As the day wraps up, get this scoop on what's been happening with Here's the Scoop, a new podcast from NBC News with me your host, Jasmine Vesugian. We'll take a deep dive into the day's top stories with NBC News' trusted journalist. It's a fresh take, a sharp, thoughtful, hand-ins informative bringing you closer to the headlines and conversations that are shaping our world. On the front page, the Zeitgeist, here's the scoop from NBC News.
Listen daily on Spotify. Hey everyone, I'm Dylan Dryer, co-host of The Third Hour of Today and Mom to Three Wild Boys. I've learned a lot in my years as a parent, mostly that I don't have it all figured out yet. And I'm not the only one.
This is my new podcast, The Parent Chat. Each week I sit down with someone new for honest conversation and real-world advice about parenting. I am over here just like winging it. Hey, I'm just trying not to screw my own kids up.
I'm not giving you advice on how much screw yours up. Here's The Parent Chat on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts. This Sunday, revenge, politics. Former President Trump sets off alarms about what his return to the White House could look like.
You would never abuse power as retribution against anybody, except in day one. Plus, abortion fight. The Texas Supreme Court temporarily blocks a pregnant woman from an emergency abortion. There's no outcome here that I take home with a healthy baby girl, you know, so it's hard.
Will the state force her to continue her pregnancy and new charges? President Biden's son Hunter is indicted for the second time this year. Nine new criminal counts, including tax evasion and filing false returns. What will be the political impact?
Plus, under fire, the president's of three elite universities facing backlash after their testimony at a congressional hearing on anti-Semitism. And now the president of the University of Pennsylvania has resigned. Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate pens rules or conduct? Yes or no?
If the speech becomes conduct, it can be harassment. Yes. Conduct meaning committing the act of genocide? The answer is yes.
My guest this morning, Republican Senator Mitt Romney of Utah and Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut joining me for Inside An Analysis R. NBC News senior White House correspondent, Kaleo Donald, Jonathan Martin of Politico, Democratic Polster Cornell Belcher, and Lonnie Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution. 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. In many ways, this week has felt like an inflection point with Israel's wargance to mass intensifying and claiming more lives. And tensions boiling over here at home about how to address hate speech.
Adding to the mix with less than a week to go before lawmakers leave Washington, there is still no deal on Israel and Ukraine aid. NBC News has learned that the White House is expecting to ramp up its outreach to Capitol Hill this week, but a senior administration official is making it clear the engagement will depend on having a clear framework on border negotiations to work from. And that hasn't happened yet. Earlier this week, President Biden signaled he is ready to make a deal.
I am willing to make significant compromises on the border. We need to fix the broken border system. It is broken. In a new Wall Street Journal poll, just 27% approve of the president's handling of securing the border, 64% disapprove.
And he's he news has also learned a number of Hispanic and Latino members of Congress, as well as advocacy groups are becoming increasingly concerned that President Biden may strike a deal with Republicans on immigration that they find unacceptable in order to secure passage of his Ukraine and Israel package. The fear, according to one Capitol Hill Democrat, the president will accept border policy changes proposed by Republicans that are quote, unimaginably cruel. Now, looming over all of it, the 2024 race for the White House, a new controversial comments by former President Donald Trump. In a Fox News interview this week, he was pressed several times to say categorically that he would not abuse his presidential power if elected to a second term.
Mr. Trump declined to give it an aisle. You are promising America tonight. You would never abuse power as retribution against anybody.
Except for day one. Except for day one. Meaning I want to close the border and I want to drill. That's not, that's not, that's not retribution.
I'm going to be, I'm going to be good on the kids. I love this guy. He says you're not going to be a dictator, are you? I said, no, no, no other than day one.
And joining me now is Republican Senator Mitt Romney of Utah. Romney, of course, was a Republican nominee for president in 2012. Senator Romney, welcome back to me. The press, thank you for being here.
Happy to join you, Kristin. A lot of headlines to get to, but let's start with that Texas abortion case, the state Supreme Court, as you know, put a hold on a lower court's decision to allow Kate Cox to have what her doctors say would be a medically necessary and potentially life-saving abortion. Now, her fetus has been diagnosed with a fatal condition. And if she carries it to term, Dr.
Say, it could jeopardize her ability to have more children in the future, something that she says she very much wants. What is your reaction? And should Kate Cox have the ability to terminate her pregnancy? Well, I'm not going to stand in for the courts.
They're going to evaluate the evidence. I am pro-life, but people like me that are pro-life also believe that when a woman's life is in danger, the opportunity for an abortion should be apparent for her. So we'll see what the court ultimately gets to, but recognize after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and the decision went back to the elected officials in the various states.
