Meet the Press NOW — December 6

If it's Friday, President Biden considers pre-emptive partners for some of the most likely targets of Trump's political retribution, as the president-elect defends his embattled Pentagon pick and sits down with NBC's Kristen Welker. Plus, the manhunt enters its third day as police release more photos of the suspected gunman who killed the UnitedHealthcare CEO amid new clues about his whereabouts leading up to the shooting. And a federal appeals court upholds a law that could ban TikTok before Trump picks office, setting the stage for a potential Supreme Court showdown as the fate of the Chinese-controlled social media app, and its 170 million users in the US hangs in the balance. Welcome to Meet the Press Now.

I'm Gabe Gutierrez in Washington. As sources have confirmed to NBC News at President Biden and his senior staff are discussing the possibility of pre-emptive partners for potential targets of President-elect Trump's values of retribution, the discussions potentially opening a Pandora's box of presidential power. Sources familiar with the discussions say no decisions have been made by Biden or his team and that there's no consensus. There's also no official list of names, but among the names that have come up so far are people Donald Trump has singled out for a potential revenge.

President-elect Adam Schiff, former Congresswoman Liz Cheney, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, this afternoon White House Secretary Kerry Jean-Pierre saying she would not get ahead of the president on any potential pardons, but signaling that more pardons or commutations will be made. The news comes after President Biden drew backlash from both sides of the aisle for his sweeping pardon of his son Hunter after repeatedly and unequivocally pledging he would. Jean-Pierre addressing that decision at the first White House briefing since that pardon and ensuing backlash.

I know what I said. I know what the president said. That is where we were at the time. There has been some circumstances that have changed us, right?

Republicans not letting up saying they won't stop. They're going to continue to do this. I mentioned the recent Trump appointees of legal enforcement positions that said during the campaign they were out for retribution and so no reason to not take in front of the war. We should know that preemptive pardons have been used by presidents in the recent past, but earlier today House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries suggesting this use of pardon power is not where the president's focus should be in his final days in office.

We've had no communication with the White House as it relates to potential pardons with respect to any sitting members of Congress or former members of Congress. It has been the perspective that many of us have shared that there are working-class Americans all across the country who have been caught up in an overly aggressive criminal justice system that at times has gone too far in terms of excessive sentencing as it relates to non-violent offenders who do not present any risk to society and are prepared to contribute to the well-being of society to the extent that the Biden administration is considering additional pardons moving forward. It's my suggestion that that is where the focus should be at this point in time. Sources telling VC News there is separate work being done on Biden's clemency power in criminal justice cases.

The discussions coming as the president-elect has made no bones about flexing his own presidential image and power weeks before his second term officially begins. This weekend the president-elect will be back on the world stage during a trip to Paris for the reopening of the Notre Dame Cathedral and Collins' Trump continues to fill his administration at a furious pace announcing four new picks last night with a focus on homeland security positions. The president-elect also appearing ready to challenge Senate Republicans on his most polarizing cabinet choices with doubts on Capitol Hill around his big four-defense secretary. This morning Trump posting his support for Pete Hagg's death on social media writing quote, his support is strong and deep much more so than the fake news would have you believe.

Pete is a winner and there is nothing that can be done to change that. Joining me now is senior White House correspondent Kelly O'Donnell Garrett Hagg is here with me on set with the latest on the Trump transition and for more on the power of presidential pardons. I'm joined by NBC News legal analyst and criminal defense attorney Danny Sivalis. Thank you all so much for being here.

Kelly, I want to start with you at the White House. Look, Haggine Jeffries seem to be giving some sort of a gentle admonishment of the administration when asked about this preemptive pardon reporting. So behind the scenes are Democrats frustrated with how the White House is approaching this process? Well, there's certainly a time now with 45 days left in the president's term for there to be a lot of excessive advocacy, lobbying and so forth for those that various groups think deserve this kind of presidential protection.

And Karishom here acknowledged that when a president is about to leave office, there is an expectation that he will use that power extensively. We have a few different buckets here. And Kim Jeffries, who is the leader of Democrats on Capitol Hill, is certainly arguing for a more robust use of commutation or pardoning power for those who have been convicted, who have served whatever penalty they were required, and as he described it, non-violent offenders and drug cases and those kinds of things where people's lives could be substantially improved if they were out from under the weight of these convictions. And we get the impression from our recording and from what Karishom here said publicly today that that kind of a candidate in a large group is likely going through that process now, that is part of the review for use of the clemency power.

