Last summer, the coolest place in the house was in your freezer. This year, it's time to level up. Reliance HomeComfort has over 160,000 5-star reviews for delivering the type of outstanding customer experience Canadians have counted on for over 60 years. Right now, don't pay for 12 months on a featured air conditioner or heat pump.
Call on the experts that know how to beat the heat. Oh, yes! Condition supply, see website for details. This Sunday, rescued, U.S.
forces pull off a daring mission to save a missing airman behind enemy lines in Iran. Plus, fueling tensions. President Trump says the war with Iran could be nearing completion, but also signals more fighting ahead. We're going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks.
We're going to bring them back to the Stone Ages where they belong. Inside the Pentagon, turmoil, as the army chief of staff is ousted. I hope he just declares victory and gets out. I'm doing everything I can to bring it into what I think is an illegal war and an unwise one.
Is the conflict winding down or could a ground invasion be next? And, justice shake up. Attorney General Panbondi is fired. The second cabinet member pushed out in recent weeks.
Could more cabinet members be next? My guest this morning, Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, Republican Congressman Mike Waller of New York, and Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna of California, joining me for insight and analysis are Susan Glasser, Staff Writer for the New Yorker, former Homeland Security Secretary Jay Johnson, and Mark Short, former Director of Legislative Affairs for President Trump. Welcome to Sunday, it's Meet the Press. From NBC News in Washington, the longest running show in television history, this is Meet the Press, the Kristen Welker.
Good Sunday morning, breaking news overnight in an extraordinary turn of events. The United States has rescued the second crew member who was in the US F-15 fighter jet shot down over Iran Friday. President Trump texting me directly this morning, the rescue was an Easter miracle, the enemy was large and violent. The rescuers were brilliant, strong, decisive, and as cool as anyone can be.
The Iranians thought they had him, but it wasn't even close. And remember, we got two but couldn't talk about the first in that it would have highlighted that there was a second. Such a rescue has never happened before and so violent and enemy territory. It is usually not done because it is considered not doable.
Such a great military like no other. Adding on truth social, open the effing straight, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in hell. All of this comes on the heels of President Trump's prime time address Wednesday night, telling Americans the objectives in Iran were nearing completion. I can say tonight that we are on track to complete all of America's military objectives shortly, very shortly.
We're going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. And joining me now is Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, Senator Kaine, welcome back to me, the press. Happy Easter. And thanks to you, Kristen, appreciate it.
Appreciate your being here. Let's start with that breaking news overnight, the fact that the U.S. military was able to rescue that second pilot that was down in enemy lines in Iran. What was your reaction to learning the new senator?
Overwhelming relief. Our Easter service at my church was last night, and I know that that was a prayer on virtually everybody's minds during the service. And so to wake up this morning and hear about the rescue of the pilot, so very, so very grateful for that, for the service of the search and rescue teams. Kristen, this is why the President and Secretary Hegset's rhetoric about no mercy, no quarter, death from above, the bombing of the stone ages.
This kind of rhetoric is really dangerous because the likelihood of having downed pilots or others who are captured in a war like this is very high. And if you send the message that there's no quarter for the folks on the other side, that really encourages them to mistreat our folks. And so I hope that White House, I doubt the President will, but please dial back a rhetoric because you don't need to put people like these pilots more at risk by the rhetoric that you use. Well, you raised the rhetoric.
Let me ask you about some of the President's rhetoric this morning, posting on truth, social, quote, open the straight, you blank bastards. Do you think that is an effective negotiation tactic? No, the bombing them back to the Stone Age, cursing them. Secretary Hegset saying, you know, it's death from above, no mercy, no quarter.
We will ignore stupid rules of engagement. This is all embarrassing and juvenile. And it's people trying to act like they're puffed up and tough. When what we really see from the administration in this war is the absence of a plan, the absence of a clear rationale, no effort to get allies on board, and thus deep unpopularity of this war with the American public.
I know that's the case in Virginia. I was traveling around Virginia all last week and I'll be doing the same this week. People see this President is having blundered into a war with no clear rationale. And there's no amount of cursing or boasting or tough talk that will cover up for the fact that this President didn't have a rationale and he doesn't really have a plan.
Well, let me drill down with you on the Strait of Hormuz. Obviously a major flashpoint. I know that you want this war to come to an end, but Senator, would you support ending this war before the Strait is reopened? I think we need to, in this war, as soon as possible, we don't need to deploy more Americans into harm's way in a war that lacked a rationale and lacked a plan.
