← Meet the Press
Meet the Press
Meet the Press NOW — June 29
00:49:47
The Supreme Court delivers blockbuster decisions on the president’s ability to fire leaders of independent agencies and the counting of mail-in-ballots received after Election Day. The U.S. says it will resume talks with Iran after a weekend of back-and-forth strikes. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser joins Meet the Press NOW to discuss his bid for governor and the future of the Democratic Party.
Loading summary
Transcript112 lines
- [00:00]
A
Everyone's talking about protein lately, but how do you actually get enough of it? Muscle Milk Muscle Milk has a great tasting new formula with no artificial sweeteners, flavors or added colors. It's high quality complete protein designed to support healthy muscles with fewer ingredients than the previous formula and 26 to 42 grams of protein. For when you're stuck in meetings or need a post workout recovery. Available in chocolate, vanilla, cream, cookies and cream and strawberries and cream. Try the new great tasting Muscle Milk today. Available in stores nationwide. Muscle Milk Protein for all you know,
- [00:31]
B
recommendations can be great. Maybe someone recommended this podcast and here you are. But home projects are different. If a podcast isn't your thing, you lose a few minutes. If you hire your cousin's neighbor to mount your tv, you might end up with a lopsided screen and wall damage. Maybe I know a guy just isn't enough for your home. That's why thumbtack works. It matches you with top rated local pros with photos, reviews and credentials all in one place. For your next home project, try thumbtack. Hire the right pro today.
- [01:11]
C
Hi there. Welcome to Meet the Press.
- [01:12]
D
Now.
- [01:12]
C
I'm Ryan Nobles in Washington, where it has been a historic day after the Supreme Court issued several blockbuster decisions, including a major victory for President Trump's efforts to expand his executive authority authority, but also delivering a setback to his party's efforts to overhaul how votes are counted heading into the midterms, starting first with the big win for the administration. While the court rejected the president's attempts to fire Federal Reserve Board member Lisa Cook, it vastly expanded his power to oust leaders at other independent government agencies, ruling he could fire Rebecca Slaughter, an appointee to the Federal Trade Commission. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing the majority opinion in the case, saying subordinates who exercise the president's power are subject to removal by him. Then and only then can they remain accountable to the president and the president to the people. But in a scathing and lengthy dissent, Justice Sotomayor, writing the court's ruling, quote, promises to unleash only chaos. Moments ago, President Trump was asked about the ruling and if he planned to fire other agency officials as a result.
- [02:20]
E
The Supreme Court just affirmed your right to fire the heads of independent agencies. Should we expect more firings as a
- [02:26]
C
result of this rule?
- [02:27]
F
I don't think so. It gives me the right and not me. It gives a president the right to do what the president should have the right to do. And it's very interesting. It's a big ruling. It's been going ON for almost 100 years they've been working on this. And you know that it comes down my term is a very great honor. But it bestows additional powers or maybe the same power on the president. The president has the right to do this. And that has to do with a lot of agencies all throughout the system
- [02:57]
C
and Rebecca Slaughter herself responding to today's decision and warning of its long term implications.
- [03:04]
E
And I think why it really matters is exactly as President Trump said, it is unprecedented and it hands a massive amount of power away from Congress and to the president to shape economic decision making in a way that will reward the rich and powerful and at the expense of ordinary Americans.
- [03:26]
C
The Supreme Court also issuing a major decision on mail in voting, rebuffing the president and ruling against the Republican National Committee that states can count mail in ballots received after election Day and rejecting a Republican challenge to Mississippi's law for late arriving ballots. Justice Amy Coney Barrett writing the majority opinion in Watson v. RNC that quote, while federal law dictates when ballots must be cast, state law dictates when they must be received. Moments ago in the Oval Office, President Trump reacting to that ruling as well, calling it surprising and, quote, very detrimental to honest elections. This despite there being no evidence that mail in voting leads to widespread fraud. He also once again touted the need for his elections overhaul bill, the Save America act, while suggesting he may not sign any bills, including a bipartisan housing bill, until the SAVE act is passed. Joining me now are NBC News White House correspondent Monica Elba, NBC News senior legal correspondent Laura Jarrett, NBC News senior Supreme Court reporter Lawrence Hurley, NBC News senior national political reporter Sahil Kapoor, and Nate Perslay, a professor at Stanford Law Elections Law, and he is an elections law expert and a former research director for the Presidential Commission on Election Administration. Thank you guys all for being here. This is obviously a very important day. Let's start with Monica. Monica tonight.
- [04:48]
G
Thank you.
- [04:48]
C
Does the White House see today as a good day or a bad day for the administration? Because this was kind of a mixed bag in the way these many decisions were handed down.
- [04:58]
E
Exactly, Ryan. And that is what the president sort of took away from this. He likes to see in this, the good for him. And that is likely what he will be touting while also speaking out about the decisions that he disagreed with pretty severely. But specifically, the president is trying to take a victory lap on. On that case that you mentioned, the Slaughter case in particular, the president saying basically that this was something that he is very proud to have been the sitting president to oversee this kind of decision because it would give him the authority to potentially remove people from these key independent agencies. And so the president is saying essentially that he feels that really gives him now the potential to do that, which he is saying is, again, an honor for him and something that he could do while on a case, for instance, that had to deal with Lisa Cook, who of course is the governor on the Federal Reserve, that he cannot remove her, he cannot fire her in the way that he tried to and attempted to, is saying essentially that maybe he will still pursue that through some potential other or different path. So it is a mixed bag, like you said, with a couple of these different cases. And we can talk about the mail in voting in a moment, but the president here trying to capitalize on what he sees could be potentially useful to him throughout the rest of his term.
- [06:11]
H
Right.
- [06:12]
C
Let's talk about the Slaughter case first. This decision grants the president broader authority to fire officials at federal agencies. Has the White House indicated if it plans to use that authority? We heard the president kind of reject that notion initially. But this does give him a power that is now realized that he thought he had and now codifies. Could we see more firings?
