← Meet the Press
Meet the Press
Meet the Press NOW — July 23
00:49:50
Fuel prices jump as fears grow over an expanding conflict in the Middle East. The Justice Department agrees to withdraw subpoenas seeking testimony and records from New York Times reporters. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) joins NBC's Ryan Nobles to discuss his growing concerns with artificial intelligence.
Loading summary
Transcript131 lines
- [00:00]
Craig Melvin
Craig.
- [00:00]
I'm Craig Melvin. Cheers.
- [00:02]
Kristen Welker
Cheers.
- [00:02]
Marco Rubio
Cheers.
- [00:03]
Craig Melvin
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.
- [00:24]
Kate Snow
Search Glass Half Full with Craig Melvin From Today on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.
- [00:31]
Hi, it's Kate Snow, NBC News anchor and host of the NBC News podcast the Drink. And this month I'm having mojitos with comedian Eric Andre. Was I a little bit worried he might prank me? Absolutely. But he promised he'd behave. Mostly did. Here at the Drink, we are all about the journey, and Eric's journey to success is anything but typical. We talk about his childhood, his brief run in music, and the decade he spent hustling in New York City before his hit TV show changed everything. It's a conversation peppered with humor, but also a real look at the path behind his larger than life Persona. We hope you'll join us for the drink. Listen and follow wherever you get your podcasts.
- [01:24]
Kristen Welker
Welcome to MEET THE press. Now, I'm Kristen Welker in Washington amid growing fears that a new front could be opening in the US War with Iran with an Iranian backed proxy group threatening to shut down another critical waterway in the region, causing fuel prices to jump. Overnight. The Iran backed Houthis in Yemen saying they struck two tankers in the Red Sea as the group threatens another critical choke point for global shipping. In a post on social media, President Trump condemning the attack and threatening, quote, major military punishment on both Iran and the Houthis. Now as a result, oil prices have jumped, closing around $92 a barrel today while Brent Oil, the international benchmark, rose to $100 a barrel today for the first time since May. Gas prices here at home remain above $4 a gallon and climbing as the Trump administration shows no signs of backing down from its military confrontation with Iran or its threat to strike civilian infrastructure.
- [02:23]
Marco Rubio
Do you rule out striking civilian infrastructure?
- [02:26]
I think I saw, you know, guys, I saw Arachi, their foreign minister, who the other day say or something about their policies. An eye for an eye. The president's policy is a head for an eye. I mean, honestly, that's what it's going to be. I mean, they will pay a very heavy price for the things they're doing. They're already paying a very heavy price.
- [02:45]
Kristen Welker
The debate over the war also featuring prominently on Capitol Hill today, with the House passing a resolution directing the president to remove US Armed forces from the hostilities. The Senate blocked a similar resolution. Meanwhile, the political fallout is intensifying ahead of the midterms, with a majority of Americans disapproving of the president's handling of the war in Iran. That's according to new polling from Fox News. And as energy prices once again climb higher, almost three quarters of Americans say they disapprove of the president's handling of inflation. That includes 43% of Republicans. You see the numbers right there. Joining me now is NBC News senior White House correspondent Gabe Gutierrez, NBC News chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel, NBC News senior national security correspondent Courtney Kuby, and Hooman Majd, an Iranian American writer and an NBC News contributor. Thanks to all of you for starting us off. Gabe, let me begin with you. The president has repeatedly said that Iran wants to make a deal. He's also said Iran is not ready to make a deal. How is he squaring the two? What are officials telling you?
- [03:51]
Gabe Gutierrez
Well, Kristen, administration officials have basically been trying to explain this away by saying, look, there are different factions to the Iranian leadership. But you're right, the president and even today, Secretary of State Marco Rubio saying that the Iranians are desperate to make a deal, that they're begging to do so. But then Secretary Rubio said that they end up breaking that deal. So they're not really serious when coming to the negotiating table. So there are a lot of questions about how this move forward and how this moves forward and whether we're in any position right now that there are serious negotiations underway. The administration giving those conflicting messages, saying at one point that, yes, they do want to make a deal, but then saying that they break it after any agreement is reached.
- [04:36]
Ryan Reilly
Kristen?
- [04:37]
Kristen Welker
Well, it's notable because the president is also threatening major military punishment on Iran and on the Houthis as well. But, Gabe, the midterms are less than four months away. Is the president really prepared to expand this war in this very moment?
- [04:54]
Gabe Gutierrez
Look, the president and senior White House officials, what they continue to emphasize is that the president does believe that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and that he is not taking the midterms into consideration when he decides what to do next. Now, the president telling Axios today that he is, quote, close to a decision on what could be a massive attack inside Iran, that the Iranians haven't felt enough pain. But, Kristen, this is something he's been saying for several days now. You remember last week he said in an interview that he was considering attacks on civilian infrastructure, on bridges and power plants inside Iran. Earlier this week he said that if there were continued attacks by Iran on the Strait of Hormuz on commercial ships, that there would be attacks on power plants, on bridges. And you heard what you played in the introduction there, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, that it's a policy of this administration, not an eye for an eye, but a head for an eye. So certainly the president continuing to make these threats no matter how close we are to those midterm elections.
- [06:00]
Kristen Welker
Kristen, really striking language from the secretary of State. Gabe, stay with us. I'm going to get back to you in just a moment. But Richard Engel, let me turn to you in the region. As I laid out at the top, the Iran backed Houthi rebels said they struck two tankers in the Red Sea. Based on your reporting, Richard, is this now a new front in the Iran war? How should we be thinking about this moment?
