali Canal, thank you. Coming up, we're sticking with the breaking news in the Middle east and all the urgent questions still swirling as President Trump's cease fire deal with Iran gets put to the test. You're watching Meet THE Press now.

Willie Geist (24:23)

Hey, guys, Willie Geist here reminding you to check out the Sunday Sit down podcast. On this week's episode, I get together with stand up comedy superstar Nate Bargetzi in front of a live audience at New York City Winery to talk about his rise from small clubs to sold out arenas around the world. You can get my conversation with Nate for free wherever you download your podcasts.

NBC News Promo Voice (24:46)

Stay informed with the NBC News app.

Melanie H (24:49)

Breaking news just coming in moments ago.

NBC News Promo Voice (24:51)

Watch, read and listen throughout your day and now unlock even more with a subscription. It's the best of NBC News with fewer ad interruptions, including ad free articles, podcasts and full NBC News shows, plus deeper access and exclusive content.

Monica Alba (25:07)

Let's just take a step back.

NBC News Promo Voice (25:08)

It's more context and clarity from the reporters you trust. Download the NBC News app now and subscribe for more.

Melanie H (25:18)

Welcome back. NATO Secretary General Mark Rudda is scheduled to be meeting with President Trump this hour as the war with Iran is pushing US relations with its NATO allies into a crisis point. The president has repeatedly lashed out at European countries for not doing more to support the US in the war. And the White House press secretary said today that NATO, quote, turned their backs on the American people over the last six weeks. But earlier today, Britain's prime minister expressing cautious optimism about the US And Iran announcing a two week ceasefire. Take a listen.

UK Prime Minister (25:50)

We just reached this ceasefire which is both welcome and I think there'll be a sense of real relief certainly is across the region and for the United Kingdom. But there's work to do and it's very important we get the stray of Hormuz open. There's a lot of work to do there.

Melanie H (26:06)

Joining me now is NBC News chief foreign affairs and chief Washington correspondent Andrea Mitchell. And Ken Pollack, Vice President for Policy at the Middle East Institute and a former CIA military analyst. Thank you so much for joining us. But Andrea, I do want to start with you. Just give us a reality check in this moment because the Iranians are throwing cold water on the idea that a cease fire has actually held, saying it's been violated. So do you think that this is a ceasefire that can actually hold?

Andrea Mitchell (26:34)

This cease fire is not going to hold. It's going to hold probably for a few days till they all go to Islamabad and have those meetings that will now be led by the vice President. It's interesting to me that, that if they're talking about the nuclear stockpile that they are again meeting without having a nuclear expert with them. They don't have Farsi translators, they don't have teams as they did have when we were all covering the negotiations with the Iranians for years in Vienna, in Switzerland and in other areas. Just those extensive negotiations that led to the agreement, the nuclear agreement. It was flawed agreement going in because it did not have missiles included, but it did cover for 15 years limiting the enrichment. And this does not specifically limit enrichment. The stockpile is supposed to be verified by satellite imagery. Well, it's buried, supposedly obliterated under these mountains by the actions last June. So how are they going to verify what's happening underground without having UN Inspectors there? And they've not been there since June? I'm not sure how that's possible.

Melanie H (27:49)

That is going to be such a key question going forward. Ken, what do we know about who's in control in Iran right now and can a peace deal realistically be negotiated with them?

Pete Hegseth (27:59)

Sure.

Ken Pollack (28:00)

So I think this is just adds to the kind of skepticism that you just heard from Andrea, which is that it's not entirely clear who's in charge. It does seem to be very much the case that the Revolutionary Guard is in charge enough to be controlling Iran's military forces. Who negotiated this deal, under what circumstances, how much they were actually speaking for a unified Iranian government is entirely unknown. And we've heard reports that Mustafa Khamenei, the new Supreme Leader, is comatose or otherwise incapacitated. We just don't know about any of this. And again, to pick up on the points that Andrea just made, you know, going into this, the Iranian regime is in a completely different place from the Trump administration. Right? The way that the two sides are talking about this ceasefire, it's like they're talking about completely different agreements. The amount of overlap is minimal. And I think that it is going to make it that much harder to come to an agreement, A, because the positions are so fundamentally different, but B, because it's not entirely clear who's fully in control in Iran or if anyone is.

