Meet the Press NOW — December 2

If it's Monday. President Biden facing intensifying criticism from both parties after pardoning his son Hunter, despite repeatedly vowing not to, while at the same time accusing his own Justice Department of being infected by rob politics. Plus, another looming confirmation clash as President elect Trump taps longtime loyalist Cash Patel to lead the FBI after Patel promised to purge the agency and go after judges, lawyers and journalists critical of Trump and meet the New York state senator vine to lead and revive the Democratic Party as he pushes Democrats to overhaul their messaging strategy and break their Beltway image. Welcome to MEET THE PRESS now.

Dave Gutierrez in Washington, and we're tracking the escalating bipartisan backlash after President Biden issued a sweeping pardon for his son Hunter, despite repeatedly promising he would not do so. Hunter Biden was set to be sentenced later this month in two separate criminal cases, in a tax evasion case where he pleaded guilty and on federal gun charges where he was convicted by jury. The president's pardon going well beyond those cases, also covering any offense Hunter committed or may have committed over the last decade. Appealing to the American public.

In a statement explaining his decision, the president writing, quote, I believe in the justice system, but as I have wrestled with this, I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice. And once I made this decision this weekend, there was no sense in delaying it further. I hope Americans will understand why a father and a president would come to this decision, biden wrote. And that announcement comes after months of the president, first lady and the White House publicly insisting that Hunter Biden would not receive a pardon.

And have you ruled out a pardon for your son? Yes. I'm not going to do anything. I said I abide by the jury decision and I will do that and I will not pardon him.

Joe and I both respect the judicial system, and that's the bottom line. It's still a no. It will be a no, and it is a no. And I don't have anything else to add.

Will he pardon his son? No. I can speak for the president. And he said he would not pardon his son.

And I'm just gonna leave it there. Does the president have any intention of pardoning him? We've been asked that question multiple times. Our answer stands, which is no.

White House press secretary Kareem Jean Pierre was asked today by reporters if comments like those were lies. She responded by largely echoing the president's statement, notably in justifying the pardon. President Biden also took aim at his own department of just accusing the DOJ of a politically motivated Prosecution echoing language often used by President Elect Trump in his attacks on the Justice Department. It's triggered criticism from some Democrats.

Colorado Senator Michael Bent writing the president, quote, put personal interest ahead of duty and his decision further erodes Americans faith in the justice system and that it's fair and equal for all. Virginia Congressman Gary Connolly going further, accusing Biden of abusing his power. I can sympathize with his perspective that his son was, you know, subject to vigilante justice. But having said that, what other father in America has the power to pardon the son or daughter if they're convicted of a crime?

I really think we have to revisit the pardon power in the Constitution. And at the very least, I think we've got to circumscribe it so that you don't get to pardon relatives even if you believe passionately they're innocent or that their cause is just. We just saw Donald Trump not only pardon in his previous administration, his son in law's father, but now appoint him to be ambassador to France. This is an abuse of power and I think it needs to be corrected.

And on the right, Congressional Republicans are accusing the president of blatant hypocrisy and trying to avoid accountability. They're redoubling their support for Trump to overhaul the Justice Department. Meanwhile, President elect Trump, who has repeatedly accused the DoJ of a deep state vendetta against him and his tapped loyalists and longtime supporters for top roles, reacted to the news saying, does the pardon given by Joe to Hunter include the January 6th hostages who have not been in prison for years? Such an abuse and miscarriage of justice.

Joining me now, NBC's justice intelligence correspondent Kendall Lane here on set. And also White House correspondent Mike Memory. Thank you so much for joining us. I do want to start with you.

You have covered the Blind family for such a long time. I want to ask you, despite all those very firm statements that pardon wasn't coming, sources now telling me seniors that it did remain on the table. Right. So what drove the president to make those public statements if that was the case?

And what's so striking, Gabe, about what the president specifically said throughout the course of the time he was asked about it was he was a candidate for reelection when he was answering those questions. And so all of this suggests that he was willing to publicly say something that he knew privately was not the case, which is our own reporting that he was still very much keeping this option over open. Now, I've covered Biden, as you say, a long time. I know that no consequential decision, whether it's about whether to run, not to run, or certainly whether to partner son is made in a short span of time.

These are things that the president has wrestled over, to use the term the White House is using today, throughout the entirety of his career. So it stands to reason why a time with his son in an intimate setting of a setting with rich significance for the family in Antiochette was what made he pushed him over the line here. But I think that this ultimate decision would have been received very differently had we not seen those very clear public denials even after the election from Karine Jean Pierre, who was unable today to even answer specifically when the president's period of wrestling began. Was this something that only changed in the last weekend when our own reporting says otherwise?

Yeah, she did have a thought on answering those questions, reiterating the president's statement essentially. Is there any sense that the president would have still issued such a sweeping pardon if Kamala Harris had won? Well, that was an interesting moment in that conversation with Free Jean Pierre today in the reporters on her first one, because the first she did seem to indicate that this might not have happened had Kamala Harris been elected. But then she backtracked to say she didn't want to engage in hypotheticals.