There are a lot of parameters and nuances that haven't sorted through yet. That's going to happen in Texas and other places, and ultimately we're going to find a settled understanding. And as you're indicating, you did support overturning Roe v. Wade, but was this what you imagined when you supported Roe v.
Wade being overturned that a woman who'd been told by her doctors that she needs an abortion potentially to save her own life would be denied one? Well, I think the question here will be whether or not in fact her life is at risk. And if it's at risk, then I think under Texas law, although I'm not an expert in Texas law, under Texas law, she'll be allowed to have an abortion. But each day he's going to have to make this decision.
And, you know, stepping back, I think you have to recognize, when you have an issue, that the nation is divided on, particularly when it's a moral issue. And when people feel it's a moral wrong to have an abortion, another feels that it should be a moral right for women to be able to choose. And it's setting like that. You don't want to have a small group decide to impose their will on everybody else.
There's got to be some kind of meeting towards the middle. That hasn't happened yet. I hope that does happen in Texas and every other state. And ultimately, that's the way America works.
We can't have people pulling each other apart. And insisting that they have to have 100% of what they want, and the other side gets nothing but what they want. Well, and speaking of that, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is fighting the lower court's decision, is threatening criminal prosecution for anyone who helps Kate Cox get an abortion, including her doctors. Does that go too far?
Do you think that her doctors should be punished if the court rules that she is entitled to the abortions? Well, certainly in Texas, as in every other state, they're going to follow the law. But I think in many cases, politicians play to their base, play to the crowd. In this case, let the courts adjudicate what the parameters are going to be of abortion in Texas and elsewhere.
And ultimately, this has got to be settled, not by one side again, imposing its will on everybody else, but both sides working together, where each gets something. And that hasn't happened yet. Okay, let's turn to those comments that we just played by former President Donald Trump. As you heard, he said he would not be a dictator, except for day one.
At an event in New York last night, he tried to downplay that. But what was your reaction to hearing those words, Senator? Do you believe him? You know, when I was a kid, there was something called a gumball machine.
You could put a penny in and a gumball would come out. It was automatic. There was no filter put in the penny, out came to gumball. Donald Trump is kind of a human gumball machine, which is a thought or a notion comes in and it comes out of his mouth.
There's not a lot of filter that goes on. There's not a lot of what's the implication. No, no, he just says whatever. I don't attach an enormous amount of impact to the particular words that come out and try to evaluate each one of them.
I do think you can look at his record as President, and particularly in the last months of his presidency, and say, this is a dangerous approach, as an authoritarian approach. That gives me far more concern than him playing to the crowd as he did. Well, given that you're saying he gives these unfiltered responses, we have actually seen him do what he says he's going to do. When he said that he believed the election was going to be rigged before people actually went to the polls.
He went on to question the results, tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Why don't you take him exactly at his word? Oh, I think we agree that we have looked at his behavior and his behavior suggests that this is a person who will impose his will if he can on the judicial system, on the legislative branch and on the entire nation. I mean, when he called people to come to Washington, DC on January 6, that was not a random date.
That was the date when peaceful transfer of power was to occur. He called that on purpose. There's no question he has authoritarian rulings and interests and notions which he will try and impose. That's dangerous for the country.
It was dangerous then. Life was lost. We were embarrassed around the world. I mean, this was a tragedy.
And a number of things he did the last months of his presidency suggest what he do if he were elected again. I want to drill down on you on just how dangerous as you say you perceive former President Trump to be Liz Cheney. Put this into dire terms this week. She told my colleague Savannah Guthrie, quote, there's no question Trump would refuse to leave office if he's reelected.
She went so far as to say a vote for him, meaning the last election that you ever get to vote in. Do you agree with that assessment? I don't think Donald Trump would want to stay longer than four years. And the reason I say that is because I think he's running for retribution and I think he will have finished his retribution after four years if he's elected.
I don't think he particularly likes being around the White House. I think he'd rather be back at Mar-a-Lago or other properties of his. But he wants to show that he's not a loser. He won.
And he wants to go after the people who were tough on him. So I think he'll be finished after four years and go back to other occupations. Given everything that we have heard from former President Trump, what do you think a second Trump term would look like? Well, I think if you can look at the last few months of his presidency, you'd suggest that that's the kind of thing you might see that he would not have the generals around him as he did last time.
People of judgment and experience offering advice. And in some cases restraining his impulses. Instead, he would have people around him encouraging his impulses and perhaps adding to them. And I'm afraid you'd find the nation more divided.
Look, our nation doesn't need to be divided right now. A campaign based on anger and hate may win at the ballot box temporarily, but it tears the country apart. The day the former President said that we are at greater threat for what is within. I think that was in some respects a self-own because what's within, if he would become elected President again, is a campaign of retribution and anger.