Melanie H (29:06)

There are just so many unknowns at this point. Ken, the White House press secretary, did say today that Iran can no longer distribute weapons to its proxies in the region and that Iran will not be able to acquire any more nuclear weapons. But is that how you see it? And have those threats from Iran actually been eliminated?

Ken Pollack (29:23)

Well, personally, how I see it, I think is irrelevant. I think that all that matters is how the Iranians see it. I think it's very clear the Iranians don't see it that way at all. I don't think they would ever agree to that. I think that if they agreed to it, you could never enforce it, which gets to a number of different problems that we're going to have with this. And again, at the end of the day, the Iranians believe that they have won a great victory. Now, I know the Trump administration believes it has won a great victory. And sometimes it's the case that the best peace deals are when both sides can claim a great victory. The problem that we've got right now is that both sides are so far apart in what they believe they've gotten the other side to do. And. And going into this, we know that the Iranians felt like they had the upper hand, like President Trump was desperate, like the pain that they were taking was less than the pain that they were inflicting on the United States and particularly on President Trump. That doesn't make for a great agreement.

Melanie H (30:21)

Andrea, I want to ask about Trump's threat to destroy Iran's civilization. The White House press secretary said today that this was a real threat and that the Pentagon was prepared to follow through with that 8pm deadline. What do you make of the White House press secretary's comments today?

Andrea Mitchell (30:36)

She can say that, but I don't think that the president was ever going to carry that out yet. I think it was another flaw in their strategy because I'm not sure that that's what was persuasive with the Iranians. It certainly has a lot of fallout with diplomats around the world, not only among our allies, but also our adversaries. It just seemed, according to people I spoke to, unprecedential. The profanity that he used on Easter Sunday was shocking to a lot of people. It seemed desperate. And it didn't seem to show that he had a real command of the situation, that he was so eager to find a way out of it. And it's just the kind of threat to say that you're going to eliminate a civilization. Even the threat of that is a Violation of Article 51 of the Geneva Conventions. You don't have to do it, obviously, far worse if you do it. And you can argue that there are dual use issues with railroads and other facilities that are civilian facilities, but it's still so far beyond the realm of the way people negotiate. And it just seemed to me that it was exposing the weakness of the American position and the fact that the Iranians had so much leverage over the Strait of Hormuz. The Strait of Hormuz was open. It was international waters before the war. And now there's an enormous distance between the two sides as to who is monitoring it, who has control, and whether tolls are going to be exacted by one or both of the parties. So it's not an open waterway any longer.

Monica Alba (32:09)

Yeah.

Melanie H (32:09)

I also want to talk about the NATO chief, Mark Rudda. He's meeting with President Trump this afternoon. Ken, how much damage has this war done to the NATO alliance and the relationship with some of our allies like France and the UK well, so I

Ken Pollack (32:24)

certainly think, Melanie, it's a tremendous amount of damage as long as Trump is president. You know, this is simply reinforced trends that they've been seeing going back to his first term in office where he has been contemptuous of NATO. He has repeatedly made clear that he doesn't care about Naito, that he is not committed to NATO's defense. Obviously, none of that plays very well with NATO this time around. I think that it has gotten worse because, of course, he took the United States to war in a way that NATO didn't appreciate. That was very dangerous for the European members of NATO and then turned around after he created all these problems with global energy, demanding that NATO suddenly respond. And truth be told, NATO's ability to respond was always going to be limited. They just don't have the military capabilities that we do. He then reacted very badly to them. I think the biggest questions right now, though, Melanie, are first, what does President Trump do after this with regard to Naito? Does he, you know, in a fit of pique, further distance, the United States Congress has made it so he can't actually pull us out of the alliance, but he can certainly do further damage to demonstrate his, his anger at the European members of NATO. And then how does NATO respond even after President Trump leaves office? Do they look at this as a sign of a bigger set of problems with American unreliability, or do they say, well, that was just Trump and whoever comes next will go back to the old way things were?