And then we'll work with allies and others to figure out the situation of the Strait. Thank goodness the United States is less reliant on oil from the Middle East, because we built up a strong domestic energy industry. The President shouldn't try to cripple the clean energy industry in the way that he's doing. Let's focus on growing American energy.
And I think when the war ends, you'll start to get the relief at the price tag, at the pump for Americans who are paying too much. The President promised to inform wars and bring down prices. He's initiating wars, raising prices, and now claiming he's got to cut Medicaid, Medicare, and other programs to fund his wars. That's not the way we ought to be going.
Well, let me ask you about what comes next. Senator President Trump asking Congress for $1.5 trillion for the military, a $500 billion increase from the military budget last year. Would you support that spending if deemed necessary for military readiness? Chris and I have a hard time seeing that that size of an increase as being justified.
The President sent that over Friday as you know I'm on the armed services committee and we'll be taking a look at it. But here's a question we have to ask, which is it's not just about the dollars, it's about the Pentagon managing the money. You just watch the Secretary of Defense fire very respected army leadership in the middle of a war, respected leadership on both sides of the island in both houses. And there's deep questions about why many suspected Secretary Hagg Seth was just trying to move people out of the way that he viewed as personally threatening to his leadership.
Maybe they were being candid to him with advice that he didn't like. And so I don't think Congress is going to be in a mood to write a blank check to a leadership team, a civilian leadership team that seems so inept these days. So you're a no right now, Senator? Well, the President, all he ascents is the number.
We don't have the details. The good news is the armed services committee is going to start having hearings in April, May before we write the bill in June. Needless to say, we have a lot of questions to ask and the administration has a whole lot of explaining to do. Let me ask you, because since the start of this war, you have co-sponsored five war powers, resolutions, two of which have failed on the floor.
Your colleague, your Republican colleague, Senator John Curtis, said he actually won't support more funding without a formal declaration of war from Congress. Senator, do you think you have enough Republican support to get a resolution to pass, given what you're hearing from Senator Curtis? Well, I was pleased to hear that from Senator Curtis because it shows that he takes the Constitution seriously, that we shouldn't be at a war, particularly over this magnitude, without a vote of Congress. I would welcome that debate on the floor.
I don't see more war after 25 years of unproductive war in the Middle East. I don't see it as a good idea. That's why I think this war is illegal. But if we have that debate on the floor and a majority of my colleagues thinks we ought to be at war, I'll still think it's unwise, but I will at least say it's legal, it's constitutional.
The problem we have now is a war that is both illegal and unwise. Senator Curtis is suggesting, hey, it's time for Congress to really get in and make sure that there's a plan here that the American public can support. Let me ask you about another major flashpoint, NATO, the new tensions between President Trump and NATO. Of course, the NATO Secretary-General poised to visit Washington this week.
You co-authored the law designed to prevent any president from pulling out of NATO unilaterally with then-Senator Marco Rubio. Do you think if President Trump tries to withdraw from NATO, Congress will be able to block him and that Republicans will be on board with that? Kristen, I do. This was a bill that I actually introduced with Senator John McCain.
I think it was one of his last bills before he died. And then Senator Rubio picked it up as the chief Republican after Senator McCain died. We got it passed in, I believe, the end of 2023, a very important bill. The president cannot withdraw from NATO without support of Congress.
We are stronger with allies than when we're operating on our own. And if the president were to announce I'm withdrawing from NATO, it would be like Donald Trump saying the sun will come up in the West tomorrow. It would be an irrelevant falsehood. He can't withdraw without us.
However, he has hurt NATO badly by imposing tariffs on NATO countries without any consultation, by waging wars that are affecting the economies of NATO nations without any consultation. And now he's blaming them for not coming to the USA with respect to the straits. Elementary human relations. If you want help from somebody, work with them.
Don't kick them around. And then when you're in trouble, ask them for help. That's what President Trump is doing now. That's why it's not working.
All right. Let's turn to the fight, the funding fight over the Department of Homeland Security, which is now closed. As you know, the Senate passed a bill, which the House is now signaling it will support when it's back in session. It's worth noting though, Senator, this bill does not include the reforms to ICE Democrats were demanding, which include no masks requiring judicial warrants.
What exactly did Democrats get out of this shutdown, Senator? Well, Kristen, the deal was what Democrats had been putting on the table for weeks. There was no need for the shutdown. There was no need for TSA lines.
We basically said to the Republicans, let's fund all the DHS agencies at the levels we've all agreed on. We've worked it out in a bipartisan way with two majority Republican houses, except ICE and CBP, which need reform. And the Republicans had pre-funded ICE and CBP activities, so nobody was losing paychecks in those agencies. So you're right.