I think it's I would speculate to say that the president did not want to have to make this decision. And had his vice president won, had he stayed in the race and won himself, it would have at least given them more time, more options here to consider how to address this. But I also know that the president was looking at over the last six years, really even longer than that since he lost Beau and Hunter went in to the depths of addiction. His concern over his well being has been paramount.

He's been something of a real shadow over his entire presidency and his campaign before that. And so this was certainly not an easy decision. But I think the fact that he ultimately got there was not surprising people. It's just a way to they got there and the way they're explaining to the public, I think is why you're seeing such a strong reaction from both parties.

That's right. And look, we've heard reaction from some Democrats, as you allude to, they've been critical of the president's decision. So does the White House acknowledge the awkward position that this is putting the party. No.

And that's, that's, I think the real puzzling part of this is the rhetoric that they're using had the president himself has made the point, simply said, I love My son. And this is in his best interest. I think the reaction would be far different today. But it is the idea of talking about a politicized justice system that is creating headaches for Democrats who are trying to recruit on so many fronts.

They're trying to make a plan for how to deal with the incoming Trump administration and what his Justice Department would do. And this has given Republicans such a clear roadmap for how to respond to any and all of those Democratic charges. And with President Biden leaving office and no political support really to count on, I think it's easier for Democrats to distance themselves from him now. Mike, mentally outside the White House.

Mike, thank you. I'm joined now by Ken Delaney here on set. Ken, what has the reaction been inside the Justice Department? Is there frustration there?

Frustration, sadness, almost despair. Because look, Mike made the crucial point. Donald Trump for years has been saying that the Justice Department has politicized, has been weaponized. There's no evidence for that.

And DOJ officials really push back strongly on that. Now you have President Biden saying some version of the same thing. That's what they really resent. Had he just said I need to save my son from a potential prison sentence and retaliation by Donald Trump Justice Department, that would be one thing.

But he said the process had been politicized and there just isn't any evidence that he said prosecution was selective. Judges have ruled that that's not the case. Yes, right. He went much further than just saying he needed to do this with his son.

And on that point, I want to read a bit more of the president's statement where he mentions his plea deal. Right. The DOJ deal to avoid charges that it fell apart in court. The president writing a carefully negotiated plea deal agreed to by the Department of Justice unraveled in the courtroom with of my political opponents in Congress taking credit for bringing political pressure on the process.

Had the plea deal held, it would have been a fair, reasonable resolution of Hunter's cases. So remind us of the circumstances of that deal. It was a complicated two step plea deal with the bottom line, people need to know it would have resulted in no jail time and no felony convictions for Hunter Biden. So it was a pretty good deal.

And it didn't fall apart because of political pressure. It fell apart because the judge in the courtroom asked some hard questions and became clear that the two sides didn't agree on the scope of immunity that that deal granted Hunter Biden. So it fell apart. But here's the other.

There's a part to this which is that some version of that deal remained on the table. It wasn't the deal that Hunter Biden wanted initially, but it would have spared him jail time, spared him trials. He walked away from that. He and his lawyers decided to take their chances and go to trial in Delaware.

And he was convicted of felonies. And then the process unraveled after that for him. So this all comes amid a presidential transition inside that Justice Department. What is the expectation heading into this new administration?

Obviously, the president elect picking this election for FBI director, but what do they think is going to happen in the next year or so, those rank and file career members of the Justice Department? Yeah, there's a lot of concern among rank and file, a lot of resumes going out to law firms, people who are retirement eligible, thinking about leaving. But there's also a sense that maybe people need to stay and try to uphold the norms of the dust storm. There's just deep concern that Donald Trump and the people he points to, these positions are going to try to politicize and do away with the independence of the DoJ, which it's a real value of it.

They pride themselves on being independent of the White House, independent politics, law enforcement officers trying to do their jobs. Even though millions of Americans don't always believe it, they believe it and they're really concerned that that's going to be eroded under Donald Trump. Kendallane, our justice intelligence correspondent. Ken, thanks so much for joining us.

And I'm joined now by Carol Lamb, former U.S. attorney and now an Embassy senior legal analyst. Thank you so much for joining us. Carol.

How and unusual is it for a president to issue a pardon this broad? Well, it is highly unusual. I think that it has been recorded that the only other time a president has issued a pardon that really says it's a blanket pardon, says that any offense or potential offense for which he can be prosecuted over the last 10 years is off the table now. And that the only time that's been done in the past has been President Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon.

In other cases, it is always tied to the offense at issue. But I think there's a reason for President Biden having issued such a broad pardon in this case. And that is because it's always been lurking in the background, the Republicans indication that they are going to look into and they're going to continue looking into Hunter Biden's participation in Burisma and Ukraine events. And I think that is really what is worrying President Biden.

And that is why he's issued this blanket, this blanket pardon for all activities between 2014 and yesterday, saying that enough. And he says that enough is enough. I've had it. And that's really what I think we see here.

