Meet the Press NOW — April 8

If it's Monday, House Speaker Johnson prepares to face a divided Republican caucus and a growing to-do list in Washington, with Ukraine funding, aid for Israel, an impeachment effort, and Johnson's own job all on the line. Plus, tens of millions of Americans across 15 states bear witness to a historic total solar eclipse as the sun, moon, and earth fully align, plunging parts of the nation into darkness. We're in the path of totality as the rare event enters its final stretch. And President Biden announces a sweeping student loan forgiveness plan.

It could cancel thousands of dollars of debt for tens of millions of Americans as the president looks to gain a much-needed political boost in the race for the White House. Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Yamiche Alcindor in Washington, where this week, lawmakers are returning after their two-week recess. But waiting for them on Capitol Hill is a long to-do list, including passing critical foreign aid for Israel and Ukraine, passing funding to rebuild the Key Bridge in Baltimore, which President Biden has vowed the federal government will pay for, as well as passing the reauthorization of a controversial surveillance program.

This all comes as the Republican-controlled House says it will deliver its articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the Senate this week. Once again, all eyes will be on House Speaker Mike Johnson if he tries to navigate a path forward on all of these issues with an increasingly narrow majority and a looming threat to oust him as Speaker. Johnson has pledged to bring some sort of Ukraine aid bill up to the House floor. Over Democrats, though, have urged him to bring the Senate past version up for a vote.

And Ukraine President Zelensky once again urged Congress to pass Ukraine aid over the weekend. He said if Congress fails to act, Ukraine will lose the war. Now Johnson finds himself on a collision course with some Republicans in his own caucus, including Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. She insists that Speaker Johnson brings Ukraine aid to a vote.

She will move forward with her motion to remove Johnson as speaker. That vote, which would only need a simple majority to pass, could throw the House back into chaos. The lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are signaling the votes just are not there to do that. I don't think he's at any risk.

I think that what people have been referring to is the chaos caucus, those individuals who are seeking attention for themselves and trying to stop all of the important work in Congress are now seen as merely disruptive. If Marjorie Taylor Greene or anybody else brings a motion to vacate the chair, and if Speaker Johnson gives us a vote on Ukraine, I and a whole lot of other Democrats will not support that motion. We will not remove Speaker Johnson from that. We can work with that in a way the Democrats could not work with Kevin McCarthy.

So yeah, I think Speaker Johnson will survive that motion. Joining me now is Sahil Kapor on Capitol Hill and Monica Alba. She's at the White House. So Sahil, as he said, Congress is facing a super long to-do list, very, very long.

How does House Speaker Johnson plan on navigating all of this? Well, Yamiche, it's a lot to navigate for a speaker just over five months into the job facing an ever-slimming majority, which is about to be cut to two defections, maximum two defections that Johnson will be able to spare in just a few weeks to pass anything without Democratic support And he doing that with of course this threat to his job Note that Marjorie Taylor Greene has not officially triggered this motion to vacate Unlike when Matt Gaetz did with Kevin McCarthy He filed it and immediately triggered it Marjorie Taylor Greene has written this out on a piece of paper and is just kind of dangling this over his head without explicitly triggering it If she does, that would require a vote within two legislative days, and that would be certainly a challenge for Johnson to keep his job. There's a whole litany of policy issues that Johnson is facing, starting with, as you pointed out, aid to Ukraine and Israel. He's got a lot of dynamics within his caucus and some changing dynamics within the Democratic caucus to navigate there.

There's the Baltimore Bridge rebuild, which some of his conservative members are demanding conditions on. FISA Section 702, the warrantless surveillance powers, expires later this month. FAA reauthorization expires next month. They've been punting that again and again, struggling to get a deal.

And a new data privacy bill that was just released yesterday by a top Republican chair in the House and a top Democratic chair in the Senate. And then there are a couple of things the Senate is working on, or at least has on its agenda, including what to do about TikTok, which the House passed, as well as this child tax credit expansion that also passed the House. It's languishing in the Senate at the moment, and rail safety legislation, which Chuck Schumer, the majority leader, said he wants to do, all while the Senate is about to receive articles of impeachment for Mayorkas, for DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. And it's not clear that's going to go very far in the Senate.

Not even there's going to be a trial. And Sahil, I mean, that was just such a laundry list that you just broke down there and you did it so well. But I have to also, of course, ask you about foreign aid. How much of the politics of this changed, given the fact that now we have this Israeli strike that killed seven world central kitchen aid workers in Gaza?

It's been shifting on the Democratic side for some time now. I mean, for several months now, as Israel's actions in Gaza have provoked a very intense backlash, especially from progressives, especially from young voters who Democrats count on. And a lot of them have been hearing from them who have been heckling them at events, have been protesting them outside their homes and their offices and things like that. So the politics for Democrats has been shifting away from unconditional aid to the Netanyahu government.