- [06:33]
E
We could, and at dozens of different agencies. So we're talking about the Federal Trade Commission in the case of Rebecca Slaughter. But this could apply to everything from the Postal Service to the SEC to the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Those are all these independent watchdogs essentially of these large corporations that oversee these things in which now the president is saying he could use this case to remove people from there if he wanted to. He was asked pretty directly today and said that not necessarily that it's not something immediately that we should expect to see more firings. But certainly if he wanted to and he made the decision and he could go forward with that, he would be able to do that. Ryan.
- [07:10]
C
All right, you mentioned the mail in voting case, the Supreme Court also rejecting the RNC's bid to throw out mail in ballots that were received after Election Day. What is the Trump administration's reaction, especially as the president continues to demand Congress pass the Save America Act.
- [07:25]
E
And this would be, as a reminder, a sweeping overhaul to the way that elections are conducted in the United States. Remember that a certain version of it has passed the House a couple of times, but there is not currently appetite in the Senate to pass that, even though what the president wants to see happen and what he has talked about repeatedly over the last many weeks and months is adding things to the Save America act that's not even currently in what has been passed on Capitol Hill, as you know well, so the desire to actually change this doesn't seem to be there from the lawmakers, but from the president's perspective from the White House, he is essentially saying that he might continue to hold other critical legislation hostage if there isn't action on the Save America Act. And in particular, he was asked about a housing bill that has passed both the House and Senate and whether he would sign it or not. He said it hasn't been transmitted to him yet, but that even if it was, he'd have to take a look at it because anything in comparison he says to the Save America act is a, quote, big yawn. Here's a little more of what the president had to say when he was asked about this moments ago.
- [08:31]
F
Well, because of the mail in ballot ruling, which was a little bit surprising, gives people more time to vote illegally, let's say. But the SAVE act is even more important. And that's the right. You have to be a citizen of our country. Okay. You have to show you're a citizen of our country, called citizenship, voter ID by photo, photo voter ID and no mail in ballots unless you're in the military, disabled, you're ill or you're away or even on a vacation.
- [09:04]
E
And the president even called out specifically certain Republican senators there. Ryan, as you know so well that he would like to see come out and support this, but it is pretty unlikely that we're going to see that happen, at least anytime soon.
- [09:17]
C
I would venture to say it's impossible. But we'll continue to talk about it, I'm sure. Thank you, Monica. Let's now turn to Laura Jarrett to get some legal analysis in the wake of all of these decisions. Let's have you walk us through these decisions today. Laura, what was the court's reasons for allowing the President to fire Rebecca Slaughter but not fire Lisa Cook?
- [09:36]
I
Yeah, Ryan, the court really does see the Fed as different. They believe that the Fed should be insulated from politics and that Congress has intended to for the Fed to be different. Obviously, the Fed sets its own budget and it has the ability to move markets. And the President has every incentive to try to see some short term changes to the Fed if he can. We've certainly seen this president try to influence the Fed where he can and put his thumb on the scale where he can. And for the Chief justice and also at least Justice Kavanaugh, they think that the Fed should be treated differently. It doesn't mean that the President can never fire someone at the Fed. They can do it. They just need to have cause. And that cause actually has some teeth. It unlike the other federal agencies. But in terms of the day to day impact that we might see, what those other federal agencies do actually matters, we're talking about another a dozen other federal agencies that really do have an enormous impact. If you think about the things that affect everyday Americans, right, like car seats for children, cribs, the things that like consumers actually see and care about, those multi member federal agencies actually do have an enormous amount of power and they can all now be fired at will.
- [10:48]
C
Okay, let's move on and talk about what FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez, who was appointed by President Biden, said about today's decision. She said in a companion decision, the court protected the Federal Reserve from political interference while leaving media regulators exposed. Democracy depends on a free press and the preservation of free expression through all communications technologies as much as it depends on a stable economy. And you've alluded to this already, Laura, but I think the point here is that yes, the court did seem to provide some level of deference to the Federal Reserve, but there are all these other ancillary agencies that have a very direct impact on the implementation of policy. And in the case of the fcc, for instance, that's usually a very bipartisan board that makes these very important decisions about the way communication is conducted in this country. You know, based on today's ruling, how sweeping is the president's authority? I mean, could federal workers just be fired and could it happen very quickly now?
- [11:48]
I
Sure. And we've already seen the president attempt to do that and to try to certainly intervene in some civil service protections that up until this point people had thought were off limits. But he's pushing all of those boundaries. And the reason, you know, that this has sort of come up is just because the president has tried to do something that other presidents just simply hadn't done before. But the rule that the court has announced today isn't unique to President Trump. It will last for generations after him, which just means you're going to see a political swing, right, Ryan? So the next time a Democrat is occupying the office, it's not as if they're not going to take advantage of this rule. It just so happens that President Trump was the one who first pushed the envelope.
- [12:28]
C
Right?
- [12:28]
J
Right.
- [12:28]
C
And there was some sense that these federal agencies at least have had a degree of consistency between administration to administration. We may see that change in the near future. All right, Laura Jarrett, thank you for your excellent analysis as always. Let's bring in our Supreme Court reporter Lawrence o' Donnell or Lawrence o'? Donnell? Lawrence Hurley, I like you just the way you are, Lawrence. And take a look at the breakdown of today's decisions because I do think this is interesting because we are starting to see some swing voters emerge. It seems like on the court and the Trump v. Slaughter opinion, it was 6, 3 along the ideological lines that we're accustomed to with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice KAVANAUGH, Joining the three liberal justice and joining Lisa Cook's firing. But Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett also ruled against the rnc. When it comes to mail in ball, are any surprises here for you about how these decisions were reached?
