You have a reason to care. You know someone you've lost someone, you've lived it. The darkest times are no match for what we can do together. Join us for the CAMH sunrise challenge from May 25th to 29th.
Canadians are waking up with the sun to raise funds for a future where everyone can access the mental health care they need. The moment they need it. Get up with the sun, show up for camh, and rise up for mental health. Register today at sunrisechallenge Ca.
That's sunrisechallenge ca. This Sunday, mixed signals. The Trump administration's national security team accidentally shares plans for military strikes in Yemen in a group text chat with a journalist. Holy crap.
Nobody was texting war plans. It was a minute by minute accounting of what was about to happen. There was no classified material that was shared. Will anyone be held accountable for this mistake?
I take full responsibility. I built the the group. Someone made a big mistake and added the journalists. It's an embarrassment.
Senator, you need to do better. So I think it's a witch hunt. I wasn't involved with it. I'll talk exclusively to the journalist at the center of the story, Jeffrey Goldberg, the Atlantic's editor in chief.
Plus Republican Senator Mark Wayne Mullen of Oklahoma and Democratic Senator Michael Bennett of Colorado. Plus, driving a hard bargain, a 25% tariff on all cars that are not made in the United States. America's allies respond to Trump's trade war with Canada's prime minister, calling it a direct attack. The old relationship we had with the United States based on deepening integration of our economies and tight security and military cooperations, is over and seeing green.
We need Greenland. How far is President Trump willing to go to try and annex Greenland? It's not a question of do you think we can do without it? We can'.
Joining me for insight and analysis are NBC News chief Washington Correspondent Andrea Mitchell, NBC's senior national politics reporter, Jonathan Allen, Simone Sanders Townsend former chief spokeswoman for Vice President Kamala Harris, and Mike Gutke, former Trump White House communications director. 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 with Kristen Walker. Good Sunday morning.
President Trump is standing by his national security team as the fallout intensifies after top officials mistakenly shared attack plans for US Military strikes in Yemen on the Signal messaging app with a journalist. In an exclusive phone interview on Saturday, the president told me, quote, I don't fire people because of fake news and because of witch hunts. Mr. Trump said he still has confidence In Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and National Security Adviser Mike Walsh.
Just hours ago, President Trump called me to tell me he is, quote, pissed off with Russia's President Putin and threatened to impose secondary tariffs on Russia's oil, quote, if Russia and I are unable to make a deal on stopping the bloodshed in Ukraine. And if I think it was Russia's fault, which it might not be, but if I think it was Russia's fault, I'm going to put secondary tariffs on all oil coming out of Russia. Mr. Trump said 25 tariffs on Russian oil could happen any moment and told me he plans to speak with President Putin this week.
The president told me, quote, I was very angry, pissed off when Putin started getting into the lesson's credibility and started talking about new leadership in Ukraine. On Iran, the president said he's also considering secondary tariffs if Iran doesn't agree to a nuclear deal. Quote, if they don't make a deal, there will be bombing and it will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before. After markets stumbled on Friday and with consumer confidence falling, the president also told me he's not backing down on his tariff plans.
What we're going to be doing is a 25% tariff on all cars that are not made in the United States. If they're made in the United States is absolutely not there. And the president telling me tariffs are, quote, absolutely permanent. And on fears of foreign automakers raising prices, quote, I couldn't care less if they raised prices because people are going to start buying American made cars.
And on his annex, Greenland, the president saying, quote, I never take military force off the table, but I think there's a good possibility that we could do it without military force. The White House is still on defense this weekend after the Atlantic editor in Chief Jeffrey Goldberg says he was added to that signal conversation by Mr. Trump's national security Advisor, Mike Waltz, where details of the plans for an attack on the Houthis in Yemen were shared with him in real time. The chat included the vice president, the defense Secretary, the secretary, Secretary of State, the CIA director, and the Director of National Intelligence.
The explanations for what happened and how serious of a security breach it was have been evolving. I'm sure everybody out there has had a contact where you it was said one person and then a different phone number, but you've never talked to him before. So how's the number on your phone? I'm not an expert any of this but secure.
How's the number on your phone if you have somebody else's contact and Then it. And then somehow nobody was texting war plans. And that's all I have to say about that. Intelligence officials defended the sensitive nature of the content, denying it was classified.