That's certainly going to complicate the vote count in the House from several months ago when Mike Johnson last put Israel aid on the floor and when there was more robust support. And then Johnson faces a continuing opposition to any new funding for Ukraine within certain MAGA forces in his coalition. These are not people that he wants to upset, especially in an election year. And of course, Marjorie Taylor Greene has described Ukraine aid as kind of a red line for her, something that could trigger her to force that vote on a motion to vacate.

And she's been a little bit shifty on this, sometimes saying it maybe can be paired with U.S. border security, sometimes saying if he pairs Ukraine's border security with our own border security, then she would move to try to depose him. She's not been very clear on that, but what is clear is that she's adamantly opposed to Ukraine aid, and there are many other Republicans who feel the same way. It's something for Johnson to navigate as he tries to build this fragile coalition.

And Monica, as we talk about Ukraine with Sahil, of course, President Biden is now facing so much pressure from his own party over his continued support for Israel. Is the president's position changing at all, given this pressure that's coming now from some of his closest allies in Congress? And how concerned is he, really, that there could even be political backlash from Republicans if he gives in to some of those democratic demands and does something like put conditions on military aid to Ukraine? I think we're on the cusp of a potential shift in U.S.

policy here, and that's because that's what the president said to Prime Minister Netanyahu in that phone call last week. He said, if you don't take some steps to immediately rectify some of the humanitarian aid situation on the ground in Gaza and to do more work to protect those aid workers then I will have to reevaluate And obviously the implication there and the message according to officials that I spoken with was one thing we could do is condition some of that military aid So that not something we had ever heard from the president until this point He told the prime minister that he wanted to see this happen within hours and in the coming days. So we are within that period of trying to determine whether Israel is doing enough when it came to its commitments that it tried to say it was going to be putting in place. So I think we're still in a place where it's too soon to say whether the president is actually going to do that.

He didn't want to condition military aid. And for six months, he hasn't wanted to do that, even though there are those moderate Democrats who are pressuring him to do so. But the president has been the one really deciding this foreign policy and saying that he thinks he knows best how to influence Israel. And that is by still completely being a staunch supporter and backing it 100 percent when it comes to the weapons and the military aid that it is requesting and that the U.S.

is sending there. Yamiche, I also want to ask you about Ukraine, the Ukrainian president, Vladimir Zelensky. He has called aid from the U.S. a, quote, vital need.

Of course, it's still stalled in Congress as of right now. Can we expect to see President Biden try to push Congress to act on this issue? And if so, how does he actually plan to do that, given that, of course, he doesn't have the power to make Congress do anything? He'll continue to call for this supplemental to pass.

That is something that the president, of course, has been talking about. But remember that in recent weeks there was some additional funding that was discovered from the Department of Defense that was used through the presidential drawdown authority that did go to Ukraine for some critical munitions and artillery, things they really were running low on and really, frankly, running out of. So that at least was a little bit of a stopgap measure. Now there's a question about whether that could ever happen again or whether that was really the last one.

But the president has also committed and pledged that he will not let Ukraine lose this war against Russia, in his words, because they didn't have U.S. support. So are there potentially other options or other ways to explore any kind of funding? That's an open question as well.

But you certainly can expect the White House will continue to push lawmakers to do what the president believes in his words, the right thing here. It's certainly going to be a busy week in Washington. Thank you so much to Sahil and Monica for your reporting. Let me now bring in Lieutenant General Ben Hodges, former commander of U.S.

Army Europe. So thank you so much for being here. Thank you, Yamiche. Now, Ukraine aid has been stalled in its fight.

I should say Ukraine has been stalled in its fight against Russia. I wonder how much the aid that is stalled in Congress, how much it could really make a difference here when you think about the boots on the ground and what Ukraine is trying to accomplish? Well, it would have two or three significant effects. Number one, obviously, the kinetic effect, giving Ukrainians the ammunition they need to stop these large Russian ground attacks and also to protect the thousands of innocent Ukrainians who are being attacked every night by Russian missiles and rockets slamming into apartment buildings by the one you're showing right there.

But it also would have a significant effect on Russia. Russia is counting on the U.S. turning its back on Ukraine. They're hoping for a Trump election in November so that real support for Ukraine will dry up.

That's what the Russians are counting on. And so if the president were to say we want Ukraine to win and if the Congress were to pass this aid package, that would take a lot of the steam out of Russia's only hope. We've also seen NATO take steps to ensure Ukraine will continue to get military aid, even if former President Donald Trump returned to the White House. What does that say you think about our allies and our view and their view of our commitment to them given the fact that NATO is now basically saying we going to take this step in case the Americans politics shift This is embarrassing Yamiche This tells you that our allies are losing confidence in the United States.

And when they lose confidence in us, we lose influence with them. Yes, of course, our European allies should do more. All of them can do a lot more. But you've got several countries that are given a much larger share of their GDP than we are.

So I think we do not want to lose the influence that we have in Europe because all of our best and most reliable allies come from Europe, as well as Canada and Australia. And so this war in Ukraine is about a lot more than just Ukraine. Well, I have to ask you, what do you think it would take for Ukraine to win here? I know you've talked about sort of what the aid could do for them.