And hey, that's not what America is based on. America was based on the idea of in God we trust and united we stand, divided we fall. Divided nation is not the nation America is intended to be. Alright, well let's move on to Hunter Biden and the headlines around that.
As you know, he was indicted on nine new tax charges this week. The second time he has been indicted by the special counsel this year alone. His lawyer said that if his name was anything other than Biden, the charges would not have been brought. What's your reaction to that?
Well, if his name were anything other than Biden, he wouldn't have been able to bill millions of dollars from foreign entities. So let's start there. And not only did he take all this money from foreign entities trading on his father's name, which is ugly and unsavory. He then didn't pay taxes according to the prosecutors.
We'll see if they can improve that case. But if they can, he violated US law and should be severely punished for having done so. As you know, House Republicans have signaled that they may vote as early as this week on an impeachment inquiry into President Biden. This like fact that they haven't shown yet a direct link between Hunter Biden's business dealings and President Biden.
Have you seen any evidence that President Biden has committed high crimes and misdemeanors? No, I don't see any evidence of that at all. I think before you begin an impeachment inquiry, you ought to have some evidence, some inclination that there's been wrongdoing and so far there's nothing of that nature that's been provided. So are you opposed to the impeachment inquiry?
Well, if I were in the House, I'd vote against it. Unless they were able to bring forward evidence that suggested there were a high crime or misdemeanor that had been committed. But so far, that hasn't been the case. Look, fortunately, for most people, we're not responsible for the misdeeds of our kids and grandkids and great-grant kids.
Nothing in my family I'm embarrassed about. But President Trump's, actually President Biden's son Hunter is obviously a very unsavory person and has had some extremely damaging personal foibles, including a drug habit and so forth. That's not President Biden. And we're not going to impeach someone because of the sins of their kids.
Okay. Let's talk about that aid package on the Hill, which is under a lot of debate, as you know. The Senate has one week left to negotiate this aid package for Israel and Ukraine. Republicans are holding a hard line on border security.
What are the implications of not passing aid to Ukraine right now, Senator? Well, I don't know specifically how quickly the money has to get to Ukraine. The armament has to get to Ukraine whether we can wait until January. But I can't say just a couple things.
One is it's not just Republicans that are holding a hard line. It's Democrats are holding a hard line. And the other side can move and can get this done. And here's the position of my side and our side.
And that is we have gone from one to two thousand encounters, illegal encounters at the border a day under the three prior presidents, under Bush, Obama and Trump, one to two thousand a day. Now we're seeing 10 to 12,000 a day. As Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman said, we're basically seeing Pittsburgh show up at the border every month. All right.
We're at a rate of incursions into the country of about four million a year. That's larger than the population of 24 of our states. So we want to solve that to secure the border. I just saw the president say that we've got to secure the border.
He's right. So any effort that doesn't do that will be rejected by Republicans. We want to get it back to the level that existed under the three prior presidents. And I guess, and you're right, I know that this is a priority for Republicans.
And you're right, President Biden said he's willing to negotiate. It was described to me. You have to get through all of the disagreement around the border to even start addressing the Ukraine and Israel. He said, taking a step back, what message do you think it sends to President Putin?
To President Xi when they see that there are a growing number of Republicans who are opposed to writing what they say is a blank check to Ukraine. Well, we're not going to write a blank check. We're going to evaluate exactly how the money is spent. What we're going to do is provide Ukraine with the weapons they need to defend themselves against a brutal invasion by Putin, who is a thug and a murderer.
So that's what we're going to do. Now, I think they realize, I think Putin and Xi recognized that democracy is messy, that our system is not authoritarian. We don't have a king. We don't have a dictator.
They're dictators. They like to make a big deal out of the process that we go through. But you know what, it has worked for America in the past. It will work in the future.
We'll get through this. And ultimately, don't forget, the president was the one that put the border and the border security issue as part of this package. This is not a Republican issue. He brought it to the front.
And that's why we're dealing with it. I just very quickly, I mean, you were the first person to call attention to Russia. What you described are number one geopolitical. So are you comfortable with your party's position on Ukraine?
Well, each individual makes their own posture known on a particular issue. My only is that it's very much in America's interests to see Ukraine's successful and to provide the weapons that Ukraine needs to defend itself. Anything other than that would be a huge dereliction of our responsibility, I believe, to the world of democracy, but also to our own national interests. Because if Putin thinks he can invade his neighbor with impunity and that we're just going to step back, we're going to say, oh, we're tired.