We have proposed funding everything, except ICE and CBP, they can use their pre-funding, and we will continue the reform discussion. And you're right. We don't yet have those reforms, but we have a wind in our back because we know the American public strongly believes that these federal agencies should follow the same standards that local law enforcement agencies follow. ID, no masks, have a warrant before you enter somebody's homes.
These are enormously popular. So we think we can make headway on getting reforms because the American public is with us on the reforms we're seeking. Well, there was a similar outcome in November after the longest government shutdown. In fact, you were one of eight senators who didn't negotiate with Republicans to reopen the government.
The fight at that point was over Obamacare subsidies, but Democrats never actually got an extension of those Obamacare subsidies. Do you acknowledge that Democrats have yet to gain anything tangible from these shutdowns? Well, the first in November, my negotiation was on a different point, protection for federal employees from all the firings and risks that the administration was conducting. And I got thousands and thousands of federal employees returned to work, which Virginia was a big deal.
That was something that I negotiated in the fall shutdown that was extremely helpful. Look, shutdowns are not good. I don't think they're certainly not winning for the nation. And again, that's why Democrats put on the table weeks and weeks ago, no need for a shutdown.
Let's fund the agencies we've agreed on and keep a reform discussion going with ICE. It does sound like, finally, the House will agree to do what the Senate agreed to unanimously. Now, two weeks ago, I hope they will do it. Then we'll continue the reform discussion and all of these questions, whether it's ICE or the Republican efforts to slash healthcare.
President Trump saying, because of fighting wars, we're going to need to cut Medicaid, Medicare, child care. These will all be matters on the voters minds this November. All right. Senator, very quickly, before I let you go, President Trump fired his attorney general, Pam Bondi.
You are someone who's actually voted yes on some of his nominees, including former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem. Are you open to voting yes on President Trump's pick to become the next attorney general? I never start off as an automatic no. We'll see who the president proposes.
If you get elected as president, I think that should carry a mandate to put in an executive team. If somebody is not qualified or has lack of character, although no, but I never start off as a no. But here's the lesson from Pam Bondi, Kristin. The AG is supposed to be the nation's chief law enforcement officer and have an independent gravitas and integrity.
Pam Bondi threw all that away and she still got fired. So look, you can either go in as an attorney general and stand up for the rule of law and you may make Donald Trump mad or you can go in and try to just do everything the president wants and you're going to make him mad. And she basically sold out her her own integrity. She couldn't even look at herself in a mirror and she still got sacked.
That should be a lesson to whoever is the next nominee for AG, be the nation's chief law enforcement officer and don't let the president cause you to trim your conscience or, you know, become a Tony. All right. Senator Tim Kane, hope you have a wonderful Easter holiday. Thank you so much for joining us.
Same. Thank you, Kristin. Thanks so much. Thank you.
When we come back Republican Congress and Mike Lawler joins me next. It's here. The Ford is a big, not yet. The Ford is a big deal.
Oh, guys, just wait. The Ford is a big deal event is on. Really? Now.
Hurry into at least a 2026 Maverick XLT hybrid all-wheel drive for $197 by weekly at 5.29 percent APR for 60 months with $29.95 down. That's like $99 a week. The Ford is a big deal event. Visit your Imperial Ford store or Ford.ca.
Welcome back and joining me now is Republican Congressman Mike Lawler of New York. Congressman Lawler, welcome to me the press and happy Easter. Happy Easter, Kristin and happy Easter to everyone out watching. Well, we appreciate your being here on the holiday Congressman and I have to start by getting your reaction to this extraordinary news overnight.
The military rescuing the second pilot who was in that F-15 fighter jet that was shot down over Iran. What were your first thoughts when you heard the news? Well, obviously it was fantastic news both for our country and certainly the families of those airmen that had been shot down. But it speaks to the courage, the bravery and the commitment to service of our armed forces.
They truly are the greatest armed forces anywhere in the world and I think they prove that once again in this rescue mission. Let me ask you because the rescue mission in Iran did involve sending in special forces and it was notable in his prime time address on Wednesday. President Trump did not rule out sending in U.S. forces on the ground in Iran.
So let me ask you, would you support President Trump actually putting U.S. troops on the ground in Iran? I think in this instance, a rescue mission, it was necessary to do everything in our power to ensure that no troops were left behind and I commend the President for taking decisive action to do that. I think the question moving forward with respect to any troops on the ground would be for what purpose and I think the only purpose that I could see would be to get the enriched uranium and I think that is something that does need to be discussed with Congress in a classified setting and I think Congress would need to be briefed on that particular matter.