What does that look like if they win? Yeah, three things. And thanks for asking that. Number one, victory for Ukraine means ejection of Russia back to the 1991 internationally recognized sovereign borders of Ukraine.

That includes, of course, Crimea. That could have happened this past year if we had made that commitment to help them win. But that's number one. Number two is the provision of long range precision weapons, such as Atakums or the German Taurus that can make Crimea untenable for Russian forces and also can neutralize Russia's only advantage, which is their mass, because with long-range precision weapons, you can destroy headquarters, logistics, and artillery.

The third thing that they need, of course, is the protection of their civilian population from Russian attacks. These illegal criminal attacks against civilian targets that are happening every night, they need more air and missile defense to protect them. And then finally, clarity from the United States. For the president of the United States to say it is in our strategic interest that Ukraine defeats Russia, and we're going to do everything to make sure that happens, not this frankly empty phrase of we're with Ukraine for as long as it takes.

Nobody believes that anyway. I want to also turn now, of course, to the other big war that's happening abroad. And that is, of course, what's going on between Israel and Hamas. President Biden has told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he would put conditions on U.S.

military aid if Israel didn't do more to protect civilians and humanitarian workers in Gaza. Do you think Israel is really taking that threat seriously? And what would withholding military assistance do for Israel's fight in this war? Well, this is a very tough situation for the Israelis, but also for the president.

But it's an even tougher situation for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who were caught in this terrible conflict. Look, Hamas is a terrorist organization and all of them should burn in hell forever. But the thousands of Palestinians who live there are caught here being used as shields by Hamas. But they're being killed by Israeli operations.

And the burden is on the Israelis to protect innocent people, despite what a terrorist organization is doing. I can't tell you how much influence we've had with Israel and their policy. I'm sure there is some of it, but I just can't tell yet. But I think it's going to require more steps from our side to tell the Israelis you can no longer use American weapons or American ammunition inside Gaza, for example, or anywhere that extends or enables the greater Israel ideology.

That means illegal settlements in the West Bank doing anything that extends beyond Israel's borders. Well, something else really striking happened today. Benjamin Netanyahu said that a date has been set for Israel's invasion into Rafah and that he also said that victory for Israel requires that an invasion of Rafah happen. But over a million people, of course, have been taking shelter there.

So I wonder what impact do you think invading Rafah could have when you think about the fact that there are so many people there, especially if Israel takes that step without having a serious plan to protect civilians there? Could that impact their aid, their relationship with the U.S.? I think this would be a catastrophe if Israel launches an attack into Rafah, a place with thousands and thousands of innocent people. if the Israelis continue the same sort of tactics that they've been using.

And plus, I mean, I think it would be almost impossible for the administration to continue to support Israel in a significant way because, I mean, this would be the prime minister of Israel telling the U.S. administration, I'm saying we're going to do what we have to do. That's after Vice President Harris has said it would be a disaster for Israel to go into Rafa, for example. I think that the problem here is that the goal that Prime Minister Netanyahu has set to destroy Hamas is a totally infeasible objective.

You cannot destroy a terrorist organization. We tried for 20 years to destroy the Taliban and al-Qaeda and Afghanistan, and we never did it because you have to address the source. What caused an organization like Hamas to come on the scene and what keeps it going? And just killing your way is not going to get it done.

It's going to have to be a political objective that is sustainable. And, of course, that means a two-state solution. I also want to ask you, you said it would be impossible for the U.S. to continue to support Israel if they went into Rafah.

Why do you think President Biden was unable to convince Benjamin Netanyahu to not move forward with this military invasion? I think that they are not the Israeli government. This particular government is not convinced that the U.S. would ever actually use the ultimate leverage that we have.

I think that they are so accustomed to Republican administrations, Democratic administrations, always supporting them, that they are confident that we would never actually use the leverage that we have. And I think that if this continues on the path that it is. And again, I want to be very clear what happened on October 7th or everybody involved in that on the homicide should burn in hell forever. but that is no reason that's not acceptable for Israel then to use aid that we provide and kill thousands of innocent Palestinians.

We're going to have to find a way to get towards a two-state solution. This war is not about religion. It's about land. Well, thank you so much, Lieutenant General Ben Hodges.

Thank you for the privilege. Coming up, could the sun be setting on Johnson's speakership? I'll talk to a House Democrat about the leadership problems. Plus, Hello Darkness, my old friend will get a live report from the Path of Totality's final U.S.

destination. Don't go anywhere. You're watching Meet the Press Now. Welcome back Speaker Mike Johnson is also facing a revolt within his own party and a slim majority and it not clear how the speaker will proceed I joined now by Congressman Adriano Esbiot Democrat from New York and member of the House Appropriations and Budget Committees He also deputy chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Thank you so much Congressman for being here Thank you.

Thank you for having me. So House Speaker Johnson is meeting with members all week on Ukraine. I wonder, how do you think outside pressure from Republicans might affect his willingness to bring forward a bill that contains aid for Ukraine in particular? I hope it doesn't impact him.