- [13:18]
K
I would say going into today, based on the oral arguments, we had a pretty good sense of how the FTC case was going to come out and how the Federal Reserve case was going to come out. The mail in ballots, one, that was one where we weren't really sure. And I think the key issue in that case was that there's a lot of practical problems with if they had ruled in favor of the RNC about military ballots and things like that that would be affected by this. And Justice Barrett mentions that in her opinion. And I think there's certain cases where some justices are concerned about practical implications, some cases where they're not, some cases where they're in lockstep ideologically, some cases they're not. And we've seen that play out today.
- [13:54]
C
Okay. All right, Lawrence, thank you for that. We appreciate it. Let's now go to Sahil, who is on Capitol Hill. You know, Sahil, it's no secret that Congress is really already at odds with the White House over the Save America Act. Will today's decision affirming mail in ballots received after election Day move the needle one way or another? Could some of these wayward Republicans in the Senate now decide maybe I should get involved and pass the Save America Act?
- [14:17]
J
Short answer, Ryan, is no. I think it's extremely unlikely it moves the needle at all for the simple reason that the logjam on the Save America act is in the Senate where Democrats have the power with the filibuster to block it and Republicans don't have the votes to get around the filibuster or to nuke the filibuster. What it's likely to do is intensify this conflict within the GOP between Trump on the one hand, who is already pressuring Republicans saying this is now more important than ever to pass the Save America act, that he will accept no excuses for it, including to nuke the filibuster which he has demanded, and a whole host of Republican senators who, as you know, are dead set against that proposition. And I think the more important dynamic is the fact that Trump, by going after several sitting Republicans, has created a bunch of free agents who have no incentive to kowtow to his political wishes. So that is extremely unlikely to change. And the simple fact is you have Democrats celebrating this decision, including the minority leader, Chuck Schumer, saying the Supreme Court just upheld a bedrock American principle. Schumer says that if you cast your ballot on time, your vote will count and quote.
- [15:19]
C
But what's interesting about this, Sahil, and it was certainly clear in the Watson vs. RNC decision, but it also applied to some of the other decisions today, is that the court made it pretty clear that this really wasn't up to them, that if Congress wanted to change the law, they could change it. And that particularly applies to when ballots are counted. We've already talked about the Save America act broadly, and how Republicans in the Senate, at least a small gaggle of them, don't feel comfortable doing that. But could there be an appetite now to address the mail in ballot issue all by itself?
- [15:50]
J
So that's a crucial distinction you just made there, Ryan, because the Supreme Court is not saying it's unconstitutional to count the mail in ballots. They're just saying that federal law as written, does not require states to toss out those mail in ballots. So in theory, yes, Congress can change the law. Are they going to do it again? It's extremely unlikely because you need a bipartisan deal to get something through the Senate. And Democrats want to move it in an entirely different direction by loosening certain laws around voting, making it easier to vote, early voting, things like that. Now, you can imagine in an alternate universe that there is some sort of theoretical middle ground, at least with public opinion. If President Trump tried to cut a grand bargain, there are Republican ideas that are popular, including requiring some kind of voter ID to vote. That is very popular. And some Democratic ideas are popular as well. If they were to get things like making Election Day a federal holiday, guaranteeing a couple of weeks of early voting, they might be willing to play ball. But that is not the environment we live in. That is not the mindset of the president. So I don't see it happening.
- [16:46]
C
Okay, Sahil, thank you for that. Let's bring in our election law expert, Nate personally to get his take on all of this. So, Nate, first off, just your reaction to today's Watson vs. NRC decision. Were you surprised?
- [16:59]
L
I wasn't surprised. I think this was the outcome that most people expected. And if this case had been brought, say, 20 years earlier, I don't think it would have been even a close case. As it stands, it reflects the division on the court where it's a 5, 4 decision, upholding a practice that has happened for many decades, which is that in some states, when mail ballots are received after Election Day, they are still counted.
- [17:24]
C
So will this have any impact at all then on November's election results?
- [17:28]
L
It won't, because it preserves the status quo. Had it gone the other way, then you would have had several states that would have had to change their rules in order to deal with the fact that they couldn't have additional days in order to count. And so in a state like mine, California, where roughly 400,000 votes that were received after Election Day ended up being counted, it would have required, you know, additional resources and maybe changing the rules as to how we administer elections.
- [17:52]
C
Let's stay in California because that seems to be ground zero for President Trump's arguments about the problems with mail in balloting. He specifically points to the fact that it takes so long to count all these mail in ballots in California. We saw that play out in the Los Angeles mayor's race where it appeared that Spencer Pratt was in a position to make it to the runoff, but then after a week or two, he was no longer in that position anymore. He continues to hint that this means that the system is rigged. Is there any evidence here? Can we take anything from this challenge in terms of how Republicans are responding to this, that it could impact elections down the road?
- [18:32]
L
Well, I think there's a good argument to be made that we should have a uniform rule as to when votes can be counted for a federal election. And so I am dismayed, actually, by California's slow pace in counting ballots, especially in a system right now where there's so much polarization and concern about election administration. I think we need to do a lot better in California in counting the votes more quickly. However, this is left up to the states. And there's nothing in federal law that would prevent a state from accepting ballots that are received after the deadline, whether it's in Mississippi or whether it's in California. I just think that we need to be aware that people's perceptions of the legitimacy of the election are in some ways affected by how long it takes to count these votes.
- [19:19]
C
And so part of what Justice Alito said in his dissent, he said, quote, when someone votes by mail, it is harder for officials to verify the identity of the person requesting and completing the ballot. Mail voting also represents a greater opportunity for voter manipulation, a more vulnerable chain of ballot custody and a diminished ability to detect improprieties in real time. Today's decision compounds these vulnerabilities. First of all, is there any evidence of that? But secondly, do you worry that comments and rhetoric like this just in general undermine Americans faith in elections?
