Senator Roger Marshall (2:17)

Or we could go further.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (2:19)

And we're going to go further.

Peter Alexander (2:20)

He gets to control the throttle. He's the one deciding. He's the one elected on behalf of the American people when we're achieving those particular objectives. And so it's not for me to posit whether it's the beginning, the middle or the end.

Caroline Levitt (2:31)

President Trump will determine when Iran is in a place of unconditional surrender, when they no longer pose a credible and direct threat to the United States of America and our allies.

Monica Alba (2:41)

Adding to the uncertainty, last night, the President suggesting he could further escalate the war if oil prices continue to rise. And this morning, writing on social media, quote, if Iran does anything that stops the flow of oil within the Strait of Hormuz, they will be hit by the United States of America 20 times harder than they have been hit thus far. He went on to threaten death, fire and fury. Iran's Revolutionary Guard responding defiantly that it will, quote, not allow the export of even 1 liter of oil from the region until the US and Israel stop the strikes. The competing claims about the war continue to roil the price of oil, which initially fell after Energy Secretary Wright posted a video today saying the U.S. navy successfully escorted an oil tanker through the Strait of Hormuz. But moments later, he deleted the post. White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt then clarifying there was no escort through the strait.

Caroline Levitt (3:35)

I can confirm that the US Navy has not escorted a tanker or a vessel at this time, though, of course, that's an option the president has said he absolutely utilize if and when necessary, at the appropriate time.

Monica Alba (3:47)

Levitt also vowing that oil and gas prices will drop rapidly once the US Mission is complete. Right now, the price of oil is roughly 25% higher than when the conflict began, and prices at the pump have gone up roughly 20% on average. Joining me now is NBC News chief White House correspondent Peter Alexander, NBC News senior National Security Correspondent Courtney Kuby, and NBC News Chief international correspondent Keir Simmons. Thank you all for joining me. Peter, is it clear what the administration. Administration's end goal in Iran actually is? Did we get any more clarity on what that is from the White House today?

Peter Alexander (4:22)

You know, Monica, first, can I say I think you look good in that anchor chair there, but let me get to the headline out of this right now. And this is what I think was particularly striking. It's that we heard this idea of unconditional surrender. That was sort of the end point that President Trump wanted. But today, Caroline Levitt, the president's press secretary, really redefined what that means, unconditional surrender. You played part of that soundbite, but it's worth repeating. She said President Trump will determine when Iran is. Is basically in a position of surrender, which in effect gives him maximum flexibility to make a decision that the war should continue or it should end at any point that he so chooses. One of the questions has been, will the President be satisfied if the now deceased Ayatollah's son does serve as the next Supreme Leader, as Iran has announced within the last several days, and Caroline Levitt was pressed on that very question by our colleague Gareth Hake. Take a listen. Is the ending of this war also contingent on Iran selecting a leader that the president finds acceptable?

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (5:19)

And if so, how is that not

Peter Alexander (5:21)

the definition of a regime change war?

Caroline Levitt (5:24)

Look, as President Trump has blatantly and frankly stated, it's obviously within the best interest of the United States and the west to no longer have a radical terrorist in charge of Iran. We have objectives that we have laid out that the commander in chief wants to see achieved. When they are achieved, then it will ultimately be up to the president to end this operation.

Peter Alexander (5:45)

Okay, so I think you're not exactly addressing my question, though.

Matt Dixon (5:49)

Is that political objective also necessary for

Peter Alexander (5:52)

the president decide to end this war?

Caroline Levitt (5:54)

Ms. Look, again, I just told you the objectives of Operation Epic Fury. When those objectives are met, the president will dictate the end of these operations when he deems that Iran no longer poses a credible threat to the United States of America.

Peter Alexander (6:08)

So, Monica, to the very basic question that you were asking. Does it give us any better clarity about how long this war will last? I don't think that it does. You'll remember the president initially said four to five, perhaps six weeks for a timeline. Then over the course of the last 48 hours, we heard from the defense secretary saying in effect that, well, this was only just the beginning. The president then said it was very complete, pretty much then said it was a short term excursion before insisting that it could go much further. So I think it's up to Americans and ultimately at the end of the day, up to the president where he's going to put himself in a position to say, all right, I think we've done enough.

Monica Alba (6:41)

Whenever he raising questions about how that ends, Peter, but also a real mix up today with the energy secretary posting that the US did escort an oil tanker through the state of Hormuz. Then the White House saying that's not what happened. Help us understand.

Peter Alexander (6:55)

Well, I think we're trying to get a better understanding of it as we speak right now. This is significant. Obviously, the Energy secretary, Chris Wright, making the announcement, as he said very specifically, the US Navy had successfully escorted, escorted an oil tanker through the Strait of Hormuz. That would be notable because obviously so much of the global markets as they relate to oil right now are concerned about the inability, the sort of chokehold on that critical passageway just about 21 miles wide, controls about one fifth of the world's oil that goes through there. Right now, and the president has made it very clear that he wants to see oil flowing smoothly through that. So the fact that this was posted made a lot of investors feel very good that there was progress, that it was quickly deleted. The White House then said that that is not the case. No oil tanker has been allowed through there. We're still trying to get answers why such a thing would have been posted if that weren't the case. And the President, you played one of his or shared one of his posts from earlier. This is a post that he posted within the last hour or so. He said, among other things, if Iran has put out any mines in the strait, in the Hormuz Strait, and we have no reports of them doing so, we want them removed immediately. If for any reason mines were placed, he says, and they are not removed forthwith, the military consequences to Iran will be at a level never seen before. Initially he said that we might hit them 20 times as hard. Now they'll be a level never seen before. This is the president's sort of effort to continue those threats and it's not entirely clear that it's getting him what he's looking for.