I hope he keeps true to his word that he's going to be a voice of reason. we want to help Ukraine. The Ukraine conflict is not just about America. It's really about the European Union and its economy.

It's about NATO. It's about the U.S. economies in many ways, because if you have a collapse or a meltdown of the European economy, it will impact the U.S. economy as well.

But ultimately, it is about the human rights of Ukrainians to be able to exist. Their sovereignty is at stake. And I think that we should stand up and help them. And of course, the speaker plays a vital role in making sure that the help guests are there right now, rationing bullets.

Those soldiers are rationing bullets to stay alive. We should step up and help them. And of course, I'm hopeful that the MAGA extreme Republican wing of the party, of the Republican Party, will not prevail. I also want to ask you about Israel.

The recent strike that killed seven World Central Kitchen aid workers has really highlighted divisions among your own party, Democrats, on U.S. military aid to Israel. Where do you stand on this issue? And in particular, do you believe that there should be conditions put on Israel to get more aid?

Look, I'm a strong supporter of Israel, will continue to be a supporter of Israel. I begin this debate by saying that the hostages are still there. Some of them are U.S. citizens.

We want them back, but we've also got to fight for peace. And this last incident where we saw the killing of seven volunteers. And I know Jose Andres, he's someone that has shown up. He showed up in Puerto Rico during Maria.

He shows up every time there's a calamity, a crisis, a human rights crisis, a crisis that impacts the quality of life of people anywhere in the world. He doesn't distinguish one continent over the other. And to have this happen is horrible. But do you think that there should be conditions?

Do you think that there should be conditions? There should be a code of conduct for any country that we give help to. Now, if you spoke, for example, about Iron Dome, which is something, a system that is used to preserve the lives of Israelis in Israel. We saw how that worked to benefit them, but there should be a code of conduct to protect human lives across the world, including in Gaza.

Now you're saying a code of conduct, but specifically, would you vote for there to be conditions put on aid to Israel? I would continue to support the president of the United States, Joe Biden, and his efforts to bring about peace to the Middle East. And I will continue to stand strong on his efforts to ensure that Netanyahu and his government understand that it is important to abide by human stability. Yes.

And we've also, in the last few days here, in the last five days. We've seen Israel allow additional aid into Gaza and we've seen Israel withdraw some troops from southern Gaza. Do you think that that a direct result of President Biden firmer tone with Benjamin Netanyahu I believe so and I believe that that a start for a good conversation But there must be another component to that as well and that is the hostages And we saw grave mobilization in Israel just recently. Israeli citizens are in the streets saying that they want those hostages back home and that they must be front and center in any negotiations that is being conducted right now.

The other component, I think, is that there's clearly Hamas is a horrible terrorist organization. and we have to, the world has to take a stand on this issue because I think we cannot continue to move forward in peace, either in the Middle East or other parts of the world. We saw what happened even in Russia with organizations like Hamas under command. Yeah.

The Biden administration, I want to turn to another issue here, of course. The Biden administration announced an extension of work permits for certain categories of immigrants. You advocated last year for work permits for some groups of immigrants. Are you happy with the administration's progress on this issue?

And do you wish the White House maybe even moved a little faster here? Well, I think very often we get into an immigration debate that's very sophisticated and complicated, right? But a work permit is a simple concept, right? We're not even talking here about a pathway to citizenship, a temporary protected status for that matter, or anything else.

The other components of the immigration debate, a simple concept, a work permit, so someone can leave their house in peace, know that they're going to get back home and they're going to provide for their families. They're not going to be a load in government and they will help the economy. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office just revealed that the immigration dynamic will help the economy by a trillion dollars in the next 10 years. So immigration is still very much synonymous with good economics.

And I think that we should look at it that way. Let's start just with a simple concept, a work permit. Yeah. I also want to ask you about because there's so much that Congress is going on and dealing with.

If Speaker Johnson were to deal with a possible motion to vacate, would you vote to keep him in his job as a Democrat? I will vote for Hakeem Jeffries for Speaker. I think that he is someone that Speaker Johnson should have a conversation with. He seems to be a leader that brings everybody together, that even with folks that maybe have traditional differences with one issue or the other, somehow he's able to bring them together.

So I will be casting my vote for Hakeem Jeffries. I hear you. I hear you. Congressman, thank you so much for joining us.

Thank you. Thank you so much. And coming up, dancing in the dark of the total solar eclipse. We're live in Maine, where people have gathered to get the last glimpse of the rare event.

You're watching Meet the Press now. Welcome back. Today's total solar eclipse across the United States is now out to sea. But not before millions of Americans had the opportunity to engage with science and culture in a profound way.

From Texas to Maine, people took off from school and work and put on their special glasses. For the lucky ones in Totale, this was a chance to witness a rare perfect alignment of the sun, the moon, and the earth, bringing fleeting darkness during the day. The tally stretched from parts of Mexico, 15 U.S. states, and eastern Canada.

