← Meet the Press
Meet the Press
Meet the Press NOW — June 30
00:49:47
The Supreme Court rejects President Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship and upholds state bans on transgender athletes in girls' and women's sports in their final opinions of the term. Voters in Colorado head to the polls in another high-stakes primary race for progressive Democrats. British Ambassador Christian Turner joins Meet the Press NOW to discuss the European view of the U.S.-Iran negotiations prior to the upcoming NATO summit.
Loading summary
Transcript134 lines
- [00:01]
America's Beverage Companies Spokesperson
When it comes to what your family eats and drinks, you know your choices matter. You're the expert because you know what fits your life. And getting it right starts with good information. That's why America's beverage companies are sharing more information about our ingredients@goodtokonofacts.org no spin, no judgments, just the facts straight from the experts. For more than 140 beverage ingredients, visit
- [00:28]
Capella University Announcer
goodtonofacts.org There's a fire inside you you can't ignore. Stand still. Not a chance. You're a lifelong learner who's come this far. Now we are here to help you keep going further. Capella University what can't you do? Visit capella. Edu to learn more.
- [00:56]
Ryan Nobles
Hi there. Welcome to MEET THE PRESS now. I'm Ryan Nobles in Washington on the final day of a historic Supreme Court. With the court issuing decisions today on everything from birthright citizenship to transgender rights to the role money can play in politics. And the most highly anticipated decision of the term. The court rejecting President Trump's controversial effort to end birthright citizenship, ruling that the executive order the president signed on his first day of his second term is unlawful. The decision was 6 to 3, with five justices ruling that the order violated the 14th Amendment. Chief Justice John Roberts writing in the majority opinion, quote, citizenship then and now was the right to have rights to freely participate in our political community. The framers of the 14th Amendment extended that promise to every free born person in this land. We keep that promise. Today, President Trump calling the decision bad for our country while also claiming without evidence that the ruling gave Congress a roadmap for legislation to do away with birthright citizenship. House Speaker Mike Johnson criticizing the court's decision, which he learned about in real time during his weekly news conference.
- [02:08]
House Speaker Mike Johnson
Oh, dear.
- [02:09]
Steve Kornacki
That the decision is children born in
- [02:11]
NBC News Senior National Political Reporter Sahil Kapoor
the United States, parents unlawfully or temporarily
- [02:13]
Kyle Clark
present are subject to the jurisdiction of
- [02:15]
NBC News Senior National Political Reporter Sahil Kapoor
the United States and our citizens at
- [02:17]
Ryan Nobles
birth under the 14th Amendment citizenship clause.
- [02:20]
NBC News Senior National Political Reporter Sahil Kapoor
What's your reaction to that, Mr. Speaker?
- [02:25]
Laura Jarrett
This is real time.
- [02:26]
House Speaker Mike Johnson
I need to read the opinion. Okay. But obviously that's, I mean, you could say that's a textualist, originalist view. However, I do think that this has been grossly abused in recent years. And I will say I'm very disappointed in that outcome. I think it subjects the country to serious challenges going forward and we'll have to deal with it as a Congress.
- [02:49]
Ryan Nobles
Speaker Johnson also insisting that Republicans are going to look at legislation, potential legislation on birthright citizenship. The the ACLU's legal director who argued this case before the Supreme Court responded, basically telling the speaker, good luck.
- [03:04]
ACLU Legal Director
Look, millions and millions of Americans, the vast majority of the American public loves birthright citizenship the way it is, the way that it was ratified in this country in the 1800s. This is a pillar of who we are as a nation. So if they want to try and overturned it by constitutional amendment, good luck to them, because they're going against the will of the people of this country, of the United States.
- [03:34]
Ryan Nobles
But the Supreme Court also delivered victories to the president and Republicans today, first by upholding state bans on transgender athletes and girls in women's sports in a pair of six, three decisions along ideological lines. While the rulings were focused on bans in West Virginia and Idaho, they will impact 25 other states with similar restrictions. And, and in another 6 to 3 decision, the justices sided with Republicans striking down campaign finance rules that limit how much national political parties can spend in coordination with individual candidates. We'll have more on that later in the show. But to kick things off, joining me from the White House is NBC News senior policy reporter Shannon Petty. Peace. Also with me, NBC News senior legal correspondent Laura Jarrett and NBC News senior Supreme Court reporter Lawrence Hurley. Shannon, let's start with you. Most legal experts had expected the Supreme Court to uphold birthright citizenship. Was the White House surprised by today's decision?
- [04:28]
Shannon Pettypiece
Well, you may recall, Ryan, that President Trump actually attended these oral arguments, which was a highly unusual move for a president. Now, he left after about 30 minutes before the arguments were completed and before the justices asked some really prodding questions. But, but of course, my colleagues here have reported extensively that it did seem the court was skeptical of the argument that the administration was making. So it should not come as a big surprise to the White House the way this ruling came down.
- [05:00]
Ryan Nobles
And Shannon, it does seem pretty clear from the ruling that birthright citizenship is enshrined in the 14th Amendment. But now President Trump is calling on Congress to end birthright citizenship through legislation. Given that that's not going to happen, what is the White House's strategy here?
- [05:15]
Shannon Pettypiece
Yeah, well, and just to be perfectly clear, this is what that would take to have a constitutional amendment. You would have to get two thirds of the House and the Senate to vote to make that change. Then you would have to get the states to ratify it. You would have to get 38 of the 50 states to ratify that change. You covered the Hill regularly. I'll let you predict the odds on how likely that is to pass. But that is a long haul ahead if Congress wants to do something. So what I think we could see instead, and what our reporting has indicated is that this White House will continue to push and make efforts to find whatever levers and tools they can pull to crack down not just on illegal immigration, but on legal pathways that immigrants have used for years or decades to try and crack down on those pathways as well. That is sort of a shift in this second term from what we saw in the first term, where it is not just immigration raids and border security and a border wall. It is also going after these legal pathways that have really been established in our immigration system, similar to the ruling we saw yesterday around this temporary protective status that would affect not just people who are seeking to come here legally, but people who have been here legally in this country for decades, in some cases who could lose their legal status. That seems to be what the White House is indicating it will continue to pursue.
- [06:38]
Ryan Nobles
To answer your question, Shannon, there is zero chance of a two thirds vote in the House and Senate to repeal the 14th Amendment. That will never happen. At least not in my lifetime, I don't think. Let's talk about this other ruling, and that is on transgender athletes. This has been a huge issue for President Trump. He's talked on and on about keeping transgender athletes out of girls and women's sports. What's the administration's reaction to this?