- [06:26]
Richard Engel
It is a new front. The Houthis have generally been staying out of this for the last several months for, for five months now we've been focusing on the Strait of Hormuz. And this has really been a battle. President Trump talks a lot about the nuclear program, but this has really been a battle over the Strait of Hormuz. Who gets to control the Strait of Hormuz? And Iran believes after its performance during this war that it has earned the right to not only control, control the Strait of Hormuz, but also to wreak, to seek economic benefit from controlling the Strait of Hormuz. It wants to impose maritime fees, toll fees, security fees on ships that pass through Horm and has been attacking vessels that don't take routes that Iran says are the designated routes that it allows. So because of the focus on the Strait of Hormuz, many countries have been shifting their traffic trying to use the alternative route, trying to use the Red Sea passageway which is responsible for about 12% of all global commerce. And now the Houthis say they fired on these two ships. It was condemned by Secretary of State Rubio. It was contemned condemned by Pakistani mediators. What's not clear is if they intend to attack all ships that go through the Red Sea. So far they have mostly been focusing on Saudi vessels and the Iranians have specifically been pointing to their enemy with Saudi Arabia. Don't forget that Saudi Arabia fought a war against the Houthis for several years inside Yemen. So there is personal animus there, but it is a new front. We've already seen oil prices rising. And here in Israel, they are bracing for an escalation. For the first time in several weeks. They have started clearing out the bomb shelters again, opening bomb shelters to the public in several key cities in this country, including in neighborhoods in Tel Aviv. The defense minister said that if Iran attacks Israel, it will pay a devastating price. That was after President Trump made these very overt threats to attack Iran and says he's close to making a decision to carrying out attacks on Iran on a scale that we have not yet seen in this war. But as Gabe was saying earlier, we've heard similar threats from President Trump in the past. He's threatened to attack bridges at one stage. He threatened to wipe out all of Iran's civilization. Here they are getting prepared for an escalation. And we are seeing a partial opening of a second front in this conflict that is certainly rattling the markets.
- [09:10]
Kristen Welker
Well, it is just an extraordinary moment. And I think the big question, is there an off ramp? Do you get the sense, Richard, based on your conversations, that there is an off ramp? Are the negotiations halted at this point? Stalled.
- [09:27]
Richard Engel
So I spoke to a senior Arab official today who's directly involved in the conflict, directly involved in the negotiations. And the word that he used to me was it's a mess. He said that we are right now in a Mexican standoff with the two sides pointing guns at each other, both prepared to fire, and that if both fire, both are in the position to potentially kill each other. So, no, diplomacy is not moving well. And people see this as a spiral that is escalating, not de escalating.
- [10:01]
Kristen Welker
All right, Richard Engel reporting live from Jerusalem. Richard, thank you so much. We really appreciate your reporting, as always. Let me turn to Courtney Kuby, who's here at the desk with me. So, Courtney, take me inside your conversations with Pentagon officials. What type of targets are they looking at when you're thinking about counterattacks against Houthi rebels?
- [10:20]
Courtney Kuby
So the Houthis don't actually have much of a maritime presence. So they have some small boats that they can take out a little ways off of the coast of Yemen. But the majority of the threat from them is land based. So the Iraq Iranians have been providing them with money and training and weapons equipment for years now. They have developed a bit of a missile arsenal, and some of those are longer range missiles. The problem is while they have guidance systems, they're not very accurate. So the majority of the time they'll fire off missiles, they'll fire off drones. They even have some autonomous sort of drone boats that they can send out packed with explosives, the majority of the time, they don't actually make it to their target. That being said, the US Military in the past, when they have threatened shipping, because they have been doing this now consistently on and off since, I mean, October 7th attacks, was when they really started ramping up some of their attacks in the shipping area. But the majority of the time, the US Responds in Yemen, going after Houthi storage facilities where they potentially where they launch their missiles, launch their drones, where they store them. The one thing about the Houthis, a lot of their stuff is buried underground. It is very hard to find. So even in the past, when we've seen the United States take dozens, hundreds of strikes, it is difficult to degrade their capabilities.
- [11:38]
Kristen Welker
Well, and following up on that point, I mean, you've really been reporting on what type of capabilities the US has for counterattacks. When you're talking about Houthi rebels, do they have the capabilities ready to actually engage in this type of tit for tat?
- [11:53]
Courtney Kuby
They absolutely do. And one thing that's similar to what we've been talking about in the Strait of Hormuz is even just the fact that they start threatening commercial shipping is enough to have a deterrent effect. We've seen that happen in the Strait. Strait of Hormuz, Iran doesn't have to necessarily hit these ships. They just need to threaten them to the point where the companies and the insurance companies no longer want to send them through. One big difference, though, between Strait of Hormuz, after the October 7 attacks, starting about a month later, the Houthis really started threatening shipping. We saw the US Take a series of strikes over the next two years, really, to try to degrade that, and then sort of this tenuous ceasefire that existed throughout that entire time. Commercial shipping has really rerouted out of that area already. So it's never been back to where it was back in earlier 2023. Many of those commercial ships now go all the way around the southern coast of South Africa, of Africa, and just take the longer. It's built into their timeline, it's built into their costs. It's become the preferred ship for the preferred route for most of those ships.
- [12:54]
Kristen Welker
Well, and so, Court, let's talk big picture here, because the US has been striking Iran for 12 consecutive days now. Talk about the scope, the force of these strikes.
- [13:04]
Courtney Kuby
Yeah, and what's surprising is the strikes have primarily targeted the same basic area and the same basic things. So coastal radar sites, drone launching facilities, there have been one or two strikes against infrastructure, more of those sort of dual use, what the military considers dual use. So areas where the Iranian military and particularly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps are retired, able to resupply bridges, potentially roads, those sorts of things. What seems strange, though, is I spoke with military officials about this today. There have been many more military targets than there have been locations. So while it's only potentially dozens of military locations, there have been hundreds of actual targets and actual strikes at those locations, which would indicate to me that Iran is able to reconstitute at those locations, bring in mobile launchers, mobile facilities, and so that they can continue to threaten the Strait in that way.
- [14:00]
Joy Bauer
All right.