And the rest of us got to witness the partial eclipse. If you missed today excitement you got some time to plan The next total solar eclipse for the continental U will take place over parts of North Dakota and Montana in 2044 There be a coast to coast eclipse the following year NBC News senior national correspondent Kate Snow is in Holton Maine which was one of the last spots in the U to experience this eclipse in its totality So, Kate, I'm so jealous of where you are right now because that's amazing. So tell me a little bit about how the weather did today for today's big announcement. Big event, rather.

You know, I guess you can't see the sky right now because I'm in the plaza here in Holton downtown. But blue sky, absolute sunshine, not a single cloud in the sky. And that meant that we had a near perfect view. I would say a perfect view of the solar eclipse and particularly the totality.

When it went totally dark here and we were looking up at the sky, it was completely on fire. But let me tell you a little bit of sound just moments before that. As the crowd here, 6,000 people live here and thousands more came in and listen to how they counted down. Six, five, four, three, two, one.

Can we take our glasses off? Yes, take our glasses off. Oh, my gosh. Wow.

There's Venus, there's Jupiter, there's Mars. Where are you seeing Venus the star? Oh, yeah, down below. These are planets.

You can see the planets in the sky. These are planets. That is the total solar eclipse. Oh, it is beautiful.

It is stunning. Yeah, Yamiche, it's hard to put into words what it feels like. It is awe-inspiring. It is this moment where everybody comes together, I think, and is witnessing the exact same thing.

And we feel, I felt anyway, so small, right, as part of just this bigger whole picture. And just to let you know about Holton, I mentioned it's a small city. 6,000 people here live here permanently. They've never, ever had an event like this.

They spent years planning just for today to make sure they would be ready. And they're a warm, welcoming people, and they wanted to host people. And that's exactly what happened. A lot of folks I talked to today were going to go to Texas.

And when they saw the weather forecast, they decided to come to a little Holton, Maine. It was just so amazing to hear people really explaining, saying, wow. And to see your face, I should say, it looked like it was amazing to you in particular. So I want to ask, of course, how did today's eclipse compare to the one in August 2017?

Well, you know, I was in 2017. I was in Oregon in the middle of the desert, in the high desert with my whole family. I mean, so I had like 20 of my family, my parents, my brother, my sister, all of our kids. So there was a very different experience for me personally.

I wasn't covering it as a reporter. But the awe that I felt is the feelings that you saw in my face. That was the same. And I have to tell you, I'm almost tempted to go to the next eclipse a couple years from now.

There's one that's going to go through Spain. Maybe you and I could book tickets together and we could go to Spain for the next one. Right. That would be fun.

Definitely pitching that idea as soon as I get off the arcade. So thank you so much. All right. And still ahead, former President Donald Trump making good on his promise to formally take a position on abortion rights, his comments, the fallout, and why what he didn't say is getting the most attention.

You're watching me, The Press Now. the partial gag order against him, and he argues holding the trial in Manhattan would be unfair due to potential jury bias against him. And earlier today, Judge Aileen Cannon scheduled a new hearing for Trump's co-defendants in the classified documents case. But we are still waiting to see when the trial will actually begin.

Judge Cannon is widely expected to move the current May 20th start date. Today is also the due date for special counsel Jack Smith's brief to the Supreme Court on Trump's presidential immunity case, or arguments for that case are expected to kick off later this month. Joining me now for more is NBC News Justice and Intelligence correspondent Ken Delaney. Ken, thanks for being here.

Of course, it's like that laundry list of cases are there, but we'll start with Jack Smith's brief to the Supreme Court, which is due today. Are we expecting anything new out of it. That's hard to know, Amish. We certainly expect him to make the same argument he made when he originally asked the Supreme Court to hear this case on a fast track back in February.

Remember, Smith said then that, quote, the president's alleged criminal scheme to overturn an election and thwart the peaceful transfer of power to his successor should be the last place to recognize a novel form of absolute immunity from federal criminal law. I'll be watching, actually, for whether the special counsel addresses a possible concern for some conservative justices on the high court, which is the sweeping nature of the D.C. Appeals Court ruling, saying that presidents enjoy no immunity whatsoever for official acts they take while in office. Some scholars believe the court may decide that there are, in fact, things the president does that should not be second-guessed by a prosecutor.

Then, of course, Jack Smith would argue that Mr. Trump's alleged schemes to overturn the election were not presidential acts, but the Supreme Court could, in theory, instruct the trial judge to rule on that question, which could then be appealed, which would be another recipe for delay. You talk about the appeals process. How long does the Trump team have to file their reply before we get to our arguments at the end of the month?

It's due on April 15th, which is both tax day and the day that the state of New York's criminal trial against Mr. Trump begins. Wow. We also have some news around the special counsel report into President Biden.

The DOJ is saying that it will not release the audio of his interview with Robert Hurst. So what more do we know about that decision. Yeah, the DOJ in a letter to the committee today said that the committee hadn't demonstrated a need for the audio recording of the interview, given that the transcript has already been made public. The DOJ said it was concerned that, quote, the committee's interests may not be in receiving information in service of legitimate oversight or investigatory functions, but to serve political purposes that should have no role in the treatment of law enforcement files.