- [07:03]
Shannon Pettypiece
Yeah, and it was a major issue on the campaign trail, I'll say, too, from the rallies and events I covered by Republicans. Not just President Trump, but an issue that came up over and over again in this last campaign. The White House is taking the win here. They are claiming a victory. The president put out a social media post saying this issue is off the table now. Well, that's. That's not necessarily the case. The court has said the states can decide on this issue. About half the states have some sort of legislation in place that would restrict who can participate in women's sports. But there's certainly a number of states, including some that have protections for trans athletes still out there. So this is not necessarily an issue that has gone away. It is settled in some of these states, but it potentially could be one that plays out politically in the future here.
- [07:52]
Ryan Nobles
Okay, Shannon, thank you for that reporting. Let's bring Laura into the conversation now to break down these decisions. You know, Laura, I. I'm sure that there were some that support birthright citizenship that were a little concerned that maybe today's decision would be murky, that there would be an interpretation that can come out of it that could make people with birthright that were born here. In this country and earn their citizenship feel a bit vulnerable. But it seemed pretty clear, especially from the opinion wrote by the Chief justice, that he was providing a degree of clarity here. If you are born in this country, you are a citizen. Explain how this decision was so important and the clarity that it offered.
- [08:28]
Laura Jarrett
Yeah, there's nothing murky about this decision, Ryan. And it's not just the Chief Justice. It's also Justice Barrett and even Justice Kavanaugh to some extent, which I'm sure we will get into. Finding this executive order just simply went too far. You know, Ryan, it wasn't that long ago that the idea of upending birthright citizenship was really sort of a fringe theory. It wasn't that it was out there, but it was just. It was never pressed this way. And then yet on day one of his second term, the President did this. But it never got off the ground, Ryan. Right. Like this was marred in lawsuits from the very beginning. It's never gone into effect. And so there was sort of almost an assumption that this would get struck down. Today. I think even the President, you saw it and sort of his comments over the last few weeks and even yesterday, an understanding that this was likely to get struck down. We just didn't know exactly what the vote totals would be. We didn't know exactly what the reasoning would be. But the Chief justice making it crystal clear today, this has been the understanding of the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment is not vague. It has been sort of the law on the land since the 1890s and nothing about the Constitution has changed. The Chief justice took on the arguments from the dissent, took on the arguments about so called anchor babies. This disparaging term that's been used by the President and some of his allies suggest people are parking themselves in the United States to be able to get birthright citizenship for their children. The Chief justice saying, whatever that situation is on the ground, the Constitution is what it is and it hasn't changed.
- [09:52]
Ryan Nobles
Lawrence, let's bring you into the conversation now because to Laura's point, it is interesting that they do appear to be taking an originalist position here, that in fact, Speaker Johnson, who fancies himself a constitutional lawyer, even said that in his remarks. I want to read to you what Clarence Thomas wrote. The Court has repurposed the 14th Amendment to protect its own set of preferred rights that the Reconstruction Congress never contemplated and that they cannot find support in its text today. The Court does so again by recognizing a constitutional right to citizenship for the children of all foreign birth tourists and illegal aliens. It's Interesting, because whenever there are arguments made against the Second Amendment, they say they don't apply to today's version of the United States. It seems as though the conservatives on the Court are trying to have it both ways here in this case. They think, well, this doesn't apply to the way things are now.
- [10:41]
NBC News Senior National Political Reporter Sahil Kapoor
Yeah.
- [10:41]
Lawrence Hurley
I mean, the Court has been criticized quite a bit over the last few years about selectively applying originalism or using it in ways that that suit partisan ends. And in this case, the dissenters certainly are pushing theories that, as Laura said, were very much fringe theories. This is the understanding that the Court embraced today, is the understanding that we've always understood it to mean, including Congress. When Congress amended immigration laws, they imported that same language from the 14th Amendment into the immigration laws. And that showed that Congress in the 1950s understood the 14th Amendment to mean exactly what it means now.
- [11:18]
Ryan Nobles
And, Laura, President Trump called on Congress to end birthright citizenship. Speaker Johnson said that Congress would deal with the issue. I want you to hear what Speaker Johnson had to say about that.
- [11:28]
House Speaker Mike Johnson
We need to address the issue as quickly and as efficiently as we can. Some are implying that or suggesting that it may require a constitutional amendment. And as you know, that is a large undertaking. But clearly, birthright citizenship has been. But I just saw an excerpt from the great Justice Clarence Thomas, who said that at the original drafting of that language, it was meant to really value and enhance citizenship, and now it's being used to devalue citizenship. I think it's a pretty good way to summarize it. I'm with Clarence Thomas. I'm with the President. I think the Court made the wrong decision.
- [12:01]
Ryan Nobles
He didn't really explain, though, Laura, what Congress could actually do to impact this and change today's decision. Shannon laid out how difficult it is to amend the Constitution. Is that really the only solution here is a new amendment to the Constitution? There's no legislation or law they could pass to fix this, right?
- [12:18]
Laura Jarrett
No. And that's why he's sort of having to acquiesce to the idea that it's likely going to be a very heavy lift. He's citing Justice Clarence Thomas, who didn't win. He's in the dissent. He's. He's not the. He's not the majority in this case. And so obviously, the President, his allies on the Hill are disappointed, and they want to be able to sort of pivot to a path forward. But the short and long of this, Ryan, is that they lost.
- [12:42]
Congressman Tom Kaine
Yeah.
- [12:42]
Ryan Nobles
And there was a little bit of nuance in the decision Lawrence, the overall birthright citizenship decision related to the executive order was 6:3. But on the specific issue of whether or not it violated the 14th amendment, and Laura mentioned this before, is that, Justin, Justice Kavanaugh basically wrote his own opinion on this. How unusual is that? And why did Justice Kavanaugh, who did vote with the 6:3 majority, disagree on that specific part of it?
- [13:08]
Lawrence Hurley
Well, one thing that's remarkable about it, I think, is going in, as we've already discussed, this was considered to be a fringe theory just a few years ago when Trump's first term, when he first raised this issue and everyone across left and right, scholars, politicians, you know, condemned it, including the then speaker of the House, Paul Ryan. And this time, you got four justices on the Supreme Court, almost one short of a majority, saying that they would have agreed with President Trump's interpretation of the 14th Amendment. So that's like a huge sea change in the law. Even though they lost, the fact that it's gathered that momentum, whether it's through politics and through the courts, and the fact that Justice Kavanaugh embraced it, even though he found this narrower ground to rule against the president, is still quite remarkable.