We see a president who said, that's enough. I've had it. Yeah. And notably, that pardon extends back to 2014, as you said, and that is the same here that Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma.

So does this pardon prevent the Trump Justice Department from opening or reopening any investigation into Hunter Biden? Well, it really does. Anything that involves conduct that occurred between 2014 and yesterday, that's the nature of the pardon. It is not appealable.

It cannot be revisited. That is the constitutional power that a president has. And you know, going to the question of why did he do this about turn, having said that he would not pardon his son, why did he then yesterday go ahead and pardon his son? You know, it could be that when he made the statements before, he actually meant it.

And remember, he had the pardon authority. He could have pardoned his son at any point in time. He let the indictment come down. He let the plea agreement fail.

He didn't pardon him at that point. He let the case go to trial. He let his son plead guilty and still did not pardon him. It seems that I suspect what happened was it was probably a bridge too far when he saw Trump saying he was going to nominate Trump's entire colonel defense team to the top positions of the Justice Department.

And then, of course, Kash Patel to the FBI. That probably created too much fear in President Biden's mind that this would never end against his son. And, Carol, as a former federal prosecutor, do you think that Hunter Biden would have faced any of these charges if he weren't the president's son? That's very, very hard to tell.

You can take criminal prosecutions and you can say that prosecution should have been brought or shouldn't have been brought. But what the public never sees and what most people, even at the Department of Justice, don't see is are the cases that are not brought. So we don't really know what the overall field is of cases that are similar to this that were never brought. We can look at the cases that were brought, but prosecutorial discretion looms large here.

And the gun charge, I think most people, most people experienced prosecutors agree that that was a little bit of a stretch, and that's why the department was willing initially to let him plead to a deferred prosecution. The tax charges were serious charges, and I can't say that it was outside the realm of normalcy for those charges to be bought. Carol Anne, a former federal prosecutor. Nambi News League is Carol, thank you so much.

And joining me now is Arizona Democratic Congressman Greg Stanton. He posted yesterday that he respected President Biden, but quote, I think he got this one wrong. Congressman, in your post yesterday, you said that this case was not a politically motivated persecution prosecution. It appears President Biden disagrees.

So what's your response to the president? Well, I think he agreed with me for months and months and months up until yesterday, which the president indicated over and over again that he would not pardon his son. And in fact, he indicated he supported the judicial process, even involving his son. Remember, his son was convicted by a jury of his peers.

And in the tax case, he pled guilty. And I don't think there's any indication that the special counsel was appointed to maintain the independence of the Department of Justice. The special counsel was in any way motivated by politics. President Biden has said for years that he wants to maintain the independence of the Department of Justice, even in light of the attacks coming from the right, claiming that some of the Department of Justice has been politicized.

It's incredibly important for people in the highest levels of government to support the independence of the Department of Justice, to support the rule of law and not to undermine it. And to that point, I'll put up some of what Colorado Senator Michael Bennett just posted. He wrote that President Biden's decision to put personal interest ahead of duty and further erodes Americans faith that the justice system is fair and equal for all. I want to ask you if you agree on that, but I also want to ask you a separate point is that today the press secretary, Jean Pierre, she said that both things can be true, that the president can support and believe in the legal system.

But he also called this a politically motivated prosecution. Can the president, can both those things be true? I don't think there's evidence in this case that the special counsel who brought these felony charges against Hunter Biden, for which a jury of his peers found him guilty of and brought the charges to which he pled guilty. I think there's any indication that the special counsel was motivated by politics.

And I think Senator Bennett got it right. And as a member of Congress, I'm pretty angry because it's going to be incredibly important that political leaders of both parties stand up for the independence of the Department of Justice, stand up to these attacks suggesting that the Department of Justice has become politicized, it needs to be dismantled or the FBI needs to be dismantled. We need to stand up and fight for the independence of the Department of Justice, not to undermine it. And I think that's what unfortunately has happened in this case where the president, after months and years of saying he would not pardon his son, has done exactly that.

And Congressman, some Democrats have come out and voiced their displeasure with what the president did. A lot of others have not. Are you disappointed that more Democrats haven't spoken out about this? Well, I'll be getting on a flight back to Washington tomorrow.

We're in session this week. So I think a lot of members may not utilize X or other social media platforms like I did last night, but they will be asked about it. I think you're going to see a lot of other elected officials feel the exact same way I do, which is we respect President Biden, we respect his term in office. But on this one, I think he just got it wrong and may in fact do longer term damage by suggesting that that the special counsel engaged in politics in the prosecution of Hunter Biden.

I think that that could do some real long term damage to the Department of Justice at a time when the Department of Justice needs people to stand up in defense of them and their independence. Not just Department of Justice justice, but also potentially Congress and your party. Do you anticipate that Republicans are just going to use this, that whenever democr question something that the Trump Justice Department does, will it now be harder to do your job? Of course the question answers itself.