Monica Alba (8:22)

So many fast moving developments. Peter, thank you so much for all of that. Courtney, I want to turn to you now because we did hear Secretary Hexis say today it was going to be the most intense day of the war so far. Is it clear what he meant by that?

Courtney Kuby (8:35)

Not really. I mean, you could figure out just based off of how the op tempo, how this campaign has been unfolding, that there would be more potential aircraft in the air today than there have been over the last nine or 10 days. And that's simply by, by virtue of the fact that the first couple of days they were, they were longer range standoff strikes and taking out air defenses and things. If you look at a map of Iran, you can actually trace from the west coast, the western side of the country, over further and further as the US And Israel continue to push more towards the center. As they push towards the center, they're essentially clearing space to make it safer for manned aircraft to fly, meaning every day. Theoretically, if they wanted to, if they have the ability, they could bring more aircraft in and conduct more strikes every single day just because the skies are simply safer to do so.

Monica Alba (9:22)

As this stretches on, we are learning about significantly more US Casualties, it seems. So what do we know about these 140 service members so far that have been injured, according to the Pentagon?

Courtney Kuby (9:33)

So we know that the majority have already been returned to duty about 108 of them. There are still at least eight who are seriously injured. That number was higher. It's gone down as some of them who were seriously have recovered more and are potentially still injured, but not in a more potentially dangerous category. We don't know a whole lot about the two dozen or so who are sort of in the middle there, other than we have to keep in mind that the majority of these injuries manifested from the strikes by Iran in the first 24 to 48 hours. That was when Iran really just pummeled the region with barrage after barrage of missiles and drones. There were probably people who had some sort of injuries then, like a traumatic brain injury, maybe a concussion, something that may not have immediately been evident to them. And they may be coming forward as the days unfold. So it's possible that we'll see even more injuries like this go forward. But it doesn't necessarily mean that there have been more attacks that have been successful against US Troops in the region,

Monica Alba (10:33)

and that could continue to change. As you point out, we've been talking a lot about the strike on the elementary school in southern Iran on the first day of the war. I do want to play an exchange a reporter had with the president and what he had to say about it yesterday.

Peter Alexander (10:48)

Hi, Mr. President. You just suggested that Iran somehow got its hands on a Tomahawk and bombed

Monica Alba (10:53)

its own elementary school on the first

Peter Alexander (10:55)

day of the war. But you're the only person in your government saying this. Even your defense secretary wouldn't say that

Matt Dixon (10:59)

when he was asked, standing over your

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (11:01)

shoulder on your plane on Saturday.

Matt Dixon (11:03)

Why are you the only person saying this?

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (11:05)

Because I just don't know enough about it. I think it's something that I was told is under investigation. But Tomahawks are used by others, as you know.

Monica Alba (11:15)

Court, give us the reality check on that. Does Iran have Tomahawks?

Courtney Kuby (11:19)

If so, it's a huge breaking story that they were able to somehow surreptitiously get their hands on Tomahawks, which the United States wouldn't. I can't envision a scenario where the US Would sell them to them. So, no, we don't believe they have any Tomahawks. There are only a couple of US Allies, close allies, Australia, the UK who have them. Japan is getting them, but I don't believe they have fielded them yet. So the US Was operating in that area at the time. We know that the Israeli military was not. The reality is this is looking increasingly likely, like this was a US Missile that landed on that school, killing all those Little kids. The real question now is why? What happened? Was it bad targeting? Was it bad intelligence? Did they just have an old target set? Did the missile go off course? We don't know the answer to that. When asked, we continue to ask the question over and over and all we're told is that it remains under investigation. But Monica, I just got to say the US Military is able to look at satellite imagery, infrared targeting, and they have to have a good sense of exactly what happened here already by now.

Monica Alba (12:19)

And the president saying that whatever the outcome is, whatever the conclusion is, he says he can live with it, whatever it might be. Courtney Kuby, thank you for your tireless reporting on this. Really appreciate it. And Kir, I want to turn to you now since you are in the Gulf region, and I want to read something that Senator Lindsey Graham, a staunch ally of the president and proponent of regime change in Iran, posted on social media yesterday. He wrote, hopefully Gulf Cooperation Council countries will get more involved as this fight is in their backyard. If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it again? Kir, you are right there. You're in the region. Do any of these Gulf countries want to get dragged into the war?

Keir Simmons (12:59)

Well, these are countries like Saudi Arabia, like the United Arab Emirates, where I am now, like Qatar, Bahrain. They are involved because they are all host U.S. bases, bases with U.S. servicemen and women. I've been to one, for example, Al Dade in Qatar. It's huge. It was substantially evacuated before this war. But these countries are involved in that sense now. What they did do prior to the conflict was say that they would not allow offensive action from those bases again. Remember, for example, Bahrain is hosts the fifth Fleet, which has aircraft carriers in the region off, not in that, in that port right now that are involved in the war. So they said they wouldn't be involved in offensive action. They're not going to take kindly to Senator Graham's edicts. They are being bombarded. The UAE here, where I am, has taken 50% according to statistics, of the drones and missiles, more than Israel, for example. What these countries are doing is, is trying to figure out how to get over this, how to get out of this. And at the same time, it does look as if they are increasingly frustrated, angry with Iran and are threatening themselves Iran, so many that bluntly many of the capitals here will find Senator Graham's intervention profoundly unhelpful in what they consider to be a very difficult situation where they are trying not to end up furthering quicksand this to turn into more of a regional war, which is a real risk at this stage.