- [13:51]
Ryan Nobles
Yeah. All right, so let's turn now and talk about the transgender athletes decision. Laura, walk us through the implications of what this means across the country.
- [14:00]
Laura Jarrett
Yeah, Ryan. It was about two states in particular, West Virginia and Idaho, but it's so much broader, broader than that. And I think that it's worth underscoring, you know, just how many states had fans like this that were watching these cases very closely. The court could have cut this any number of different ways. It had constitutional arguments, it had statutory arguments. And at the end of the day, the court really went all the way there on both scores, saying essentially the states can, can go quite far in banning transgender women and girls from sports teams like this. We had been interested to see what Justice Gorsuch would do on this issue, given that just a few years ago, he was the one who authored the landmark ruling giving transgender workers protections under a landmark civil rights statute. But the justice, the chief, sorry, Justice Scorsius, I should say today, making it clear he did not see the situation around employment the same as. As it relates to kids in school, Ryan. So it's massive implications nationwide.
- [15:00]
Ryan Nobles
But before you go, Laura, this is the one side of it, right? It is upholding the bans, but there are other lawsuits that are taking place challenging laws in California and Connecticut that allows transgender athletes to compete in girls and women's sports. How does this decision affect any of those suits.
- [15:15]
Laura Jarrett
Yeah. It'll be interesting to see how those play out through the courts. They're not yet readily teed up for the Supreme Court to take those up, but you can be sure that's exactly where they're going. Typically, you know, when these things have come up, if you think about other cases, sort of analogous situations as it relates to reproductive rights, when the court essentially says, look, somebody doesn't have rights and tried under the Constitution and they kick it back to the states, it doesn't mean that states can't then also have broader rights. Right. And certain states couldn't have broader rights for transgender athletes. But I think it's too early to tell exactly how the court would treat that and it would have to depend on exactly how it got raised for them.
- [15:54]
Ryan Nobles
Okay, Lawrence and Laura, terrific conversation. Laura, you should like do a podcast where you talk about legal issues that. Has anyone thought it all covered?
- [16:01]
Laura Jarrett
We have it all covered.
- [16:02]
Ryan Nobles
Have it all. Just take what we did here today and put that on your podcast. We could do it.
- [16:06]
Laura Jarrett
Here's the scoop.
- [16:06]
Ryan Nobles
We got it all taken for you. Here's the scoop with Laura Jarrett. All right, Lawrence Hurley, thank you for being here as well. We appreciate it. Still to come, much more on the fallout from today's rulings, including the court's decision overhauling campaign spending laws and what it means for the midterms. Plus, if it's Tuesday, it's primary day in Colorado and it's another major test for the Democratic establishment. We're on the ground breaking down the marquee matchups and Steve Kornacki's at the big board with what to watch for as the results start rolling it. You're watching Meet the Press now.
- [16:42]
Comcast Business Announcer
The world of business is constantly evolving and Comcast business keeps you totally in step with secure AI backed networking in more than 100 countries. They're powering over 90% of the Fortune 500 and millions of small businesses. That's a lot of muscle. And behind it all, thousands of experts answering your call at 2am like it's 2pm One partner powering how business gets done for companies around the globe. When you add it all up, no one does business like Comcast business.
- [17:13]
Genesis GV70 Announcer
The Genesis GV70, with all its award winning tech and performance is built to thrill. So you can hit the road, hit the turns and hit sport plus mode for serious acceleration and handling. Inside, you'll find intuitive tech that elevates every driving experience. And wherever you go, the GV70 will have you on the edge of your seat it's luxury that's built to thrill. Learn more at genesis.com and feel the GV70.
- [17:41]
Capella University Announcer
You've never been one to settle, stand down or stand still. You're a lifelong learner, energized by excellence. There's a fire inside you you can't ignore. You've got competition to outrun, momentum to build on and your own high standards to meet. Stop now. Not a chance. At Capella University, we help you catch what you're chasing because you've always had the drive. Now go earn the degree. Capella University. What can't you do? Visit Capella. Edu to learn more.
- [18:14]
Ryan Nobles
Welcome back. If it's Tuesday, voters are voting in Colorado. Two of those races could have major implications for the power of progressives in the Democratic Party. After establishment Democrats were put on their heels last week in New York's primaries. Democrats are also eyeing Colorado as an opportunity to flip a competitive House seat in the fall. And both parties have candidates fighting it out for a chance to replace the term limited Governor Jared Polis. Joining me now is NBC News chief data analyst Steve Kornacki and also with me, Kyle Clark, who's an anchor and political reporter for our Denver affiliate kusa. Steve, let's start with you. And where things stand in these races, progressives really hoping to make inroads, in fact, Congresswoman De Guett's district and the Senate primary in particular, what do they need to do to be successful?
- [19:00]
Steve Kornacki
Yeah, let's start in that first congressional district there. I think everyone acknowledges that the longtime incoming here, Diana degett at the very least, is in some serious jeopardy day in this primary. Her main challenger here coming from the far left, Mehlat Kiros, endorsed by backed by the Democratic Socialists of America, running to the left of deget, really stressing Israel, criticisms of attacks on Israel, sort of quarter her campaign. That is a model that we just saw some Democratic, some insurgent Democratic candidates successfully use in New York congressional districts last week. We've seen it in some other districts around the country. And just demographically, if you're looking at this first district in Colorado, what you're looking at here basically is Denver. It's not all of Denver, but it's a big part of Denver here. That's the core of the district. And I think demographically you got a lot of, you know, young, college educated renters, political, politically progressive types. That's sort of been the mix that has worked for that style of politics elsewhere in the country. So it's another test for it tonight. But certainly on paper, this is the kind of race that if you're to get first elected back in 1996, you're probably sweating a lot in these final hours heading into the, into the vote tabulation. Where there is more suspense, I think here just in terms of whether it's going to be competitive, would be the Senate primary. John Hickenlooper, originally elected to the Senate back in 2020, being challenged by a state legislator here, Julie Gonzalez, again ideologically running a similar campaign here. But the question is not the city of Denver and some other progressive pockets throughout the state, but whether this expands across the entire state here. Obviously, Colorado, we don't have a lot of sort of statewide primaries to measure a candidate like this against. But you do know back in 2020, Bernie Sanders did win a relatively crowded Democratic presidential primary in Colorado. Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, probably the two most leftward candidates back in that primary, got a combined 55% of the vote. Hickenlooper, by the way, in 2020, he was, he was opposed on the left in his primary bid. He got 59% in that primary. One all but one county here. So this is a, this is a sort of a mystery. There's only been one poll. We're not even sure what to make of that poll. So this is the, the question, will this one get close tonight?