Of course it becomes harder to do our job. But most importantly, we need the American people to have confidence in important institutions like the Department of Justice. President Biden for years has stood up for the independence of the Department of Justice for years has stood up to the Republican attacks, the right wing attacks, suggesting that the Department of Justice is politicized. And in this case, there is no evidence that the special counsel who brought these felony charges against Hunter Biden were acting with politics in mind.

And so it's at these critical moments that we need to stand up and defend the independence of the Department of Justice. And it's disappointing that the president chose this moment to take this action which undermines independence suggests that there's politics at play when there really wasn't. And that does make it harder. But so I'm most focused in on American people's confidence in the justice system.

And I think what happened the last 24 hours has hurt that. Really briefly, Congressman, though, on a human level, as a father, would you have done anything differently? Well, I mean, that's so incredibly difficult to say about whether I as a father or any parent would do the same thing for our child. I'm a policymaker.

And so I have to, I have to look at this, about what the implications are for the American people's confidence in our justice system, our confidence and trying to undermine or suggest that politics are at play when they, when they aren't, and for the greater good of the justice system, for the greater good about what is clearly coming down with the President Trump making these choices for these incredibly important decisions, what is likely to come our way, attacks on, on our justice system. We need people to defend that, that system when it is worth defending. And I, I believe that the special counsel did not act with politics in mind. Congressman Greg Stanton of Arizona, thank you so much for your time.

I really appreciate it. And coming up, the Cash Patel pick. President elect Trump says he plans to replace the FBI director with a loyalist who has promised to purge the bureau and shut down its headquarters. Plus, more controversy swirls around another one of Trump's cabinet pixies.

Pete Hegseth faces new allegations of misconduct in a damning new New Yorker report. You're watching MEET THE PRESS now. Stay with us. Hello.

Welcome back, Republican. They're facing new questions today about some of President elect Trump's picks for key administration roles, including his decision to pick Cash Patel as FBI director. Patel, an ardent Trump loyalist, has touted false claims that the 2020 election was stolen and has vowed to go after judges, lawyers and even journalists who he accuses of improperly investigating Trump. Meanwhile, Pete Hexseth, the president elected to lead the Pentagon, was on Capitol Hill today for meetings with senators.

He's under new scrutiny after the New Yorker reported overnight that a 2015 whistleblower report and other documents suggest Hexseth was forced out of leadership positions at two nonprofit veterans groups amid allegations of financial mismanagement, sexist behavior and repeatedly being intoxicated on the job. NBC News has not seen the whistleblower report or a separate letter of complaint cited by the New Yorker. And we have not received a response from the Trump transition team. But Hegseth's attorney told the New Yorker we're not going to comment on outlandish claims laundered through the New Yorker by a petty and jealous disgruntled former associate of Mr.

Hegseth's. And join me now as MSC News justice reporter Ryan Reilly. And also with me from Capitol Hill is NBC's Garrett Haig. Thank you so much for joining us.

Ryan, I want to start with you. Walk us through who Remind us who Pastor Patel is. I think, you know, the lead up front is that he's the first person to be nominated FBI director who wrote a children's book calling the President a king. That's sort of what you start off with.

King Donald. Exactly. With him presenting himself as the wizard who was sort of working on behalf of the king. So that's, you know, he's basically an online influencer.

He's been very supportive of Donald Trump. He came over from Devin Nunez's campaign, he was writer from Devin Nunez's committee and he was a staffer there and then sort of worked his way into Trump's circles and you've seen him many times on some of these podcasts and very supportive of Trump and is very willing not to sort of go after the FBI and made some very aggressive attacks on the FBI. So that was sort of this name that had been floating out there that was sort of a worse nightmare for a lot of employees inside of the bureau. And here we are now to that point.

Yeah. He's also said that he wants to shut down FBI headquarters and turn it into a museum of a deep state. What is the reaction, your context inside the FBI and the doj, what has been the reaction inside of that agency? Yeah, I mean, there's a lot of worry over what this means.

Exactly. And if it's going to go through. I mean, this is essentially, I think to them the same as the MacGates nomination was for Attorney General, where it's just this really bombastic guy who's been willing to support Donald Trump at every turn, basically being potentially heading the agency. So, you know, this would be something that I think would be just a really revolutionary act again with the FBI.

And it's because of time when Donald Trump has been clear that he wants the fi to act in his own interest. Christopher Wray, the current FBI director, has he given any indication whether he will resign or is he just gonna wait for Donald Trump to fire? That's an interesting question here because it's not really technically opening. And you know, we're sort of rolling past this idea that created 50 years ago after Watergate of this 10 year term for FBI director.

The idea was to sort of remove this from daily politics. The FBI should be on sort of a steady path and you know, every 10 years a new president gets to choose them. But the reason that this is happening now is because Donald Trump's new FBI director, even though he appointed the one who was currently in the spot, and that opening only occurred because he fired the first FBI director, James Comey. So, you know, if we ended in normal order, what would have happened was probably there would have been a point to last year that President Joe Biden would have made to make a new FBI director for the next 10 years, next decade.