- [19:55]
L
I am worried about the rhetoric on this. I do worry that whether it comes from the Supreme Court or whether it comes from the president, that casting doubt on the legitimacy of a system, by the way, which has existed since the Civil War, right. We've had soldiers that have been voting absentee for over 150 years now. And so mail voting has been part of the election administration system for some time. And Republican and Democratic states, Right. Have administered it fairly without massive fraud, as is suggested. And that's true of places like Utah, which basically has almost all mail voting. It's true of places like Washington, Oregon, Colorado, which have almost uniform mail voting. And then places like California and Arizona where the overwhelming majority vote by mail, that we've had a sort of tried and true system for counting mail ballots. The problem right now is that there's so much doubt being thrown at the system by elites and it doesn't help when a Supreme Court justice does that as well.
- [20:52]
C
And it's worth pointing out that President Trump and Republicans won big in 2024 and there were many millions of mail in ballots that were cast during that window of time. Nate, personally, thank you so much for your expertise. We appreciate it. Coming up on again, off again. President Trump says the US And Iran will hold a new round of talks tomorrow after a series of strikes from both sides threaten to derail the peace effort. Plus, fear and frustration in Venezuela as hopes begin to fade for potentially tens of thousands of people still missing. For after last week's devastating earthquakes. We're on the ground in Caracas. You're watching Meet THE Press.
- [21:28]
F
Now.
- [21:36]
M
A morning walk, some bird watching. It's another easy Sunday. UnitedHealth Group makes these ordinary days possible with partners like the University of Tennessee Health Sciences helping communities manage their health. Closer to home, 54% of participants have lowered their blood pressure, meaning fewer heart attacks. And more Sundays at the park. This might feel like an ordinary day. To UnitedHealth Group, it's the healthcare system working better for everyone. Learn more@unitedhealthgroup.com Commitment I'm Hannah.
- [22:06]
N
I've lost 75 pounds in 20 months with GLP1s/ diet and exercise on row. I've gone from struggling to run a mile to running farther every day. You can access FDA approved GLP1s online. Get the support you need to reach your weight loss goals. Go to Ro Co Weight to see if you qualify. I'm a paid ROE partner, 20% average weight loss in one year and non diabetics with obesity or overweight with a weight related medical condition versus 3.1% in placebo arm Rx only. To stay informed about serious side effects, go to Roe Co Safety.
- [22:36]
A
You know that thing where you get an amazing pair of shoes at a really great price and want to tell everyone about it?
- [22:42]
G
Yeah.
- [22:43]
A
So do we. Here at Designer Shoe Warehouse. We'll give you something to brag about, like the latest styles from brands you love or the trends everyone's obsessing over
- [22:52]
O
or shoes that make you feel like, well, you.
- [22:55]
A
So go ahead, show off a little. Buying shoes that get you at prices that get your budget. Head to your DSW store or dsw.com today. DSW. Let us surprise you.
- [23:09]
C
Welcome back. The United States says it is set to resume talks with Iran after days of intensifying strikes on both sides threaten to derail the fragile peace process. The president posting on social media that those talks will take place tomorrow in Doha, Qatar, though Iran has yet to confirm an official meeting. Over the weekend, the US Conducted strikes on several Iranian military targets, saying it hit Iranian missiles and drone storage sites and radar locations. Iran responding by launching strikes against US Military positions in the Gulf countries of Kuwait and Bahrain, hitting one residential building in Bahrain during the attack. It comes as this afternoon, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Mideast envoy Steve Witkoff are giving both the House and Senate unclassified briefings on negotiations with Iran for the first time since President Trump signed the memorandum of understanding with Tehran earlier this month. Today, Iran's president called that MOU a major victory for the Iranian people, saying that the $6 billion in frozen assets will be released to Iran. Joining me now is NBC News chief international correspondent Keir Simmons and NBC News senior national security correspondent Courtney Kuby. Kier, let's start with you. What do we know about these talks that are set to resume tomorrow?
- [24:28]
P
Well, they are happening. Exactly what the format is is not entirely clear. The White House says that Steve Wyckoff and Jared Kushner, President Trump's envoy and his son in law are headed to Doha overnight. When the Iranians arrive is a different question. Through the day, the Iranians have been suggesting that they haven't confirmed whether they'll be there. Other Iranian Sources suggesting they will be. I think there's a lot of game playing here, not least because you have to remember that the Iranians are trying to signal to the home crowd, if you like, to people back home that might be opposed to these negotiations. And there's also a real attempt to muscle their way through these peace negotiations in order to, to gain more. I mean, effectively, the war may be over for now, but both sides are trying to battle to, to win the peace. And so the Iranians insisting that they are in charge of the opening of the Straits of Hormuz, insisting that Israel should, should withdraw from Lebanon, insisting a number of things that they say the deal with President Trump gives them, which is, of course, the Trump administration would say, no, we didn't sign up to that.
- [25:37]
C
So we assured you before that. Iran's president says that $6 billion in frozen funds are being returned to Iran. But so far, officials say no frozen Iranian assets have been released. What more do we know about this? You mentioned is it a degree of, just of a PR campaign by the regime, or at some point are these funds going to be released?
- [25:58]
P
Well, I think certainly that's what is being promised to the Iranians. Certainly the, one of the ways I think that they've got the Iranians to the table and to agree to a deal has been the prospect of money, albeit we have to say that $6 billion is not close to the kind of money that Iran would need to rebuild after the Iran war. But you can imagine, I mean, I don't think I have to tell you that what's happening here is something like a game of chicken, inching each piece forward. If you do this, we'll do that. And an enormous lack of trust on both sides. So when you have a situation where just before the weekend, just because a ship was passing through the Strait of Hormuz, not in Iranian waters, Iran fires on it. And that ignites an escalation with the US Launching strikes on Friday and Saturday night. When you have all of that taking place, there are many questions about what pieces of all of this deal are going to be fulfilled and when it's going to be fulfilled and, and how. And not least as well, because just back to that memorandum of understanding that the point about that MOU is that it is vague. And the fact that it's vague is good because it meant they were able to agree. But now the challenge is what exactly have both sides agreed to?