- [21:08]
Ryan Nobles
Yeah. And then we also have Colorado's 8th district. That could be a battleground this fall. What are you watching for tonight?
- [21:15]
Steve Kornacki
Yeah, so, I mean, take a look here. Democratic matchup. We know the Republican is Gabe Evans. He was elected in a very close race back in 2024. And we know it's going to be closely watched this November because look, this is a district that Donald Trump carried by 2 points in 2024. It's a district that Joe Biden carried by 5 points back in 2020. It is a swing district. You're looking here at the Democratic primary. Most of the suspense here is whether it's a Root now or Shannon Byrd here, a state representative, a former state representative. These are the two leading candidates here in the backdrop. Again, not just a super competitive district, a swing district in November, this district with a very large Hispanic population, a lot of population growth in this part of Colorado. You're talking about Adams county into Weld County, City of Greeley, Colorado, Commerce City. A lot of population growth, a lot of Hispanic population growth. It's a population that Donald Trump made a lot of inroads with in 2024. One of the reasons he was able to narrowly carry this district. So Again, it's going to be close this November and we'll watch this race particularly to see about those Hispanic inroads the president made in 24, whether they're holding up or receding in 26.
- [22:23]
Ryan Nobles
Okay, great. Steve, thank you so much for that. We appreciate it. Let's turn now to Kyle Clark. Kyle, you've been covering these races for months and maybe level set for us. Are Colorado Democrats ready for the same type of progressive push that we saw in New York last week?
- [22:40]
Kyle Clark
Denver Democrats are Ryan for sure. I think Colorado is a different story. And the thing you have to remember when you look at Denver vs. New York City is New York has closed primaries. Colorado has semi open primaries in which unaffiliated voters, no party, that is the majority of voters in the state can participate. So that can have an interesting impact on primaries out here. But certainly 29 year incumbent progressive Democrat Diane DeGette is in real trouble against a 29 year old Democratic socialist challenger in Mila Kiros who appears to have caught deget napping, nearly kept her off the ballot at the caucuses and deget has been begging for national resources to come in and savor and Kiros has all the momentum.
- [23:22]
Congressman Tom Kaine
Momentum.
- [23:22]
Ryan Nobles
Is it about one specific set of issues for both to get and Hickenlooper or is it more just kind of the mood of the Democratic Party right now? Is it specific to Denver or specific to Colorado, I should say, or is it more part of this nationwide movement that we're seeing to the left for the Democratic Party?
- [23:42]
Kyle Clark
A lot of it. Ryan is the same complaint against both deget and Hickenlooper, which is they're not delivering for progressive Democrats. But the concern is a lot more acute for DeGet because of the fact that she has been in a safe seat for decades and a lot of Democrats say she doesn't have a whole lot to show for her time there. Now as for John Hickenlooper, he was a very popular mayor of Denver, went on to be a pretty popular governor. He has incredibly strong name awareness around the state. Democrats generally like him even if they don't think he's been a particularly effective senator. They remember his time as governor and his time as mayor. But most importantly, he was not caught napping. He was ready for a challenger. He kept high profile folks out of the race. So he has a former Democratic socialist who's challenging him. I would be surprised if that race is close. She hasn't made it. A statewide race has not deployed resources, whereas as deget found herself napping, interesting
- [24:37]
Ryan Nobles
That's a great point. And also you've got a very competitive governor's race there. Two different primaries tonight, both on the Democratic side, one involving the incumbent Senator Michael Bennett, another on the Republican side as well. Just give us an idea of what you're looking for in both of these races.
- [24:53]
Kyle Clark
Certainly. So Colorado's Attorney General Phil Weiser has a couple of things accruing to his benefit tonight. He has been able to SUE Donald Trump 65 times, keeping his name in the headlines as a strong anti Trump voice saying that Senator Michael Bennett has acquiesced to Trump too much while he's been in the Senate. And the other thing that Weiser has going for him is that he's not a creature of Washington. So even though he's an incumbent, he's benefiting from the anti incumbency, anti Washington wave in an interesting way. He was a real, real long shot underdog to Michael Bennett when this campaign started out. It's believed that this race is going to be neck and neck tonight. And Bennett of course would keep his job that he appears to hate in the Senate that he wants to leave and come be governor. He would keep that job if he loses. If he wins, he would then time his resignation to pick his own replacement in the U.S. senate. And the thought is that it would most likely be one of three Democratic reps from Colorado, Joe Negus, Jason Crow or Brittany Petterson.
- [25:49]
Ryan Nobles
And in the Republican race, just quickly, what your thoughts are there?
- [25:55]
Kyle Clark
It's a wild one. I mean, Colorado Republicans have elected one Republican governor in the last 55 years. They have a very mainstream legislator, Barb Kirkmeyer, who's running but has not caught fire in any way in the primary. There's an ultra MAGA pastor named Scott Bottoms who has trouble with the ninth commendment, often saying some things that he can't back up with facts. And then the frontrunner is a ministry leader named Victor Marks who claims to have rescued women and children around the world. Kind of like a Rambo meets Billy Graham character. But he doesn't appear to have proof of his claims and he wouldn't straightforward answer the question about how many people he's killed. He likes to brag about that kind of thing but wouldn't get into specifics.
- [26:34]
Ryan Nobles
Yeah. And I'm sure our viewers have seen you pressing both of these candidates on those exact topics. Kyle, you do great work there in Colorado. So great to get your insight into these important races tonight. Thank you so much for joining us. And don't forget, tune in tonight to the latest edition of the Kornacki Cam. He'll be breaking down the results from Colorado in real time. It all kicks off at 8:45 Eastern on nbcnews.com and on YouTube. Up next, though, Republican Tom Kaine breaks his silence and reveals why he was absent from Congress for months, leaving his colleagues and his constituents in the dark. That's next on MEET THE press.