Monica Alba (14:48)

Yeah. And also in the region there, of course, Israel is continuing with its military operations in Lebanon. What has the reaction been to that? And are the US And Israel on the same page when it comes to the broad objectives in the region Overall,

Keir Simmons (15:04)

It's a good question. It doesn't appear that they are. Certainly President Trump himself has said that they have different ambitions, different objectives. And if you remember, at the beginning of the war, for example, that strike on Ayatollah Khamenei, that killed Ayatollah Khamenei, it also killed a number of Iranian leaders, which President Trump has described as some of the people that they would have liked to perhaps have taken over. Then over the weekend, just gone, the Israelis struck the Iranian oil infrastructure, and that caused an enormous blaze in one case, for example, in Tehran lit up the night sky. I think that frustrated the US as well. And Senator Graham actually put out a post about the Israelis suggesting that they should be not targeting the oil infrastructure which the Trump administration was hoping to protect.

Monica Alba (16:00)

Keir Simmons, thank you so much. Please continue to stay safe. And coming up wartime in Washington, a Republican senator reacts to the White House's contradictory timelines on Iran and the president's push for a sweeping bill to overhaul voting rules. Senator Roger Marshall is standing by. Plus, if it's Tuesday, voters are voting somewhere. We're live in Georgia, where the race to replace former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is underway. You're watching Meet THE Press. Now.

Peter Alexander (16:36)

Why have I asked my electrician I found on Angie.com to bury my pet hamster? I was so moved by how carefully he buried my electrical wires. I knew I could trust him to bury my sweet nibbles after his untimely end.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (16:45)

This is very strange, Angie. The one you trust.

Erin Gilchrist (16:48)

Define the ones you trust. Find pros for all your home projects@angie.com Close your eyes. Focus. Listen to work getting done with Monday.com

Keir Simmons (16:58)

Relax as AI does the manual work while your teams are aligned on a

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (17:03)

single source of truth.

Monica Alba (17:05)

Feel the sensation of an AI work

Erin Gilchrist (17:07)

platform, so flexible and intuitive it feels like it was built just for you.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (17:13)

Notice you're limitless. Limitless.

Keir Simmons (17:16)

Now open your eyes.

Monica Alba (17:17)

Go to Monday.com, start for free, and finally breathe.

Courtney Kuby (17:21)

A text says, you're on my mind. A bouquet from 1-800-FLowers says, you're my everything. Heartfelt moments belong in the real world,

Monica Alba (17:29)

not just your phone.

Courtney Kuby (17:30)

For 50 years, 1-800-Flowers has helped millions of people make memories that'll last a lifetime with gifts they'll cherish forever, their expertly curated arrangements and gift baskets shipped nationwide with a 100% satisfaction guarantee. Don't wait for the next big moment. Make it when you visit 1-800-flowers.com sxm today, that's 1-800-flowers. Com sxm.

Monica Alba (17:53)

Welcome back. As the war with Iran stretches on, Republican speaker of the House Mike Johnson now says Congress is anticipating passing a supplemental funding bill for the military. Listen to that.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (18:04)

I think a supplemental funding bill for military is inevitable. We were anticipating a supplemental even before the Iran operation began. So that will happen. The timetable is yet to be determined.

Monica Alba (18:17)

Now, bipartisan support would be needed in the Senate to pass any kind of supplemental. And it's not clear that there would be enough Democratic votes. Today, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is calling for a public hearing into the war.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (18:30)

Donald Trump, Pete Hegseth and Marco Rubio owe the American people some answers. The administration needs to come before Congress and testify in public hearings under oath as to why our troops are fighting and dying in the Middle East.

Monica Alba (18:45)

Joining me now is Republican Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas. Senator, thanks very much for being with us today. I want to start with what the president said on Monday, and that is that the war would be, quote, quote, ended soon. But he also said, quote, we could go further and we're going to go further. So which is it, Senator?

Senator Roger Marshall (19:04)

Well, Monica, I think sometimes we hear what we want to hear. I think the president's been very clear from the beginning what our goals were here. So it's going to be over with when we have annihilated Iran's missile systems, their nukes, their navy, and they're unable to fund or arm terrorists. He described what would have been a four to six week timeline to begin with. We're ahead of that timeline. We could only wish that war was so simple that we could predict exactly how long it's going to take. Again, the good news today is it sounds like Iran's firing power is down over 90%, that they're firing 80, 90% less missiles and less drones.

Monica Alba (19:43)

So you have been supportive of the president launching these military strikes on Iran. But we are 11 days into the conflict. So is there a point when you do believe the president needs to ask Congress for authorization to continue with this war?

Senator Roger Marshall (19:58)

You know, I think the War Powers act is very clear that it gives the president about 60 days of leeway. And the president has followed the law to the letter that he notified Congress within 48 hours and now he has this 60 day, time period, really to protect Americans, that he's constitutionally called to protect Americans. But Congress has the right to recall the situation as well. The Democrats tied that once and it didn't work. To me, it's really interesting that the only one really supporting, supporting Iran right now, it's not China, it's not Russia, it's the Democrats.

Monica Alba (20:31)

Well, Senator, I find it interesting that you brought up the 60 day timeline because Vice President JD Vance has actually called the War Powers act, quote, fundamentally fake and unconstitutional. So what makes you think the administration will come to Congress within those 60 days?

Senator Roger Marshall (20:47)

Well, I don't know if I have an answer to say what they will and won't do, but I think when we get to that 60 day limit is that Congress does have more powers than that we can act.