- [14:01]
Kristen Welker
Courtney Kuby, as always, thank you so much for being on set. Really appreciate it. Great to see you as always. Gabe, let me go back out to you at the White House if I could. I want to get your take on this nuclear agreement the United States just signed with Saudi Arabia. The president on social media now placing new conditions on that agreement saying Saudi Arabia needs to join the Abraham Accords as a part of that deal. So, so what's the status of this agreement, Gabe? Is it actually finalized?
- [14:27]
Gabe Gutierrez
Well, Kristen, it was presented as finalized yesterday and then the president seemingly throwing that monkey wrench in it earlier today with that surprise social media post, throwing that extra condition that Saudi Arabia needs to be part of the Abraham Accords, essentially normalizing relations with Israel, something that has long been an issue across the region and as Saudi Arabia has previously said that it would not consider unless there was a Palestinian state, something that has been a non starter, obviously in the past. I pressed White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt about this earlier today in the briefing room. Let's listen to what she said. Why was that condition not mentioned yesterday when the energy secretary announced it?
- [15:12]
Caroline Levitt
Well, look, the president is always the final deal maker, as you know, and this is something that he has mentioned on numerous occasions going back. I can provide you with those statements. And he has said if they don't join the Abraham Accords, the deal is off. So we'll continue to have those conversations with our Saudi counterparts moving forward.
- [15:29]
Gabe Gutierrez
So the deal is dead if Saudi Arabia doesn't join. And have you any indication that Saudi Arabia is even considering this?
- [15:36]
Caroline Levitt
Ms. Again, the President has spoken directly with the Saudis about this in numerous conversations in the past, and the administration will continue to engage in those conversations.
- [15:45]
Gabe Gutierrez
Now Levitt went on to say, Kristen, that the president had not spoken with the Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman since his post on social media. She also seemed to indicate that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not play a role in that abrupt change. But as I said, this was initially presented when it was announced by the Energy Secretary yesterday as a finalized agreement pending congressional approval. Now it's really up in the air. Kristen?
- [16:10]
Kristen Welker
Yeah, interesting bit of whiplash there. Gabe Gutierrez at the White House for us. Gabe, thank you so very much. Houman Maj, let me turn to you now, and I want to ask you for how you are viewing this moment. As I was just discussing with my colleague Courtney Kuby, the United States has been attacking Iran for 12 days consecutively. There does not seem to be an off ramp. How would you describe the current state of play between the United States and Iran?
- [16:39]
Hooman Majd
Well, it's pretty bad. I mean, that we know the Iranians aren't going to give up very easily. It doesn't matter. I mean, you know, it depends on what, what President Trump means when he says he's going to hit them harder than they've ever been hit before. Well, they've been hit pretty hard. It's pretty astonishing how much ordinance has been dropped on Iran, how many missiles, how many bomb. And yet Iran is resilient. Whether we like it or not, they're resilient and they can threaten the Strait of Hormuz for the, for the long term future, really, because unless you change the regime, which at one point seemed to have been one of the goals of this war, Iran will always have the ability to threaten ships. As Richard pointed out, and as Courtney has pointed out, you don't actually have to hit a ship. But if the threat is there, a lot of ships aren't going to want to take the risk. So right now, the state of relations is horrible. I mean, the president says, president of the United States says Iran really wants a deal. The Iranians are saying, no, we're not asking for a deal. In fact, we're not even thinking about a deal. According to the mediators, the Pakistanis, the Omanis, the Qataris, all are, you know, allies of the United States and are trying very hard to bring this to a ceasefire, a new ceasefire. But Iran is not particularly interested in giving up the one advantage it has here, and that is control of de facto control of the Strait of Hormos. So it's going to be a mess unless President Trump backs down or agrees to have another memorandum of understanding. The real problem with the memorandum, which was signed in a hurried fashion, was that the interpretation on the Iranian side was very different from the interpretation on the US Side. The US Believed that the Strait of Hormones is going to be Wide open. And then was starting to escort ships through the southern route, avoiding the Iranian route. The Iranians say paragraph five. Wait a sec. That says that everything that goes through. We're not going to charge a toll because we agreed not to for 60 days. But everything that goes through the strait, according to that paragraph, has to be coordinated with us. So with these ships going silent and being escorted by the US Navy, they argue, the Iranians argue that this was a violation of the memorandum. And as we know. So then what happened is President Trump wants to reinstate, or did reinstate the blockade and has started the war, really basically restarted the war. So I think it's a huge problem. I don't know where you were asking about an off ramp. I don't see one. Unless President Trump decides he wants to take one, they're there for the taking. President Trump is remarkably good at making things look good for his base, look good for the Republican Party, saying, we defeated them. We're talking about the nuclear program. There is no nuclear program in Iran. Let's face it, it doesn't exist. There are elements there. There is a capability of restarting it at some point, but as President Trump himself has said, if they restart it, we'll know and we can bomb them again. So there is no nuclear program. Well, the only. The only thing that's there is the regime is still there. Yes.
- [19:59]
Kristen Welker
Well, okay, let's talk about the regime, because I wonder how that is factoring into just how complicated it. Get a memorandum of understanding, which all sides agree to the terms. You still have Iran's supreme leader. A lot of questions about the role that he is playing, the irgc, how complicating are these various factions? And who do you think the supreme leader is actually listening to around him?
- [20:28]
Hooman Majd
Well, he's not meeting with a lot of people. Even Foreign Minister Arakchi, who you've interviewed, has said that he just recently in the last couple of days, has said that he has not personally met with him. So for security reasons reasons, they're keeping that extremely, extremely tight, the circle around the new supreme leader. So he has not appeared in public. He's presumably underground somewhere. The president has said he has met with him. We have to remember what Iran has is a supreme National Security Council. And in that council, the president of Iran is there. Pezeshkyan, the head of the IRGC is there. Khaliboff, who is currently the current negotiator with the United States when there are negotiations. And he's the speaker of Parliament, powerful, former Revolutionary Guard commander. And these people come up with what is the policy? What is foreign policy? You know, the foreign minister really is the regime's foreign minister, not just the government's foreign minister. So these, these people get together and presumably some of them, the head of the Revolutionary Guard, the president, do they do speak with the supreme leader and they come to some sort of agreement of what the policy is going to be. So even though there are on the outside, there's, for example, this Paidari front in Iran, which is very hard line and they oppose all negotiations. But still the main people, the Supreme National Security Council, don't oppose negotiations as long as it's in their control.