We're not going to keep on helping. Then guess what? He's not going to stop. And he's going to go into a NATO nation that's going to draw NATO and our troops into war with Russia.
This is an America's interest to make sure that Ukraine puts up a great fight. Senator Romney, thank you. Stay with us. We have a lot more after the break, including we'll send it around the Indo-Romean door to Canada in the 2024 race.
Plus, three top university presidents are under fire for their responses to a congressional hearing on anti-Semitism. More with Senator Romney after the break. Stay informed with the NBC News app. Breaking news is just coming in moments ago.
Watch, read, and listen throughout your day. And now unlock even more with the subscription. It's the best of NBC News with fewer ad interruptions, including ad free articles, podcasts, and full NBC News shows. Plus, deeper access and exclusive content.
Let's just take a step back. It's more context and clarity from the reporters you trust. Download the NBC News app now and subscribe for more. It's about anti-Semitism yet.
It's about hate in all of its forms. Does Congress have a role to play in addressing the issue of hate on college campuses? Should Congress be more engaged in what's happening? Yeah, not by creating law, but by creating example.
And recognize that the people we choose as our leaders are not just going to write law and effectuate policy. They're also setting the character of the country. That's one of the reasons I have such concern about President Trump, which is he has affected the character of America. Look, we are a diverse nation.
Whether people want to be that way or not. We're highly diverse, not just by ethnicity, but also by religion, by sexual orientation. I mean, there are a whole series of dimensions in which we're diverse. That's who we are.
We may not like it. That's who we are. And the only way a nation as diverse as us is able to be strong is if we recognize the divine nature of humanity, we recognize one another, their faults, and we don't attack each other. Tearing out other Americans, retribution, revenge, anger.
That is not the future of a great country. Let's turn out to the 2024 race as you bring up former President Trump. Why haven't you endorsed a candidate yet, Senator? And do you plan to do so?
Well, because if I endorse them, I'd be the kiss of death. I should like to endorse the person I like least right now. I'm not going to be endorsing President Trump, obviously. I made that very clear.
Look, Christie has done a terrific job so far. I think his being in the race has kept Donald Trump from coming to the debates. Because I think Donald Trump recognized if he went to the debate with Christie, Christie would reveal him for what he was, and Trump would be badly hurt. So we stayed out.
But Nikki Haley, she's rising. Right now, I think she's the only one that has a shot becoming the nominee other than President Trump. It's a long shot in her part, but she's the one that has a shot. So we'll say...
Do you think it's time for other candidates, not Nikki Haley, since you think she has the momentum right now to drop out of the race to start consolidating their support, given what you're saying? Yeah, I don't think it's my role to tell other people when they should get out. It's too big of a sacrifice and investment by people and their supporters to be running for President for somebody to come in and say, hey, you want to get out? Yeah.
But I hope it continues to consolidate, and it becomes at some point a two-person race. But even then, I think Donald Trump is a prohibitive favorite. Let me ask you a little bit more about what Liz Cheney said. She said the country would be better run by Democrats than by Donald Trump and the Niagara Republicans.
That's not an exact quote, but that's effectively what she has said. Do you agree with her there? Well, President Biden's policies have not worked for America. You know, I know that the economic statistics are looking better right now, but the American people are hurting.
As they go into the grocery store and bread cuss $5 a loaf, they recognize that that's the result of Biden's policy, so I'm not going to say Biden's policies are good for America. There's some Democrats out there that I think would do a better job. I hope someone besides President Biden is the nominee of the Democrat Party, we'd see who that might be. Well, you wrote your wife's name in for President 2016, and 2020.
If there is, in fact, a Biden and Trump rematch. Would you vote for President Biden, given what you're saying about former President Trump? Well, the Joe I would like to vote for is Joe Manchin, and I'm not going to tell you right now who I'm going to vote for. Fortunately, for me, I'm in a state that's not a swing state.
It's not a state in contest. Whoever I vote for, Utah, Utah is going to be for Donald Trump. So it's kind of irrelevant, but I typically vote for for Ann for that reason. Do you think that Senator Manchin is going to run?
No, I don't, but I wish he would. I wish he'd be the Democratic nominee. And by the way, there are a couple of Democrats. I might think that it would be a better nominee.
I think than President Biden. Just to put a fine point on it, though, it sounds like you're not ruling out voting for President Biden. I'm not going to describe who will rule out other than President Trump. I just, you know, you have a setting where you have someone who's too old, and someone else who's a little too nutty.
And where are you going to vote on that basis? And by the way, in my view, bad policy, we can overcome as a country. We have in the past. Yeah.