Monica Alba (20:59)

Well, the President and the Defense Secretary haven't ruled out so far sending ground troops into Iran. They haven't taken that off the table. And there was reporting this week that the President is even discussing sending special forces to recover Iran's remaining highly enriched uranium. Is that something you would be supportive of?

Senator Roger Marshall (21:18)

I don't know if I want to get that specific. I certainly don't want to take anything off the table, but I want to be real clear is that I hate war. War, okay, I served, my dad served, my brother served, my son is serving and we hate war. But unfortunately the price of freedom is not free. And I'm grateful to the soldiers, the airmen and women are able, they're out there defending our nation right now. I wouldn't want to get real specific, say what I would and wouldn't do, but I certainly hope and pray that this war will be over very soon and that we'll never have any boots on the ground.

Monica Alba (21:50)

Got it. Thank you, Senator. For that I do want to turn to the idea that the U.S. according to the President, could lift some oil related sanctions that had been put in place to punish Russia specifically for the war in Ukraine. That move came after the President had an hour long phone call with Vladimir Putin yesterday. Do you support lifting those sanctions, Senator?

Senator Roger Marshall (22:12)

I do. And here, here's a great use of the tariffs by President Trump. President Trump used the tariffs to get a first time ever done deal done with India. And he also on geopolitical scale, got India to agree to not buy any further oil from Russia. So, but here we are, it's a new day. That's just it. This life does not happen in a vacuum. So it's a new day here and we do have a significant conflict in The Middle east and oil prices surged. Fortunately, they're coming back down those markets anticipating that this conflict will be shorter than everyone's expecting.

Monica Alba (22:45)

Senator, I do want to turn to the Save America act since Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the votes are not there to get it passed the Senate filibuster. Let's listen to that. We'll talk about it on the other side.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (22:56)

We don't have the votes either to

Senator Roger Marshall (22:59)

proceed, get on a talking filibuster nor to sustain one if we got on it.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (23:05)

But that's just, that is just a function of math and there isn't anything I can do about that.

Monica Alba (23:11)

So how do you see this? What would be the feasible path to passage here?

Senator Roger Marshall (23:17)

Yeah, well, I think the real issue we should be talking about is why 10 Democrats won't come across the aisle and support this Save act because 70% of Democrats support some type of voter ID. So I think that we can easily take what the House has done and start the process over here and let's get it to a vote, let's get everybody on record and maybe some Democrats will indeed cross the aisle. I don't know. But the true issue to me is that Americans think election integrity is very important, that election integrity is the backbone. It is the heartbeat of a free democracy. So I'm just surprised that we, we can't get Democrats to come and support voter ID because their constituents do well,

Monica Alba (24:00)

Senator, but it's not just voter id. Right. Because President Trump is saying that he wants to make additional changes to what the House has already passed, in fact twice. So do you support what the President is now calling for what he wants to add to the Save America act when it comes to some of these additional unrelated stipulations?

Senator Roger Marshall (24:20)

Well, those would not be my highest priority. If I'm asked to vote on him, I will support him. I think we go back to the SAVE act that we're talking about, act that talks about requiring voter IDs, that requires proof of your that you're a citizen as well, and then some type of limit on mail in ballots as well. I think we should stay focused on that, get Democrats on the record. And by the way, do you hear any Democrats saying that they would support voter id? They may object to some of these other things, but that's how the law is meant to work. Why won't Democrats come to the table and say, well, we support voter ID, but maybe they want to tweak what we would handle with the mail in ballot? So I'm just surprised that that's not, that conversation's not happening.

Monica Alba (25:02)

But would you concede that it would be more difficult to try to get Democrats to potentially consider this, given there are these additional considerations that the president now wants to add, Would you concede this now is more of an uphill climb?

Senator Roger Marshall (25:16)

Gosh, I mean, the more, the more you add, the more you add to any bill, the more complicated it is. You'll gain a couple, you'll lose a couple. My advice is to take what the House has done and take, take that up, stay focused on these three issues and then take amendment votes on those other ones and see what happens. But again, where are the Democrats saying that they support voter id? If they won't support that, they're certainly not going to support the rest of the bill. Why aren't they being held accountable at the national level when 70% of Democrats support voter ID? Why there's no one at the national media holding them accountable for that?

Monica Alba (25:53)

Well, we are discussing this and asking senators of both parties similar questions on this very topic. Senator, I do want to ask you, the president yesterday told Republicans that if the bill passes, quote, Democrats probably won't win an election for 50 years and maybe longer. So does the president's message there undermine the overall goal of the bill when he says that,

Senator Roger Marshall (26:16)

you know, I don't know the context of what the president was talking about. I think that if the Democrats have nothing to fear, they should come forward. Let's stay focused on what we can control. I can't control all the things that the president says, but we can control that Democrats are, are denying their own party when 70% of their constituents believe in voter ID. That's the real issue here. We can go off on all these tangents, but the real issue why do Democrat senators not support election integrity? Why do they not support voter IDs?

Monica Alba (26:48)

And I think they would say there are other issues within this bill that the president is trying to add that certainly complicate the overall conversation. Senator Roger Marshall, thank you so much for your time today. We really appreciate.

Senator Roger Marshall (27:01)

You're welcome. We hope they come to the table and have that conversation. Thank you.

Monica Alba (27:06)

Up next, it's Election Day, and you know what that means. Steve Kornacki is at the big board, breaking down what to watch for as the results start coming in in the special election for Georgia's 14th congressional district. Stay with us on MEET THE Press.