My communications, to be clear, in a signal message group were entirely permissible and lawful and did not include classified information. There was no classified material that was shared. Was there any mention of a target in Yemen? I don't remember mention of specific targets.
Was there any mention, Ms. Gabbard, of a weapon or weapons system? I don't recall specific weapons systems being named. How about anything about timing?
I don't recall specific timing, any mention of any military unit whatsoever, Mr. Ratcliffe? Not that I recall. Mr.
Not that I recall. After the administration insisted there was no classified information on the text chain, Goldberg released the messages that included Defense Secretary Hegseth sharing specific details about when bombs would drop and when US jets would take off. Just 30 minutes before they launched the attack. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz texted that a key target of the attack had been seen walking into his girlfriend's building that had collapsed.
President Trump is privately angry with Waltz, two Republican sources tell NBC News. The Senate Armed Services Committee has requested a formal investigation from the Pentagon's inspector general, but the FBI and the DOJ seem unlikely to investigate the matter, even as pressure mounts for more accountability. There was a crime here and there should be accountability. This White House lies.
It's hypocritical, it's corrupt. So, no, I don't, I don't trust the Fox to investigate the hen house. I'm also puzzled by some of the answers that were given by the DNI at the intelligence hearing. I think everybody's acknowledged, including the White House, that that mistake made.
And what we want to do is make sure that something like that doesn't happen. And voter anger is growing over the issue on display at this town hall in Indiana. Will you demand the immediate resignation of Pete? No, I would recommend it.
And joining me now is the editor in chief of the Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg. Jeffrey, welcome back to MEET the press. Thank you. Thank you so much for being here after an extraordinary scoop and week for you.
We really appreciate it. I want to start with what we've been hearing from administration officials throughout the week. Various excuses, explanations for how you were added to that signal group chat. Take a listen to some of what we heard.
Maybe Goldberg found a way. Maybe there's a staffer, maybe there's a very innocent staffer, but we'll get, I think we'll get to the bottom of it very quickly, and it's really not a big deal. Well, look, a staffer wasn't responsible. And look, I take full responsibility.
I built the, I built the group. And my job is to make sure everything's coordinated. I'm sure everybody out there has had a contact where you. It was said one person and then a different phone number, but you've never talked to him before.
So how's the number on your phone? I'm not an expert in any of. Has a number on your phone, you have somebody else's contact, and then. And then somehow someone sent you that.
Jeffrey, what do you make of those explanations? Well, this isn't the matrix. Phone numbers don't just get sucked into other phones. I don't know what he's talking about there.
You know, very frequently in journalism, the most obvious explanation is the explanation. My phone number was in his phone. Because my phone number is in his phone, he's telling everyone that he's never met me or spoken to me. That's simply not true.
I understand why he's doing it, but, you know, this has become a somewhat farcical situation. There's no, there's no subterfuge here. My number is in his phone. He mistakenly added me to the group chat.
There we go. All right. Well, I do want to draw on your long history of covering national security issues. Throughout the week, the Trump administration said that the information was not classified, that it was not war plans.
And yet, as we just laid out there, the single chat included very specific details about timing, human targets, weapon systems. I know you've been asked this before, Jeffrey, but just to clarify, do you believe the information on that group chain was classified? Well, let me answer it this way. When the texts are coming over as I'm watching them unfold.
It's 11:44am on a Saturday. Pete Hegseth is promising that U.S. warplanes are taking off in 30 minutes to bomb enemy targets that we know are protected by anti aircraft batteries. Okay, so if that's not the most sensitive information, the most secret information in the world, I simply don't know what the meaning of classified or secret or top secret is.
Because American pilots were about to fly into possibly a deadly situation, and the Secretary of Defense is telling everyone on the group chat, which by the way included me, that these pilots are about to go into harm's way. Talking about them going after they come back is a different thing entirely. But letting that information out on a commercial messaging app seems very odd. So I was sort of aghast when I'm, when I'm watching this unfold on my phone.
You know, there's a really striking moment in the text exchange when the vice President argues against launching this attack. I want to read you part of that text. He says, quote, the strongest reason to do this is as POTUS said, to send a message. But I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his mess message on Europe right now.