Bad character is something which is very difficult to overcome. Well, let me ask you, if Donald Trump is the Republican nominee but loses to President Biden, do you think the certification process will be peaceful or are you concerned that it may not be? Oh, I think it'll be peaceful. I don't think there's any question, but that Vice President Kamal Harris will not try and reject electors from states that are certifying President Biden as one.
I just don't think America is going to erupt, but I know there'll be some people who hope that would occur. Well, let's talk about you and your future, your decision to leave the Senate. You've been adamant you're not going to run for president, so I won't ask you that question, but what is next for you, Senator? Well, I came here to ask you whether perhaps a position here at NBC News to be available for me.
I don't have the answer to that. I will continue to work to keep America the hope of the Earth and the hope of the people in this country. And whether that's by lecturing in universities or going around the country and speaking or writing another book or two, or maybe just getting behind some of the ambitions these days. My wife is leading an extraordinary Center for Neurologic Research.
There's, I mean, life is so fantastic. It's so wonderful being alive. And I don't worry about my next chapter. Alright, well, I have to ask you about your dad, George Romney, who was, of course, the governor of Michigan.
He also ran for president. You have called him your life's hero. What would he think about the state of the Republican Party today? Oh, he would not understand it.
He would not believe it. The party's very different than it was. Look, and I'm reading a lot of history. I'm reading a book right now called The Age of Acrimony.
It talks about the American politics within the 1800s and the early 1900s. Holy cow, the parties were so different back then. When I ran in 2012, the party's different than it is today. President Trump became our nominee.
We got all sorts of new people who've been Democrats forever that flowed into the Republican Party. And a lot of people left. And so it's a different party today than it was then. I think he'd be surprised to see how much it's changed.
And I think the social and cultural division that you're seeing today would be of concern to him. But don't forget, when he was a governor, we had race riots. Even his home state of Michigan, Detroit. So, you know, we're wrestling with some of these divisive issues even today.
Alright, Senator Mitt Romney, you're welcome back anytime. Thank you so much for being here. Really appreciate it. When we come back, Republicans are demanding changes to border security before a Green Descent military aid to Ukraine and Israel.
Is a deal within reach? Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, the lead negotiator joins me next. Welcome back. A bipartisan group of senators restarted border talks on Thursday, offering dim hopes that Congress can pass a broad legislative package that would include aid for Israel and Ukraine before the end of the year.
The president signaled he is ready to compromise. Would you be okay with Democrats willing to put more on border policy to get this current package through? Yes, significant anymore. Particularly by starting off equipping the border capacity that we need on the border, from judges to border security.
And Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, the lead Democratic negotiator in those talks, joins me now. Welcome back to me at the press center. Thanks for having me back. Thank you so much for being here.
So bring us up to speed. What's the very latest on the negotiations? Where do you think stand? So first, I think it's absolutely tragic that Republicans are tying the resolution of maybe the most difficult issue in American politics, immigration, to support for Ukraine and Israel.
Vladimir Putin is delighting right now in Republicans' insistence that we get deal immigration reform. And if we don't, then they are going to allow Vladimir Putin to march into Ukraine and perhaps into Europe. I think this is one of the most dangerous moments that I've ever faced in American politics. And I wish Republicans weren't holding Israel aid and aid to Ukraine hostage to the resolution of immigration reform.
That being said, we are still in the room trying to deal with Republicans with Republican demands. We are not going to put Donald Trump's immigration policies into statute. We're not going to do that. That would be bad for the country.
But we do need to do something to try to resolve this crisis at the border. We have too many people crossing, too many people that don't have valid asylum claims. And if Republicans are serious about trying to control that crisis, we're also still allowing into the country, people who are legitimately fleeing terror and torture and violence, then we can come to a resolution. I want to delve into some of the details with you.
But give us a gut check. How close are you to a deal? Is this going to get done before the New Year, Senator? I mean, right now, Republican demands are unreasonable.
They don't actually get democratic votes. If I were a cynic, I would say that Republicans have decided to tie support for Ukraine to immigration reform because they want Ukraine aid to fail. But I'm not a cynic. And so we are still trying to resolve some pretty big differences that remain.
You don't have the very optimistic that this is going to get done with the handful of days that you have left. We are coming up against the end of the year. And of course, this is a crisis moment for Ukraine. Ukraine is running out of ammunition.
And if we don't solve this in the next few weeks, Vladimir Putin is going to have an opening, an opening to march through the Ukrainian lines to make a move on Kyiv, threatening all of Europe. So this has to be resolved right now, which is why Republicans have to be reasonable. We are not going to solve the entire problem of immigration between now and the end of the year. But we can make a down payment.