Melanie H (33:54)

Yeah, we'll certainly be watching very closely to see President Trump's tone when it comes to NATO. Andrea, I want to ask about the topic of Lebanon. We were talking about it earlier in the show. Israel continues to bomb Lebanon. What is Netanyahu endgame here?

Andrea Mitchell (34:09)

It's really unclear because Netanyahu is going after Hezbollah. Hezbollah is part of the parliament. It's part of the system in Lebanon. But this Lebanon, this government in Lebanon has been trying to control it and to limit their power. Israel had already done a lot to get rid of their weapons, and they are a threat to northern Israel. They have been firing against northern Israel. They are a proxy of Iran. But there's a way of doing it, even if they are taking land and creating a dmz, if you will. They've been bombing Beirut. Million two people are displaced and the Arab allies are saying just stop bombing Beirut. We're going to have to the Saudis and others, we're going to have to come in and rebuild that as well as Gaza. I mean, what are you doing here? It's also destabilizing Syria next door, which is a fledgling country. So it is. But the US And Israel both say that Lebanon was not part of the ceasefire. Iran and Pakistan say it is. So there's another disagreement.

Melanie H (35:06)

Another disagreement. Andrea? Ken, thank you so much both for your important perspectives. Up next, Democrats, they're going to be tightening the margins in a big way. Even as Republicans hold on to Georgia's deep red congressional district. Steve Kornacki is standing by at the big board to break it all down. You're watching Meet the Press now. Welcome back if it's Wednesday, we have election results. The Trump endorsed Republican Clay Fuller, defeated Democrat Sean Harris in Georgia's deep red 14th congressional district in a special election to replace former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. Fuller's victory gives Republicans a little more padding on their House majority, which is very narrow. But the results are also a potential warning sign for the gop. Democrats cut into the Republican margin of victory by a massive amount compared to the 2024 presidential election. Joining me now to explain is NBC Chief Data Analyst Steve Kornacki. So, Steve, Democrats, they didn't win in Georgia, but still made some pretty significant gains. So walk us through the results from last night.

Steve Kornacki (36:16)

Yeah, that's right. The Republicans hold the seat. But I think the story here has to do with the margin. So you see here Fuller beating Harris, the Democrat, essentially a 12 point margin right there. This is what this same district, Georgia's 14th, looked like in the 2024 presidential election. Donald Trump won this by 37 points. That's also what it looked like. It was 38 points in 2020. So in presidential races here, this has been almost 40 points for the Republicans. For the Republicans last night, only 12. So that's a massive shift away from the Republicans toward the Democrats, even though Fuller does win the seat. Notably within the district, there were a couple places that it was extra pronounced. Whitfield County, I think comes to mind. This county is a Republican county, but it has one of the highest concentrations of Hispanics of any county in Georgia. And look at the shift here. Trump won here by 44 points. He had done pretty well with Hispanic voters in Whitfield county, down to just a 15 point margin in this county for the Republican there. So you see a pretty big shift there within the district. There were a couple other places like that. So massive shift away from Republicans. And I think the thing is, it is not a one off. Take a look at this. These are all of the special congressional elections since Donald Trump came back to the White House at the start of 2025. And the pattern is clear in all of them. Look, you go back to the first one. This is a year ago, April 2025, Florida's first district. Trump had won it by 37 points in the 2024 presidential election. The Republican in that special election won by 15. That was a shift away from the Republicans of 22 points. Look, another shift that same day in a different Florida district. Here's a blue district last September that Kamala Harris had won by 34 points. In the special congressional election, the Democrat won it by 50, it got more Democratic. Right. Another blue district got bluer in the special election. We saw a Tennessee special election for Congress in a district Trump had won by 22. The Republican won it, but the margin came all the way down to nine. And then what we saw in Georgia yesterday, that's the biggest shift we've seen in all of these, 25 points away from the Republicans towards the Democrats. But in all six of these elections, double digit net shifts away from the Republicans towards the Democrats since 2024. Certainly a big factor in this is we're seeing a Democratic base that's more energized than the Republican base in a special election that can make a big difference. But the fear here for Republicans and the hope for Democrats is this isn't just turnout. This isn't just differential turnout. Are there some voters in these districts, too who are changing their minds?