- [21:59]
Kristen Welker
All right, Hooman Maj, thank you so much for your incredible insights. We really appreciate it. And coming up, breaking news. The Justice Department has just moments ago agreed to withdraw subpoenas of New York Times journalists as the administration investigates leaks tied to the president's Qatari gifted Air Force One. Plus more on the growing economic and political toll of the Iran war as President Trump tells his supporters in battleground Georgia that he needs more time to address affordability issues. With just over 100 days until the midterm. Stay with us. You're watching Meet THE Press now.
- [22:42]
TextNow Advertiser
Your phone is your lifeline. Calling your kid to say good night, waiting on a job call back, or just sending a meme to your best friend when it's been that kind of day, wherever life takes you, the Text now app keeps you connected for free. Get a real phone number, unlimited talk and text, and 5G data for your favorite apps, all for $0 a month. No fixed contracts, no hidden fees, no panic when bills pile up. Just phone service that's there when it matters most. TextNow, we've got your back. Download TextNow in your app Store today. Wireless plans require the purchase of a sim card. Visit textnow.com for terms and conditions.
- [23:13]
Joy Bauer
July means you're halfway through the year, but there's still time to reach your 2026 wellness goals. With half off an annual subscription to the Start Today app. Hi, everyone. I'm Joy Bauer, the Today Show's nutrition expert. And as part of the Start Today family, we offer easy to follow meal and fit fitness plans. And we support you with simple, realistic tools that keep you inspired. To reach your goals, go to today.comstart and download now because it's never too late to Start Today.
- [23:41]
Kate Snow
Subscription automatically renews each year at 65.99 plus taxes and fees until canceled. Offer ends July 31, 2026. Price is subject to change. Visit today.comstart for full offer terms. And.
- [23:58]
Kristen Welker
Welcome back. We are following breaking news now. The Justice Department has agreed to withdraw subpoenas seeking testimony and records from New York Times reporters. Those subpoenas had been part of the federal investigation into the sources used in the New York Times reporting on security concerns regarding the new Air Force One. During a hearing before a US District judge today, the DOJ said it agreed to withdraw the subpoenas to pursue other investigative steps, but would not rule out seeking new subpoenas in the future. NBC News senior justice reporter Ryan Reilly joins me now. How significant is this decision?
- [24:35]
Ryan Reilly
It's a really big deal. And I think, you know, journalism groups, the New York Times are sort of celebrating. What was clear from this hearing today was that this was a pretty rushed and sloppy process. And that was something that the Justice Department even conceded there. You know, in one instance, they went after phone records for the mother of one of the reporters who was on this story. And they said that that was just a public records database era. Essentially, they were rushing through this so much that check whether it was actually his number or, I guess, his family members. And so I think it's really, you know, an indicator that, you know, this is something that although the Trump administration wants to aggressively pursue this and have pursued a lot of cases against journalists, including by, you know, going to their homes and with search warrants and by through the subpoena process, that there is going to be this continued pushback both from the fourth estate as well as from judges.
- [25:25]
Kristen Welker
Well, you know, it was notable. Federal prosecutors today made a point of saying this investigation is about figuring out who's behind the leaks. They also said they were willing to grant immunity to reporters who testify. What are the implications of that? Is that something that we could see?
- [25:44]
Ryan Reilly
Yeah. I mean, they've always said that. Right. That reporters aren't necessarily the targets of a criminal investigation here, that rather they are trying to figure out who gave them that information. But the chilling effect and the First Amendment ramifications of that are pretty significant. And there have been regulations in the past. This has been something that's unfolded over multiple administrations. Right. There was scandals during the Obama era about how they were pursuing these sort of leak investigations. And so there were some regulations that had been put in place that the Justice Department is supposed to go through here. But, you know, in this instance, based on the Justice Department's own accounting, this was a pretty rushed procedure. And from public reporting, we know that that was something regarding the airplane's capabilities that Donald Trump was very upset about and wanted there to be an investigation into.
- [26:30]
Kristen Welker
Let's shift gears a little bit. The Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Jim Jordan, is now urging the Justice Department to prosecute former special counsel Jack Smith, accusing him of being untruthful during a deposition before the committee which took place last December. What specifically are these allegations that Jim Jordan laid out today?
- [26:50]
Ryan Reilly
So it's interesting, and I think one of the reasons that I think Jack Smith can feel relatively safe at this moment is because he was asked a completely different question on a different topic than than what Jim Jordan is actually alleging. Right. And so he was asking this question about whether they had gotten any records through a subpoena process of members of Congress. What he actually had gotten separately was because it was on the back end on the White House side from the National Archives, he was able to get some of their communication. So essentially, I think the equivalent here would be as though you're When I email the Justice Department, for example, that's on a government listserv that's automatically in their possession. And I know that because I sent it to them. Right. And that's sort of the same standard, as you can think of this as members of Congress, when they communicate with the executive branch, that communication is obviously going to be held on that side. But what the Republicans are sort of claiming here is that that was some sort of spying mechanism. And that's not what Jack Smith did at all. He did not pursue the content of those actual communications from members of Congress. He only got it from the other side. And whenever you message with anyone, you know what that happens on the other side is completely separate than whether you are individually getting targeted. So I think that that's going to be a rough go of it if they actually pursue this.
- [28:03]
Kristen Welker
Well, I know it's one you're going to track very closely. Ryan Reilly, thank you so much. Great to have you here. Really appreciate it. Coming up, exclusive new reporting on the growing rift between the president's new Homeland Security chief and the White House as the number of ICE arrests surged to their highest level since President Trump took office. Keep it right here on Meet the Press.