We know that based on a reporting the White House is going to get more engaged. The president himself get involved in these negotiations this week. I think the White House is going to get more engaged this week. Of course, when you're talking about something as complicated as more security, you need the White House engaged because you need to know whether they're going to sign the bill and need to understand how the changes you're making are going to be implemented at the border.
So they are and they will get more engaged. Let's talk about some of the same points. I know you're not going to negotiate with me here. But if you could give me a sense of where potential common ground could be, we know that Republicans are asking to toughen the asylum criteria.
We know that they want new restrictions on the use of parole. Are those potential areas of compromise for Democrats? I think the bottom line for Democrats and the bottom line for my constituents is pretty simple. We don't want to shut off the United States of America to people who are coming here to be rescued from dangerous miserable circumstances in which their life is in jeopardy.
That's the best of America is that you can come here to be rescued from terror and torture. So we are not going to support anything that shuts down the border completely to people who are legitimately coming here to have their lives rescued. But we are willing to talk about tightening some of the rules so that you don't have 10,000 people arriving a day. Our resources are not equipped to be able to handle that number of people.
So let's reduce the number of people who are coming here, but let's not shut down the border completely to legitimate claims. Well, Republicans would argue many of them. They're not calling to completely shut down the border. But as you say, to make it tougher to get through, if you look at the poll numbers latest Wall Street Journal poll, she was a whopping 64% of people disapprove of President Biden's handling of the border.
Does that add pressure on you, on Democrats, to get something done here? Well, I'm not paying attention to the politics here. What I know is that the future of the world is at stake. If we fail, if Republicans don't get reasonable in the next 24 to 48 hours, Russia is going to march into Ukraine.
China is going to be given a green light to invade Taiwan. The world for my children is fundamentally different under that scenario. The United States security is at risk. So I am just beside myself.
The Republicans are playing games with the security of the world. I will try to meet them where they are. But this is a very dangerous point. I want to ask you about Ukraine aid.
You are giving these dire warnings here. We have consistently heard you say that. Can an extra $60 billion in aid change the outcome of this war? Or will it just allow Ukraine to continue with the status quo?
It can change the outcome of this war because at the very same time that we are making a renewed commitment to Ukraine, Russia's ability to continue to fight this war is in jeopardy. You look at the revenues from oil sales, so the projections for the next year. Russia is going to have a hard time coming up with the resources necessary to keep this fight going. In the end, will there likely have to be a negotiated solution?
Absolutely. But if we cut off Ukraine now, the outcome is certain. Ukraine loses this war. Maybe not next month, but sometime next year.
Because Europe will not stick with us if the United States abandons Ukraine. This is a decision moment for Ukraine for the United States in the world. I do want to ask you about some of the other headlines this week. Hunter Biden has been indicted again on tax charges.
Do you think the Hunter Biden prosecution is political as his lawyer has contended? Or do you think that it's legally justified? I think this is a very troubled individual who has done things that are worthy of prosecution. And so I look forward to that case continuing.
I think ultimately the American people understand that Hunter Biden is not going to be on the ballot next fall. Joe Biden is going to be on the ballot. And this is a president who has led an economic recovery that has been pretty unprecedented. That's going to be what matters to the American people.
Senator Romney was here and he expressed outrage over the broader issue of Hunter Biden profiting off of his last name. Do you think, Senator, that it is inappropriate for a politician's family member to profit off of their last name? I do, in any case. And frankly, when I look at the Trump family, it seems that they have made an industry out of profiting off of Donald Trump's presidency.
In fact, as soon as Donald Trump was out of the White House, what did his son in law do go and raise billions of dollars from Saudi Arabia? And so I think the American public are going to be very concerned about what has happened inside the Trump family since Donald Trump left the White House. But Senator respectfully, I asked you about the Biden family. Hunter Biden, do you think it's inappropriate that he has apparently profited off his last name?
Could that hurt the president's reelection chances? I think Hunter Biden is going to be held accountable in court for any violations of the law that he's committed to the American public. I'm going to get the chance to watch that play out in real time. What I'm absolutely certain of is that the American public are going to see a distinct contrast between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, but are not going to be interested in a Trump presidency that's going to criminalize abortions, give more handouts to billionaires and the wealthy.
They're going to see President Biden who has invested in the middle class, who has helped this economy recover. That will be the contrast that will matter to the American people. Senator Chris Murphy, thank you so much. Thanks for being here in person.
Really appreciate it. When we come back, will Iowa voters look beyond Trump as their party nominee? What history tells us about how important winning Iowa really is for a presidential campaign? Welcome back.
We're now just five weeks away from the Iowa caucuses and the very first votes of the 2024 presidential cycle. Historically, Iowa hasn't been a great predictor of Republican nominees. Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee all won the state. None of them became their party's nominee.