Melanie H (38:52)

Steve, thank you so much for breaking all of that down. After the break, though, seeing red inside the growing mag revolt over President Trump's foreign entanglements and his threat to end the Iranian civilization. Keep it here on MEET THE PRESS now. Welcome back. Joining me now is our panel, Shelby Talcott, White House correspondent at Semaphore, Ashley Etienne, former communications director for Vice President Harris and former senior adviser to Nancy Pelosi. And Mark Bednar, Republican strategist and former adviser to former Speaker McCarthy. Thank you guys so much for joining me. On a busy news like day like today, there's just so much going on, so many unanswered questions. But Shelby, I want to start with you because there are still a lot of questions about the cease fire. We've also heard conflicting things from the administration. Vance is saying this is a fragile truce, President Trump declaring victory. What do you make of that split coming from the administration?

Shelby Talcott (39:53)

I think the reality is when you're looking at all of these kind of mixed messages or kind of different variations of what's going on, it shows that there is, it is a fragile cease fire. And there is a lot of questions unanswered. I think when I talk to administration officials and and really the core kind of mag supporters, their huge focus is on this enriched uranium and Iran not obtaining a nuclear weapon because remember, that was the president's sort of goal for, you know, ever since he got into office here. And so if he can't achieve that, even the most, you know, staunch Trump supporters are telling me that's not going to be a win. And you heard Caroline Levitt earlier today emphasize that that is a focus for this administration the question is, is that something that Iran is going to agree to in writing and are we going to see the outcome from that?

Melanie H (40:47)

Well speaking of the confusion over what Iran is going to agree to Mark, there's been this ten point plan. Vance said there's multiple versions of it floating around but it's not actually what's being negotiated. But don't you think the United States should come out and say what is being negotiated or else risk this void that Iran is apparently eager to fill?

Mark Bednar (41:05)

Well that within the fog of war you don't necessarily want to tip your hand of what you're interpreting what you're bringing in. And multiple things can be true at the same time. On one hand there could be a fragile truce that's going on right now but also militarily that we're doing exceptionally well. So I think we're in a very much a distrust. But make damn sure you verify where we're going next because obviously Pete Hagseth very happy today, you know, saying that militarily we're exceeding and that we're doing very well. But this is going to be a day by day experience and you know Republicans that we're rooting for the president on this and we're going to see where this goes. But like today was a very big news. The world is safer, America's safer for the strait is safer because it's today.

Melanie H (41:47)

Well Ashley, I'm sure there's a huge sigh of relief among Democrats but is there damage that is long lasting here especially in terms of gas prices and our relationship with some of our allies?

Ashley Etienne (41:58)

I mean I don't think anyone's is experiencing a sigh of relief. I mean there's still to your point and everyone's point today is there's much so there's too many unanswered questions to have confidence in anything at this point. I think I was just recently on the phone with Mr. Jeffries team and I made a couple pieces of advice and it looks like they're moving forward on many of them. One, they're introducing a war powers resolution that's actually during pro forma. My advice to them is introduce a suite of bills. Do one on violations of international law. These children that got killed that's deplorable. Do one that would prevent funding for the Iran war. Do another one that really gets to this issue of whether or not not we're still focused on nuclear weapons versus the strait. I mean we've lost the main thing is no longer the main thing. But in addition to that because, you know, I ran this, the opposition for Pelosi. Do an outside strategy, an inside, outside strategy. Get the outside groups activated on the ground in those districts that you need to win, those 40 districts. This isn't an independent voter play right now. These are going to be the people who you're going to be able to pick off going into November. Go into those districts right now and wear out the Republicans on this issue of whether or not they're going to sign the War power resolution, whether or not they want to admonish the president on his own words. You know, put some pressure on these Republicans on this particular issue. You've got his back against the wall. Not only do the Iranians have the president's back against the wall, but the Democrats now are in an advantaged position. They've got to throw everything they've got at it.

Melanie H (43:23)

Well, on that war pause vote, I was actually talking to a House leadership source, a Republican, who said they don't think they're going to be able to keep staving off these Iran War Powers Resolution. Mark, do you think it's going to put some Republicans in an uncomfortable spot if some of these do come to the floor?