- [27:09]
Chuck Rocha
Now,
- [27:16]
Capella University Announcer
There's a fire inside you you can't ignore. Stand still. Not a chance. You're a lifelong learner who's come this far. Now we are here to help you keep going further. Capella University, what can't you do? Visit capella. Edu to learn more.
- [27:31]
Angie Hicks
Hi, I'm Angie Hicks, co founder of angie, and one thing I've learned is that you buy a house, but you make it a home. Because with every fix, update and renovation, it becomes a little more your own. So you need all your jobs done well. For nearly 30 years, Angie has helped millions of homeowners hire skilled pros for the projects that matter, from plumbing to electrical roof repair to deck upgrades. So leave it to the pros who will get your jobs done well. Angie the one you trust to find the ones you trust. Find a pro for your project@angie.com Walmart
- [28:03]
Walmart Money Card Announcer
shoppers, meet the debit card Designed with you in mind, the Walmart Money Card offers up to $75 cash back on purchases at Walmart each year, early direct deposit, overdraft protection, and so much more. When Walmart is your everyday store, you need a card to match. That's the Walmart Money Card. Open your account today. The Walmart Money Card is issued by Green DOT Bank Member FDIC. Fees, terms and conditions apply. Visit WalmartMoneyCard.com to learn more.
- [28:33]
Ryan Nobles
Welcome back. House Speaker Mike Johnson's latest attempt to pass the Save America act and regain control of the House legislative agenda has earlier the House voted down a rule that would have linked the defense funding bill to the voter ID legislation, which remains a top priority for the president. Fourteen Republicans voted against the rule, including hardliners like Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna, who are vowing to block everything in the House until the Save America act is passed. House Speaker Mike Johnson downplaying the failed vote but insisting that House Republicans aren't giving up
- [29:05]
House Speaker Mike Johnson
a couple of the members. If you ask them why they voted no, they'll say it was out of frustration from Senate Democrats refusing to do the will of the American people and work on election integrity. It makes no sense for us to stop our very important progress forward from House Republicans because some Senate Democrats are refusing to do their job. That's where we are. That's the reality of it. This is life with a small margin, small majority, and we'll work through it.
- [29:28]
Ryan Nobles
So you're going to come back and
- [29:29]
Chuck Rocha
try to do this.
- [29:30]
House Speaker Mike Johnson
We're going to do it again.
- [29:31]
Ryan Nobles
Joining me now is NBC News senior national political reporter Sahil Kapoor. I think you and I, Sahil, have been in probably about 400 gaggles like that where Mike Johnson has said basically the same thing in response to a question related to the Save America Act. This time around, he tried to link it to the ndaa. It didn't work. Does he have another card to play here?
- [29:53]
NBC News Senior National Political Reporter Sahil Kapoor
Not at the moment. At least not that we're aware of, Brian. He is going to try again. That much he's made clear, because it's the ndaa. It's a micro must pass piece of legislation that he and every congressional leader here is committed to, but he doesn't currently have a path forward. What's ironic about this is that he's already trying to attach the Save America act to the ndaa. He's just doing it through a mechanism that passes two bills separately and kind of packages them together and sends them to the Senate. These conservative hardliners who voted down this rule worry that that mechanism makes it too easy for the Senate to simply smash those two bills apart and ignore the Save America act and only deal with the rest of the ndaa. So he's got to placate those hard right members. And meanwhile, look, Speaker Johnson is talking about Democrats. He wants to keep the focus on the skirmish between Republicans and Democrats. But this is a fight within his own party. This is a long standing divide between Republicans which President Trump has exacerbated and fueled about how to get the Save America act passed. And they don't have a way to get it done.
- [30:53]
Ryan Nobles
And to be clear, Sahil, is there anything to make us think that this has changed in the Senate, that they'd be willing to pass the Save Act?
- [31:01]
NBC News Senior National Political Reporter Sahil Kapoor
No, absolutely nothing has changed. They are trying this every which way. They're talking about attaching it to reconciliation. They're trying to pass it the normal way, which requires 60 votes. They're trying to see if they have the votes to nuke the filibuster. They don't. They're trying to attach it to fisa. They're to trying to attach it to the ndaa. Now these are demands from President Trump. And all these roads lead back to the same cul de sac. They don't have the votes to get it done in the Senate because they can't break the 60 vote filibuster and they don't have the votes to pierce that using the nuclear option. Republican senators, enough of them are dead set against that. But the fact that President Trump isn't giving up is giving enough of these hardliners some permission structure to keep pursuing it.
- [31:42]
Ryan Nobles
Meanwhile, a story that many of us have been watching for quite a while, and that is the situation with Congressman Tom Keene Kaine, New Jersey. He hasn't been on Capitol Hill since March. He did come back today. What more did we learn about his disappearance? Did he really give us any clarity as to why he was so secretive about what was happening for the last four months?
- [32:01]
NBC News Senior National Political Reporter Sahil Kapoor
No is the answer to the question of why he's been so secretive. But this has really been one of the more bizarre stories on Capitol Hill all year. Congressman Tom Kaine had been absent for nearly four months. He has not been here on Capitol Hill since March 5th and he's missed more than 140 votes. He'd not been seen anywhere in D.C. he's not been seen anywhere at home. People tried to knock on his door and there was really no sign of him. He did of course come back today and gave a speech on the House floor where he said he had an extended hospital stay for depression. Take a listen.
- [32:35]
Congressman Tom Kaine
Several months ago due to health concerns, I entered the hospital for some testing. I did not believe that this would result in a long term stay. I was given the diagnosis of depression. Now when people hear the word depression, many people think simply means feeling sad. But depression is so much more than that. It is physical, it is emotional. And until you experience it yourself, it is difficult to fully understand how powerful this illness can be. The doctors recommended that I remain in the hospital to address my illness.
- [33:15]
NBC News Senior National Political Reporter Sahil Kapoor
And Ryan Cain went on to say he is happy and grateful that he accepted help from the doctors that he feels healthier and ready to return to work. Part of the reason this has gotten so much attention is that Cain faces reelection in a swing district, one of the most important districts that will decide control of the House this fall. Brian?