In 1988, Kansas Senator Bob Dole also won Iowa. The eventual nominee, George H.W. Bush, finished a distant third. Senator Dole joined this broadcast the day before the caucuses.
Can you afford to lose here? Are you finished if you don't finish first? I don't think I'm finished, but I do well here. But I haven't moved since 1980 and I ran in 1980 and it wasn't the neighborhood that made me finish last.
I think it's the fact that I've been dealing with the issues since that time. I have a message to the Iowa voters. And what we want is a signal to go out to Marnites that the Bob Dole message was accepted by a majority of people and went to the Republican caucus. A majority of the people, you're looking for 50% of it?
Well, I mean a plurality, excuse me. I'll call oversight. Can you survive a loss here? Oh, yes.
A loss is a loss. A win is a win. Well, that's certainly a mark to a foul. Yes, it is.
Good, good, it's time. A loss is a loss and a win is a win. Good stuff there. All right.
When we come back, what's the political impact for President Biden as his son faces a new set of criminal charges? The panel is next. Welcome back. The panel is here.
NBC News, senior White House correspondent, Kelly O'Donnell, Jonathan Martin, senior political columnist for Politico, Democratic Polster Cornell Belcher, and Lonnie Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution and former Romney campaign policy director. Thanks to all of you for being here. Kelly, let me start with you. There's this new Wall Street Journal poll, which shows that former President Trump is leading President Biden by four points.
Take us inside Biden world. How concerning is this? And I know within this context, you've got new reporting on how they might use the issue of abortion, which we've obviously been talking about here in 2024. The first reaction is that bad poll numbers are something that is somewhat baked in in the minds of people who are close to the president.
They've seen it before, and then they turn quickly and look at recent elections and say when voters are asked not just respond to a survey, but to cast a ballot, they have done so in ways that match up with some of the president's priorities. We saw it in November in Virginia with the state legislature. We saw it in Ohio with respect to abortion on abortion. The new reporting is that the campaign will more aggressively tie Donald Trump to every instance in America where there is a restriction, a ban on abortion.
When there is abortion in the news, you were talking with Senator Romney about the Texas case to say Ken Paxton, the state attorney general, was endorsed by Donald Trump. And so they want to link Trump in every way to the change in people's lives with respect to abortion. And to then say that is the kind of position you would have when Donald Trump talks about day one, being an authoritarian, and the kind of thing that you would have. Being an authoritarian dictator, they're saying day by day he's becoming more autocratic.
And so if they look at something practical, like abortion, that's a way to get at it. Democracy might be more theoretical for many Americans. And so abortion is a way where they can link him to that day by day. Fascinating.
Jonathan, you heard Mitt Romney a couple of things. It's to come to you. One, he did not rule out voting for President Biden. Number two, he said he'd like to see Joe Manchin run.
Is that realistic? I mean, we've been trying to get an answer out of Joe Manchin. I don't think Joe Manchin is running for president. And I think Mitt Romney is going to have a choice next fall that he's not thrilled about.
But I think ultimately he will come down the side of picking president Biden. It's a matter of how public he is about that, whether or not he tries to avoid the question a few more times between now and then. But that's the option. And by the way, not just Mitt Romney.
I think a lot of what I would call kind of the pre-Trump GOP figures in this country. George W. Bush, Liz Cheney. They're not thrilled about Joe Biden.
But that's going to be the option they have. And I think they're going to be challenging. Especially if President Trump keeps talking in this sort of autocratic fashion of, you don't like Biden policies, but do you really want this as the alternative? Which is why you see so many people like Romney say, maybe they'll be a different Democrat.
Maybe somebody else will emerge like a vote for because they're desperate to not have that Biden Trump option. But that increasingly seems like that is where we're going right now. And so they're going to have to pick. It sure does.
Lonnie Chen, you were the policy director for Mitt Romney when he was running for president. A lot of people want to compare this moment. A lot of Democrats to 2012. They say, hey, remember when former president Obama, I should say, was locked in a fierce fight with Governor Romney.
But is it the same as 2012? I don't think so. I went back and looked at the numbers as an example. In 2012 at this point in that campaign, Barack Obama either had a narrow lead or in some cases he has as much an eight-point lead in a head-to-head against Mitt Romney.
The challenge in this election is really two-fold for the president. I think, first of all, the issues on which he's weakest, the economy integration in that Wall Street Journal poll, happened to be the issues that Americans care most about if you believe that poll. The other challenge he has is that, look, I think this applies to Donald Trump as well. They are both equally disliked to John this point.
If you look at their very unfavorable ratings, these ratings of great intensity sort of saying, who do you really like, who do you really dislike, Donald Trump and Joe Biden are equally disliked with an equal amount of fervor. 50%. It's a remarkable number. This is the election no American wants.