Mark Bednar (43:37)

Well, it's going to be really important throughout all this between these next two weeks and beyond for President Trump to be clearly articulating where he wants to go with this. Because for better or for worse, they get criticized for it, but they should also get credit. The House and Senate conference Republicans, they are loyal followers of President Trump. If he leads them to water, they will drink. And so if he's able to demonstrate where, where the war is going to here, what's the strategy they will follow. And so it's going to be very important for the administration as a whole, Secretary Rubio, Secretary Hegseth and beyond, to be able to show these Republicans, hey, here's the North Star, here's where, here's how you need to think about this.

Melanie H (44:14)

And Shelby, there are still going to be some economic consequences. It might take a while for things like gas prices to come down. What is the White House's view here? And do you get the sense that there is any effort to try to pivot to more of a midterm messaging strategy and try to put the war behind them?

Shelby Talcott (44:29)

Well, it's an interesting question because I think that there are aids around the president who have been trying to pivot to a midterm message.

Melanie H (44:37)

Right.

Shelby Talcott (44:37)

We know that Susie Wiles and some of the president's top aides have been telling him for months hey, you need to get out on the campaign trail more. You need to be talking more. We need to sort of have you front and center so that those Trump voters who only vote for you will also come out and vote for other Republicans. You've seen them try to do that. But really the President has been still really focused on foreign policy. So I think there are people around Trump who are aware of the gas prices, who are concerned about it. You've seen the public messaging of this is short term, it's going to come down, it's worth it in the long run. But there are top aides who are acutely aware that this is where voters concerns are. And they're sort of trying to constantly shift the President's focus.

Ashley Etienne (45:19)

The problem is they don't have an answer for any of those issues that American people are facing right now. I just went to the grocery store and bought my daughter some Lucky Charms. The box cost me 9.99. I mean, it's ridiculously expensive. I think they're completely out of touch. And what's happening and what we're seeing in Iran is only exacer the challenges of the American people. So he's got multiple different challenges, not just the economic, but the fact that everything you said you weren't going to do when you were campaigning, now you're doing. You have an expanding war across the entire Middle east with 40,000 troops in harm's way.

Shelby Talcott (45:50)

And I think to your earlier point, the question is, are Democrats going to be able to capitalize on some of the kind of missteps or some of the issues that this administration is having? In the past, they've struggled with that and they're clearly trying to kind of figure out an avenue forward to, to be able to take advantage of some of the economic troubles that the country finds itself in right now.

Ashley Etienne (46:10)

I'm glad you said it, not me.

Melanie H (46:12)

I also wanted to ask you about this rift we are seeing in MAGA world. My colleague, John Allen, he reported on some of the backlash that the President has been getting over the war. I mean, what do you make of that rift? Is it overblown? And could this be a problem heading into the midterms?

Mark Bednar (46:27)

I do think it's overblown because what the President says MAGA is, that's what MAGA is. Right. But that's why, from my earlier point, he needs to be out there expressing where he's going to go and because. Because his followers, his voters in swing states, swing districts, and also members of Congress, they need that guiding light in terms of where the energy markets are going to go. It's very important for the president to continue to lay out where, you know, what are, what is our navy going to do in order to usher ships through the Strait of Hormuz? So the president's transparency, the president's activity, him being out on the campaign trail, that's gonna be really important for the next several months going into the midterms.

Ashley Etienne (47:07)

Part of the problem, though, is what's complicating the president's position is that he's not aligned with Israel. Israel wants to continue this mission and Trump is clearly trying to find an off ramp, like desperately trying to find it. That's what's going to keep complicating this for the president right now. He can't go out and forcefully say where we're headed if he's not aligned with Israel.

Mark Bednar (47:27)

The sooner that we can get a victory here or the president can outline what victory looks like and to capitalize and put final, put a stamp of approval on it, the better it will be for Republicans. The longer this lingers on, the more complicated that becomes.