The other sort of bucket is this broader, more unconventional, preemptive pardon power, which in many ways is intended to protect from investigation, from potential prosecution, from conviction, a group of people that the White House considers to be vulnerable. And it's not just that there is any kind of a suggestion that there is wrongdoing that's been done, but the process of Washington being put through investigation is a costly and difficult one. And they're trying to preempt that in essence. If that doesn't fact go forward, okay?

So Kelly, is there, how is the recent Hunter Biden pardon playing into all this? I know Karishom piercing frustrated answering questions about that still at the White House briefing today. Well, it was litigated a lot of the briefing today because it was, as you noted, the first non-camera briefing in a formal sense since that pardon was granted from father to son, president to citizen. And so there was a lot that needed to be sort of put on the record.

And she did revert to the president's own statement many times. The impact of a pardon like this is when you, when any president does something controversial, it does cast a shadow and others who believe there should be clemency offered in different directions or explanations given will certainly try to fill that void. We're seeing that now there are Democrats who believe that the use of the pardon for the president's son is a way of perhaps giving a free pass to Donald Trump when he returns to office to grant pardons as he would like. So there's some frustration among Democrats about that and this desire to see others who could benefit from it also be given pardons or commutations.

Yeah. Is there concern, Kelly, that some of these preempted pardons could actually be rejected? Well, there's been some talk of that in the sense that individuals don't want to say that they, you know, that the typical use of a pardon power is when someone acknowledges wrong doing, often is paid the price for it and then accepts that mercy from the president. This would be different.

And so it may be the case, for example, Senator elect Schiff of California says he doesn't want that kind of protection, doesn't believe he needs it. Other names have been floated publicly. We don't have specific comments from them, but certainly the idea of those in Washington who recognize when people are put through this process of investigation from committee level to actual prosecution, there's a lot that is involved in it and it can be very stressful and costly. And perhaps that's what the White House is seeking to give some relief there, a lot of distance to go, Gabe.

Yeah, we heard any reaction from the Trump team to this pardon reporting. Yeah, we have. In fact, Caroline Levitt who will take over the podium for Karine John Pierre next year said that what she had heard out of the briefing room today suggests that Karine John Pierre had either been lied to or was lying to the American public when it comes to the Hunter Biden part and then all of President Biden's blanket statements that he wouldn't pardon his son were proven untrue and that it reflects negatively on the credibility of this White House. Now, substantively beyond that, we haven't gotten anywhere in terms of the, you know, these projected future pardons, but I think it's in one more way for the Trump administration to kind of stick an elbow in the ribs of the outgoing Biden team here.

And Garrett, on another topic today, for the first time we heard from Donald Trump on Pete Hexa for the first time. Why is he weighing in now? That's a good question. You know, Hexa had a rocky start to the week on Capitol Hill, but his, the vibes around him certainly seemed to approve the second half of the week.

He leaned in, he was told by senators and by Trump that he needed to fight for this position if he really wants it. And I think what we saw reflected in that true social post is a recognition that he had done so. Jamie Vance went even further than that, by the way, today. He was in North Carolina and told reporters that Hexa would be the guy that he's not going to be taken down by the media and that he's actually been making calls on his behalf, including the journey earns to, you know, could end up being the key player in this old drama.

So this weekend, Hexa's lawyer says that Hexa is going to fill out those FBI background checks ones. What impact that have next week? Could we start to see more senators back away from Hexa, you know, depending on how that background check is? It could be a while before we see the results of that background check, perhaps not even till right before a confirmation hearing happens.

So I wouldn't expect any big change, you know, soon based on that. But I think there is a lot of concern on Capitol Hill and Marlago that there could be other shoes out there to drop on Hexa. Hexa has hung some of his defense on this idea that he is now a changed man. That so much of these stories about him happened four, five, six, even more years ago that he's, but he's also saying some of those things are untrue.

Yeah. Right. That's a total defense, okay? That's right.