Ryan Reilly, our justice reporter. Ryan, thanks so much. I want to turn now to Garrett Hake. He's on Capitol Hill.

And I also want to turn to Pete Hexseth. What are the allegations laid out in that New Yorker article we mentioned? And I understand he was just on the Hill. That's right, Dave.

Yeah. Look, in summary, the New York article describes him leading these two different veterans organizations about a decade ago, beset in the way the article describes it by alcohol problems, spending the organization's money on parties and on women, and sort of connecting all of these things together in a trail of mismanagement that ultimately led to his being forced out of these two positions. You mentioned a statement from his attorney this morning, but that's the only substantive response to those allegations from either Hegseth or the Trump transition, which I find notable. He was just on the Hill for meeting with Senator Tommy Turville of Alabama, who came out saying positive things about him, but saying it would be up to Hegseth himself to address personal issues that could be a problem for his nomination.

While we're in the room together, I tried to ask a couple of questions about the article specifically and whether or not he has a problem with alcohol. He didn't respond at all, only saying that he was going through this process, which, as you know, will ultimately include hearing of some kind. We're gonna have to answer all of these questions under the bright lights. Yeah.

And to that point, Derek Hegseth has had already been under scrutiny. Right. For these past allegations of sexual misconduct. So is there any concern in Trump world that these latest allegations could derail his potential nomination?

I think the silence here is very telling. The fact that the Trump transition hasn't commented on Hegseth today since this article came out isn't for lack of trying. I mean, I've been calling everybody in my phone book who speaks for the transition and who speaks for these nominees, and they're not rushing to defend him. And so I think what you're seeing here now is him on the Hill doing the work that will be necessary to see where this nomination stands and how it can move forward.

But these kinds of questions about judgment and character are especially important. You're talking about leading an organization with 3 million people in it that's responsible for the defense of our country. And so he's gonna have some very difficult questions to answer. He's starting with some favor.

Lawmaker certainly time Zuberville is not somebody who you expect to vote against any of President Trump's picks. But the strategy now may, and again I emphasize may because the Trump team's not talking be to see how well Hexef can sink or swim on his own in this moment. Yeah, Gary, I have no doubt that you've been looking at your contact list all day trying to pick that up, but have any Senate Republicans voiced any concern over Hegseth or Cash Patel's pending nominations? Well, we heard some concern about Hegseth when his nomination was first rolled out from folks who you might expect, someone like Lisa Murkowski, who's been critical of some of President Trump's nominations the first time he was President Trump.

Susan Collins, Joni Ernst, also a veteran herself, suggested that there be a lot of work Hegseth wants to do to make sure he gets confirmed. I think we're going to see here similar what happened with Matt Gates, which is none of these lawmakers want to be public. They don't draw the ire of Donald Trump by criticizing any of his picks publicly. They're going to send messages behind the scenes and communicate the fact that their votes are there or not quietly to Hexet and his allies to see if they can affect the total there.

As for Cash Patel, same dynamic applies. Nobody's publicly come out to criticize him yet. What you have seen, which to me feels like a little bit of a coded criticism, as folks like Mike Brown say, look at the current FBI director's doing just fine. Garrett Hake live for us on Capitol Hill.

Garrett, thank you. And up next, we'll have more on these controversial Trump picks. Plus, the president elects two of his in laws to serve in his next administration. You're watching Meet the Press now.

Stay informed with the NBC News app breaking news just coming in moments ago. Watch, read and listen throughout your day. And now unlock even more with a subscription. It's the best of NBC News with fewer ad instructions, including ad free articles, podcasts and full NBC News shows.

Plus deeper access and exclusive content. Let's just take a step back. It's more context and clarity from the reporters you trust. Download the NBC News app now and subscribe for more.

Get the best of NBC News with a subscription viewer ads fee for access and exclusive content. And now during the Xfinity member celebration, members can get an exclusive 50% off an annual subscription. Head to xfinity.com membership to learn more. Xfinity Imagine that subscription automatically renews each year at $65.99/ taxes and fees until canceled.

Offer ends May 12, 2026. Price is subject to change. Visit nbcnews.comxfinity for all of our terms and details. As the day wraps up, get the scoop on what's been happening with here's the Scoop, a new podcast from NBC News with me, your host, Gassy Studio.

We'll take a deep dive into today's top stories with NBC News's trusted journal. It's a fresh take that sharp, thoughtful and informative, bringing closer to headlines and conversations that are shaping our world. The front page to the Zeitgeist. Here's the scoop from NBC News.

Listen daily on Amazon Music. Welcome back. As we mentioned, President Biden continues to face a steady stream of criticism, including from members of his own party, over a sweeping pardon for his son, Hunter. While Democrats have been sympathetic to President Biden's position as a father, they are raising concerns about the political ramifications, especially with President elect Trump set to take office in just a few weeks.

Joining me now is our panel, Nicholas Wu, congressional reporter at Politico Megan Hayes, former special assistant to President Biden and Rick Tyler, Republican strategist and NBC News political analyst. Thank you so much for joining me. Nicholas, I want to start with you. How frustrated are Democrats right now?