- [28:23]
Caroline Levitt
Now,
- [28:28]
Xfinity Advertiser
Honey, did you invite the minions over?
- [28:31]
Marco Rubio
Well, you know how we talked about
- [28:32]
Kristen Welker
getting WI fi from Xfinity?
- [28:33]
Xfinity Advertiser
Yeah.
- [28:34]
Kristen Welker
I ordered it this morning, was online in minutes.
- [28:37]
Gabe Gutierrez
Then they showed up.
- [28:38]
Xfinity Advertiser
So they just came over to use the WI fi for what?
- [28:44]
Richard Engel
Better not to know.
- [28:45]
Xfinity Advertiser
Get online in minutes with same day wi fi from Xfinity plus lock in your price for 5 years and see minions and monsters only in theater Xfinity. Imagine that restrictions apply. Not available in all areas. Learn more@xfinity.com SameDayWiFi
- [29:02]
Kristen Welker
welcome back now to exclusive new reporting on clashes between the White House and one of President Trump's newest cabinet members. Sources tell NBC News tensions between Homeland Security Secretary Mark Wayne Mullen and the White House appear to be growing. Among the points of contention, Mullen's directive last week that ICE officers temporarily stop making vehicle pursuits in the wake of two deadly ICE involved shootings. President Trump reversed that policy just a day later. The dispute comes just four months after Mullen took over at DHS and as the Trump administration seeks to ramp up its mass deportation efforts. NBC News senior Homeland Security correspondent Julia Ainslie joins me now. Julia, thanks so much for being here. So let's break down your reporting. What's really at the root of this tension between the White House, the president, and the Department of Homeland Security?
- [29:51]
Julia Ainslie
Well, Kristen, you know well that President Trump hates surprises coming from his Cabinet secretary. And just last week, we saw Secretary Mark Wainmillen put out a new memo to ICE telling them to pause all vehicle stops after those two fatal shootings in Maine and Houston. And that caught the White House and President Trump completely by surprise. And as you know, he reversed that in a true social post less than 24 hours afterwards. But there's actually been a string of incidents like this. In fact, there was another one after the Supreme Court revoked temporary protected status and sided with the Trump administration. Mark Wayne Mullen said publicly that those people could get in line and just apply for legal status status. That's not the case and it's certainly not the message that they would want out. And then, of course, you have the ICE nominee who is an ally of Mullen. And now he is facing an uphill battle as he tries to learn more about the topic.
- [30:39]
Kristen Welker
And Mark Wayne Mullen's only been on the job for four months. Julia, is there any buzz whatsoever about President Trump firing him?
- [30:48]
Julia Ainslie
I don't think it's gotten that far yet. The folks that I spoke to, as well as Gabe Gutierrez who covers the White House, just said that it's been more of an annoying something they're conscious of. Some people mentioned frustrations. There have been meetings, particularly about this incoming nominee to rent ICE and whether or not this ally of Mullins is really prepared for the job. But all in all, I don't see tea leaves look anything like what we were reading before Kristi Noem was fired just earlier this year.
- [31:14]
Kristen Welker
Well, I know you're going to continue to track that. And in the meantime, you're also tracking an uptick in deportations. What can you tell us about that?
- [31:21]
Julia Ainslie
Yeah, that's right. We understand that there were just under 40,000 in the month of June. That's a fast uptick. And there are over 65,000 people in detention. Now, those 40,000 are arrest rather than deportations. But we understand deportations do follow, though not always, and I'm sorry, arresting people who they can't deport right away or at all. But this is a significant increase and it comes as ICE has issued this mandate to try to arrest 2,000 people a day. Folks I've talked to said that even now, just in the past few days, they're not reaching 2,000 a day, but they are arresting sometimes double than they were just in May.
- [31:55]
Kristen Welker
Well, given that, Julia, is this pace sustainable, do you anticipate going to continue to see this type of a pace?
- [32:01]
Julia Ainslie
Well, a lot of people say no, that morale is actually very low among ICE officers. They feel they're under a lot of pressure. They're not getting the time off that they need. And of course, after having three ICE officers involved in fatal shootings this year, they're under a lot of pressure to try to boost arrest and deportations while also not putting ICE again in the public spotlight. So there's a lot of pressure for ICE right now, and a lot of those people do feel that they could use a break, or at least they want the White House to understand that this pace that they've been been asked to set isn't sustainable. But it's one of the president's biggest campaign promises.
- [32:35]
Joy Bauer
All right.
- [32:35]
Kristen Welker
Covering a lot of different angles. Thank you so much, Julia Ainsley. Really appreciate it. Coming up after the break, data centers and the booming debate over AI safety after a major incident this week involving open air agents going rogue and hacking into another AI company. We'll hear from a top Democratic senator on how Congress is responding, responding to the emerging economic and security challenges. Stay with us and meet the PRESS now. Welcome back. Turning now to the boom in artificial intelligence and the growing concerns around the safety of the rapidly developing technology and the data centers that power them. President Trump today announcing new pledges from state lawmakers, utility companies and data centers developers to pay above normal rates for electricity to prevent prevent soaring power costs from being passed on to average consumers. They joined seven major AI companies who signed the same pledge in March. The pledge, though, is non binding, which means there's no enforcement mechanism if companies and states do violate them. The announcement comes after a troubling incident this week highlighting the power of AI systems. OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, disclosed that what it described as an unprecedented cyber incident when one of its its. Chief Capitol Hill correspondent Ryan Nobles on the growing backlash against data centers for quite some time now. How is this announcement by President Trump being received? Could it ease concerns?