But to the degree that he can say, I'm not that guy anymore. That's really contingent on him not being that guy anymore. And they're not being more recent things coming up that would fly in the face of that argument. So it doesn't seem that Trump pushed the Senate very hard on Matt Gates.

Why is he sticking by Hexa at this point? I think there's a risk here of this becoming a Trent. I mean, Trump really was aggressive in his cabinet picks with people that he thought would be loyal to him. They thought would shake up the system that would be outside of kind of what a traditional Washington set of selections would look like it was certainly the case with Gates and with Hexa, losing Gates quickly, then losing Hexa immediately afterwards sets entirely the wrong tone.

They're not the last controversial nominees he's got up. I mean, Tulsi Gabbard has not set foot on Capitol Hill. She's supposed to be up there next week, you know, being 0 and 2, essentially before you even get to some of the more controversial nominees is not where the president elect wants to be. Hey, covering the Trump transition a lot to watch the next few weeks there.

Thank you. I want to turn out to Danny Savala. So Danny, what is your reaction to these preempted pardon discussions? Well, preempted pardons are fascinating because they're incredibly rare.

First, broad pardons like the one given Hunter Biden, very rare. But in a way, the Hunter Biden pardon was a preempted pardon. Had Biden just pardoned Hunter on his specific two federal cases, it would not be preempted. But when you cover a large swath of time, that's a preempted pardon.

So Biden's already done it, no reason he might not do it again. And in terms of pardoning a big group of people, that's been done as well. Washington pardoned the participants of the Whiskey Rebellion and President Carter pardoned all the Vietnam draft dodgers, which numbered thousands of people. So there's plenty of precedent for this and the pardon power is arguably the most broad power given to the president.

It's virtually unreviewable. And if the president wants to pardon these folks preemptively for any and all conduct, as long as the conduct has already happened, that's what Supreme Court president tells us that the only time limitation is that whatever they did, prosecuted, arrested or not has to have already happened, you cannot pardon future crimes. So Danny, you mentioned some examples of previous preempted pardons and you mentioned, for example, to me Carter with the draft dodgers. Look, that was for a specific thing that he pardoned them for.

These preempted pardons, what's the scope of this? What would President Biden, how would the wording look for anybody that he's looking to preemptively pardon? Any and all crimes, whether or not prosecuted, there's a Supreme Court case that actually would give some helpful language. And the limitations are very few.

As long as it's any conduct that happened, whether prosecuted or not, it's exactly what he gave the Hunter Biden, had he limited the Hunter Biden pardon to those two federal criminal prosecution in California and Delaware, then that would have been specific, but instead he covered it in entire time period. So I'm sure if he does it, it will follow the same format as the Hunter Biden pardon, which is a preempted pardon in part other than the crimes that we know of and that the president mentioned specifically in his statement. So is the only check on a president's pardon power, essentially impeachment? Yes.

And I would argue that since the Supreme Court's immunity decision this past year, that it's even less checkable now, because let's say, for example, imagine a situation where a president pardons people that were arguably co-conspirators in a crime that he committed. This is exactly what one of the framers, George Mason, was worried about when they argued about whether to include the pardon power in the Constitution. They almost didn't include it, or at least they were those who argued against it, even though it came from the English tradition, it was already in existence in the colonies. There were folks who didn't want the pardon power for exactly that concern.

So it's strange that now post-immunity decision, that exact conduct might not even be prosecutable. So yes, the short answer is it may be that the only check is impeachment and probably not even criminal prosecution for a criminal part. And then is accepting this pardon, essentially an admission of guilt? Oh, that is a thorny question.

The Supreme Court case from 1815 suggested that yes, acceptance of a pardon is an admission of guilt. But in the modern era, that's probably not the case anymore. For example, I handle wrongful conviction cases, and often if you get a pardon, critical is whether or not it's a pardon based on actual innocence, because actual innocence is key to wrongful conviction pay-out statutes. So in the modern era, it's still an open thorny question, but the more likely answer is that depending on the language in the pardon itself, that can control a pardon may no longer be, per se, an admission of guilt.

Thanks, Wallace. Are legal analysts, Danny? Thank you so much. Okay.