But I want to push back on something Senator Cain said. This is not an illegal military operation. The President is fully within his authority to conduct this military operation. The War Powers Resolution and War Powers Act gives him 60 to 90 days to conduct such an operation and Congress was lawfully notified within 48 hours of the initial incursion.
So for Tim Cain or any other Democrat to say this is illegal, especially after so many Democrats including Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi supported Barack Obama's seven-month war in Libya is just hypocritical at best and they are gaslighting the American people when they talk about this. Well, look, it's not just Democrats, it's Republicans too. I want to drill down with you on this very point. Republican Senator John Curtis of Utah wrote on Wednesday, quote, the Constitution assigns the legislative branch the clear and explicit right to declare war to accord a president, the power to wage an ongoing war without a congressional declaration of war is to render that congressional authority void.
Do you agree that if President Trump once were funding for the war or more time to fight it that he does in fact need congressional approval? Congress has not declared war since World War II and in fact, we have had numerous operations and conflicts and wars. Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War, Iraq, Afghanistan, yes, there has been congressional involvement, but the declaration of war itself has not occurred since World War II. But yes, look, as this moves forward, if it goes beyond the 60 to 90-day window, then yes, Congress will need to take necessary action and I would support that.
But the idea that the administration and our armed forces are not meeting their objectives or that there wasn't a plan is absurd. The fact is that they have conducted an incredible operation over these last five weeks, eliminating a much of the leadership of Iran and the IRGC, obliterating their air defenses, their ballistic missiles program, their drone programs, their naval fleet, these are significant steps that were taken to eliminate the threat posed by a nuclear Iran. And for many of my colleagues who have said for years that Iran could not get a nuclear weapon, that action must be taken to prevent them from doing so. It seems for some of them those were hollow and empty words and they didn't actually mean it.
President Trump took decisive action last year to go after three of their nuclear facilities. He eliminated much of their leadership in this operation with Israel and has taken aggressive measures to go after their ballistic missiles program, which if allowed to continue producing ballistic missiles at the rate that they were, it would have made it almost impossible to stop their nuclear ambitions. Congressman, let me just back to the point, it sounds like you're saying you agree that the president would need to see congressional approval if this war goes beyond 60 days. But let me ask you about new funding after the 60 to 90-day window, which is part of the War Powers Act.
But would you vote for new funding for war that Congress has not approved? Look, Congress has continually funded military operations. There's an appropriations process to do that. We will go through that process.
The administration released its budget. That is not going to be the final budget where appropriations numbers, as we saw this past January, Congress finalized bipartisan appropriations on 11 of the 12 bills, including the Defense Department. And so we will continue to ensure that our armed forces have the resources that they need to conduct military operations. And so we will go through that process.
So you're a yes. You're a yes. Congressman, you're a yes. You would be a yes for the money.
I mean, yes. I mean, yes for funding our military and ensuring they have the capabilities to perform their operations, absolutely. All right. Let me move now to the funding fight over the Department of Homeland Security, which has been shut down now for 50 days, the longest partial government shutdown in US history.
There appears to be a plan to reopen the government. There were days of disagreements between Republican leaders. The Senate did pass a bill. Now it appears as though House Speaker Mike Johnson is on board with trying to get that pass.
But Congress is not back until April 14th, Congressman. Is that acceptable to wait that long to fully fund the government? Or should House Speaker Mike Johnson call everyone back this week and get the government reopened? Kristen, what's not acceptable is that for this fiscal year, Democrats have shut down the Department of Homeland Security for over 90 days, not paying FEMA, not paying the Coast Guard, not paying the Secret Service, and not paying critical operations within the Department of Homeland Security.
The fact is Democrats made a very calculated decision to shut down the department because they do not want to enforce our immigration laws. Here is an example of not enforcing criticism. This is critical. Here is an example of not enforcing our immigration laws.
An 18 year old girl in my district, Sheridan Gorman, was killed in Chicago after an illegal immigrant was allowed to enter into the United States during the Biden administration. He was captured. He was detained. He was released.
He went to Chicago. He committed a crime. He was arrested under Chicago's disastrous criminal justice laws. He was released back out onto the street and he executed this 18 year old girl.
Democrats do not want to fund ICE and Customs and Border Patrol. And what will happen is individuals like Jose Medina will be allowed to enter into the country and kill innocent Americans. That is wrong. I will not stand for it.
And that is why we are pushing back against this. Let me just get back to the question though, Republicans are in charge of all three branches of government. House Speaker Mike Johnson has the capacity to call everyone back. Does he have a responsibility to do so to bring everyone back to get the government reopened?