- [34:21]
Ryan Nobles
Maybe a little bit, Kristen. But the problem with the White House's announcement today is it only addresses one of the many issues surrounding the rapid expansion of data centers, and that's the cost to power them. It doesn't talk at all about the land that it requires to build these massive data centers. It doesn't deal with the water usage. It also doesn't deal just the encroachment on residential neighborhoods that we're seeing across the country, particularly in counties like nearby Loudoun county in Virginia, which has more than 600 of these data centers. So there's this is a big problem with a lot of different tentacles attached to it. The White House truly trying to address at least one part of that, and that's the power issue. But it's still a long way from solving this problem going forward, and it's going to become something that just continues to grow over time.
- [35:09]
Kristen Welker
Yeah, I think you're absolutely right about that. And you also had the chance to speak to Senator Mark Kelly today about those growing concerns on the Hill. What did he have to say?
- [35:18]
Ryan Nobles
Well, Senator Kelly's worried about the back end of artificial intelligence, and that's when it gets to the consumer, particularly how it impacts the elderly community. There are more and more senior citizens that are falling victim to scams that are the direct result of interaction with artificial intelligence bots. And he thinks it's time for Congress to get involved and try and regulate these platforms. Take a listen to what he told me.
- [35:42]
Senator Mark Kelly
We're dealing with a technology that's moving incredibly fast. I've been somebody that for my whole career, 25 years in the Navy, 15 of that at NASA, where I've been a user of technology. I believe in innovation. I think AI could be a big win for our country if we get it right. If we don't get it right, we're going to have more problems to deal with. And that's why seniors, you know, are at risk. I sit on, on the Aging Committee, Special Committee on Aging. Over the years I've been on this committee, we often talk about scams against seniors. This will enable more of that unless we put some guardrails in place.
- [36:24]
Ryan Nobles
Talk to me about some of the things that you say are relatively simple steps to try and help rein in some of this.
- [36:30]
Senator Mark Kelly
Seniors and everybody should really have the right to know when they're speaking to an AI instead of a unit. And there's some upside with this, right? Maybe you don't have to wait on hold for four hours to talk to customer service at your bank or your airline or the utility company. You're trying to deal with a problem. And instead of having to wait on hold for a real person, you get an artificial person. I think you should be notified that the person you're speaking to is not a real person. I think the scam stuff is going to be harder to deal with. We've got to be more proactive about it. We've got to educate, you know, seniors about how easy it is to be, you know, convinced that somebody is a real person.
- [37:19]
Ryan Nobles
Senator Kelly believes this legislation can pass. He has a bipartisan co sponsor in Senator Jim Justice. But one of the issues with this, Kristen, the technology moves a lot faster than the legislative process. And that's been a real challenge for lawmakers on Capitol Hill.
- [37:32]
Kristen Welker
All right, great interview there, Ryan. Thank you so much. And a programming note here. You can hear much more from Senator Mark Kelly on Iran on the midterms and much, much more this Sunday on Meet the Press. And for more on these growing concerns around artificial intelligence, I'm joined now on SET by Peter Williford, head of policy at the AI Policy Network, an organization that advocates for federal policy policies on artificial intelligence. Thank you so much for being here.
- [38:00]
Peter Williford
Thank you for having me.
- [38:01]
Kristen Welker
Well, it's great to have you here at really what is a critical moment. So just to remind our viewers, OpenAI says it's investigating what caused one of its models to basically break out of its environment and hack into another company's system. For folks who don't really understand all of the language around AI, how did this happen and why is it so significant?
- [38:25]
Peter Williford
Yes, well, basically what happened is OpenAI, those are the makers of ChatGPT, they were working on this new AI system, and the AI basically went rogue. It's like a sci fi story come to life. It outsmarted the engineers of OpenAI. It like, slipped right past them.
- [38:43]
Kristen Welker
It outsmarted the people? Yes, The AI outsmarted the people.
- [38:46]
Peter Williford
Yeah. The engineers were trying to keep this system under control, and the AI found a vulnerability in the control system that the humans didn't even know were there. And it exploited that vulnerability and it escaped. And then it went on and attacked another company. And this happened in the real world, this wasn't like an experiment. This wasn't a simulation. This was a real world attack against a real company.
- [39:10]
Kristen Welker
You are someone who's immersed in AI policy, AI research. Is this something you ever imagined you would, would witness?
- [39:17]
Peter Williford
No. I'm also a former software engineer. I worked with AI for five years and I've never seen anything like this. This is kind of really mind blowing to me.
- [39:26]
Kristen Welker
It raises the question, are AI companies moving too quickly with too few guardrails?
- [39:31]
Peter Williford
Yeah. Well, there's a very intense race between these companies. If you, if you try to slow down to build the right guardrails, basically another competitor is just going to come out and cut you off.
- [39:42]
Kristen Welker
What kind of guardrail could make a difference? Because that's now, I think, where a lot of the conversation, and as Ryan was just discussing with Senator Mark Kelly, where a lot of the conversation is coalescing on Capitol Hill around what potential guardrails can be put in place.
- [39:57]
Peter Williford
Yes. I think what's really important is that this technology AI, it's not like other technologies. Like if you have a hammer, the hammer is not going to just like leap off the table and start hammering in nails. But these AIs, they can take independent action. They can act without any human directing them to do. And that's exactly what happened here. I think OpenAI really needs to make sure they're building security for this kind of new, new level of threat. Like these AIs, they can find vulnerabilities that no one even knew were there and they can exploit them.
- [40:28]
Kristen Welker
Well, there was a bipartisan House bill that was introduced just today. It was called the AI Kill Switch Act. It would basically give the federal government the authority to shut down or slow AI models that the government deems too dangerous. What do you make of that proposal? Is it realistic? Would it have made a difference difference in what happened this week?
- [40:47]
Peter Williford
I think it's a very smart, bipartisan proposal. Basically, this bill would require companies to be able to keep control of their models and like be able to shut down their model if the model went rogue. I personally don't think OpenAI or other companies should be building these models if they can't reliably shut them down.
- [41:04]
Kristen Welker
So you think that the companies themselves also need to have some responsibility?