I should point out, though, you mean that news organizations, including NBC News, are seeking access to that audio because we believe it's a public record and we think the Justice Department doesn't have a right to withhold it. We believe that audio could add context to the transcript and to the question of whether Special Counsel Robbherr accurately characterized President Biden's memory lapses and mental capacity during that interview. OK, thanks so much for juggling all these legal cases for us, as always. Turning now to the issue of abortion, as former President Trump has tried to avoid taking any firm position on the key 2024 issue.

Despite weeks of hinting at support for a 15 or even 16 week federal abortion ban in a video released on social media this morning, Donald Trump did not mention a national ban at all. Instead, he repeated familiar talking points. Many people have asked me what my position is on abortion and abortion rights, especially since I was proudly the person responsible for the ending of something that all legal scholars, both sides wanted. and in fact a mandate be ended Roe v Wade My view is now that we have abortion where everybody wanted it from a legal standpoint the states will determine by vote or legislation or perhaps both Like Ronald Reagan I am strongly in favor of exceptions for rape incest and life of the mother You must follow your heart of this issue, but remember, you must also win elections to restore our culture and, in fact, to save our country.

Now, despite Donald Trump's claims, polls show that the majority of Americans disapprove of the Dobbs decision and abortion access is broadly popular with the American public, with 70% of Americans saying it should be legal in all or most cases in the latest Marquette poll. NBC News correspondent Dasha Burns joins me on set for more. So, Dasha, thanks for being here. So we saw Donald Trump release this four-minute video laying out his stance on abortion.

Do we have a clearer picture, though, of exactly where he stands? He's had a lot of different stances here. But what did we learn from this video today? Yes and no in terms of that clarity question.

I mean, prior to this video, he had been sort of testing out 15, 16 weeks. He was talking in interviews saying, you know, a lot of people say people are finding consensus at 15 or 16 weeks. There was some New York Times reporting around that being something he was discussing privately. But that is not what this video talked about.

And there was a lot of speculation. We knew this was coming. A lot of people thought that perhaps he would come out with something on the national level. But here he is sticking to the state's rights direction.

However, he did not answer the question, which I'm sure he's going to be asked, whether or not he would sign a federal abortion ban if that were to land on his desk. That question is not put to bed. And there are so many issues surrounding abortion and reproductive rights that a lot of people still have questions about. There are a lot of questions, as you said, especially because former President Trump is a resident of Florida and that state is set to have a six week abortion ban go into effect on May 1st.

So is he going to have to take a position on the abortion ban that's happening in the state that he lives? I don't know if he will take a position, but he's certainly going to be asked. On top of that, in Florida, that's one of the states putting the question to the people. The Supreme Court there just approved a constitutional amendment question for their ballot in November.

So people will actually be able to cast their votes to decide whether or not to enshrine the right to abortion in the state constitution. Former President Trump, of course, a resident of Florida. So how will he vote on that? I also wonder, Democrats have really tried to seize on the issue that the GOP isn't coalescing on one message, one unified message around abortion.

Is Trump's announcement today, does that connect with all of that? Is that going to impact the way the Democrats are going to be able to go after Republicans on this issue? Well, you're already seeing the fallout from this where you have folks on the left, President Biden saying, look. He's saying he's proud that he overturned Roe versus Wade.

He's on the wrong side of this issue. At the same time, you have folks on his right, Lindsey Graham, Susan B. Anthony, the pro life, the anti-abortion organization, saying that they're disappointed in this position from the former president. But I think he is kind of tuning out that noise right now.

This is from the reporting that I've done. This is an issue that has been top of mind. A key part of that message in that video, he said, follow your heart, but it's important to win. And he knows that this has been a losing issue for Republicans that the 2022 midterms, even some of the candidates he himself endorsed.

He was very frustrated with the positions that they took on abortion. So for him, it's less about the fundamentals and the philosophy and more about the message, the rhetoric, and whether or not this could be the Achilles heel for the GOP. And there this issue that you said where he tuning out some people that are in favor of restricting abortion Is it because he thinks maybe he doesn need them in this general election or that they really have no place to go anyways I mean I think what you just said at the end there I mean even in some of those statements including from Susan B Anthony at the end, they said, you know, we are not going to support President Biden. We're going to do everything we can to make sure he doesn't win this election so they can speak out now and say, you know, we want him to take a different position.

But at the end, they don't have a lot of places to go. Yeah. Well, a lot of questions to still answer. Thank you so much, Joshua, for being here.

And up next, President Biden trying to steal some sunshine on this Monday. We'll ask our panel if the new student loan debt relief plan will provide a ray of hope. Come November, you're watching Meet the Press Now. Welcome back.

This afternoon, President Biden announced a sweeping new student loan forgiveness plan. It comes less than a year after the Supreme Court rejected this first attempt to cancel debt. The president called the relief, quote, life-changing. Tens of millions.

Tens of millions of people's debt was literally about to get canceled. But then some of my Republican friends, elected officials, and special interests sued us. and the Supreme Court blocked us. But that didn't stop us.