Do you read that as the vice President disagreeing with President Trump after a decision had actually been made? Right. I not only read it as a disagreement with Trump post decision, I read it as very fraught because what JD Vance is saying in the group chat, which included, as you know, much of the Cabinet, much of the President's Cabinet, he's saying the President doesn't even understand what he's doing here. So I found that, I found that remarkable.
Obviously, given that JD Vance has tried very hard to make sure he's 100% aligned with what Trump says. Here we have a serious, substantial conversation where he's telling members of the Cabinet, members of the President's own Cabinet that no, no, he doesn't even get it. So, so sure. That, that's interesting.
I would have to imagine that that, that caused a little disturbance in the force in the White House. Well, you know, in addition to everything we heard from the administration this week, Jeffrey, we did hear some personal attacks directed at you. I'm going to play some of that, get your reaction on the other side. Somebody I don't even happen to know.
The guy's a total sleazebag. The Atlantic. The Atlantic is a failed magazine. I don't know this guy.
I know him by his horrible reputation and he really is a bottom scum of journalists. So this guy that pedals in garbage, this is what he does. Jeffrey, I don't have to tell you this. The administration has taken legal action against news organizations.
Are you concerned that this administration will come after you? No, I don't get bullied. I'm not worried about that. They're obviously being very, very silly.
There, there's a playbook that. And you know this as a journalist, I'm not the only journalist to be the target of these kind of attacks. When they do something wrong, they go on the attack and they attack the messenger. You know, and the odd thing about this one is I didn't really actually do anything.
I'd like to claim that I was some bold investigative reporter here. All I did was answer a, answer a message request from Mike Waltz on signal and then the rest of it just came on my phone. So even if I had those terrible character traits that they ascribed to me, all I did was simply print what they said. So I don't think the tactic is working.
Sometimes it works. Sometimes people get intimidated. We at the Atlantic are not intimidated by this nonsense. We're going to keep reporting the truth as we see it.
And I just think it' of silly deflection. Finally, last question here, Jeffrey, do you have any regrets, any second thoughts about how you handle this situation at all? No. I mean, I wish that I had not been put in the position to have to release the more sensitive texts, but the only reason I did that was because they said we were lying about what we had and they were trying to cover up what was obviously a massive national security breach.
Journalists, I hope, operate in the public interest. The public needs to know that they don't take national security seriously. So that's why I put out what I did. Jeffrey Goldberg, thank you so much for being here after really a remarkable week for you.
We really appreciate your perspective this morning. Take care. And when we come back, Republican Senator Mark Wayne Mullen of Oklahoma joins me next. Welcome back.
And join me now is Republican Senator Mark Wayne Mullen of Oklahoma. Senator Mullen, welcome back to MEET the press. Thanks for having me on. Thank you so much for being here.
We really appreciate it. You're, of course, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Do you think it was appropriate for President Trump's national security team to be discussing an imminent military strike on Signal, which is a commercial app? Well, what they showed was an open conversation that was happening.
And I think it's a very thoughtful conversation, but there was no war plans that the Atlantic put out. What they did is they had a very successful attack against the Houthis. It's a terrorist organization, had been harassing our our Navy for since 2023. They attacked our Navy 174 times.
The Biden administration did nothing but set on hands. What the Trump administration did was take the fight directly to the Houthis. So what this conversation should be is why didn't the Biden administration do something the last two years instead of being focused on this Signal chat, which there was no classified information given out, the conversation was a thoughtful conversation and the attack was extremely successful. You take me to my next question.
You say there was nothing classified. I'm going to show some of what Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth did text out. Here's a little sample. 12:15 Eastern Time, F18's launch first strike package.
14:15 Strike drones on target. This is when the first bombs will definitely drop. Pending earlier trigger based targets. 15:36 F18 second strike starts.
Also first sea based Tomahawks launched. Those are specific times and weapons. And later there's a discussion about target details center. If that's not classified information, what is?
Tell me where the location was at, what part of the region was that? What part of the world was this at? We have a lot of conflicts, a lot of issues going on around the world from Africa to anywhere in the Middle east to even in Asia or possibly through Europe. This could have been going on any place in the world.