- [41:10]
Peter Williford
Definitely, yeah. It's unacceptable to have your product just go and attack another person. These companies need to be able to control their models. And if, if they can't, the government needs to step in and help these companies get it under control.
- [41:23]
Kristen Welker
And just to be really clear. Do you think there's anything that could have prevented what happened this week?
- [41:27]
Peter Williford
I think the bill from Representative Lewin left, Representative Moran, could have helped. I think there's another bill from Representative Moran, he's a Republican from Texas, that would require companies to report incidents like these. Right now, there's just no legal requirements on these companies if you don't have to report these incidents. OpenAI chose to do it voluntarily, but there's no obligation to. And there's also no obligation to control your models. Like, if a human from OpenAI did this, they would be fired and then they would be prosecuted. But there's no law requiring that to happen.
- [42:00]
Kristen Welker
For AI, it would be illegal activity.
- [42:02]
Peter Williford
Yeah. So it would be literally a cybercrime if a human did it. But there's not like a cyber crime law for AI.
- [42:08]
Kristen Welker
It's interesting because your organization just did some polling. You found that 78% of likely voters do want guardrails on AI and 62% want those guardrails to be government led. There seems to be a lot of public will here. Why do you think nothing's been implemented so far?
- [42:27]
Peter Williford
I mean, I think the AI is just moving so quickly, it's kind of hard for Congress to stay up. I think there's a lot of members of Congress that are very interested in doing something about this, but the AI is just moving so fast, they don't even really know what to do.
- [42:41]
Kristen Welker
Well, Peter Williford, thank you for being here to help us understand this extraordinary incident this week. Please come back again soon because questions are only growing.
- [42:51]
Peter Williford
Thanks for having me.
- [42:52]
Kristen Welker
Great to have you. Still to come in the red and on the clock, new polling shows Republicans are in a deep hole with voters on the most important issues heading into the midterms. Affordability. The panel's here. This is MEET the Press now.
- [43:13]
I mean, it's going to be tumbling down. It was three weeks ago. They thought we had a deal. I said, I don't think we have a deal with these guys. They break every deal they make. But I said, you know, but people thought the geniuses on Wall street, they came down, really down and goes back up a little bit. But it's going to come down maybe lower than when we even started. But just give me a little time.
- [43:34]
Welcome back. That was President Trump speaking to supporters yesterday in Georgia asking for patience as oil and gas prices rise once again due to the Iran war with no end in sight to the conflict. Joining me now is our panel, Dan Marika, co anchor of the early Brief newsletter at the Washington Post, Ashley Etienne Amit, the press contributor and former communications director for Vice President Kamala Harris and Republican strategist Malik Abdul. Thanks to all of you for being here. Dan, let's start right there with President Trump basically saying, look, it's not that Americans don't support the war, but he acknowledges they don't like gas prices, says give him a little bit more time. What are your sources telling you about how the administration's trying to thread the needle here?
- [44:15]
Dan Marika
There's this remarkable disconnect that I'm getting a sense of, you know, when you talk to people at the White House, some people in Washington, there's this sense that, yeah, the president would like more time. He thinks that he could get more time from especially his base. But when you talk to Republicans who are running especially House rates races in these battleground districts, they'll tell you that the time is almost up, that if these gas prices don't come down by, you know, late August, early September, some would say even earlier, you're going to have a real problem for Republicans in November because people are filling up their tanks right now. They're driving to their family's house, they're driving to the beach, they're going on vacation. And all of that sticks with them as they decide who to vote for. So even if the president can convince members of his base to give him some time, there are Republicans out there in the country who are running in these races or running these races with eyes on holding the House who are very worried that time is almost up if they don't bring these gas prices down. There's no level of redistricting or different messaging that they can do to really overcome the way that voters feel about the prices that they're paying.
- [45:14]
Kristen Welker
Well, Dan paints the picture. Malik, let's look at some of the polling here. This is from the Washington Post last week shows just how unpopular this war is. 68%, Malik, say it is not worth fighting. President Trump is saying, give me a little bit more time. I mean, Dan's talking about this August, September timeline. Do you think that voters are going to give him or any of the lawmakers in his party more time when
- [45:39]
Craig Melvin
it comes to the economy? Time is really, it's not on our side here. And we've seen in past presidents, remember George Bush, President Bush talking about the fundamentals of the economy being strong? That may be true. There's different elements. Even during the Biden administration, there were fundamentals of the economy were strong. Same thing applies now. But how do People feel. And at the end of the day, how people feel is how they vote. And until we get on page, and I'll say until Republicans get on page with a consistent message talking about the economic progress under this administration, that frustration will turn on us.
- [46:16]
Kristen Welker
And Ashley, how are Democrats viewing these numbers, viewing this moment? There's a lot for Democrats to work with. And yet do candidates run the risk of looking like they're cheering for a batacom?
- [46:29]
Marco Rubio
I would say no. I mean, I think our candidates are elevating the reality that people are facing right now. I mean, the interesting thing about Donald Trump is I've always said that he's one of the most effective political communicators I've ever seen and experienced. And on this issue of Iran and even on the economy, he continues to fumble the ball. He just had two speeches in the last two weeks, two missed opportunities to really drive a message about the economy and to drive one about Iran. Now you're looking at polling where you can see MAGA supporters and other Republicans are his base supporters. I should just say 50% of them think that this war needs to end. 50% of them are blaming this war for high costs. This is a Red 5 alarm fire for Republicans right now that it seems to me that they can't get out of. And the reality is the only person who can bring them out of this is Donald Trump and he seems to not be interested.
- [47:18]
Kristen Welker
Is it fair to say it's a five alarm fire?
- [47:20]
Craig Melvin
Oh, absolutely. Midterms, you know, we could possibly leave.