Does this not fall to Republicans to do this? Kristen, no, Kristen, we have passed Homeland Security funding four times, four times in the last few weeks and every time Brad has been against it. They're not funding, they're not funding, Kristen, they're not funding the full Department of Homeland Security. They're not funding ICE.
They're not funding Customs and Border Patrols. They say that, oh, we passed funding during reconciliation. And we did for much of the operations, but many people within ICE and Customs and Border Patrol civilians are not being paid. You cannot defund critical elements of our Homeland Security.
And so we are going to go through this process and not only fund the other components of the department, but we are going to ensure that ICE and Customs and Border Patrol are fully funded. That is what the House and Senate Republican leadership are going to put forth as we come back. All right. Well, we'll see how it all unfolds when Congress does come back.
Congressman Lawler, appreciate it. Hope you have a fantastic holiday. Thank you so much. Thanks, Kristen.
Happy Easter. Happy Easter to you. When we come back, Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna joins me next. It's here.
The Ford, it's a big deal. Not yet. The Ford, it's a big deal. Oh, guys, just wait.
The Ford, it's a big deal event is on. Really? Now, hurry into least a 2026 Maverick XLT hybrid all-wheel drive for $197 by weekly at 5.2% APR for 60 months with $29.95 down. That's like $99 a week.
The Ford, it's a big deal event. Visit your Ontario Ford store or 4.ca. Welcome back and joining me now is Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna of California. Congressman, kind of welcome back to me, the press.
Thank you. Happy Easter. Happy Easter, everyone. Happy Easter to you.
I hope you have a wonderful holiday. We appreciate your being here. I have to start by getting your reaction to this rescue mission of the second pilot that was shot down over Iran. Well, I am relieved in what an extraordinary achievement of our troops.
I mean, they really deserve to be commended. But you know what the thing Kristen is, is that the president is really failing them to have a tweet this morning, cursing out and threatening war crimes to be saying that we've destroyed the ballistic missile capacity of Iran and yet having troops flying over that are being shot at. We need to end this war now. We need an immediate ceasefire.
Iran, Israel, and the United States need to stop bombing and have a negotiated settlement. Would you be okay, though, with leaving Iran without the Strait of Vermouth being reopened? President Trump has set that deadline for Monday saying they're going to be significant consequences if it's not reopened. Let me tell you what won't reopen the Strait of Vermouth's threatening war crimes of bombing indiscriminately power plants, cursing at Iran.
What we need is statesmanship like President Obama had. What we need to do is to stop the bombing, have a ceasefire, and then to work with Oman, to work with China, to work with the Gulf allies and European allies to have a solution to allow hormones to be opened. But it's not going to happen by massive escalation. Is there any scenario where you would support new funding if it was determined necessary for the readiness of the military?
No, I'm not supporting new funding. I mean, they're asking for $400 billion. I know you said it came and it represented lower. The answer for every Democrat should be absolutely no, absolutely no.
We don't need to read it. We need to study it. It's $400 billion for a war that we oppose. We could have universal child care for that.
We could have free public college for that. We could pay teachers $60,000 for that. I call a new economic patriot as a Democrat to oppose this funding and say we're actually for the American people. Well, let's talk about the other big news at the White House this week.
President Trump firing Attorney General Pam Bondi, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, says he still wants to hear from Pam Bondi with her deposition scheduled for April 14th. Do you think Pam Bondi still needs to come and testify even though she is now a private citizen congressman? Yes. I mean, if we could chase Hillary Clinton, who hasn't been in office for 20 years, certainly we can get Pam Bondi to explain why she covered up documents, why we haven't had prosecutions.
But Kristin, the most important thing is there need to be two tests for this next attorney general. First, the Senate needs to fight to make sure that they commit to releasing all Epstein files with no redactions other than survivors. And second, they need to begin investigations and prosecutions. There are people like Les Wexner and the Unblack who have allegedly have such horrific abuse that there has not been any investigation.
You have been calling for all of the Epstein files to be released. You've spearheaded that effort, in fact, congressman, what exactly are you going to do in this new phase now that the President's moving toward a new attorney general to make sure that all of the files are released? What can you do? Well, first, we're going to make this the issue for any new attorney general.
And people say, well, okay, they're going to come before the Senate and they may tell the Senate one thing and do something else. Well, then that new attorney general will face the same consequences as Pam Bondi, because they're Republicans on the oversight committee who are insisting on the release of all files. And there are a lot of the survivors who talk to me who text me to this day saying, why aren't these people being prosecuted? So I'm going to continue to work in a bipartisan coalition as Thomas Massey and I have with Nancy Mays, with Lauren Bobert, with other people on oversight like Tim Burchide, hold this Epstein class accountable and make sure the new attorney general actually follows the law.