Melanie H (47:41)

Guys, thank you so much. That was such an insightful conversation. We'll be right back with more. And this is MEET THE PRESS now. Welcome back. The Iran war fallout continues, including a brewing revolt inside some corners of the MAGA movement in response to the president's handling of the war, including his threat yesterday to destroy the entire Iranian civilization. NBC News is reporting that there are significant signs of strain among Trump loyalists, including from prominent MAGA aligned media. Media figures. For more on this, I'm joined by NBC News senior national politics reporter John Allen, who's been tracking all of the MAGA pushback. John, thank you so much for joining us.

John Allen (48:28)

Just call me the MAGA Tracker.

Melanie H (48:30)

The MAGA Tracker. I do want to ask, though, just give us an assessment here of how much damage the war in Iran has actually done to his stando within the MAGA base.

John Allen (48:38)

I mean, there is a significant fight going on about the policy, about the ideology. Now, a lot of these people are still aligned with Trump, Trump. But some of those big media figures that you've known from the past as advocates for everything he's done have flipped on this. Tucker Carlson, for example, Marjorie Taylor Greene obviously has a beef with the president. He pushed her out of Congress. But also somebody who's been very loud about this. We've seen some folks who are big online influencers, like Mike Cernovich coming out and talking about the president being in the wrong place on this at least for the policy with maga. And I think, I think you're also seeing it, though importantly, in corners of Congress. We've seen Ron Johnson, senator from Wisconsin, you know, talk about not wanting to destroy Iranian civilization. We've seen Curtis, the senator from Utah, also pushing back against this war. And the biggest tell, of course, is there aren't enough votes in Congress to authorize this war to appropriate for this war, meaning spend money on it or to stop this war to do anything, basically. And that indicates a split in Maga. The president had said he wanted $200 billion for the war, or at least that was what was reported. That's being scaled back right now. And the big reason is that there was not an appetite to do that in Congress.

Melanie H (49:49)

You mentioned Tucker Carlson. There was a fascinating New York Times piece from Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman about the pushback that Carlson was giving to Trump. I want to read part of the story they wrote. Mr. Trump, who had known Mr. Carlson for years, tried to reassure him over the phone. I know you're worried about it, but it's going to be OK, the president said. Mr. Carlson asked how he knew because it always is, Mr. Trump replied. So, John, do you think there is a way for the president to turn this all around before the midterms?

John Allen (50:16)

By the way, this is a wild conversation. It sounds like a parent talking to their child, like stroking their head at night going, it's going to be all right, honey. This relationship between Trump and Carlson. Look, I think that it is possible, of course, for the president to fix his problem with his own base. But I think if he is going to continue with a long running war in the Middle east, and obviously he is trying to back off of that now, if it continues, if there are American soldiers in harm's way, if it costs hundreds of billions of dollars, if Iran ends up controlling the Strait of Hormuz and, you know, basically getting tax money for ships going through, I think it's going to be a serious stain on his relationship with maga. And we'll find out in the midterms how enthusiastic some of those voters are. I've talked to voters in swing states who feel like they got fooled and are not excited to go out and help help Trump continue to have majorities in the House and Senate.

Melanie H (51:07)

Do you think it's a problem for Trump if there's not an enthusiasm among MAGA voters who, like the ones you talk to, don't feel like they're actually delivering on some of these promises?

John Allen (51:16)

Yeah, absolutely. That's a huge problem from independents. Moving is also a problem. But lack of enthusiasm among the MAGA base could kill the majorities for Republicans not only in the House, but also potentially in the Senate.

Melanie H (51:26)

We were talking about the House, but I think the Senate is seriously at risk for Republicans as well.

John Allen (51:31)

In play as they say.

Melanie H (51:32)

In play as they say. John Allen, thank you so much for all of your reporting. That was such a great story. Thanks for having me to go check it out. We are back tomorrow, though, with MEET the PRESS now. And there's more ahead on NBC News now.

Craig Melvin (51:44)

I'm Craig Melvin. Cheers. Cheers.

Mark Bednar (51:46)

Cheers.

Craig Melvin (51:47)

I've always been a glass half full kind of guy, and now I'm talking to some people who look at the world that way, too. Some really fascinating folks who share their defining moments, their triumphs, their challenges. Their stories are funny and quite candid. So I hope you'll join me each week. And who knows, you might just come away with your own Glass Half Full

Melanie H (52:08)

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