So this is a talk of your Should I? Thank you. This is a talk of the first question one, highlyheavy investigation into that deadly shooting of a healthcare CEO in Midtown Manhattan, NYPD's chief set today that investigators believe the suspect has left New York City. Police meanwhile believe the suspected shooter seen here in images from an upper west side host where they believed he was staying may have traveled to New York last month on a Greyhound bus from Atlanta.

And minutes ago, the Atlanta police department confirmed that it was assisting the NYPD in this investigation. Police meanwhile say they're looking at a series of videos that may show the suspected gunman right before and after the shooting, including this footage of a person without distinctive grave backpack leaving a subway station about a half hour before the incident. surveillance video obtained by our New York station, WNBC, that appears to show him riding a bike about 30 blocks north of the shooting shortly after the gunfire. And he's seen his law enforcement and intelligence correspondent Tom Winter joins me now.

So Tom, how close are the police to finding this guy? Well, they have all sorts of video game as you just laid out. But the problem for them is that the trail at least appears, or at least as much as they're willing to say at this point, appears to grow cold at the Port Authority bus station in New York City. So basically, after this shooting occurs, this homicide occurs, they have him entering Central Park.

They now video of him leaving Central Park and going down towards the Port Authority. They have video of him entering the Port Authority, but they do not have video of him exiting the Port Authority. So the active belief among the police department, at least at this hour, is that he left town perhaps on some form of a bus. There's buses that obviously go to New Jersey, there's buses that go really all over the East Coast from that location or near that location, because, you know, there's some of these long distance buses that just happen to be near the Port Authority, much the way that an airport has all sorts of different carriers going to different places, kind of a hub and spoke.

Well, that's kind of what exists at the Port Authority in New York City at their bus terminal on a smaller scale. So that's going to be a big question for them. What type of bus did he get on? Where did he go?

And so this investigation at this point is going to expand, because until they get an identification on this person, they don't know where they're from, and they do not have an identification of this person at this hour. And it could be a lot of information, as you've said, that the NYPD just isn't sharing at this point. So, Tom, the Atlanta Police Department says it is assisting in this investigation, as we said. Does that suggest that investigators might believe the suspect is either from Atlanta or travel back there now?

So, if you travel to New York City on November 24th from Atlanta, so it was a bus that originated in Atlanta, came to New York City made a number of stops along the way, so it makes sense that the NYPD, which enjoys relationships with law enforcement agencies, major law enforcement agencies across the country, they even have detectives that are embedded with some of the larger departments, so that there's a really great information share back and forth. So they would definitely know who to contact at the Atlanta Police Department. Of course, they might say, hey, can you guys check your files one more time for somebody that looks like this? You have anybody that might recognize them, anything within your, what they would call in law enforcement circles, holdings, but basically anything in your files of somebody that looks like this that might help us with a name or perhaps threats in the past or anything that can lead us to an identification or whereabouts of the person that they're clearly seeking a person of interest that they call them suspect in some of the other photos, this particular photos.

But bottom line is this is the person they believe at this juncture at least that they would like to talk to you about this case. And Tom, what about the hostel? What information have police gotten from there? The best information so far.

I mean, the best information they've gotten is the fact that he felt smitten at some point with the, one of the people that works there at the hostel desk, he smiles at her and it's that moment when he brings down the mask and you see that smile game that has allowed them to get at least a decent shot of his face. Now, what they'll do is they, and what they did do is put this into their database of video surveillance throughout the city just to see if that face pops up anywhere else. And that was one of the things that was helpful for them with respect to figuring out where he came in from. But at this point, it's not led to any specific driver's license photo match or any sort of other information they could.

Again, it all goes back to that name. Who is this person? Once you get to who you might be able to get where they are. Tom, once you know you'll stay on top of it.

Tom, thank you. And we're, of course, following the Mantine in New York City closely and bringing you any major updates when we get them coming up. What's next? For TikTok, a federal appeals court just ruled to uphold a nationwide ban on the massively popular social media app, unless it's sold, setting the stage for a potential Supreme Court showdown.

And a major programming reminder, my friend and colleague, Kristen Welker, has an exclusive one-on-one interview with President Elect Trump that will air this Sunday on Meet the Press. And it's Trump's first broadcast interview since winning the election. So tell me this. I'll be right back with more Meet the Press now.