- [47:24]
Kristen Welker
Well, Dan, let's look at some more polling. This is FOX News polling. Okay, that came out today and it points a pretty grim picture for the president. If we could put it up, asks voters to. If you look at these various key issues, inflation, the President is down 46 points. The economy 34 points. Iran 32. Immigration, negative 15 points. Dan, what do you make of these numbers?
- [47:51]
Dan Marika
Yeah, it seems like the president is focused on trying to turn things around rhetorically on Iran without actually dealing with the fact that the Iran war is unpopular. He had an event today. He speaks about the Iran war often. He had an event today talking about data centers. Your last panelist talked about how unpopular data centers are in parts of the country. I mean, he's kind of going to these events and talking about issues that aren't exactly resonating with very many Americans. And I think you're absolutely right about how voters feel. It's about vibes. I mean, I think to some degree the Kamala Harris race in 2024 was also about vibes. It's about how people felt when they were going to the store, when they're going to the gas station. And you're absolutely right, because I think unlike other prices, gas prices are advertised in big neon lights on every street corner in America. People know what they're paying at the tank and it affects them personally. And the president doesn't seem to be connecting without, despite, as we have seen over the last, him being an incredible political communicator, it just doesn't seem to be connecting.
- [48:48]
Kristen Welker
So to that point, let me show you a little bit more polling, Malik. This is still the FOX News poll, and again, it's incredibly informative of where voters are right now. This snapshot. They give Democrats the edge, plus 22 on income inequality, health care, inflation, the economy. I mean, you go down the list, it's all blue, Malik, with the exception of national security and crime. What do you see in those numbers? Are we looking at a potential blue wave? What do you think?
- [49:17]
Craig Melvin
Well, I'm supposed to say that, hey, you know, there's a silver lining.
- [49:21]
Marco Rubio
Is there a campfire that you can't find?
- [49:24]
Craig Melvin
I'm not exactly sure where that is. What I will say, though, I'm reminded all what. In 2022, there was this notion, remember the red wave, that was more of a trickle. I'm seeing probably more of that this time around. Even if Democrats do take the House, I'm not convinced that there will be a blue wave. And we may end up a situation that's similar to now where Democrats have maybe a three or four point.
- [49:46]
Dan Marika
How much of that is redistricting, though? Because so many districts are not as.
- [49:49]
Ashley Etienne
We don't know.
- [49:50]
Courtney Kuby
Right.
- [49:50]
Caroline Levitt
Yeah.
- [49:51]
Dan Marika
We have just aren't as many battleground districts.
- [49:52]
Marco Rubio
Exactly.
- [49:53]
Kristen Welker
Yeah. Well, you think about, is there going to be a blue wave? Will Democrats in fact, take back the House? What is the Senate going to look like? Another part of the FOX News poll. Not to overdo this, but there are a lot of key takeaways in this poll. Poll, 53% in the generic ballot say they would vote for a Democrat, 46% for a Republican. Do you think actually this potentially translates into big wins for Democrats? Do you think it's gonna be closer because of redistricting? How do you see it?
- [50:21]
Marco Rubio
I think it actually does. The question is whether or not it's sustained. Right. What I think voters are doing right now is voting against Donald Trump and not for Democrats. Right. And so if you look at those issues that you just laid out, I was Shocked by the immigration number. I mean. I mean, that to me is striking as we talk about the 5 alarm fire for Republicans. But there's also some numbers that should concern Democrats in that particular poll. One, all these others look really great. But what concerns me Most is that 50% of the Democratic Party feels like the party has betrayed them. You've got about 50% that feel like they need a radical change, which is why these Democratic socialists are beating incumbents and winning these open seats. Because the Democrats feel like they need a change. Interestingly enough. Can I just make one point? The Republican Party in the last 20 years has gone through three iterations from the Tea Party Freedom Caucus to now MAGA. The Democratic Party has not gone through any transformations. It continues to reject these transformations. And that's what we're seeing happen right now. I think if they were to fully embrace it, this party could come out much stronger by virtue of the lessons we're learning.
- [51:25]
Kristen Welker
Embrace the transformation of the socialist far left candidates who are running. Is that what you mean by that?
- [51:31]
Marco Rubio
What I mean by that is what I think that they're doing well. That we're not doing well. Is laying out a vision that's speaking directly to people's concerns. The Democratic Party has no proactive agenda, is not speaking to the concerns. The entire agenda is anti Trump. People wanna know, what are you gonna do for me? And that's where socialists are delivering.
- [51:46]
Kristen Welker
Malik, I wanna go back to something that Dan talked about, which is the timeline by which gas prices would need to come down. Dan talks about this late August. August, maybe early September. Is that how you see it?
- [52:00]
Craig Melvin
Labor Day? We always talk about Labor Day. You know, people start paying attention after Labor Day. After Labor Day, kids will now start going back to school. If we don't see those type of numbers going down by then, it's really going to be a problem.
- [52:13]
Marco Rubio
Can I just say, the other issue is not just gas prices. You've got. Grocery prices are still up. Electricity costs are still up. So even if you fix the gas prices, people are still being hit from. 93% of the nation thinks that we're in an affordability crisis right now. That is a big problem.
- [52:28]
Kristen Welker
Dan, final ten seconds.
- [52:29]
Dan Marika
I just. I wonder if, because prices have become such an issue in politics for so long, whether that Labor Day timeline is off of the table and it's just. It's already. It's already baked in.
- [52:38]
Kristen Welker
All right, we're going to watch it closely, guys. Great conversation. Dan, Ashley, Malik, really appreciate it. We're back tomorrow with more Meet the Press.
- [52:44]
Ashley Etienne
Now, real talent is defined by what people can do, not where they learn to do it. So by stopping at the education section of a real resume that you might throw away the perfect Hire Skills First. Hiring helps you see talent others miss, like more than 70 million stars skilled through alternative routes, let their story unfold and gain a competitive advantage. Because hiring managers who start with skills are 60% more likely to find a successful hire. Hire skills first. Learn why at tear the papersealing.org brought to you by opportunityatwork and the Ad Council.