- [27:15]
C
And then there also is the backdrop of these ongoing military hostilities, not only the situation with Iran and the US but we also have Israel and Hezbollah. They renew renewed strikes on south Lebanon. The Israelis did, despite that US Brokered security deal. Can we even call this a cease fire at this point? And how could that complicate the talks with Iran?
- [27:35]
P
Well, it is a cease fire in the sense that despite kind of the fairy tale idea of a cease fire, if you like, the reality is that they're always somewhat messy and involve escalations and they're broken and then reinstated. So I think we're okay in terms of the language there. Although you're right to, to ask the question in terms of the question of Lebanon, southern Lebanon, remember, the Israelis were not in those negotiations that led to the memorandum of understanding. They weren't in Switzerland when those negotiations taking place. Confusingly complex. There has been separate negotiations between the Lebanese government and the Israelis. Fundamental principle, principle that the Israelis are holding out is that they're not prepared to leave southern Lebanon until Hezbollah, which is, which is for which it is a stronghold, stops firing on Israel.
- [28:21]
C
Okay, Keir Simmons in Israel, Kira, thanks as always for your reporting. Let's turn to Courtney now and this back and forth. Fighting over the weekend began after Iran struck a tanker in the Strait of Hormuz last week. Iran's foreign minister says that Iran has sole authority of the strait, and they have and they will continue to be. Is it clear who currently controls the Strait of Hormuz?
- [28:43]
O
Yeah, both sides are saying that they control it. I think what's important to point out here is that there are multiple parties here who have tremendous influence over the traffic that's going through the Strait of Hormuz as opposed to one side really controlling it or the other. But right now we've gone through these periods of almost stalemate. Where is, you know, we saw during the war that Iran was saying that they were controlling the strait. The US Was saying it. They're still saying that. And both still have the ability to really influence the traffic that's going through. As you said, Iran firing a drone and hitting a commercial ship just last week, the US Military responding with strikes, the US Military shooting down at least one Iranian drone. So at the end of the day, no one party really controls the strait. But multiple, at least the two sides, the Iran and the US have the ability to greatly influence the traffic that's going through there. And thereby, again, we, you know, we don't talk about this as much anymore, but a tremendous impact on worldwide commerce still.
- [29:41]
C
And then there's a question about just how much Iran has in terms of military capability we saw over the weekend a number of missiles and drones were shot down, the US Saying that it struck several of Iran's military assets. I mean, does Iran still have robust military capabilities right now?
- [29:59]
G
Yeah.
- [29:59]
O
And it really fights some of the narrative that's come out of the Trump administration about how Iran's military has been decimated. What the reality is is the US Military and the Israeli military during the war actually did have a take a big chunk out of Iran's conventional capabilities. So things like their ballistic missiles, their launchers, their air force and their conventional navy were greatly, greatly damaged during the course of the war. But Iran has spent the cease fire the same way that the US Military has. The US Military has been refitting. They've been sending in additional munitions and sort of resetting if in case there is a resumption of large scale combat operations. Iran did the same thing, moving things around to where they needed them. They were digging things out of that had been in some cases buried by military strikes. And in other cases, Iran buried some of their own assets to keep them safe from strikes. Iran has now brought some of that out there. They still do have quite a substantial conventional military capability and they have arranged some of it along the Strait of Hormuz. Now, Ryan.
- [31:00]
C
Okay, Courtney, thank you for being on top of it as always. We appreciate it. Up next, emergency workers from around the world are racing against time to rescue survivors still trapped under the rubble five days after those historically powerful earthquakes in Venezuela. We're live from Caracas. Stay with us on MEET THE press. Now.
- [31:22]
Q
Trip yips. The panic that sets in right before you book travel. Hands sweat, teeth grind, stomach flip scene flight prices going up, up and away from your budget. One finger hovers the button. Taunts confirm. Now beach thoughts bank thoughts. Brian thoughts. Will he pay you back this time? Group chat blows up. Did you book it? Did you book it? Skip the trip yips. Book travel with flexible payment plans from a firm on Expedia. Payment options with a firm are subject to eligibility. See lending terms@affirm.com disclosures.
- [31:53]
R
Hello from Etsy. So we've got a pretty personal question. What moments mean the most to you? Big firsts like your first home, baby or pet. Or what about hosting a party, getting a freelance gig or ending a toxic relationship? One moment isn't bigger than the other. They're all special. And for each one, there's an Etsy seller who makes and picks the perfect piece, like custom drinkware, personalized portraits, jewelry and more. Celebrate your moments and celebrate being human with Etsy.
- [32:23]
S
The GLP1 pill you've been waiting for is now on Roe. Yep, it's finally here with the same clinically proven ingredient now in a pill and now on Roe. It's the first FDA approved GLP1 pill for weight loss at the lowest price available. That's one daily GLP1 pill. For big results now on RO go to RO. Listen to see if you qualify. RX only go to RO CO safety for serious side effects and boxed warning associated with GLP1s.
- [32:56]
C
Welcome back. We turn now to Venezuela where search and rescue teams are working around the clock to find survivors trapped under the rubble in a race against time. Following last week's massive back to back earthquakes, the death toll continues to climb with the government now saying more than 1700 people are dead and tens of thousands still remain unaccounted for. A senior administration official tells NBC News three Americans are among the dead and 12 are missing. The chances of finding survivors diminish with every passing hour. In the hard hit region north of the capital, Caracas, people are using shovels and their bare hands to dig through piles of collapsed concrete searching for their loved ones. Over the weekend, international search and rescue teams pulled multiple survivors from the debris. Here you can see a team from Fairfax, Virginia alongside local firefighters rescuing a nine month old baby from under a collapsed building. His mother was also brought to safety. With crowds cheering. Joining me now is NBC News is Ana Vanessa Herrero in Caracas. Ana, you have visited La Guaira this morning which is considered ground zero. Take us through what you saw there.