Welcome back. A federal appeals court ruled unanimously today to uphold a law that would ban TikTok unless it divests from its China-based owner, ByteDance, the three-judge panel sided with the Department of Justice, which cited national security concerns about the app and its ability to collect sweeping amounts of data on its 170 million users in the U.S. The nationwide ban is expected to go into effect on January 19, though TikTok has already signaled they will appeal today's ruling to the Supreme Court. Joining me now is NBC News correspondent Savannah Sellers.

Savannah, thank you so much for joining us. What more did the judges say in this ruling and how soon should we expect that appeal? Hey, Gabi, I think so much for having me on, so you nailed it. They really pinned this on national security, and you also said this was unanimous.

That was not a given. There was kind of a chance that we were interested to see if at least one of the judges would side with TikTok, given some questions that were asked about the validity of their freedom of speech argument back in September out of hearing. But you said it unanimous. And here's more of what they said.

They said we recognize that this decision has significant implications for TikTok and its users, but the first amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States. So the government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit the adversary's ability to gather data on people in the United States. So really hanging their hat, hanging that concern on the fact that this Chinese ownership of ByteDance, which is TikTok's parent company, could be of concern both in what it means is able to be pushed through that algorithm, content that Americans actually are going to consume, and also what could they be doing with the data of the 170 million American users? Gabe.

And Savannah, I know you've been following this for a while, and we've talked for a while about the potential sale of TikTok and whether that's going anywhere. What's the latest on that? Is there any bulk here? No, Gabe, there's not.

There's the short answer. TikTok has a signal that they're not even interested in. It's not up for sale, essentially. We've heard some interesting people come forward, for example, former Treasury Secretary, Stephen Ushin, people who maybe in theory could gain a group of investors, let's say, together that could come up with the money.

But TikTok has not even said what they cost, or hey, there's not even a price tag for what it could be purchased for. So it is interesting that we talk about, you know, oh, by January 19th, if it's not sold, it could be banned. The wholesale of this is not something that TikTok has at all pursued in terms of an option to prevent that ban. Really, it's just this legal action, which, as you pointed out, is likely to head to the Supreme Court, something we'll probably hear about quite soon.

And Savannah, there's the politics of this, of course, right, you know, president-elect Trump at one point, he went to ban TikTok, but he's now reversed course. What impact could he have on all this litigation once he takes office? Yeah, we actually just recently even heard him say, I will save TikTok, so total reversal on that one there. There's a couple things here.

So the way that it's written right now, essentially, president-elect Trump could come in and say, once he's president, say, I'm going to give a 90-day extension for bite-dance TikTok to continue to pursue that divestiture. Again, though, back to what we were just talking about, that's not really on the table as far as TikTok is concerned, they're not pursuing that. So then what could get more complicated, right, is once there's a new president in the administration, as well as a new Department of Justice, how could that go down? Because right now, this is kind of a fight of TikTok versus the Department of Justice.

Now, you have to keep in mind, though, this was a law passed by Congress, signed into law by President Biden. It's not exactly something that can just immediately be repealed. Could we, though, see something, Dave, especially with a president Trump, something like him directing his attorney general, who he appoints to that position, saying, don't enforce that law. And then what type of fight that will be very interesting to watch that over the next couple months.

Yeah, Savannah. So if this ban were to go into effect, what does that look like? Does it just disappear off your phone? Is it some error message that pops up?

Yeah, it's a really good question. So our understanding right now, it was kind of interesting to see that language within this opinion that we got from this Circuit Court of Appeals, it would be unavailable, potentially for a period of time. It's a little bit murky. But what we understand it to me right now is that it would not disappear off your phone if you have TikTok.

Two main things. You would not be able to download it. So if you don't have the app, you're not going to go and get it right now. And then second and very important for anybody who does, it would essentially stop updating, stop having that connection to the mothership and not algorithm, and then essentially and effectively become defunct over time.

And that time could be pretty quick when you think about how often you're updating some of those tech apps and they're interacting with the software on your phone. Kind of slowly be something that would not at all look like the TikTok that we know today. Savannah Sellers, thank you so much for following up for us. We appreciate it.