There was no specific information except that a target was going to be hit. We have terrorist organizations coming out of the United States everywhere because the Biden administration has done nothing for four years. Instead of having peace through strength like President Trump is leading, they try to do an appeasement. And what happened is these rogue regimes and terrorist organizations to take advantage of it.
What happened here is President Trump took the fight to our enemies, which should have happened a long time before. What is wrong with the conversation that's going place? In fact, why are we focused so much on this? Why didn't we focus on the 13 service members killed in Afghanistan?
There was no outcry or anybody resigning from there. What about the idea when Secretary Austin MIA for surgery and went completely offline? No one was talking about him resigning. But the left has completely lost their mind over a good conversation and that was a absolute successful mission.
And they can't let it go because President Trump is leading the world again. Senator, what's your message to service members and their family who may feel like officials in this chain were careless with information that could have put their loved ones lives at risk? I think the numbers speak for themselves. We've had record numbers of new recruits coming to service since President Trump has taken office.
The morale is through the roof because people are finally saying President Trump has taken the fight to our enemies rather than sitting back and apologizing to focus more on DEI than actual legality, which is what our service members want to do. They want to sign up for what they did, protect American rights and go after those enemies that want to and harm Americans. Let me ask you, I had a conversation with President Trump just this morning, Senator, and I want to ask you about some of what we discussed. He told me he is quote, angry and pissed off at Russian President Putin for disparaging Ukrainian President Zelensky, saying that's moving in the wrong direction.
President Trump saying he feels peace talks are moving in the wrong direction. He's threatening the possibility of secondary tariffs on Russian oil if he feels as though things aren't getting back on track. Would you support tariffs of 25 to 50% on Russian oil? Absolutely.
President Trump has been very clear from day one, even when he was running for campaign or running for office, he was saying he wants to stop the killing, full stop. And what has happened is the left has been saying that President Trump is compromised, administration is compromised by Putin. The friendship is too close. But the President Trump is trying to negotiate an end to the deal of individuals dying in Afghanistan, in Ukraine, because this awful war that would have never taken place if President Trump was in office.
What has happened here is that Putin, he doesn't feel is negotiating on actual terms. He keeps delaying. And what President Trump has said right now is if he continues to play games, he's going to get tough on Russia, just like he did in 2017 in Syria when Russia was was doing the bidding for Assad and he took back the airspace from Russia because they want to deliver weapons that the President has warned them not to do. That Same message in 2017 is being delivered now by President Trump saying, if you don't get on board with ending the killing in Ukraine, then we will go after you through sanctions and anybody that does business with you, they will also be sanctioned and have a terror put on their country as well.
President Trump makes very clear where his positions are, and he's tough on all situations, but he's want to go through diplomacy first before anything else takes place. So him having a friendship or trying to have a relationship with Russia before this goes to this place was the right move. Now he's saying he's done. So either Putin comes to the table to go showcase a peace deal, or he's going to move on and take an alternative plan.
Oh, and you're right to know that this seems like a new moment. I mean, he's saying he's angry and pissed off. We have, frankly not heard President Trump use that type of language against President Putin. We saw the Oval Office blow up with President Zelensky, of course.
What are the implications of the fact that he's taking this tone with President Putin? What everybody needs to know, and I think they already know this about President Trump, is he doesn't bluff. His words have meaning. And when he's done, he is done.
And he's moving on to plan B. The President is always looking down the road. He always has alternative plans. He wants to do plan A, plan B, plan C but if that doesn't work, you'll go to plan D.
And where we're at right now is diplomacy with Russia hasn't been working because Putin hasn't been negotiating on good terms. The President now with you and American people, he's putting Putin on warning, saying, hey, listen, you better pay attention here. If you don't come to the table, negotiate it into the killing like I said I want to do, then we're going to have alternative plans here. This is the first alternative.
And by the way, we have three more plans behind this if this doesn't work. We also talked about tariffs. The President saying these auto tariffs that he has just announced are permanent. And of course he's continued his vows to make Canada the 51st state after imposing these new auto tariffs.
I want to play for you a little bit of what Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney had to say in response to these tariffs. The old relationship we had with the United States based on deepening integration of our economies and tight security and military cooperations is over. Senator, has the United States lost Canada as an ally? No, we haven't lost.