- [34:06]
G
Yes, absolute devastation, more or less the same thing we saw the first day. But now the difference is that we see more international rescue teams on the ground working together with civilians and with local teams to try to find anyone that might be alive under the buildings that have collapsed. Also there in front of those buildings, in front of those efforts, another story unfolding and it's the story of thousands. There are now figuring out what to do next. Those who survived. Now they need to live in very bad conditions and without any support from the central government. That is what they are telling us here on the ground.
- [34:55]
C
It just is devastating. It's hard to put into words. We are now past that critical 72 hour window to find survivors trapped under the rubble. Has that changed how these search and rescue operations are being conducted?
- [35:08]
G
Yes, they are trying to accelerate as much as they can. But let me tell you what we witnessed today. So in the same street, you can see several rescue teams from different countries in one building trying to rescue possible survivors. And then in the next one, family members with their bare hands taking it upon themselves to bring their loved ones to life, if that is even possible. They are trying to hold on to that feeling of hope. And that is happening on the same street, on the same place. Even here, family members are still trying to wait for news, for positive and miraculous news about their loved ones. So time, it's of essence right now. And they know, family knows and rescue teams know that. And they're working as hard as they can so that we can see images as the one you just showed about, you know, that can bring a little bit of happiness to everyone here on the ground.
- [36:05]
C
Yeah. The US has pledged $300 million in aid to Venezuela so far.
- [36:10]
T
Yeah.
- [36:10]
C
Do Venezuelans feel like they're getting the help they need right now from the international community?
- [36:17]
G
They, they do. I've been talking to a lot of people and they do say that the presence of the international teams here is extremely helpful. They do not think that they are getting enough. But you know what? They also think that the government, the national government took way too long to act on this tragedy. And they say still that they don't have what it takes and the resources to face a tragedy like this. So, yes, they're hopeful. They're grateful about the international community. But right now, a lot of people feel it's too late.
- [36:53]
C
Anna, Vanessa Herrero, terrific reporting on the ground there. Thank you so much. Please stay safe after the break. Colorado's Attorney General Phil Weiser has sued President Trump more than 65 times. Now he's challenging Senator Michael Bennett in the Democratic primary for governor. We'll meet the candidate next. This is MEET THE press. Welcome back. Tomorrow is primary day in Colorado. And as Democrats debate the direction of their party, two key races could provide some clues on the durability of the progressive message. After last week's win in New York City, Veteran Congresswoman Diana DeGette is facing a challenge from Democratic Socialist Mehlat Kirosi, who enjoys significant progressive backing, including Senator Bernie Sanders. Senator John Hickenlooper is trying to fend off his own progressive challenger as he runs for a second term with state Senator Julia Gonzalez making a bid for his seat. Meanwhile, primary voters are also set to weigh in on the race to replace term limited Governor Jared Polis. Senator Michael Bennett and state Attorney General Phil Weiser are in a tight race for the Democratic nomination. And joining me now is one of those candidates in that race for Colorado, the attorney general from that State, Phil Weiser. Mr. Weiser, thank you so much for being here. We appreciate it.
- [38:13]
H
Thank you, Ryan. Great to join you.
- [38:15]
C
All right, let's start with your message heading into election Day. What exactly is your sell to Colorado voters as they head to the polls?
- [38:24]
H
Would Colorado voters know about My campaign is I'm committed to fighting for them, whether it's taking on the lawless, bullying Trump administration. We filed our 67th lawsuit today standing up for Colorado, taking on Big Pharma. We brought back close to a billion dollars to address the opioid crisis and put that money to work to save lives. Corporate landlords, Live Nation, Ticketmaster. I'm going to always fight for the people of Colorado. And secondly, if you look at our campaign, we're running a people power campaign. And the campaign against us has out of state billionaires, corporate money, special interests. What Coloradans know about my commitment is my true north is to serve the people of Colorado. And I believe in doing it at the grassroots. And finally, when we're looking for someone to lead our state, we want someone who's ready to take the work on, who knows our state inside and out. No state government. Senator Michael Bennett has 18 years experience in the Senate. He'll be a chair of a committee this fall. When the Dems take the Senate, it doesn't make sense to take him out of his strength and take my abilities off the field where I can serve the state level, which is why this race has a famous bumper sticker now. Phil Weiser for Governor, Michael Bennett for Senate.
- [39:37]
C
An interesting strategy, to say the least, touting your opponent's upside. But let me get back to your initial point about your efforts as attorney general to fight back against the Trump administration. I think you concede that the role of attorney general is a bit different than the role of governor. What does it mean in terms of fighting and this effort of pushing back against the Trump administration as governor? What you need to work with the administration on a whole host of Is there any world in which you'll be able to develop a positive relationship with Trump administration officials to the benefit of the voters of Colorado?
- [40:14]
H
Ryan, there's several points there. And there's a philosophical question that Governors across the U.S. take J.B. pritzker in Illinois have had to deal with, which is how can we lead with moral clarity? And my view is when you have a lawless, bullying administration that says to Colorado, for example, we want to tell you how to conduct your elections, we want to tell you to let out a former clerk, county Clerk Tina Peters of prison because it's part of a
- [40:43]
C
conspiracy to declare it was your Democratic governor that released her from prison. That was not the Trump administration that did that, sir. Right.
- [40:49]
H
Well, but here's the thing. The Trump administration had a bullying campaign. Our current Democratic governor decided, yes, we will accede to this request, let her out with a commutation. My point is that's wrong. And what Coloradans know about me is I will fight for what's right, stand the line, stand up for our values, our principles, and here's where it's relevant. A lot of the state agencies are the ones that are affected when a federal government operates illegally and harmfully. I, as governor, I'm in a position to direct those state agencies to bring lawsuits, working with the attorney general, who will be a partner. And so the skills, the commitment, and the values I've shown as attorney general, they're directly relevant to how Ali is governed.