You know, it's kind of a mixed bag in the party. I mean, some congressional Democrats are, you know, very sympathetic to the president and saying that as a father, they understand what he did. But really, this is the last thing that Hill Democrats want to be asked about as they return from the things that we recess right now. As you know, we see controversial Trump Cabinet nominees come up to the Hill this week instead of, you know, seeing holy senators asked about Democratic senators and members of the House asked about Hunter Biden.

Right. Look, guys, do we really think was this a surprise to anything? No, of course. I mean, everybody's talking about how he repeatedly said he wasn't going to do it.

When that was happening, did anybody legitimately think that if pushing him to shove and Islam was going to be sentenced, that he wasn't a part of him? No. And I think he was saying that he was running for president and it was a different time. So I think that the dynamics like the six were different at the same time, though, you understand?

I'm sure Rick will jump in just because to understand why he did this to Understand Joe Biden, the father. Joe Biden has already lost two children. He's not going to lose another one. He's 82 years old.

He does not want his only son to be in jail. He does not want that for his son or the rest of his family. And this is something that he can do. I think if anyone is surprised by this and they weren't paying attention to Joe Biden is, would he have done this if Vice President Harris had won the election?

I don't think he would have needed to because I think the vice president probably would have pardoned him. Okay, well, Rick, let me play some of what White House Press Secretary Kari Jean Pierre said today on Air Force One. Let's listen. Two things to be true.

The president does believe in the justice system and in the Department of Justice. And he also believes that his son was singled out politically. One of the reasons the president did the party is because it didn't seem like his political opponents would let go of it. It didn't seem like they would move on.

Is that possible to actually believe those two things? To believe in the justice system, but then also believe it was politicized against Hunter Biden and what is the political cost gonna be here for Biden? Look, I was surprised when Joe Biden said he wouldn't pardon. He should have said nothing because I'm sure his objective was to balance something that's very important, which is he is the head of the executive branch.

He has enormous power. He doesn't want to influence the judicial system. That's a very important sign of the send. So he didn't have to weigh in at all.

He just says, I'm not gonna comment on that. I am not surprised that he pardoned his son. I can't imagine what he would feel like the day after he loses power and his son is condemned to federal prison. However, this was botched because they didn't have to attack the justice system.

It's very hard to believe that the justice system which you're in charge of, which you defended as having integrity the whole time, which convicted your son of his peers for crimes he committed and one he admitted to, what's not going to say no? I don't know. I mean, it's just he's put them all out on a limit. It was completely unnecessary.

All he had to say is this is that I'm partying. My son, my son has suffered enough. There's a lot of things he could say, but undermining the Justice Department on his way out the door is a really a bad signal. It's a bad, it's a bad message.

Heading into the new year and you know, the new administration, what do you think the messaging is going to be for, you know, the Trump team on this heading into next year? Whenever questions come up about the Justice Department, they're going to be able to bring us up. You're asking me if essential Trump Cash Patel has already said he's going to obliterate the department which he's going to be head of. Like no one believes that.

No one's going to diminish their own power when they're in charge by getting rid of the agency or reducing the agencies in charge of. President Trump famously pardoned his father in law. And here's the important point. He pardoned his father in law, Charles, who will now be the ambassador of France.

You see, traditionally the pardon was supposed to be to fix things that anomalies like people who serve punishments that didn't really fit the crime. But in all those cases, there was a sense of contrition. And Hunter Biden, by virtue of his father being president, that power pardon comes from the government. The government is governed, the people.

And therefore Hunter Biden should issue a statement. Maybe he will, but there should be contrition, meaning that I did wrong, that I was sorry, that I should not have done these things. And that has that has not been forthcoming and hasn't come to date. And Nick, I want to turn to you.

You cover capital. We just heard from Garrett P. Tech stuff on the Hill today. But I want to talk about Cash Patel and you know, just a few days ago in a statement with my colleague Kristen Walker, Ambassador John Bolton compare Patel to one of the leaders of Stalin's secret police.

Obvious. Bolton said the Senate should reject his nomination 100 to 0. How do you see this playing out as Patel the new man case? Well, we'll have to wait and see how all these interviews on Capitol Hill are going there.

Still, senators were holding their cards pretty close to the chest on him. And all eyes are going to be on more moderate members of the Senate, Republicans, Alexis Murkowski, Susan Collins. We might even have to see where Mitch McConnell goes on this. Now that he's no longer in leadership, he won't have to deal with the same sort of burdens he did before in getting nominees through.

And with the seal of the near margin, there's very little room for error. Do you think that Republicans and Republicans have the summit to take another one of Trump's picks? I think there are things that emerge in the confirmation process that are particularly damaging. We saw Pete Hexath over the weekend.

There are more things coming up with Matt Case. Obviously there was that looming ethics report with caution. Palliation remains to be seen. Speaking of Patel, Rick, I want to quickly ask you about him.