Again, they need us more than we need them. The fact is we've been subsidizing our economy by the tunes of billions of dollars every single year. And they know that what President Trump is saying is enough is enough. Right?
If you want to have a relationship with the United States, it's going to be an even playing field, a two way street. We want reciprocal terrorists. We want to be treated the same. We want to have access to your economy like you have access to us.
And if you want to have fair and balanced trade, then that's fine. But our economy is not subsidizing your economy anymore. What Canada knows is that the United States have given them a sweetheart deal for them to have access to us, access to our economy. At the same time, we protect them.
Now, they do fight with us. They are an ally of us in every word we've had. We appreciate that. But at the same time we need to be treated equally.
And if they don't want to come to the negotiating deal and realize that we're in this fight together, our economy is our border. National security means national security for all America, not just the United States. And if they want to have that type of negotiation and that type of deal with us, we're willing to do that, but they're not wanting to. They want to keep the same old sweetheart deal they've had in place.
And President Trump is willing to say, and that's Enough. It's about time, because what President Trump is doing is he's protecting America's future, America's economy going down the road. Our workers have suffered, our farmers have suffered, our manufacturers have suffered because we've had weak leadership in the White House. And President Trump isn't put up anymore.
So thank goodness we have a tough leader finally that's standing up against these people. All right. Senator Mark Wayne Mullen, thank you so much for joining us on a very busy Sunday. We really appreciate it.
Thanks for having me on. And when we come back, Democratic Senator Michael Bennett of Colorado joins me next. Welcome back. Democratic Senator Michael Bennett pressed top Trump national security officials over the signal leaks during a Senate intelligence hearing this week, at one point engaging in this heated exchange with CIA Director John Ratcliffe.
This sloppiness, this incompetence, this disrespect for our intelligence agencies and the personnel who work for him is entirely unacceptable. It's an embarrassment. Senator, you need to do better. And joining now is Senator Michael Bennett of Colorado.
Senator Bennett, welcome back to MEET THE press. Thank you for having me. Kristen, thank you so much for being here after a very busy week. In addition to that fiery exchange, intelligence officials told your committee this week that no classified information was shared.
Do you believe that directors Ratcliffe and Gabbard were truthful when they testified before your committee? No, I think they lied repeatedly to our committee and to the House committee. Kristen, let me try to make this as simple as I can. And I think the American people know this.
If this material was not classified, literally nothing that I've ever heard as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee over all these years is classified. I wish I could say that we have deep, dark secrets that are even more classified than this, but it's not true. This targeting information in real time, everybody knows it's classified. And I think that's why, you see, the American people, no matter what party they're in, are so deeply concerned about not just what happened, but I think the lies that are being told about what happened.
Well, you know, your colleague, Senator Richard Blumenthal said the sharing of this information on SIGNAL actually violates a law and said there should be legal consequences. Do you agree with? Well, I think these people should go. We need the top, you know, the top members of our intelligence community to be nonpartisan.
We need them to tell the truth to the American people. We need them not to attack the press just because they're trying to lie about what happened and what they did. They have a responsibility that is Solemn to our intelligence agencies and to the men and women of our armed forces, and above all, to the American people. And they have, they have failed that test.
Not to mention the fact that our allies have now been dragged into this, according to public reports, because the classified intelligence that they acted on was shared by our, our closest allies and now has been revealed as a result of Pete Hexess's text chain. Well, we'll continue to track that story. I do want to ask you about something else. This morning I had the opportunity to speak with President Trump.
Just this morning. He had some stern wor for Russian President Vladimir Putin. He told me he's angry and pissed off. Those are quotes at Putin over comments he recently made saying that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky needs to be removed from power.
Let me ask you, Senator, would you support secondary tariffs against Russia if it became clear that they were not serious about getting a peace agreement with Ukraine? Of course I would, but this is, this is crazy. I mean, Donald Trump, until this morning, has been saying that Zelensky is not the, is not the real president of Ukraine, that we should have an election in Ukraine to establish that. He said that Ukraine started this war.
He has, he has cut off now, he's restored it, but he cut off our intelligence and our munitions that were going to Ukraine. He's done nothing but undermine Ukraine's negotiating position, Europe's negotiating position, the negotiating position of the United States of America. And now today, because he's, quote, unquote, pissed off at Trump or Putin for doing exactly what everyone on planet earth would have expected Putin to do, which is not come to an agreement unless he's forced into an agreement. And after President Trump has undermined America's position, this is a painful experience.