- [41:33]
C
And I understand that there are a whole host of issues that you oppose the Trump administration on, but can you give me even one example of a way that you could work with the administration going forward if you become governor?
- [41:45]
H
I'm gonna give you a few examples. Let me start with how I'm currently doing it as Attorney General. As Attorney General, I'm currently working side by side on the antitrust case against Google. It's a monopolization case that we are working side by side. When this administration works in a lawful, appropriate way on the merits, then absolutely, we'll work together. And there'll be plenty of ways for us to work together on how we lower healthcare costs, taking novel experiments here, just like currently Governor Polis is doing, working with the FDA to import drugs so people get access to lower drugs. That's a collaboration. That's about how we support people, how we make life more affordable here. We've got a real challenge right now with housing costs. I'm looking to lean in with innovation. The federal government's passing a bipartisan bill on housing, assuming it gets signed by the president. I'm excited to get to work with the federal government, with other states, and finally fighting forest fires, something we need to do with our federal partners, state, local, federal level. So when this administration works together lawfully, count me as a partner. When they try to intimidate me, try to harm Colorado, break the law, I'll stand up for what's right.
- [42:52]
C
All right, let's get back to this novel campaign approach that you've taken in highlighting the positive aspects of your opponent and Senator Bennett, who's a record, you've praised you, as you told us just a few minutes ago that throwing away his experience would be, quote, a waste for Colorado. Why do you believe that his experience is good enough for him to represent Coloradans in Washington, but not in Denver?
- [43:17]
H
Jim Collins, who wrote a book called Good to Great, says you need the right people on the bus in the right seats. When you're looking at my skills, my accomplishments in an executive role at the state level, enforcing the law, whether it's our insurance commission, our public health department, I know how to be an effective enforcer. Whether it's working on legislation with our state legislature, working on regulations, I've done that effectively administering programs like in the opioid crisis. So I am looking at being governor with a track record of accomplishments and experience, which is why more people in every single elected office, current and former, you could Name County Commissioner, DAs, school board, have endorsed me than Senator Bennett. There's one category. He's got more support members of Congress. He does know Congress better than I do. He does have experience in Congress. That counts for a lot of what makes the most sense for Colorado when looking at the two of us is keep Michael Bennett in the Senate and make me Colorado's next governor.
- [44:15]
C
All right, let's talk about the future of the Democratic Party. We saw a number of progressives in New York City win elections last week. Some even describe themselves as socialists. Where do you see the future of the party? Is there enough room in your party for everyone from moderate Republicans to people that describe themselves as socialists?
- [44:36]
H
I am absolutely a big tent person who believes in diversity of viewpoints, who believes in finding common ground on our values and fighting for people. What I have done in Colorado in this campaign is show up everywhere. I went to a Colorado Muslim Votes forum and I was the only candidate who showed up, gave some answers that they didn't necessarily want to hear, but they appreciate me for showing up. They endorsed me for showing up. Colorado Indivisible endorsed me because of my deep commitment to grassroots. We in Colorado believe in learning from one another. And Roy Romer, a former governor, had this really important teaching which applies across the spectrum. All truth is partial. When someone says to me they're concerned about something, instead of writing someone off right away, I want to say, tell me more, let me learn. And I've been clear about my values. I've been clear about what I'll fight for. I've also been clear that I believe in an inclusive party and inclusive Colorado.
- [45:31]
C
Okay. Attorney General Phil Weiser, good luck tomorrow. We'll be watching your race very closely. We appreciate you being on Meet the Press.
- [45:37]
H
Thank you, Ryan.
- [45:38]
C
All right. Let's bring in our panel now to talk more about this race and some others. Joining me is Sabrina Rodriguez. She's a politics reporter for the Wall Street Journal Taryn Rosenkranz, the Democratic strategist and founder and CEO of New Blue Interactive and Mark Bednar, Republican strategist and former adviser to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. So, Sabrina, let's start with what's going on in Colorado in this kind of conversation, maybe we'll call it the Democrats are having about the future of this party. You know, obviously the voters in Colorado might be a little bit different than the voters in New York City, but there is this socialist question that keeps popping up. And President Trump has now taken to calling many of these Democratic candidates communists. Is this something that Democrats have to wrestle with? Do they need to define themselves to the voters?
- [46:23]
D
I mean, I think we've seen the Democratic Party for years now trying to grapple with this, going back to 2016 when Bernie Sanders was running against Hillary Clinton. So it's not exactly a new phenomenon. But we see it picking up steam when we see someone like Mayor Mamdani win in New York City when we see three congressional candidates, two of which identify as Democratic socialists. But I think it's a broader question in the party right now about how do you show that you are fighting? How does it show that you are going to bring about change? And the thing I consistently hear from voters on the campaign trail is just this exhaustion with Washington, this feeling that the government doesn't get things done, that whether you are a Democrat or Republican, if you are in Washington, if you are in Congress, what have you actually delivered? And that's created an opening for the progressive left to say we want to jump in, we have radical ideas, we can bring about change. And you see the establishment side of the Democratic Party kind of struggling with how to grapple with it and navigate it.
- [47:16]
C
Could that be playing out in Maine? There's a new poll out today that shows Graham Platner, who's the anti establishment progressive, leading Senator Collins, the long term incumbent by two points. It's within the margin of error. And before Mark says anything, we know that Maine is a very difficult state to poll. He has his own controversies that he's dealing with. But is there a sense, like to your point, that voters are just sick of the establishment? It doesn't matter how you label yourself. If you're presenting something different, we're at least going to listen.
- [47:42]
I
Yeah.
- [47:42]
D
I mean, when you're talking to voters in Maine. And I've had colleagues that have spent a lot of time out there that the thing that they're consistently hearing from voters who are backing Platner is that exactly that some people are, you know, saying they're holding their nose. If they support him, they don't like the controversies around him. But one of the things that has helped him ascend, and particularly in the Democratic primary that he won, was just the idea, this is an outsider. He's going to shake things up. Susan Collins has been around for so long. What has she delivered? And just this feeling of wanting an outsider and change.