No, I mean it sincerely. We continue to find alternatives past to reduce student debt payments that are not challengeable. And altogether, my administration has taken the most significant action to provide student debt relief ever in the history of this country. The White House hopes this narrower plan with a different law as its justification will survive legal challenges and Democrats hope that forgiving student loan debt will also help them, particularly with young voters in November.

In all three of our deciders focus groups, voters in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Michigan said the president's efforts on student loans resonated. Well, for me, it comes down to the whole thing with student loans. Who can name at least one thing President Biden has achieved while in office? Something that President Biden himself would say is an achievement.

Todd? Student loan reduction. Andrea? Yeah, student loan forgiveness.

Mary? Student loan forgiveness. Anybody has anything you like about President Biden? Student loan forgiveness.

I was going to say the same thing as Michelle. Student loan forgiveness. Okay, hold on a second. So if President Biden comes through with student loan forgiveness, you might vote for him.

Mm-hmm. OK, so literally it's that kind of thought process. Yes, because now is nothing. He's not doing nothing for me personally to where I feel like I want to get my vote again.

Striking. So joining me now is our panel, Benji Starlin, Washington Bureau Chief for Summophore, the former Democratic congressman from Maryland, Donna Edwards. She is also NBC News political analyst, Republican strategist, Matt Gorman. He recently worked on the presidential campaign of Senator Tim Stass.

Benji, I want to start with you. I mean, I can't stress enough how much I heard even from Republicans and Democrats that student loan debt forgiveness was the thing that they saw as an accomplishment for President Biden. But of course, this new planet could get caught up in legal challenges again. So I wonder how much is the president wanting to just be caught trying and how much of this is maybe them really trying to do something?

Well it a mix of both He needs to show he made real substantive gains on this for people to believe that you know he doing I mean one thing we seen in addition to those focus groups is for every one of those you have someone on Twitter or on TikTok driving your white house completely crazy complaining about what has Biden ever done for us on student loans They say we trying we done all these things But part of the reason they holding these events is that a lot of what they done is either stuff people don quite realize exists options they don't realize exist. A lot of this is about making things automatic and just publicizing it more. And also they don't connect it to Biden, that it's like, now I'm paying 5% of my income instead of 10% of my income on, you know, loan payments. But I have no idea that that's because the White House made a decision.

So they really have to communicate the change at every opportunity is what they really are going for here. And Congresswoman Edwards, this idea, though, that if this all backfires and people see him try but fail, I wonder, could that hurt the president in the long run? Could that hurt Democrats if they're seen as doing something that ultimately gets blocked in the courts? Well, look, I think it is important for the president to try.

And look, already he's already canceled or forgiven about one hundred and forty six billion dollars in student loans. The challenge, though, for the president is it hasn't benefited enough people. And so this announcement that he's just made will benefit something like over 30 million people. That is a wide swath of people who will benefit from these various programs.

And I think that will help them get the message out that he's doing something. I want to stick with you for a minute, Congressman, because there's also this issue of while he was making this announcement, there were protesters and they were focused on Gaza and the civilian casualties there. I wonder what you make of that, the fact that he's trying to say, I'm doing this thing on student loan forgiveness. So there are a lot of young voters and also African-American voters that I've interviewed who say, yeah, but you need to take a better stance on Gaza.

I really can't get behind you. Well, young people like most Americans are not single issue voters. And so I do think that when it comes down to it between Gaza, I think the president does and the administration does have to do more to hold Israel accountable for civilian casualties. I think that's what these young people are demanding, young people, African-American people, people of color demanding.

But I think the combination of doing something on student loans, taking a positive step around abortion rights, and then, you know, trying to wrap his head around what to do around Israel and Gaza, I think can make a real difference to some of these voters. I don't think it's a secret either. We saw news over the weekend political that Biden's losing ground among younger voters, specifically minority younger voters, too. I'm sure they're seeing the same thing probably earlier in their internal surveys.

So I don't think this timing is a coincidence either on that front. Also, when you talk about timing, though, he was speaking during the solar eclipse. Now, of course, I'm sure that, you know, maybe the two are related, but, you know, there is that timing. What do you make of that?

Well, as a cons person, you've got to try and get it out a little before. I mean, look, I don't think it was a coincidence Trump put his abortion statement out early enough in the morning. But with enough time, though, that there was time to cover it before the eclipse. If I always wanted to dump some negative information, I would put it out.

What time did it hit around the D.C. area, about 3.30? I would put it out right at 3.10 or so. Well, President's News actually did come out earlier in the day and got tons of coverage, even though his statement came later in the day.

I think their timing is OK. Well, Benji, what do you make of this, this idea that this abortion announcement by Donald Trump came out today, especially because he's been facing pressure because abortion has been seen as an issue that could be a liability for him? Well, you see the difficulty of trying to please everyone on this issue, which Trump keeps saying he's doing. He keeps promising some big compromise that everyone agrees on that everyone will love.