Let me ask you, because you've asked for King Charles to meet with Epstein survivors when he visits the United States later this month. And the same request came from the family of Virginia Dufres. She's, of course, a survivor of the Epstein's abuse. She died by suicide tragically.
Last year, as you know, former Prince Andrew was stripped of his royal titles over his associations with Epstein. What exactly are you hoping and thinking that Epstein survivors will get from a conversation with the king? Well, the Epstein survivors want this, not just Virginia Dufres family, but other survivors. They want someone powerful to acknowledge that what they've been through.
They want them to be, have justice for people who abuse them. And actually Britain has been ahead of where we have been. They've been prosecuting Mendelssohn and prosecuting the former Prince Andrew. And the king has an opportunity to say, look, the modern British monarchy isn't going to be with the Epstein class, isn't going to just be fighting for the rich and powerful.
We are going to stand with these survivors. It would be an extraordinary moment. It would be extraordinary. Do you have any indication that that is something that is going to happen?
Well, I get a long interview in the Times this morning, which the ambassador and others tell me the king reads. So I'm hoping he will really do it. If he doesn't have to discuss the details of any of the cases, it would be an extraordinary moment. And it would mean a tremendous amount to the survivors.
All right. I do want to ask you, here we are in the midst of the midterms. You're someone who's been quite outspoken. You have made several appearances on a show hosted by socialist commentator Hassan Piker.
Some of your fellow Democrats, though, have raised alarms about his views. Here are two members of a left-leaning think tank. This is how they put it. They wrote, quote, no left-wing agitator is more influential and extreme than twitch streamer Hassan Piker.
He's referred to ultra-orthodox Jews as inbred, employee anti-Semitic dog whistles, bloodthirsty, violent pig dog against an anti-homoss viewer of his stream, compared liberal Zionists to liberal Nazis and said Hamas is a thousand times better than the Israeli state. Now, Hassan Piker says some of his comments have been taken out of context and he largely stands by them. Do you have any regrets about appearing on his show? None.
And I would go again. But I, of course, condemn those comments. I mean, I'd describe Hamas as a terrorist state. And we need to unequivocally condemn anti-Semitism.
But Hassan Piker was at the DNC in 2024 covering Vice President Harris. What should the standard of the Democrats be? Should we not go on Theobon? Should we not go on Sean Ryan?
Should we not go on Joe Rogan? Should we just have these charity tests of canceling folks? The lesson of the last election is we've got to be out there. We've got to engage.
It's a complex, messy, multiracial democracy. I will defend my views. But the people who are saying don't engage will cost us future elections. Do you run the risk of legitimizing some of those views by appearing on his show?
How do you answer that? He's got millions of followers. He'll have millions of followers with a Rogan and coach on a show or not. The point is that we should go on and have tough conversations.
You know, I respect Rahm Emanuel. Rahm Emanuel says he'll go on. And if he makes a comment that I disagree with, then I will push back right there. So I think the test should be what you say.
If someone is going on these programs and not pushing back against anti-Semitism, it isn't fine. But you know, I haven't done the background check on you, Chris. And I'm sure there are no present comments. I've not said anything like that.
I can assure you that. Where do you draw the line, Congressman? Would you appear on, for example, a right-leaning show, Alex Jones, for example, who has made controversial comments that have enraged people hurt people deeply in some instances? Look, there is obviously a line.
And I probably wouldn't appear on Alex Jones. But the point is I don't think that that line should be with Hassan Piker, who has millions of hours. And largely what his view has been, has been critical of the blank check that we gave Netanyahu in the war in Gaza. Now, I don't agree with every one of his statements.
And it's a judgment call. But well, here's what I will say, Chris. And the Democratic Party has been too reluctant to get out there, to mix it up, to engage. And we should be on actually doing more of these things.
We should have more interviews during 2024. You know, Vice President Vance was one of like three Sunday shows in a row. I was like, where are folks? We've got to be out engaging in the media, out engaging in podcasts, out engaging in communities and offering our vision going forward.
Okay, you're obviously someone who's getting a lot of buzz for 2028. Have you made that decision yet? Focus first on 2026. We're going to win.
We've got to stop Trump's corruption and lawlessness. But I have an economic vision, a vision of what we're going to do with AI to prevent job loss, a vision of what we're going to do, economic patriotism to create jobs across this country, lower costs. And that needs to be what the Democrats are focused on. So not really get out, Congress is what I hear.
I've got an economic vision, but we've got to win first for the house. All right. Well, listen, thank you so much for being here. I hope you have a great Easter holiday.