Caroline Levitt (27:20)

Now,

Peter Alexander (27:24)

why have I asked my electrician I found on Angie.com to bury my pet hammock dumpster? I was so moved by how carefully he buried my electrical wires. I knew I could trust him to bury my sweet nibbles after his untimely end.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (27:34)

This is very strange. Angie, the one you trust to find

Erin Gilchrist (27:36)

the ones you trust.

Peter Alexander (27:37)

Find pros for all your home projects@angie.com

Courtney Kuby (27:40)

this is a Monday.com ad, the same Monday.com helping people worldwide getting work done faster and better. The same Monday.com designed for every team and every industry. The samemonday.com with built in AI scaling your work from day one. The same Monday.com that your team will actually love using the same Monday.com with an easy and intuitive setup. Go to Monday.com and try it for free. Yes, the same Monday.com

Monica Alba (28:13)

welcome back. If it's Tuesday, voters are voting somewhere. And today those somewheres are Mississippi and Georgia, where there's a very crowded special election to fill former Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene's seat. Meanwhile, in Mississippi, incumbent Republican Senator Cindy Hyde Smith is facing a challenger in her primary. And on the Democratic side, it's a generational battle as incumbent Congressman Bennie Thompson, who recently turned 78, faces a primary challenge from 34 year old Evan Turnage, a former Senate aide. Joining me now is NBC chief data analyst Steve Kornack. And Erin Gilchrist is on the ground in Georgia. Thanks to you both. Steve, it is quite the field of candidates. So is it even possible to avoid a runoff here?

Steve Kornacki (28:58)

Yeah, it's possible, but certainly not likely. Look, this is a top two primary, they call it, right? You see the three sort of leading names right here. But we could keep scrolling down and go all the way down to 17 different names, 17 active candidates here. And the way this works is they're all on the ballot, Republicans, Democrats, there's Libertarians, Independent. Whoever finishes in the top two slots advances to a runoff in April unless somebody gets 50% plus one, an outright majority wins tonight. Nobody is expecting that. But I think the dynamics to keep an eye on as the results come in. First thing to remember, of course, this is an overwhelmingly Republican district. Marjorie Taylor Greene had won by nearly 30 points in her final election. Donald Trump won this district by 37 points. Now this Democrat right here, Sean Harris, Harris, he was the opponent that Green faced in 2024. He got 36% of the vote. He's got he's raised a ton of money nationally for this race. And it seems like he's probably largely consolidated the Democratic vote in this district. So while this is overwhelmingly a Republican district, if Harris can sort of monopolize the Democratic vote in an incredibly Crowded race like that, he could get one of those two runoff spots. There's even a world tonight where maybe Harris could finish with the most votes of any candidate tonight. But again, something to keep in mind, part of that is because he may consolidate the Democratic vote, whereas the Republican vote is going to be split up. And I think the suspense and the drama when it comes to that Republican vote is around these two candidates right here, Clay Fuller and Colton Moore. Clay Fuller is the candidate endorsed by Donald Trump. I think that's what you need to know. He ran for this seat six years ago. He barely registered in the Republican primary, but he's got Trump's endorsement. And sometimes that's all it takes in one of these primaries. And then there's Colton Moore. He was a state senator. He certainly had some very provocative antics. He's been aligned with a lot of MAGA figures. I think he was certainly thinking he would get the Trump endorsement in this campaign, but he didn't get it. So can his sort of MAGA style work without the ultimate MAGA endorsement from Donald Trump? And I think those two Republicans here vying for maybe one of those spots, and then Harris the Democrat. But again, whoever emerges overwhelmingly Republican district,

Monica Alba (31:08)

still, big day for the big board. We love to see it. Thank you so much, Steve, for breaking it down. Erin, I want to turn to you since you are in former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene's district today. She hasn't weighed in right on the race to replace her, but the president did endorse Clay Fuller, as Steve just pointed out. You just spoke to him. What did he tell you?

Erin Gilchrist (31:29)

You know, I think Steve laid the foundation here very nicely, Monica. Clay Fuller believes that, that this endorsement from President Trump is really going to be helpful, very helpful in helping him to get to a place where he is closer to winning this election. Steve laid out why we think that a runoff is very likely here. Just the math seems to suggest that that's going to happen, given that there are so many people on the ballot in this district right now. But Clay Fuller told me that he does feel like he is the one with the win behind him, helping him to get to a good place after tonight. I want you to hear part of our exchange change a little earlier today.

Peter Alexander (32:06)

We feel great, feel really confident. I feel like I'm the most dangerous candidate in the race with the president's endorsement. So we're just making sure that we're driving out the boat here today, trying to contact as many voters as we can.

Erin Gilchrist (32:16)

Well, let me ask you, since you brought up the president's endorsement. How significant do you feel like that is? How much do you feel like that's been helpful for you?

Peter Alexander (32:23)

It's been immensely helpful. Not only is it the honor of my lifetime because I work for President Trump in the first Trump administration as a Trump appointee, but I know going out and talking to voters across the district, one of the main things that they were concerned about when this race first started was where the president was going to be.

Erin Gilchrist (32:40)

Now, I can tell you that the people here that we've spoken to already today have seemed to indicate that Clay Fuller is their choice because he's gotten this Trump endorsement. And also if you sort of listen to him talk, people like him because he's not like Donald Trump. So there's definitely a clear desire to have Trump policies. But the temperament, maybe, Monica, is something that some voters in this area have indicated they're not necessarily wanting to see in the person that they choose. That's why they backed Fuller in this case. But of course, Colton Moore is a contender and somebody that folks are voting for. We've spoken to some people here who did vote for him, and we're going to get a chance to talk to him in just a couple of minutes here.