Just in the reaction today, why he might want to bury it under, say, an eclipse. I mean, obviously, you have Biden and the Democrats. They're not going to let up their criticism of the fact that, as they keep mentioning an ad after ad, even a new one today, it's Donald Trump's court appointments that ended Roe v. Wade and put us in this situation in the first place.

But on the other hand, you're seeing some of... The most spirited criticism from the right that you really ever see of Donald Trump. I mean, Mike Pence, who is not voting for him already for some fairly personal reasons, put out just an absolutely scathing statement saying this is a slap in the face to pro-life voters. Some of the leading anti-abortion groups were unusually critical of Trump for this.

He's just caught from all sides on this. And sure, I want to play some sound for you, Matt, of where Donald Trump has been on the issue of abortion. Take a listen. I'm very pro-choice.

I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject.

But you still, I just believe in choice. Just very briefly, I'm pro-life. Do you believe in punishment for abortion? Yes or no, as a principle?

The answer is that there has to be some form of punishment. For the woman? Yeah, there has to be some form. We're going to agree to a number of weeks or months or however you want to define it.

At the federal level? It could be state or it could be federal. I don't frankly care. I don't frankly care, federal or state.

So I wonder when you look at all of that that he said, but most recently, of course, he was the president who put the conservative justices on the Supreme Court that eventually overturned Roe v. Wade. What do you make of this shifting position? And can he really still shift, given what happened at the Supreme Court under his watch?

I feel like I'm back in 2015, 2016 when I was working for Jeb Bush and trying to pitch stories about his position on abortion. But I will say this. There's no politician who read polls as part of their stump speech really other than Donald Trump. So I think he knows polls, I think, more acutely than any other politician.

What I'll say is this. You know, Benji's right. He has gotten some blowback on the right on this. But look, this was this is one of the few issues that Tim Scott during his campaign that we attacked Trump on for being kind of moderate on abortion that we viewed.

And so you see this a little bit, too. I think it's going to come down to really this campaign. There's really two issues that one side feels like they're winning on the other side that you're going to attack on it. It doesn't want to talk about abortion, certainly against the Republicans by the Democrats and immigration on the other side, too.

And who can win that argument? It's going to tell a lot. And Congresswoman, I want to ask you, do you think that the Biden administration is able to connect Donald Trump in the way that they want to to this issue of abortion? There was a Fox News poll out that only 1% of people saw overturning Roe v.

Wade as his biggest accomplishment. 2% of those said it was his biggest failure. So there's real issues there. What do you make of that?

Well except that if you look at what happened on state ballots in an election since Dobbs was overturned Roe was overturned that you actually do see that the electorate really cares about that and they identify that as Donald Trump responsibility And frankly the administration doesn have to do a lot They just use Donald Trump own words to define where he has been and where he is on abortion. He can, on one hand, take credit for overturning Roe v. Wade. And then on the other hand, position himself as a moderate on some of these issues.

And I think the electorate is going to see that. Yeah. And irony of this is that for a long time, especially early on in that cycle you're talking about 2016, Trump's big weak spot was with the right on abortion. It was trying, especially while Roe v.

Wade was a law of the land, it was trying to convince him he was one of them. So he's trained himself and was still doing it today to just constantly brag about how he's against Roe v. Wade and now how proud he is to have gotten rid of it. And Democrats have been banking all that footage.

You're going to have hundreds of millions of dollars to make sure that every voter has at least seen the clips of Trump himself taking credit. And that is also, of course, the issue of IVF. Trump mentioned it very quickly in this video. But do you think that that is a sort of liability for Republicans going into that?

Well, look, I mean, when you talk about having to answer these at the state level, these are some of the issues that trickle out. And whether you're a congressional candidate, Senate candidate, you are going to have to start talking about these things. You know, it'll flow down ill, so to speak. So these are the sorts of things.

If I'm back at the NRCC running communications, you have to then talk about when you get asked about IVF and about abortion, you have to start thinking of these answers. Trump can say it could be a state issue, but eventually somebody has to answer for it. But Donna, I talked to so many women in Alabama, in particular, Republicans, they have lasting trauma from their doctors telling them, sorry, hold on, we've got to wait for the legislator to let you build your family. How do you think that's going to impact the election?

Well, I think that what voters can see is that it really does trickle down. And every single time that Donald Trump goes to take credit or to disabuse himself of the idea of abortion rights, voters really step up and they just go, it doesn't make sense to me. So I think it's going to reverberate from the top of the ticket all the way down to the bottom. Yeah.

Well, thank you so much, Benji, Donna, Matt. Thank you for being here. And we'll be back tomorrow with more Meet the Press Now. The news continues with Hallie Jackson right now.

I'm Craig Mell. Cheers. Cheers. Cheers.

I've always been a glass half full kind of guy, and now I'm talking to some people who look at the world that way too. Some really fascinating folks who share their defining moments, their triumphs, their challenges. Their stories are funny, and quite candid. So I hope you'll join me each week, and who knows?

You might just come away with your own glass half full. Search Glass Half Full with Craig Mellman from today on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.