What he should do is support the Ukrainian people who are on the battlefield in the dead of winter in Ukraine right now, who have suffered 400,000 casualties in this war on behalf of democracy, this war on behalf of the west, and have done punishing damage to Russia's army in the process. And the reality of the situation, the American people need the President, United States to describe it accurately and properly and to put us in the right position to get the best outcome for Ukraine, which is a peace guarantee from Europe and from the United States of America. I want to ask you about something else. The President told me, he told me he would post secondary tariffs on Iran if they do not seem serious about striking a deal on nuclear weapons, making sure that they do not get one.
He says he has not taken bombing Iran off the table. In fact, he would bomb them, the likes of which they have never seen, if he thinks they are not serious about a peace deal. Would you support, Senator, bombing Iran under those circumstances in which it seemed like striking a deal to avert any nuclear weapon was out of reach? We can never allow Iran to have nuclear weapons.
The world cannot allow it. We've seen how problematic it is when a rogue regime like, for example, North Korea has nuclear weapons. We cannot allow the mullahs in Iran to have a nuclear weapon. Having said that, you know, it is extraordinary again, that here is a case where Donald Trump got rid of the original Iran nuclear deal, during which, during the course of which Iran was much further from getting to a nuclear weapon than it is today as a result of the decisions that Donald Trump made in his first administration.
And now he's saying that if the Iranians don't do a deal, he's going to bomb them. Let's hope that there is a deal that would be a better outcome for the world. But if it comes to it, if it comes to it, we have to take the steps necessary with our allies to make sure that Iran never possesses a nuclear weapon. Iran needs to know that about how the American people feel.
Let me ask you now about the future of the Democratic Party, Senator. You have stopped short of calling for Senate leader Chuck Schumer to step down, that you were critical of his striking a deal to a very government shutdown, effectively siding with Republicans there. But you did say, quote, it's important for leaders to know when it's time to go. Do you still have confidence in Linda Schumer?
I think that a much more important question is what we're going to do as a Democratic Party to create a compelling view for Americans that are going to allow us to lead again. We should never have lost to Donald Trump once, much less twice. And there are many things I blame Donald Trump for, as you can tell from the conversation we've had today. But getting elected president wasn't, wasn't, isn't one of those things.
The Democratic Party has lost touch with working people in our country at a time when 50 years of trickle down economics has meant that most Americans feel like no matter how hard they work, their kids are not going to live a life better than the life they led. And I think the Democratic Party needs to use this moment of having been repudiated at the national level to figure out a creative and imaginative agenda for the 21st century that's going to lift the fortunes of working people and the middle class all across this country. You know, California Governor Gavin Newsom went so far as to say the Democratic brand is toxic right now. Senator, those are powerful words.
Do you agree the Democratic brand is toxic? I do agree that the Democratic, the Democratic Party brand is really problematic. And I think it is a brand that is, with all respect to my colleague from California, is associated with New York and with California, is associated with the educated elites in this country and not anymore with working people in this country. You know, the good news is for the party, I think, is that Donald Trump is pursuing the same trickle down economics that he pursued the first time he was president to make sure that he can create again the tax cuts for the wealthiest people in the United States states and pay for it by taking away health care from the American people.
That's really bad for America. But the Democratic Party ought to be able to come back under those circumstances with a pretty good argument about why we could lead better than Donald Trump and why we are able to provide a better set of economic policies, a much better set of healthcare policies that ensures universal healthcare finally for everybody in this country. And as a former school superintendent actually has something to say about the fact that we're running an 18th century school system in America and our kids desperately needed to be a 21st century school system that makes them competitive again. Donald, our kids are invisible to Donald Trump.
And if the Democratic Party would show up with some imagination, I think not only would we do better, the American, the American people would do better. Senator Bennett, very quickly before I let you go, a lot of talk about the fact that you are seriously considering running for governor. Can you confirm here today do you plan to run for governor of your great state? I'm not going to do it here today.