Monica Alba (33:16)

Erin, tell me more about those voter conversations. What issues are there they saying that are driving them to the polls today? And is the war against Iran weighing on their decision at all?

Erin Gilchrist (33:27)

Yes, it's a conversation that we've had with a few people that we've spoken to here. Folks who have been supporting Republicans do support President Trump in a big way, and they've spoken about their support for what he's doing in Iran. There's been some conversation with folks who are a bit uncomfortable with the reality of needing to take that action in, but they do feel as though the president has made the case for why that action is needed. Listen to some of the voters we talked to a little while ago.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (33:54)

I feel like he's doing the right thing. I heard they was trying to make the bomb and he's trying to stop that.

Keir Simmons (34:01)

And I think that's important.

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (34:03)

If you get picked on enough in school, sooner or later you get mad.

Senator Roger Marshall (34:05)

And I just sort of feel like

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (34:07)

we've been picked on enough and I guess our president decided he'd had enough.

Peter Alexander (34:11)

I was. I would just like there to be some return on investment for our time. If we do anything in another nation, that would be my primary hopes, because it's not really a moral or an ethical question.

Erin Gilchrist (34:23)

It's an ROI question.

Peter Alexander (34:25)

Unfortunately for the taxpayer.

Erin Gilchrist (34:30)

And I think it's worth mentioning that we're seeing that support for President Trump from voters. And each of the 12 Republicans that are in this race have indicated that they are essentially aligned with the president's too, saying that they support an America first agenda. And so, Monica, it could very well come down to style when we see who the Republican is that rises to the top today.

Monica Alba (34:49)

Fascinating and always important to get those voter voices. Aaron, thank you so much for doing that. We appreciate it. After the break, Air campaign new reporting on how the war with Iran and President Trump's many foreign entanglements could end up boosting Secretary of State State Marco Rubio's 2028 prospects over Vice President J.D.

Courtney Kuby (35:09)

vance.

Monica Alba (35:10)

Plus, the Justice Department's investigation into the 2020 election expands to another key county in a battleground state as President Trump continues to push false claims about his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden. That story's next on Meet. Welcome back. Turning now to the Trump administration's ongoing scrutiny over the results of the 2020 election, which Donald Trump lost to Joe Biden. President Trump posting on social media that the FBI had secretly seized election records from Maricopa County. Now, that's the largest county in Arizona, which helped propel Biden to victory in the state. The Republican leader of the state Senate yesterday confirming that writing, quote, late last week, I received and complied with a federal grand jury subpoenaed for records relating to the Arizona State Senate's 2020 audit of Maricopa County. The FBI has the records. Now, the FBI is not commenting and the Maricopa County Elections Department says it has not received a subpoena but will cooperate if it does. And it comes more than a month after the FBI raided an elections hub in Fulton County, Georgia, for records and ballots from 2020. NBC News Senior reporter Jane Timm joins me now. Jane, thanks for breaking this down. There are some discrepanc over what records are actually being sought and what records have already been obtained. So what do we know at this point?

Caroline Levitt (36:38)

You know, we haven't seen this grand jury subpoena. So there's a lot of questions here. But what we understand from Senator Peterson, Senate President Peterson's tweet is that these are records in relation to the audit that the Arizona senate instigated in 2021. Now, this was a sort of highly controversial, at times very sloppy review of the 2020 election results in Maricopa county that was instigated by the state Senate. They hired a sort of little known firm called the Cyber ninjas to go look at their ballots, to hand count their ballots in a warehouse. They did a lot of sort of questionable and controversial sort of tactics here and sort of methods. This was not a standardized review that you might see or a hand count that you might, you might have seen in, say, Georgia, where they do do hand counts as an audit or a check of their election results. This was a they had UV lights, they had plans, talking about what would happen if Antifa wanted to try and storm the audit, as they called it. So it's important to note that while they say that the records from the election are now in the hands of the FBI, they aren't actually the records of an election. These are records that were created in the course of a controversial audit that was paid for by election people who believe that election widespread election fraud occurs, conspiracy theorists, people like Patrick Byrne, the former head of Overstock.com, his group Khalida Mitchell, the president's, the president's former election lawyer who tried to overturn the results of an election, people who spent lots and lots of money to pay for this sort of controversial audit five years ago in Arizona.

Monica Alba (38:21)

So, Jane, if people are wondering, is there any possible connection here to the raid on the election facility in Fulton County, Georgia, we know the president has certainly accused them of rigging that against him. What would you say? Is there any possible link here between the two investigations?

Caroline Levitt (38:38)

You know, it's hard not to tie the two together, of course, because we have two 2020 election sort of reviews by federal prosecutors. But it's important to note that the this was not a search warrant like we saw in Fulton County. This was a grand jury subpoena, which is essentially a formal request for documents, kind of an often negotiable request for documents from a prosecutor, essentially. So we don't exactly know if they're tied together or how, but we'll be watching to find out.

Monica Alba (39:05)

Jane, thank you very much. I want to turn now to some behind the scenes details at the White House in the jockeying over who will be President Trump's successor in 2028. The Iran war does seem to be raising the profile of Secretary of State Marco Rubio, raising a bunch of questions about whether President Trump could champion Rubio over his own vice president, who President Trump said yesterday was, quote, less enthusiastic about the decision to go to war with Iran. Joining me now is NBC senior national politics reporter Matt Dixon. Matt, thank you so much for joining me. What does it tell you that the president is basically polling a room at a fundraiser just hours after these strikes started against Iran about how he views this 20, 28 choice.