- [33:31]
Ryan Nobles
Yeah, no doubt glad he is getting the help he needs. Sahil, rest your voice. I know you have a big performance tonight at the RTCA dinner with we look forward to that. Thank you for being here. After the break though. May the best Dan win. Alaska Supreme Court allows two Dan's Sullivan, Dan's Sullivan or Dan Sullivan to appear on one ballot in the race for Senate in Alaska. And Dan Sullivan is not happy about it. At least one of the Dan Sullivans. We'll explain the panels next on. Welcome back. As we mentioned, the Supreme Court struck down a longstanding campaign finance restriction today, siding with Republicans and removing limits on how much the national political party committees can spend in coordination with individual candidates. It's expected to lead to the party spending tens of millions more dollars on campaign ads ahead of the midterms. The decision is being celebrated by Republicans, who will likely benefit more from this ruling, at least in the short term, because their party committees have significantly larger war chests right now than the Democrats. In fact, when you look at that number, The DNC has $15 million in their bank account, but they also have a lot of debt. Democrats, meanwhile, calling the decision a win for billionaire donors and special interests. Joining me now is our panel, Kerry. Dan is the managing editor at the Cook Political Report. Chuck Rocha is a Democratic strategist. And the president of Solidary Strategies is also an advisor to the Talarico campaign. And Steven Hayes is the editor and CEO of the Dispatch. He's also an NBC News contributor. So, Kerry, well, we're very lucky to have you on here and with your expertise to talk about the impact of this campaign finance law. How significant could this ruling be and will it impact the race this fall? Is this something they'll be able immediately be able to take advantage?
- [35:21]
Kerry
Absolutely. I think this will immediately go into effect and it is, as you said, a real boon for Republicans, at least in the short term, just because Republicans have a lot more money in their coffers when it comes to the party apparatus. What this allows both parties to do is give money directly to candidates. That's important because when placing campaign advertisements, candidates used to be the only ones who could get the lowest cost for exactly the same ad as the party would have paid for on their behalf. This erases the advantage that Democrats had with small dollar donors because both parties are able to basically cut big checks to the candidates themselves who get more cheaper ads. Now, the two caveats, I would say there's a long way to go before donors and parties figure out exactly how this is going to work. There's a lot of outstanding questions, particularly about how news stations who are counting on getting big dollars from super PACs and candidate campaigns are going to react. Also, campaign advertisements don't always lead to victories. Just ask the Kamala Harris campaign, who spent half a billion dollars more on ads and still lost that.
- [36:20]
Ryan Nobles
And just so I understand it right now. As it stands, obviously, there's a limit as to how much I personally can donate to any candidate. Is there a limit as to how much an individual donor can give to the rnc, for instance?
- [36:30]
Kerry
So an individual donor can give somewhere around half a million dollars to a party apparatus, this to a super PAC that is unlimited. So super PACs are still going to be a very valuable part of this ecosystem for.
- [36:40]
Ryan Nobles
And they're separate. They can't.
- [36:41]
Kerry
And they are still separate.
- [36:42]
ACLU Legal Director
They are.
- [36:43]
Kerry
This, this court case does not impact super PACs. They are still going to be paying top dollar when they place ads, but they're also still going to have a lot of outside spending that are still going to influence these race.
- [36:51]
Ryan Nobles
But there's a significant more that you can donate to the party than you can to an individual.
- [36:54]
Kerry
Right? Exactly.
- [36:55]
Ryan Nobles
And it's the individual candidates that can.
- [36:56]
Kerry
And then the parties can funnel that money to individual candidates who can then place ads at a discounted rate.
- [37:01]
Ryan Nobles
So, Stephen, I mean, there's got to be Republican ad makers that are salivating over this. How do you think it's going to impact them and their strategy going forward?
- [37:08]
Stephen Hayes
Yeah, I think they're right. I think Kerry is exactly right. The way that she described it, one of the things you're likely to see now is Republicans rushing out and raising more of that money immediately. They already have a huge advantage, as you've pointed out, but you can bet that they were on the phones as soon as this decision came down. Calling people saying this now gives us an opportunity with an unpopular president, with some challenging Senate races, with some tough races in the House, to further even the playing field. And I think that's likely to be a pretty receptive argument for the people on the receiving end.
- [37:37]
Ryan Nobles
Chuck, There was already quite a bit of criticism of the dnc, in particular about their fundraising situation. The argument the DNC was giving back is that our candidates are raising so much money, they can spend this money better than we can. Anyway, they've lost that argument. Now, does the DNC and these party committees need to get their act together?
- [37:54]
Chuck Rocha
Now, the party committees have been doing a good job. The DNC is a standalone. The DNC is for state parties and for the presidents. We don't want to get into the 101s of all the different party committees and what they do, but we've been prepared, preparing for this. I am fortunate enough to make ads on the Democratic side for these party committees. We kind of knew this ruling was coming down and the way that it Hits with the American people is our candidates had an advantage of folks who like the candidates giving their money most of that, as you said, low dollar donations to Democrats. Democrats almost had a 2 to 1 advantage at the money level, at the individual donor level with those candidates. And I like UD over ur, but to your point, the party committees levels that playing field just for the party committee parts. And to Kerry's point, the Super Pacs will spend probably 10 times what the candid or the party committees will is where the real game is. And they'll still play full fair. Right.
- [38:39]
Ryan Nobles
So the television stations are okay if anybody was worried about that. So Kerry, let's talk about how this spending could play itself out. And one of those places is Texas, which will probably be the most expensive race this fall. There's a new poll now that shows Paxton and Talarico, Ken Paxton the Republican, James Talarico the Democrat tied. This is just four months out from November. Of course we have talked ad nauseam on this program in particular about Democrats. Democrats finally winning in Texas. Could this be the year or should we still be skeptical?
- [39:09]
Kerry
I mean look, I think Democrats in this, what you see in this poll is they are benefiting from a poor national environment for Republicans, but even more so the candidate selection here, right, the generic ballot. In this poll, voters prefer a generic Republican over a generic Democrat by six points. When you add Ken Paxton into the equation, this is a now it's now it is tied essentially in this poll. Voters say they don't particularly like his moral values. They don't particularly like him as a person. They do like Talarinko. His favorables are reasonably high here. So to me it's really an illustration of the own goal that Republicans had by nominating Paxton here with Trump endorsing him over the objections of the rest of the party. I think this poll shows why. But Tellarico is still at 47% and 47 and a win are two very different things. And really what you have to look at is what that ceiling is for him, particularly when all that money that you just mentioned is spent reminding some of these voters of some of Telo's past quotes which are probably going to maybe be demotivating for some of these sort of small c conservative Latinos, for example, who like the guy for now maybe won't once that those ads drop.