Have a good one. And turning now to some news on the economy. November was a good month for the labor market. The economy adding 227,000 new jobs last month, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The unemployment rate did take up, though, a bit to 4.2%. Those numbers were buoyed by the thousands of workers, including workers at Boeing, who returned to work early in the month after being on strike. The labor department also noted that more than 50,000 more jobs were created in September in October than previously reported. The last several months, though, have shown job growth slowing nationwide, increasing the likelihood that the Fed will cut interest rates again when it meets later this month.

And up next, the uncertain way forward for Democrats in Republican-controlled Congress. I'll talk to one of the few Democrats who managed to flip his district by beating a Republican incumbent by just 653 votes. Don't go anywhere. They're watching me depressed now.

And welcome back. As President Elect Trump prepares to take office in just a few weeks, his incoming foreign policy team is already ramping up their diplomatic efforts. And he was just confirmed that Trump's recently named Mideast Envoy met with the Prime Ministers of Israel and Qatar last month to begin discussions about a ceasefire in Gaza. That's according to two sources familiar with the meetings.

Joining me now here on set is Aviva Siegel. She was among the hostages freed from Gaza during the brief ceasefire last November. And unfortunately, her husband, Keith, continues to be held hostage by Hamas. Aviva, thank you so much for joining us.

We really appreciate your time. It's been more than a year since you were released. How are you doing? Thank you, Fadi.

First of all, how am I doing? It's been a very, very difficult week for me because Keith's mom, Dallas Siegel, she was 97 years old, and she passed away just a couple of days ago. And for me being here with that, Keith, in North Carolina, asked myself, what am I doing here with that, Keith? Because North Carolina is Keith.

He grew up in North Carolina, in Chapel Hill, and his special lovely sweet mother did everything she could for anybody in this whole world. And Keith learned that from her. He's just the sweetest. And everybody, everybody just loves Keith.

And he couldn't even say goodbye to his mom. And I want to tell you that one of the days while we had to keep completely utterly silenced underneath the ground, he came up to my ear and he whispered to me, he wanted, he told me that the first thing that he wants to do when he comes out of Gaza is to go and give his mom a hug. And then, unfortunately, he's not here to do that. So he's going to be really, really surprised with bad things that have happened since he hasn't been here.

I'm so sorry you're having to go through this. How are you fighting through it? Well, you know, I wake up every morning and I tell myself, be strong and talk for Keith. I'm here talking for Keith.

I'm here talking for all the hostages that are still in Gaza underneath the ground. And believe me, then I'm sure that they're screaming, just get me out of here. When was the last time that you spoke with someone from the Biden administration or from the Prime Minister's office? And what did they tell you about the status of the ceasefire talks?

I made a, if I didn't just a while ago, well, I was in the state, I've been to the United States. This is my ninth time. And I believe that they're trying to do everything they can. I really believe, I believe, first of all, they know Keith, they know so much about Keith and they was just, everybody was just so happy to get me out of Gaza.

And I'm sure that they can't wait just like me to get them out. And what if any conversations have you had with the incoming Trump administration? We haven't yet, but we're trying to arrange and if anybody can hear me, we'd love to talk and for me to tell the story of what happened to me while I was in Gaza for 51 days and just worried so much for Keith and hostages, the girls that I was with that are underneath the ground that we need to get him out as soon as possible. Earlier this week, speaking about the president of the lab, he posted on social media that there would be, quote, hell to pay if the hostages weren't released by inauguration day.

When you heard that, what went through your head? You know, I was trying to figure out what does it mean? So I've been asking everybody that I know, what does that mean? What does it mean?

Does it mean that it could injure or hurt you? I'm trying to keep on my hope that it won't affect Keith in any way and that it will get Keith back alive. And that's what I want to believe in because I'm against walls, Keith's a peacemaker and I want good for the whole region, for the whole world, for all people. And I'm just too worried, just too worried, so worried after Hush, the American hostage that came out did just a couple of months ago, the conditions that he came back in are the worst.

And you know, more than that, I was there for 51 days underneath the ground and I'm lucky to be sitting here because I could have died. And before I let you go, Viva, we have the privilege of having you here describe for our viewers, just part of the horror that it was being held captive for so long and it's rare that we get to speak with someone who was held hostage. Just figure yourself lying underneath the ground on a faulty dirty mattress for days and you have to keep silence, you can't do, you're not allowed to, and you're not allowed to feel. And when they torture, somebody that you love like they tortured Keith, you have to just keep quiet.