But these new allegations, do you think that we talked about earlier in the broadcast, do you think that Trump will stick by Hexath? Is he only loyal to stick by Mac8? Because they don't tend to stick by anybody. And the fact is the Senate has not paid the political price for this.

They managed to get rid of these nominees without going through the messy process of hearings and then having to vote against them. They're gone and they're all but what they've done is they preserve the political capital to take on another one. So that's still in the bank and maybe they'll get rid of another one and they won't have to spend the political capital at all. Meghan, how what options do Democrats have here with any of this?

Sit back, watch. Right. But I think they also have the ability of during cognition and brings that thing. That's what happened with banks.

They got enough attention, enough attraction that people went to drop it. He's not going to get the votes. And if you get up enough step on hence ether or cash Patel, that may happen again. So they can preserve their political capital on some of the other folks, they're less controversial and they may say, you let me help you exactly.

Mac and Rick, Nick, thank you all so much for joining me on the panel. Really appreciate it. And after the break, make Democrats win again as part of my next gas campaign message as he vows to become the next chair of the Democratic National Committee. You're watching Meet the Press now.

Welcome back. As Democrats plot their way forward after their 2024 election loss, one of the first steps is to pick a new party chairman. Right now, four people have declared their running. Former Maryland Governor Martin o', Malley, New York State Senator James Fufus, Minnesota Democratic Party Chair Ken Martin, and Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wickler.

Here's what Wickler said about his candidacy yesterday on msnbc. You know, the things that unite us are the needs we have in common to be able to support our families, to be able to lead the kinds of lives that we want at the dnc. We need a strategy in every state to bring together the resources, the communicators, the people power to be able to win these fights. And that is the goal in the Democratic National Committee.

That's why I'm running. And joining me now is one of those other contenders vying to be the next DNC chair, New York Democratic State Senator James Scufus. Senator, thank you so much for joining us. And you may not be a name that's well known to many of our viewers, so I want to start big picture.

Why do you want to run the Democratic Party and why do you think you're the best person to the job? Thanks for having me, Gabe. Pleasure to be here. I'm running to be DNC chair because I so strongly believe, as do the vast majority of Democrats, that we have to get back to one thing and one thing only, and that is winning again as a Democratic Party.

I come from a district that Donald Trump just won by 12 percentage points. I won re election by 14 points. In fact, he's won my district three times. And so I am the outsider in this race.

I happen to think that's a positive attribute. I wear that as a badge as I'm talking to DNC members and seeking to earn their support. The next DNC chair has to be hyper focused on getting us back to what we used to do, having a really big tent coalition building, bringing back the folks who are now on the outside looking in and believe the Democratic Party has been disrespectful to some viewpoints. And that's what I'm looking to do as an ex DNC chair.

Senator, I don't think you have much argument for Democrats that they want to win again. The question is how to do it. And I want to press you on something that you said. You talk about being an outsider and bringing an outsider perspective.

Isn't that the same as Mr. Wickler and Mr. Martin in Wisconsin and Minnesota? They're from those places.

Aren't they a long way from the Beltway as well? So I have a lot of respect for both of them. In fact, I've been in touch with them over the last couple of days. They are there are a lot of things that contributed a lot to the Democratic Party and to the DNC specifically.

But I think objectively anyone would be hard pressed to call them outsiders. No, they've been part of the dnc. They've got a list as long as my arm of years, if not decades long DNC relationships. I come at this as someone who doesn't.

I'm introducing myself to everyone outside of New York for literally the first time. I've made about a hundred or so calls to DNC members. And what has been heartening is that These members, these conversations, they all get it. They are reading the room.

They understand we've got to do things differently. We don't want someone who's a product of a party machine or a. Or an operative or a Beltway guy. We need someone who just knows how to win.

And, Senator, I do want to turn to your diagnosis of the party. Kamala Harris was the first Democratic presidential nominee to lose a popular vote in 20 years. And what's your explanation for that? Is this an issue of policy or messaging?

It's a little bit of both. But it first starts with showing up everywhere. I go to some places in the rural parts of my district, for example, and folks tell me, thank you not only for delivering. You're the only Democrat that even shows up and talks to us in our communities and does so in a way that's not condescending, that's not lecturing, that includes listening.

That speaks to them in a relatable manner. I'm not academic in a way that I'm talking to people, telling them what they should believe. The economy's doing well when in fact they're going to supermarket. And they can see for themselves that it's not.

Not using terms like Latin, X being overly politically correct. That's how we get back to winning, first and foremost. But within the dnc, this is important. We have to reorient what our priorities are.

We can't just reform around the margins. We've got to shift a lot of our spending, cut out the sweetheart deals with contractors and vendors, and send that money to the people in the trenches, the state parties, the county parties, and our partners in organized labor. And, Senator, our lead story today was President Biden announcing his pardon of his son Hunter. At the moment, the Democrats are warning against judicial overreach, against the politicization of the Justice Department.

Is that pardon counterproductive? So I'm a father. I get where he's coming from. This intense desire, I'm sure, to protect his family at all costs.