Matt Dixon (39:54)

Well, first, it's hard to ignore the timing, right? I mean, we're now at war with Iran and this is what was on the President's mind. So it's clearly important to him. But he's, you know, still the apprentice president. Right. I think he likes a bit of tension the you're fighting. I think we have seen a history of him throughout his two terms in office where a little staff tension is something that he likes. So Marco Rubio is clearly having a moment. He's Secretary of State, he's the foreign policy guy. And I think that's going to naturally elevate him a bit. JD Vance leads in most of the polling, so there is definitely a horse race dynamic that's, that's starting to shape up.

Monica Alba (40:29)

What does it tell you about perhaps the divide in the MAGA base when it comes to these two potential candidates?

Matt Dixon (40:35)

I think it's important moving forward that we define the MAGA base.

Peter Alexander (40:38)

Right.

Matt Dixon (40:38)

There's a shrinking part of the Republican Party that identifies as that MAGA base. I think among those true believers, President Trump's base, President Trump's sort of core supporters, they're going to go with whoever he says they should go with. But I think from some degree, Marco Rubio is a very good political talent, been in public life his entire career. Career that, you know, there's going to be a real conversation to be had there about MAGA folks who are going to do what Trump says versus Republicans who maybe have a different view of things.

Monica Alba (41:09)

And it's still really early, a lot could change. But looking at our latest NBC News poll that showed that 90% of those self identified MAGA Republicans do support US military action against Iran. So does that mean that would translate? Would those numbers potentially change if it's Rubio urging intervention, how might that shift it?

Matt Dixon (41:30)

I think when we've done some reporting on this as well, I think the length of what happens in Iran, how many service members potentially die, unfortunately, is going to do a lot to shape that. If it's quick or in or out, that I think is going to be a significantly different thing than if this goes on for months or whatever the duration might be.

Monica Alba (41:49)

And we've seen a little bit less of the Vice President maybe than we normally would, which. What is his team saying about that?

Matt Dixon (41:56)

I think the general perception is that Vice President Vance isn't as supportive of the operation, the war in Iran, as President Trump is. And I think there's some intentionality to the idea he disappeared on social media for a few days, which is much different than is normal for him.

Monica Alba (42:14)

Well, and the president seems like he will tell us what he thinks once he makes a decision. Right. About whether he will endorse his secretary of state or his vice president. Matt Dixon, really appreciate it.

Matt Dixon (42:23)

Thank you.

Monica Alba (42:25)

And still to come, you might call it a book of revelations. A leading scholar on executive leadership lays out what he calls President Trump's Ten Commandments and what it all means for the fate of US Politics. Keep it here on MEET the Press. Welcome back. For the last decade, Donald Trump has drastically reshaped the Republican Party and reshaped American politics altogether. In his upcoming new book, Trump's Ten Commandments, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, a Yale University scholar and informal advisor to five U.S. presidents, outlines the 10 principles that have defined the Trump era of politics. Jeffrey Sonnenfeld joins me now. Jeffrey, thank you so much for being here to talk about the book. And, and I want to start first with your relationship to the president. How did you come to know Donald Trump?

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (43:17)

Well, it's an interesting story. Back when Jeff Zucker was running this great enterprise, he was running NBCUniversal. He asked if I would write a review each week for the first episode, the first issues, the first season of the Apprentice. And I would go in the Wall Street Journal. So he would get them to me a day in advance and he thought to be positive messages. But I looked at them, they were unbelievable. As I referred to it as the elimination game premise that it was sort of like a musical chairs game at a Hooters restaurant with the sexist overview that it had because the outtakes are pretty scary. Nothing that Access Hollywood needed to discover later when you see these things, things. And so if you can believe it, he's a little sensitive to criticism and he was a little threatening. After the first, first review where it was labeled Last Emperor, Trump and I predicted he would run for president. This is 2004. And he said, well, to Zucker and NBC and Wall Street Journal, tear it up. And the Wall Street Journal said, no, he can set traffic out of this. Let him see next week. So I said, I'm not going to recant. They said, yeah, you have to rescind. So I looked at it and said, you know, Mr. Trump asked if I rescind. And, you know, I do. I thought I wouldn't. Last week I said that was the worst possible portrait of business leadership on television I could imagine for young people to follow. But I hadn't seen this week's and we wound up actually ultimately becoming friends as he got pretty threatening. We'd go on the Today show, we'd go on to the old Kudlow and Kramer show and your old shows from your old sisters at CNBC and things. And the. He. He and I would wind up in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, or in Sao Paulo, Brazil, in battles. And he wasn't taking well to it. So he called and said, let's get together for golf. I'm a horrible golfer. But as we got together for lunch, he offered me the presidency of Trump University. I said, no, I don't think so. But he was trying to replace the squeaky wheel, actually drown it in oil rather than replace me. And we wound up becoming friends because I suggested what became the Celebrity Apprentice. I said, the trouble is getting these engaging young millennials and putting them in this zero sum, throw them off the island setting. And he said, well, that's the premise that Jack Welch, who GE owned NBC at the time, wanted us to steal from Survivor, from cbs, and that was Mark Burnett, the producer. So we just stole Mark Burnett to produce the same show in a business setting. I said, well, you know, you got nobody to lead if you're throwing them all off the island if you kill off your own people. So. But he understood that. And I said, go for these fallen celebrities. I never loved ethnic humor. And he said, let's do it. So he moved it to the Celebrity Apprentice and we became friends after that, although I disagree with him about at least two thirds of the time.

Monica Alba (46:19)

So you have studied Donald Trump the businessman, and now Donald Trump the president, in terms of some of his strategies, how he approaches leadership. And let's talk about one of the tenets that you write about in the book, specifically something called the Sleeper Effect, which you write is when someone states falsehoods with unwavering confidence, people begin to think, maybe there's something I've missed. This is precisely how the Sleeper Effect works. You write, the messenger's confidence becomes more memorable than the message's accuracy. When have we seen him embrace this?