- [48:10]
C
So, Taryn, I want to play for you something that Senator Chris Murphy, who could be a party standard bearer going into 2028, told me yesterday Meet the Press. Does the Democratic Party actually need to embrace the moniker of socialism, lean into it?
- [48:26]
B
No.
- [48:27]
H
But I think we have to understand that people do not believe that this version of capitalism has worked. Democrats are not going to win by defending this version of capitalism, but I think we'll be able to offer ideas on how to dramatically reform it rather than. Than throwing out the entire system.
- [48:45]
C
Do you agree? Can they make that distinction? Or could the inertia from the kind of the energy in the party just carry the party with it, whether it likes it or not?
- [48:53]
T
I mean, I think that's the headline that we would all love, right, is everybody's like, oh, Democratic Socialist Mondami is making. But I think the truth is, is that candidates have to win where they are. And right now, what people care about is they're like, it is too expensive. Everything is too expensive. And I think that, that as you see, or the. What did you say, hold your nose about. Like, I think some of this is about change. They want something different. So I don't think we need to get wrapped up in what the Democratic Party. There is never going to be a leader of the Democratic Party. Like, that's just not who we are. We're the big tent party, and we've been that way for hundreds of years. So you're just not gonna see one unified message. Because it's not. Except that you can see the reason it's not is because we know this isn't working. Trump. Trump's policies are not working. It's more expensive at the pump, at the grocery store, our health care at the places that matter. And that's what's going to matter to voters, not the moniker after the Democrat Party.
- [49:45]
C
Well, Mark, there's nothing that President Trump loves more than a moniker, and he's already taking advantage of this leftward push. He's called these candidates communists. He has really focused in here, particularly in Washington, D.C. he won't let Janice Lewis George, who won, he says that the Janice Luce George who won the Merrill primary here, he's warning that she could destroy the city. He's gone as far as to call them godless communists. Is that taking it too far or could the communist moniker actually resonate with voters in places like Iowa or North Carolina?
- [50:14]
U
Well, those same communists who call him a fascist and a Nazi on a regular basis, I mean, in terms of the rhetoric, like, of course, that's all over the map right now. But the fact to your earlier point, if, if Democrats, if moderate Democrats are able to make a distinction, to be able to separate themselves from socialism, that's only a failure on the part of Republicans. It's the job of Republicans in this campaign season heating up now at just a couple months away from the election. They need to do their best job of reminding voters, here's what these socialists who have won these primaries actually believe. And the best poker tell the biggest poker tell that you know, that Hakeem Jeffries does not want to talk about this at all. He looks in every interview that he's giving, he looks like he's in a hostage video. He does not want to talk about this at all. He does not want to talk about Mondoni or any of these candidates or what they stand for. He tries to brush it off. So it's going to be incumbent upon Republican leadership, whether it's Speaker Johnson, President Trump, everyone in between, to actually tie all these candidates together.
- [51:09]
C
So I guess if I can understand what you're saying here, it's not so much about the labels. It's trying to identify what those labels mean in terms of votes and politics.
- [51:18]
K
For sure.
- [51:18]
U
Absolutely. And if you get too hyperbolic, then voters will actually kind of write that up. But if you actually, even in the case of D.C. get down to the nitty gritty of does this candidate want to defund the police? Does this candidate not support curfews for teens who are causing problems in different neighborhoods that we've seen throughout the city?
- [51:35]
G
Okay.
- [51:35]
U
You know, those are really big deals that the president, he's focused on and he should highlight.
- [51:39]
C
All right, I want to talk about an issue that's kind of dividing the Republican Party right now, and that's the future around the President's Save America Act. Listen to what, what this House Speaker, Mike Johnson said after returning from the White House just today where he had a conversation with President Trump about this. Listen, I understand the frustration. My colleagues and Senate Democrats are refusing to move the Save America Act. Remember, we passed it three times in the House and we intend to pass it again. But the only way to get that to the president's desk, we've been shown many times, is to put it on reconciliation. So now we're talking reconciliation when it comes to the Save America Act, Sabrina. And what I found interesting was the response from Republicans with the speaker taking this route. Anna Paulina Luna, who's in his conference suggesting that it's not going to work in reconciliation. Do you think that the speaker might misjudge the purists when it comes to this issue? They actually want to see what the president is asking for. Past and reconciliation water it down in a way that it actually wouldn't have the intended consequences that President Trump is looking for.
- [52:43]
D
I mean, I think Speaker Johnson is struggling to figure out how to move forward here. We've seen, you know, the conversation both between the House and the Senate about whether or not the votes are there to pass the Save America act. And they've tried to move past that conversation and try to move on to other legislation. You see the excitement from Republicans to get to say that they passed the housing bill and what that would mean for the United States and then they get reeled back into the Save America Act. So I think there's some frustration and some trying to chart a path forward. And that's a struggle that Johnson has to grapple with because he does have members of his party who are not going to vote for a watered down version. But he also has to find the votes if he wants to actually try and pass this.
- [53:19]
C
Taryn, I have very little time, but I want to give you the last word. Are Republicans losing an opportunity here by not making this about affordability?
- [53:26]
T
I think they are. I think we've got to be. That's the only thing we need to be talking about in this election right now is that it is too expensive to live here and how can we make that better? And if they stay away from that, it's going to be hard.
- [53:36]
C
Excellent work on the time cube. Karen, you saved me there. Sabrina, Mark, thank you guys all for being here. We're back tomorrow with more MEET the PRESS now, but there's more news ahead right now on NBC News now.
- [53:49]
R
Want to make your home everyone's favorite summer destination? Shop Etsy for hosting essentials like outdoor furniture for your backyard guests. Celebrate summer.