Let's be clear, Donald Trump is probably about to pardon people who beat up police officers on January 6th. So there's a little bit of a double standard here. I don't want to hear the noise from Donald Trump and his allies on this. But to be clear, this does undermine our case that we have to press as Democrats against Donald Trump's ridiculous claims that the DOJ is being weaponized against him and his loyalists.

We, as Democrats have been carrying a lot of water afore President Biden this year, and it's really Unfortunate that we have to spend time expectedly on this program talking about that instead of the future of the Democratic Party and the dnc. Those are some strong words. Senator, do you think President Biden should have dropped that earlier? I do, and I've made that clear.

And I think if you're running for DNC chair, you should be able to answer that question. Otherwise you're not going to be able to go on Joe Rogan's podcast and Fox News regularly and answer tougher questions. Yes, he should have dropped out sooner. I believe Vice President Harris certainly still would have been the nominee even with an open primary and it would have made her a stronger nominee in the end.

Senator, how should the 2028 Democratic primary be different than what we've seen in the past? What do you want the primary at to look? So it's gonna be, I'm sure, an open primary. It remains to be seen whether Vice President Harris runs again.

If she wants to run, she should. But South Carolina was moved up in the calendar in order to make the early nominating contests a bit more diverse and they deserve to get a crack at being first. They had an uncompetitive primary for the presidential nomination. We should let them be first, have a test run at least a single time, and then we can evaluate whether it worked or not, whether we should reevaluate the order.

But it's gonna be an open primary and that will make for a stronger nominee for sure. State Senator James Griffith, one of the contenders for DNC Chair. I really appreciate your time, Senator. And silly Tom.

The US calls for the de escalation in Syria after thousands of rebels take control of major city in a surprise deadly offensive. They're watching me the press now. Stay with us. Welcome back.

We've got developments on multiple fronts in the Mideast conflict today, beginning with the news of the death of Israeli American soldier. Israel's military announcement today that Omer Nutra was believed to be a hostage in Gaza was actually killed on October 7 and his body taken by Hamas. In a statement, President Biden said he was devastated and outraged to hear about his death and reiterated his commitment to get the hostages home. The news comes after Hamas released a propaganda video showing another Israeli American hostage, Eden Alexander under duress calling on President elect Trump to quote, negotiate for our freedom.

Meanwhile in Syria, the Assad regime is now rushing reinforcement troops to the country's northwest region after Syrian rebels seize control of one of the country's largest cities, Aleppo. A UK based monitoring group estimates 514 people have been killed since the renewed clashes began five days ago. For more on the situation in Syria, I'm joined now by Ambus News correspondent Halagh Gharani. Hala, thank you so much for joining us.

How did we get here? What was the status of the Syrian civil war? And who are these rebels who see Salepa? So, Gabe, all these stories we've been reporting on over the last year are connected.

Hezbollah is weakened. Iran is on the back foot. Russia is preoccupied with Ukraine. Those are all part of that same axis, that same alliance that props up the Assad regime in Syria.

As a result of all of this, the rebels, many of whom are backed by Turkey, saw an opportunity and they advanced on the country's second largest city, Aleppo, in a pretty stunning operation that really surprised, I think, even their backers, even their supporters. The question now is, what happens next? Because the regime and Russia have started bombing rebel positions once again in Idlib Province. They are bombing civilian targets, according to reports on the ground, including hospitals.

And so there are concerns that this will really reignite the civil war in the way that we saw it kind of play out during the darkest days of that conflict in 2015, 16, where tens of thousands of people were killed, killed, which really caused a huge migratory wave out of Syria, millions of people leaving and all the effects that that had on the region and even beyond in Europe. Where does the US Stand in all this? Is trying to deescalate the situation. How and do you think they might have any success?

Well, it's unclear what kind of leverage the US Would have in this. The US Has a few hundred troops in the eastern part of Syria. They're allied more or less with the sdf, which is a Kurdish majority Kurdish faction. They are using that alliance to keep ISIS in check in that part of Syria.

So there is a US Presence. It's a small one. What will really change the calculus here is the fact that if a Assad falls, which is, you know, a few weeks ago, if you asked me, well, that happened, I would have said really, it doesn't seem likely. But if he's weakened, if he falls, if Syria becomes certainly, you know, moves more to the orbit of Turkey and other powers, then that lifeline between Iran and Hezbollah will be interrupted.

So it will have huge consequences regionally. And it's something that's playing out at work speed. So it's really hour by hour. So it's a story that we really have to keep our eye on very closely.

Gabe, Holly, covering all those developments in the movies. Paul, thank you and thank you for watching. I'm Dave Gutierrez and I'm back tomorrow with more Meet the Press. Now the news continues with Hallie Jackson.

Right now, I'm Craig. Mel. 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. It's really fascinating folks who share their defining moments, their triumphs, their challenges, their stories. Ways are funny and mechanical.

So I hope you'll join me each week. Who knows, you might just come away with your own glass apple. Search Glass Apple with Craig Melton From Today on YouTube and wherever you get a podcast.