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (46:48)

You really studied this well. You do not have to take the final exam. You're all set. You've mastered. That's exactly right. It's a scary thing. It was studied at Yale in the 1940s and 50s, based on what was happening in Germany in the 1930s. And their work was really controversial. The Sleeper Effect basically says, for a sophisticated audience and it sounds really class conscious. Tell them both sides of the story, but implant some fatal flaws in it. Unsophisticated just tell them one side and both times just keep pounding away. And no matter who comes along to correct the source, like you have source corrections out there, there are these pointer institutes or fact check places, news guard or things. People don't care about that because they, they see that the message lingers on the memory curve. It lingers. So you can still, if you keep repeating the message, you can get maybe 20, 25% of Americans to believe that Haitian refugees are eating their neighbor's pets, even though it's denied by everybody.

Monica Alba (47:41)

Have you seen him employ that when he's discussing the war against Iran?

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (47:46)

Yes, actually. Obviously what's interesting on that one, he's not sure what message he wants. Just in the course of the last 48 hours, we happen to have President Herzog and the chief of strategy for the Israeli Defense Forces and the Chief of Information Officer as well as Prime Minister Theresa May and others, some U.S. generals. And they all said, basically, what's the strategy here? He told us that the nuclear capabilities had been defanged and now he's saying he wants to make it inoperable. But wait a second, I thought it's where we were eight months ago, 10 months ago. And then he's shifted to say that we've accomplished about 80% of what we want. Then he said we've not yet begun the fight. So it's confusing, but he needs to have a consistent message and he usually does that. But right now he's shopping messages to find out what works. And that's what he also does does. There's a lot of trial balloons. And then once he sees what seems to be working similarly with Venezuela, he went through a whole litany of alternatives. He suggested we're going to Venezuela for drug interdiction. But when it turned out that he had just freed one month earlier of the former president, Honduras Hernandez, President Hernandez, who hadn't just been extradited, but indicted by a jury and then convicted by another jury and sentenced for 45 years. Years. And then he pardoned him. And that guy actually had proven links to massive drug trafficking into the US Whereas the Venezuela case wasn't so strong. Is that didn't hold up. So he switched and he said, well, let me try and say that it's Russian and Chinese ships. And that didn't work. So then he shifted to say, well, the oil industry put me up to it. It was at the behest. And I called the leaders of the oil industry. They said, no, we have no interest in that sour heavy crude, Venezuelan oil. And it's too expensive to extract. It's there.

Monica Alba (49:35)

Have you noticed any changes or evolutions from his first term to his second term and how he uses these commandments, as you call them?

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (49:42)

Yeah, when he went in, I don't think he thought he was necessarily going to win. He kept calling me in 2015 asking if he should run. And I told him that I thought that if he wants the attention, he could do it, that he'll get 15 to 18%, as Ross Perot did previously as a business leader with no background in government, and he'll crest there. And he said, great. That's what Melania says. She says I should run, too. I said, wait, I didn't say you should run. I said, just. But. So he did. And he wound up with an inelegant moment. I believe it was in New Hampshire where somebody had a hostile, bigoted statement about Muslims. And I told him afterwards, you missed your McCain moment where John McCain as a candidate corrected somebody for attacking Barack Obama on similar terms. And he's not Muslim. But even if he were, but that was the wrong thing to say because he hated John McCain, because McCain stood up to him. And he said, well, I never said it, but he had a confidence issue back then. And he also put together what he thought was a marquee cabinet. They weren't, but they were people who were grounded in the legitimacy of their fields. They had authority, they had knowledge. Now he has sycophants, or if we weren't on television, I would say suck ups. And people who have a filial piety back to him, they're beholden to him. And that's a problem because he has no guardrails now. So he keeps pushing and pushing and pushing to see how far he can go. And he wouldn't mind it if somebody pushes back. For example, when we saw the community of Minneapolis, including 60 major business leaders, the CEOs of Target and Medtronic and Cargill, and 60 of them, along with the clergy, and of course, massive street demonstrations. He moved away. The way you counter a bully, which is another point in here in this book, is through basic collective action is another one of his lessons is always to divide and conquer. He hates nafta, then USMCA that he created, he hated that, too. Trying to constantly start fights between Mexico and Canada. He doesn't like NATO, which is to try to stern things up in the eu. And he feels that he's better off if he has peace. People that are constantly at war with each other and they're not a threat to him. In Trump 1.0 he had delegated a lot of power to people that also had authority. They were known in their fields of expertise in diplomacy or law enforcement or science, whatever it was. He didn't like that. So now it's like a hub, like a solar system or a wheel with a hub with spokes coming off of it. Everything goes through him and Trump one point know it wasn't so centralized. So there for the price of nothing. If you just got three of the of the ten chapters.

Monica Alba (52:33)

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, thank you so much for your time today. And we'll be back tomorrow with more Meet the Press. Now there's much more ahead on NBC News. Now,

Erin Gilchrist (52:47)

real talent is defined by what people can do, not where they learn to do it. So by stopping at the education section of a residential resume that you might throw away the perfect Hire skills first. Hiring helps you see talent others miss. Like more than 70 million stars skilled through alternative routes, let their story unfold and gain a competitive advantage. Because hiring managers who start with skills are 60% more likely to find a successful hire Hire skills first. Learn why at tear the paperceiling.org brought to you by opportunityatwork and the Ad Council.