- [40:15]
Ryan Nobles
Nobody knows more about Latino voters in Texas than Chuck. You are obviously advising the Talarico campaign. I want to read part of an op ed from the Houston Chronicle on what the Talarico campaign needs to do. Quote, Talarico must not only expand the Democratic coalition but also strengthen its fracturing core that begins with placing black voters at the center of both his campaign strategy and his governing vision. Is James Talarico doing enough to energize black voters in Texas?
- [40:42]
Chuck Rocha
Look, I think he's doing a good job. We can always be doing more. But don't talk about what folks should do. Let's look at what they have done. And I was there on primary night in Texas when James won and when he took the podium, the first thing he said was, I don't want to thank my mama. I don't want to thank Chuck Rocha. I don't want to thank my staff. I want to thank Jasmine Crockett for running a good campaign and I look forward. These are his words, not my earning the support and knowing that I need to work for that support. For a long time I've worked for Democrats who took that for granted, but not James Talarico. And they're working in the cities, we're working in those cities to make sure we can shore that up. Right now in the New York Times poll, it is the same as the support for Jasmine Crockett. That doesn't mean that support stays there, but it means we're going to work hard to earn that support. And that's different rhetoric than you hear from most Democrats who take the black vote for granted.
- [41:24]
Ryan Nobles
Okay, Stephen, let's move on and talk about the other fun might not be the right word, but interesting political story of the day and that's the saga of the Dan Sullivans in Alask. There is another candidate running named Dan Sullivan. Dan Sullivan's obviously the incumbent in Alaska. Initially he was thrown off the ballot. Now he is back on. In a state like Alaska, could this actually be a problem for the incumbent Dan Sullivan? Could there be people that don't realize what's going on and go in and cast a ballot for this other Dan Sullivan thinking that they're voting for the person that actually has a job right now?
- [41:55]
Stephen Hayes
Yes, it could be a significant problem. You're going to have to know the individuals middle initials depending on how it's presented on the ballot. Look, I think this is if your goal in an election is to allow voters to vote with the clearest options, this is pretty bad. And I think Republicans are right to make suggestions that this is dirty tricks. The other Dan Sullivan, the non senator Dan Sullivan, clearly has ties to the Democratic Party. He's contributed to Democrats over the years and it feels like a dirty trick. However, on the law, it's hard to find fault with the decision that came down, which said there isn't anything here to keep being on the ballot.
- [42:31]
Ryan Nobles
You can't just say because of vibes like, I think this guy's trying to help the other guy. Kerry, obviously you guys had already kind of viewed this race as competitive with Mary Peltola as the nominee. How does this Dan Sullivan being on the ballot impact him?
- [42:42]
Kerry
Well, I think it's important to note exactly what you just said was this was already trending to be a very, very competitive race. Mary Peltola is the best possible recruit probably that Democrats could have gotten here. She has won statewide. She has bipartisan appeal. Lisa Murkowski had previously endorsed her in her at large run. This, I think is another complicating factor and is at best a headache for Republicans and could turn into a real problem. We will get a test of this in the primary, the top four primary ballot in August. So we will get to see how much of an issue this ballot drama really is. But either way, this had been a real problem, a really competitive race. And Dan Sullivan has a lot of work to do.
- [43:24]
Ryan Nobles
Chuck, you get the last word less than 30 seconds, you feel good about Alaska.
- [43:27]
Chuck Rocha
Alaska is one of those places you can do a lot of damage with a little bit of tv. As we were just talking about these rates, we keep going back to that because no peso, no say so. If you're going to spend real money, you're going to have a real race. And in Alaska, a million dollars goes a lot further than it does in Houston.
- [43:40]
Ryan Nobles
Okay, perfect, Chuck. He knows his time cues. Kerry, Chuck and Steven, thank you all for being here. Still to come, the latest twists and turns in those fragile peace talks between the US And Iran as President Trump sends two of his top advisers to Qatar for talks which may or may not happen. This is MEET THE PRESS now. Welcome back. Turning now to the latest in the negotiations with Iran, US Special envoy Steve Wyckoff and President Trump's son in law, Jared Kushner arrived in Doha for the latest round of talks to end the war. Though the pair will not meet with their Iranian counterparts. That according to Qatari officials. That's despite President Trump insisting that Iran had requested a meeting with the US following this weekend's exchange of fire near the Strait of Hormuz over the weekend. Qatari officials say that Kushner and Wyckoff have instead been holding talks with mediators with technical negotiations taking place through lower level officials.
- [44:40]
Sir Christian Turner
We're not Expecting any high level Iranian officials at the moment. But as I said, the technical meetings are on ongoing since Lutheran. They haven't stopped since then. Regarding deconfliction measures, as you know, there is a channel of communication that was established for that purpose which has been used in the containment of the escalation that took place in the past couple of days. I won't go into the technical details of how that happens, but I would just say that there is a channel of communication that's been established and it is in operation.
- [45:08]
Ryan Nobles
And joining me now is the British Ambassador to the United States, Sir Christian Turner. Mr. Ambassador, thank you for being here.
- [45:13]
Sir Christian Turner
Here.
- [45:13]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
Great to be with you.
- [45:14]
Ryan Nobles
Let's start with Iran. It's obviously going to be one of the many topics that are going to be discussed at the upcoming NATO summit. Talks on a final peace agreement with Iran are ongoing. Do you think that any final deal between the United States and Iran needs to be signed by the United Kingdom as the JCPOA was?
- [45:31]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
Well, look, it's a different context now to the JCPOA, which was what, over 10 years ago? Countries like the UK have a shared interest in the outcome of these talks, talks. And that's why we are supporting US efforts to get the Straits of Hormuz open to work with the Omanis and others. We're delivering minesweeping capability to try and be part of that story, make sure we're helping keep those straits open for our economies. Of course, for the nuclear talks, which I used to be a part of, we absolutely want to see them lock down their highly enriched uranium. I mean, we're all agreed Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. And then of course there's the Lebanese factor as well. The excellent work the US did to get this, this MOU over over last weekend. So on all of those fronts, I think the US has absolutely got the UK at its shoulder. To make sure we get, get a
- [46:21]
Ryan Nobles
physical signature by the United Kingdom is not as necessary, not the way it's
- [46:24]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
being constructed at present. But we are very much part of the conversation. My team's here in Washington. Others working closely with Gulf partners to, to get success. We need to see this, this regime dealt with.
- [46:37]
Ryan Nobles
And as we mentioned, we're on the verge of this upcoming NATO summit. But President Trump's been pretty critical of NATO members, including the UK's support for the war. I want to play some of his recent comments.