Thank you, Congressmen. When we come back, moonshot America's mission to deep space for the first time in more than 50 years. We'll hear from the astronauts on board and from the past meet the press minute is next. Stay with us.
This is the magnificent accomplishment to be up here to see the moon to see the earth and to know that we are between those two celestial bodies. And you can see it when you look out the window. The earth is almost in full eclipse. The moon is almost in full daylight.
And the only way you could get that view is to be halfway between the two entities. It's just it is truly awe inspiring up here. Welcome back. Those were the extraordinary words of one of the four astronauts on the Artemis II mission, speaking with NBC's Tom Costello as they launched into space this week, the first crewed mission into deep space since Apollo 17 in 1972.
The 10 day lunar flyby mission will take them farther past the moon than humans have ever traveled. As the United States once again pushes the boundaries of space exploration in the new century, it's a reminder that questions about the value of these missions are nothing new. Back in 1963, the first American to orbit earth, John Glenn, was asked on me the press to defend the value of space exploration and why it was worth taxpayer dollars. Have you ever had any doubts about the importance of getting to the moon?
Well, I think all of us have to consider these things very thoroughly. Certainly Congress does because they're right in the middle of the budget hearings now, of course. I don't think we can pinpoint the worth of this really. I know that the race aspects have received at least their due credit.
I think that basically this is an exploration and I don't think we know really until the exploration is completed, whether it's going to be completely worthwhile or not. I certainly think it will be. But I don't think we can really pinpoint every answer until we complete the exploration. And I'd like to get your own personal opinion on this.
You've risked your life and you've devoted your energy and your time in this race to get to the moon. I knew yourself convinced beyond question that it's worth doing and why. Well, yes, I am. I wouldn't be in the position I'm in.
Remarkable to hear from him. When we come back, Attorney General Pambondi is out. Could more cabinet members be in jeopardy? The panel is next.
Welcome back. The panel is here. Susan Glasser, Staff Writer for the New Yorker, Jay Johnson, Former Secretary of Homeland Security under President Obama and Mark Short, Former Trump Director of Legislative Affairs. Welcome to all of you.
Happy Easter to all of you. Thank you for being here. Happy Passover Susan. Let me start with you.
In his speech this week, President Trump said Iran had been eviscerated and is no longer a threat. Then on Friday, that F-15 was shot down. Both pilots remarkably have now been recovered. But what do you make of where the war is right now?
Yeah, that's exactly right. I think we're seeing this extraordinary gap between the incredible capabilities of the U.S. military, launching this remarkable operation, rescuing this service member after two days on the run. It's an amazing story.
But in a way, it also highlights the incredible gap between the reality of the situation and the remarkably contradictory and at times very untruthful accounts of the war that President Trump has given including in this 19-minute speech to the nation the other day, we still don't have a clear sense of what the war games are and definitely not what an endgame is, especially the biggest consequence of Trump's war in Iran has been the closure of the Strait of War moves, which accounts for something like 20% of the world's energy. Iran has a chokehold over it. Donald Trump suggested the other night that he was willing just to walk away and leave that for someone else's problem. It's hard to call that a victory if that is what he pursues.
Secretary Johnson weigh in on that point and how you see the F-15 getting shot down, impacting the trajectory of this war. If at all does President Trump need to retaliate in some way or does he just keep his side chemistry from us? Well, first of all, the events of the last couple of days reminded me of 25 years ago. I was General Counsel of the Air Force.
I got a ride in F-15 in the back seat. I remember being strapped in and I asked somebody, what is this lever right next to my thigh and I'm sure that's to eject. I suggest you not touch that. So I did the ride like this.
This operation for the first pilot and the second pilot was a remarkable exercise demonstration of US military courage, technology, power. I would encourage the President and the Secretary of Defense, consistent with operational security, share as much of that with the American public so that the American public can appreciate what goes into it. This kind of operation was more complicated than the Bin Laden operation, for example. I'm not sure any of that.
I'm not sure any of that justifies a $1.5 trillion budget request. But still, this was remarkable and I think Americans deserve to see a lot more about it. I also believe that going forward, the President needs to provide a much more coherent explanation of the sacrifice he is asking of Americans. On the one hand, as Susan points out, he said Wednesday, we're getting almost no oil from the Strait of Hormuz, yet price of the pump in Northern New Jersey is over $4 a gallon in Southern California, it's over $6 a gallon, and he is threatening to take action to reopen.