And I'm considering where the best place to have this fight is and where the best place to reinvent the Democratic Party is and what I can do, you know, where I can fight best for the people of Colorado who have given me the privilege to represent them in Washington, D.C. and as soon as I have a final answer to that, I'll let you know. Please come back with your final answer. Senator Bennett, thank you so much.
We really appreciate it. Thanks for having me. When we come back. Thank you, Senator.
That's for sure. When we come back. Her government plotted to kill her. Now the men who tried to do that are behind bars.
The Iranian journalist Masia Nijad shares her extraordinary story next. Welcome back. Two men were convicted in a plot to murder Iranian journalist Masia Linejad. Three years after the attempt on her life at her Brooklyn home, though has lived under threat by Iranian government for more than a decade.
I sat down with her in 2023. She told me then that she was scared but refused to live in fear. This week I caught up with her again on me the press now and asked her what it was like to come face to face with her would be killers in court. To be honest, nervous.
I was absolutely nervous. But at the same time, that was the dream of millions of Iranians to finally face the killers, to finally those who dare to silence us for the crime of speaking up, for the crime of just, you know, want to show our hair for the crime of fighting for freedom. So that's why I said I'm gonna face the I'm gonna stand, you know, remember all those who were the victim of assassination plots like other people who were not as lucky as I am to be alive. So I stared them down and I, I'm so proud to see all my neighbors, my neighbors, the people that you know from, from Brooklyn were there sitting there, my friends, human rights activists, journalists, even a woman who was shocking her eye during woman life uprising in Iran.
She was there. Although she was blinded by the same killers in the, in the Makashi inside Iran. She was there. It was beautiful moment, but it's scary as well.
She is truly a hero. When we come back, more of my exclusive conversation with President Trump. The panel is next. Welcome back.
The panel is here. NBC News chief Washington correspondent and chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell. NBC News senior national politics reporter Jonathan Allen, author of Fight Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House, Simone Sanders Townsend, former chief spokesperson for Vice President Harris and former Trump White House communications director Mike Dubkey. Boy.
Thank you all for being here on a very good morning. Andrea, let me start with you. Let's make some more. Let's start with signal.
Andrea, and the national security implications of this. You heard what Mullen had to say. You heard what Bennett had to say. Obviously, two very different views.
What are the implications for the United States allies and adversaries who are watching all of this? First of all, Mullen didn't say this and won't say this, but Roger Wicker, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, without whom Hexif would never have been confirmed. Confirmed. He pushed that through.
He said that it should have been classified. And people on the intelligence committees are pointing out that as you did, as you showed this was targets. And also when you talk about allies, the intelligence we have reported and it's first reported by the Wall Street Journal, the intelligence came from Israel and the targeting of one of the key Houthi players. And that could have been very easily a human source, jeopardizing human source.
So already our allies are very nervous about sharing intelligence with people like Gabbard and others in this administration. Hegseth, clearly, you know, newbie who does not know what he's doing in terms of specifying all of this and why is Russia and when you get to Russia, Russia, the news that the president made with you last night and again today, he's pivoting on time for the first time. And the question I have is, are they going to back down on the revised draft of that minerals agreement, which I've seen it, it's 55 pages and basically it would indenture Ukraine forever. The US would control it out of a Delaware corporation, would have full say over all the members of this group.
And it would be oil and gas as well as minerals. And there's no way that Zelensky could ever sign this, but he's so nervous about again appearing to oppose it. So this is the first acknowledgement by Donald Trump of any pressure on Russia. It is extraordinary.
Angry and pissed off, he says. John Allen, first of all, let me just remind folks, you have a new book out, Fight Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House Great Revolution. Let's focus. You talk about the internal machinations of all of these campaigns.
Let's talk about what's happening internally inside of the White House. Bouncing off of what Andrea said, you have reporting about the fact that there is frustration with Mike Waltz, President Trump, when I spoke to him, defiant. He says he's not firing anyone. He says he doesn't fire people over fake news.
So for now, at least, it seems like Mike Waltz is going to stay. What are you hearing inside the White House? Yeah, from what happened with the signal from the outset with the single story, President Trump was frustrated with a couple of things as it pertains to Mike Waltz, who, by the way, is not Pete Hegset, the defense secretary who actually put operational information into a commercial app. Mike Waltz invited Jeff Goldberg into that conversation according to the single timeline.