It's not just the elites. Americans don't want this election. Look, I think there are some differences. There's some huge differences between now and 2012.
But I will say this in the public polling. No, actually Mitt Romney was ahead of Barack Obama and the public polling and internal polling. It was different. But let me say this about polling, enough about polling, right?
It's not predictive of what's going to happen in the presidential election. Even though there are a number of polls pointing to the same thing. Listen, this is why we use polling in campaigns. This is what we use polling for in campaign.
We use polling to see what the problem is and how you build a campaign to fix the problem. When I see that 4743 number, I'm not at all concerned about what's going to happen in the future. By the way, I'm actually emboldened because I know quite frankly where Donald Trump's going to be. He gets 4746%.
He wins by his subtraction, not an addition. Now underneath that poll, what you have there is what I call the Obama continuum, right? These younger voters who are not necessarily strongly tied to the Democrat Republican, although they're a lot more progressive on most issues. And that's where Biden right now is suffering the most.
And these are not going to ever be Trump voters. So the campaign they're going to have to build is work to bring those young voters back. They don't vote at all or even more on this or more on providing. You have 10,000 voters or more in Madison, Wisconsin in our Michigan who pull a lever for Jill sign or Cornell West.
That is devastating to Biden's coalition. I'm more worried about their third party voting than I'm worried about Trump doing it. And the campaign tells me that they are aware of that. And so they don't believe that with black and brown voters and young voters, they can just do traditional get out the vote.
They have to do persuasion, active persuasion to remind voters about things like the trouble spots you mentioned, economic issues. But really quick, but also look, it came out and filled with a poll two weeks ago. And this is what actually helps him, right? It's the comparison to Trump.
When I asked African American voters, talk about African American voters, a closing list of what's the greatest threat to African American community inflation crime. The reelection of Donald Trump. Really? So Donald Trump by plurality of African American voters think that's the greatest threat to the African American community, not inflation, not crime.
That's a motivator. We got a new data point in the race, of course, this week, which is that the son of President Biden has been indicted yet again and that Republicans are moving to open impeachment and Korean to President Biden, despite there not being a link yet. Here's what he had to say about that inquiry this week. Can you explain to the Americans that this impeachment inquiry, why are you interacting with so many of your son and brothers for the coefficients?
I'm not going to comment that I did not and assess a bunch of lies. Interacts with the law. I did not. There lies.
Kelly fired up there. We should note those comments were made before Hunter Biden was indicted. What is the strategy to deal with this inside the White House? It's painful.
It's personal. They want to put it in that category. They also say that in 2020, Hunter Biden was a fixture of the Republican campaign. And I think they want to talk about voters able to separate the candidate's son from the candidate.
And they think Republicans are trying to use this to diffuse the legal troubles of Donald Trump. Yeah, finally the Biden White House adviser is going to go to the boss and say, what do you do strategy about yourself? I've been in a conversation with the parties and the waters. That's the challenge that they have.
This is an issue on which they could potentially prosecute Donald Trump. They're going to have to turn this into a referendum on Donald Trump. And if they're going to use the issue, which they want to use, which is the character of Donald Trump, this money is the waters for the White House. And that's the challenge here.
It's really, how do they overcome this? And someone has to speak truth to power on this. Someone has to make that one. I just think what your child does as most parents understand is not money in my waters, right?
That if your child gets in trouble, that's not money in my waters. Here's another thing. Look, don't take it from me. Take it from Chip Roy, right?
Republican, what have House Republicans done that they can run on? Right? Last time I checked, I've been in the focus groups for the last two months. No middle American working mom is bringing up Hunter Biden.
She's bringing up costs. She's bringing up student loans. She's not talking about Hunter Biden. This is the issue they want to.
And yet Republicans are winning on the generic ballot. And yet it's the case that Republicans are winning on the generic ballot. Because of the Internet, what he says, what he says, what he says, how he looks in the presentation that is jarring Americans. Alright folks, we have to leave it there.
This was fantastic. You don't need me here at all. Thank you. That is all for today.
Thank you for watching. Happy Hanukkah. We'll be back next week because if it's Sunday, it's me, the press. As the day wraps up, get the scoop on what's been happening with Here's the Scoop, a new podcast from NBC News with Meet Your Host, Jasmine D'Sougean.
We'll take a deep dive into the day's top stories with NBC News's trusted journalist. It's a fresh take that's sharp, thoughtful, and informative. Bringing you closer to the headlines and conversations that are shaping our world. On the front page of the Zeitgeist, here's the scoop from NBC News.
Listen daily on SiriusXM.