- [46:48]
ACLU Legal Director
What do you want the allies to
- [46:49]
Walmart Money Card Announcer
do more than what they are doing right now?
- [46:51]
ACLU Legal Director
Do you want to ask?
- [46:53]
Ryan Nobles
I just want their loyalty. We don't need their money. We don't need anything. We have the most powerful military in the world by far. But I just want loyalty. I'm not sure if you heard that, but the crux of what the President had to say there was he just wants loyalty. He wants the UK to be loyal. Do you feel that the UK is a loyal ally of the United States in this moment?
- [47:15]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
On this specific subject, running into NATO, we have good news today because we've heard the President's ask. It's actually not new. He's been saying this for, for 10 years really since his first term on the need for Europe, Europeans to burden share and I'm pleased to say the UK absolutely agrees with that. We've announced an historic rise in our defence spending. That's our largest rise since the Cold War. It's a total of US$393 billion, Ryan, a huge amount over four years. That's equivalent to about a 20, 27% rise, making us the third largest cash spender in NATO. So those figures actually for people like us sound a bit, just inconceivable. Let me tell you this. That will allow me to buy all 32 NFL franchises. I'm told it would allow me to buy McDonald's globally, twice over. So this is a really serious recognition that we need a strong Europe in a strong NATO and the countries like the UK need to be at the forefront of it. And for those who are interested in the detail of this, we're learning from the war against Iran, we're learning from the war in Ukraine. Ukraine, it's more autonomous capability. This is about drone warfare. This is about being really ready for the tech enabled war, the modern warfare of the future.
- [48:30]
Ryan Nobles
I'm sure the White House is happy with the increase in funding, but I think their argument would be that it is still less than NATO's 3.5% defense spending goal. What is keeping the United Kingdom from reaching that mark?
- [48:41]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
Well, it's not less because it puts us on the path to that 3.5%. So the 3.5% is by 2020 35. And this gives us a clear trajectory towards it. All countries are on that trajectory. The challenge for every democratic country is that's, that's a trade off. And we have schools, we have hospitals, we have voters who are saying they need local services. And that's the difficult democratic decisions any government has to make. My government today has stood up and said, yes, our security is our first responsibility and we're putting, putting our money behind it.
- [49:12]
Ryan Nobles
Right. And President Trump would argue that you have more flexibility to make some of those decisions, decisions versus domestic versus national security decisions, in part because the protection that's provided by the United States military and the investment made there. What would you say to that response?
- [49:25]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
Well, I basically accept the challenge. We have to stand up and burden share. As I say, if you look, I mean, Mark Ruta, who we just saw there, talked about the Trump trillion. That's a trillion dollars of investment over the last 10 years. In just the last year, in 2025, non US allies in NATO have had an increase of 20% in their defence spend. So I really do think we are seeing Europe stepping up to say, yes, we must all be part in this new volatile world we face with shared threats of stepping up to respond for shared security.
- [49:58]
Ryan Nobles
Let's talk about Ukraine. You mentioned that already Kiev says that it needs an additional $20 billion from its allies ahead of the NATO summit to cement what it sees as its current battlefield advantage over Russia. Do you believe that Ukraine still has an opportunity to win this war? And is it incumbent upon the NATO allies, the NATO partnership, to back Ukraine at this key moment?
- [50:19]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
I don't even believe it. I mean, I know it from the facts. I mean, the hard news is that Putin is not winning. We assess that he's losing maybe 35,000 soldiers a month. That's 1,000 deaths a day. It's a devastating figure. His economy is creaking. We really think this is time to keep the pressure up to support Kyiv in what continues to be a, you know, a devastating war. So, yes, in Europe we have stood up. The money going in, the munitions being bought is now being led by Europe. And that's why we need the strong NATO that we will all celebrate and be part of an Ankara.
- [50:55]
Ryan Nobles
And finally, before you go, I can't let you go without talking about the political situation in your country right now. Europe. Prime Minister Keir Starmer announcing that he intends to resign. You're about to welcome your seventh prime minister in the last 10 years. How do you explain this political turbulence to those of us in America that are watching it from afar?
- [51:12]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
Yeah, well, probably the first point is that we're a parliamentary system, so it's a different kind of democracy. And we vote for a party, not a president or a prime minister. And in many ways, I would seek to reassure people that whomever takes over from Keir Starmer and as leader is standing on a manifesto on which the Labour Party was elected. So I think that is a degree of continuity. I mean, people all over the world, it's no different. Here in the us they're asking for growth, for jobs. They're saying to their elected politicians, we're feeling left behind by metropolitan elites who aren't responding to our needs. So actually, there's quite a similar narrative, I think, in the UK as voters look in different directions. So I think the turbulence, turbulence is common across many of our countries, if turbulence is a word we should use. But I'm confident, and the one thing Rana will guarantee is this, in the middle of all of this, our strongest relationship, our vital, consequential and enduring alliance in this week, the 250th birthday, is the UK US partnership.
- [52:11]
Ryan Nobles
And in terms of the World cup. No predictions there now.
- [52:14]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
Now, I'm a diplomat. I've got to be really careful. Now, I had two teams, Scorpion, Scotland and England. Of course, Scotland, sadly, the Tartan army have gone home. This after the poor people of Boston and I think Miami have had their bars drunk, dry traffic cones on the statues. It's actually, I mean, the serious point is it's been the most extraordinary sign of those ties I'm talking about, of the friendship, of the kinship between peoples, of those connections that soccer is all about. Let's hope it's English, England, USA and the final. And I could be quite split there. But you know who ultimately I'll be
- [52:48]
Ryan Nobles
supporting and kudos to calling it soccer in this environment.
- [52:51]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
Well, I know my audience.
- [52:53]
Laura Jarrett
Mr.
- [52:53]
Ryan Nobles
Ambassador, thank you so much for being here.
- [52:55]
Sir Christian Turner (continued)
A pleasure to be with you. Thank you very much.
- [52:57]
Ryan Nobles
And we're back tomorrow with more Meet the Press now. But there's much more news ahead right here on NBC News.
- [53:03]
Sir Christian Turner
Now,
- [53:17]
Capella University Announcer
There's a fire inside you you can't ignore. Stand still. Not a chance. You're a lifelong learner who's come this far. Now we are here to help you keep going further. Capella University, what can't you do? Visit Capella Edu to learn more.