You see. But President Trump was frustrated with this twofold. Number one, obviously, Waltz had potentially included this journalist on the chat. But the other thing he's frustrated by is Mike Waltz's congressional seats.
Mike Waltz was in Congress. The president brought him into the administration. And now that race is closer than it should be, the Republicans are likely to win. But it's also A reflection.
And the president can't blame himself for this scuff. I know other people blame for him. It's partially a reflection of the backlash against some of the early days of the Trump administration. Since that's Mike Waltz's former seat, some of the blame is falling on him.
But you talk to the president, he's not making a movement that says to me, is that the fight internally, the tension between those who thought he looked strongest if he fired somebody and those who thought he looked strongest if he said no scalps? He went with those who said no scalps were the strongest. Mike, weigh in on this point in the politics of this moment where you do have some jitters about Mike. Walt Disney, you have jitters about Elisa Vonik's seat.
He pulled her from UN Ambassadorship nomination. She's going back to Congress because he's worried about some of the special reporting that's been out there about the president asking, should I fire this person, Should I fire that person? That was my experience with the first Trump administration. That's exactly what he does, how he pressure tests all the people that are around him.
Number one, I reread these. I reread these last night, these signal things. This is really a messaging and a policy conversation. This was much less of a at the end of the day.
And this is an administration built for speed. And they're going to give forgiveness to those as they try to press hard before the midterm elections. And that's what we've got to worry about. That's the political calculation here.
What can we get done before the midterms? Yeah, someone weigh in on this signal. How you're no stranger to having to deal with damage control. What do you make of how this White House dealt with this week?
And again, the political moment which they find themselves. Is there some fraying around the edges for the Republican Party? Look at some of these special elections in Florida, Elise, the Fonicsy, for example. Look, I think that what we're seeing from the White House is because of the signal to pop up.
I think that they deployed familiar playbook, something that we see before. Before, deny, deflect. This isn't a big deal. However, there are people within the federal government, people outside.
They're support of the President. They're like, this is a huge deal. We spoke this morning on our show to the former deputy chief of staff, to Lord Austin, who said that this information absolutely would have been classified, that they should not have been discussing on the signal app and wouldn't also be classified. Until the people who the fighter pilots were back to the base.
And so there's broader implications for this and this is one conversation. It is much so more about the machinery of our national security, the thin line between order and chaos and how this administration conducts business when it comes to these special elections. Molly and danger Girl, as the streets would say. I do think that the people are not necessarily liking what they are seeing, the consternation in their own lives and some of the White House.
I'm not blamed Trump just yet, but I don't know if that Democrat and the math teacher actually going to win my policy. But the fact that it's extremely competitive is a testament frankly to the weakness of the current Republican Party campaign. We'll have 90 seconds ago. The word of the week is tariffs.
Tariffs here, tariffs potentially for Iran, potentially for Russia, secondary tariffs for Russia and secondary tariffs mean that he would be tariffing Turkey, India, China, those who buy the Russian oil which is sanctioned under UN resolutions. So that is really unusual for him to be saying that. I was surprised that he initially said to you that they would be that he didn't care if they would be raising prices. With the volatility of the markets and his sticking to tariffs, it shows you how when it is to tariffs because he's never ignored the markets and what's happening as consumer confidence is down, inflation, he's dug in.
He says he doesn't mind if foreign car prices go up. John. He's defiant that these tariffs, these auto tariffs are permanent. He says ultimately it's going to improve American car sales and prices.
One of the most consistent things about President Trump, of course the time is that he loves terrorists and he's finding out now I think he always knew he was finding out now that as a threat it is a much better weapon than it is when you use it. Okay. All right, guys. Unfortunately we're out of time.
I'm sorry. That is all for today. Thank you for watching. We will be back back next week because if it's Sunday, it's Meet the.
As the day wraps up, get the scoop on what's been happening with here's the scoop with a podcast from NBC News with me, your host gazing studio. We'll take a deep dive into the day's top stories of NBC News's trusted journalist. It's a fresh take that sharp, thoughtful and informative bring you closer to headlines conversations that are shaping our world. Front page to the zeitgeist.
Here's the scoop from NBC News. Listen daily on Amazon Music.