So he needs to provide a much more coherent explanation for what's going on and what the sacrifice is that he's asking of Americans. Mark, do you agree with that? And Susie Wiles, Chief of Staff, told Time magazine this week she had concerns that President Trump had a rose-colored view based on what aides were giving him in terms of information and updates about the status of this war? I think he has a clear eye view of the status of this workers and I think he gets his information beyond his White House as you know.
He talks to you frequently. He talks to plenty of folks in the media. He talks to a lot of people. And so I don't doubt that he has a clear eye view.
I think that Iran has been a war with the United States for 47 years. They've killed many innocent Americans. I think the world changed on October 7th, 2028, because at that point Israel decided they're going to take matters in their own hands. I think that the President heading into these next 48 hours, he understands leverage better than most people do.
He understands that Iran's leverage right now is the Strait of Hormuz. His leverage is having the most powerful armed forces the world has ever assembled. And I think you're going to see that. You're going to see that in the next 24 to 48 hours.
And that's why, you know, when he tweets out this morning, I think there's a lot of commentary that it looks deranged. It looks juvenile. It's not. It's the President is basically sending a message.
We could disagree with not as presidential. We could disagree with a statement like, but it's not accidental. It's basically him wanting an arena to think he's deranged because he's planning something here in the next 24 to 48 hours. Okay.
This is all happening against the backdrop of new turmoil within his cabinet here in Washington. Susan, he fired his attorney general, Pam Bondi, one of his most loyal servants. Do you get the sense that the dam has broken? It was a lot more stable in this second term.
I mean, the first term he was getting rid of cabinet members left and right. But we haven't seen that in this second term. But do you think the dam has broken? We'll be next.
Well, I mean, look, Donald Trump, if, you know, your signature line is your fire, then obviously, you know, he's somebody who's not hesitant over time to get rid of people. And, you know, Mark may understand this better than I do, but you know, Donald Trump, when he gets back into a corner and right now, Kristen, he's in a pretty bad position. Not only is his war going very much not according to plan regardless of what he says, I mean, he's told this that it was 100% destroyed around the military capability, well, then they wouldn't be able to shoot down American fighter jets. His unpopularity has really taken him to new levels.
CNN had a poll the other day that had 64% on popularity. That's basically as much disapproval as any president. And for Trump in a corner, I think that's when he escalates, that's when he's willing to do things like fire the Attorney General. And again, Pam Bondi, will she be remembered?
I think she will be remembered as a person who did more damage in a short period of time to the United States Justice Department than anyone we could possibly imagine. Secretary Johnson weigh in on that point. And the fact that there is no head of DHS right now at a time when DHS is shut down, and does that do real damage? Yes, I'm concerned that these perpetual shutdowns do long term damage to aviation security, counterterrorism, cyber security.
Last Sunday, Senator Langford told you he was sponsoring the Prevent Government Shut Down Act. I support that. It's a bill that would, if you run out of time, if they go past October 1, automatically revert to a continuing resolution at last year's funding levels. The detractors say, well, that takes away all our leverage, and it promotes complacency.
On the other hand, a piece of legislation like that also says, we're limiting your congressional travel. In other words, you can't go home until you finish your job. I think in concept, that's a good idea, because we're getting into these shutdown modes year after year, more often than once a year. We have to decouple policy disagreements in Congress with funding.
The most basic function of Congress is keep the lights on in front of the government. And there is this perception that something is broken, because we keep seeing these shutdowns. Mark, talk about this new moment in the Trump administration. Do you think more heads are going to roll?
Who do you think could be next to? Are you watching right now? I think that for everyone around the president, they're expendable to him. And so, you know, I think we often ask the question, like, well, why was why was Pam on your place?
She did everything she did. Same with Kristi. No, but if you get to the reach of point that you're no longer useful and in fact, you become embarrassment, then it's time to go. And he hates to have his people around him mocked.
I think that's that's the situation with those two. I certainly think that once this, you know, bandy's been ripped. I think you could see more in the coming days. I don't know exactly when, but I think that at some point reaches he feels like this person no longer useful to me.
Then he'll make a change. Okay. All right, guys. Thank you so much for being here on this Easter Sunday.
Great conversation. We really appreciate it. That is all for today. Thank you for watching.
Have a very happy Easter and pass over to all those who celebrate. We will be back next week because if it's Sunday, it's meet the press. It's here. The Ford, it's a big deal.
Not yet. The Ford, it's a big deal. Oh, guys. Just wait.
The Ford, it's a big deal event is on. Really? Now. Hurry up to least the 2026 Maverick XLT Hybrid all-wheel drive for $197 by weekly at 5.29% APR for 60 months with $29.95 down.
That's like $99 a week. The Ford, it's a big deal event. Visit your Ontario Ford store or Ford.ca.