There's so many moments there that I just wanted to cry and my heart just wanted to burst from the cruel way they treated my kid that's 65 years old and American hostage that's underneath the ground for more than a year and two months. Viva, thank you so much for joining us. Viva Siegel, who's husband Keith is still being held captive by Hamas, your strength is so impressive. Thank you for sharing his story and your story and we'll keep him round of applause.

Thank you so much. And we have much more news still ahead. We'll be right back. Now, welcome back.

While Democrats came up short in the presidential race and lost their majority in the Senate, House Democrats actually added seats, just barely missing, rethinking the chamber. Democrats netted two seats, leaving Republicans with a historically narrow majority. The gains for Democrats were on the strength of some tight races in California in the state's 13th District in the San Joaquin Valley, Democrat Adam Gray defeated incumbent John Duarte by just 187 votes out of more than 200,000 cast. And then the California 45th down here, Orange County, Democrat Derrick Tran defeated incumbent Republican Michelle Steele by 653 votes out of more than 300,000 votes cast.

Join me now. Fresh off that narrow victory is California Congressman elect Derrick Tran Congressman elect. Thank you so much for joining us. You know, as we said, Democrats netted two seats in the house and you're responsible for one of those gains, Democrats fell short in a lot of places, but not in your district.

How do you explain that? Hi, Gabe. Thanks for having me. This race was always about having the right candidate with the right profile, wanting to give back and serve the community.

This is a majority minority district. We have about 40% AA NHPI out here in this district with the Vietnamese community comprising 17% of that. I am the son of Vietnamese refugees, first generation here, and so honored and proud to be the member elect to serve this district. And we've heard from some California Democrats that Vice President Harris really wasn't much of a help in the districts.

What do you think? You know, it's my district is not a battleground district and it's totally understandable why the Vice President has to focus on those areas and those districts that she needs to focus on. Now, at the end of the day, I ran my campaign. I was powered by the people.

We listened to them. We wanted to make sure that they understood that we were going to make them my priority and their issues our priority. So that's what it took to win and 653 is my new favorite number. And I'm curious.

Would you like to see Vice President Harris run for governor of California? I would like to see the VP do what's right for her. I am so excited about being able to go to DC and serve and really just focus on giving back to my community. And looking towards that future, does the Democratic Party at large need to make any changes?

So why do you think Vice President Harris came up so short and what does the Democratic Party need to do next? Look, I think at the end of the day, you know, there is some soul searching we as Democrats have to do. And I intend to be a part of that discussion. I intend to help them understand why I was successful in my race, just like Adam and his race that was recently called.

And you know, we got to look to the future and really learn from our past. And you'll be sworn in in just a few weeks and we'll find yourself in the minority. So what do you expect the job will be like in the minority? You know, being a veteran, I was I've always been about working with whether you're Republican or Democrat.

It's about getting things done. So when I get to DC, I want to make sure I work across the aisle to accomplish tasks and missions for the people by district. Well, I want to press you on that. So you say you want to work across the aisle.

So what specifically are the areas that you can see working together with Republicans? Well, I think there is an immigration bill that was passed by the Senate not too long ago. That's something that there are Republicans that were backing it. That was something that President Biden is willing to sign.

And that's something that the House should take up. Well, the Republicans in the Senate were behind it, Republicans in the House or not. And it was Donald Trump that urged him not to. He won the election.

So do you expect them to be very forthcoming on that or willing to budge? You know, I know it's going to be a new make up with 119th. I understand that we have President Trump coming back in and Speaker Johnson still there. But I'm hoping that with a new class in Congress that we're going to be able to work with each other to get things done again.

So this Congress Republicans struggle to pass bills to keep the government from shutting down only passing them with Democratic support. So with Donald Trump in the White House, should Democrats continue to help Speaker Johnson or we let them fail? You know, the Democrats are going to do what we've always done, which is to make sure that the interests of the people is at the forefront of what we do and what we protect. So whatever it's going to take to make sure that we take care of the American people, we're going to do.

Congressman elect with other respect Republicans will say the same thing that the interests of is, you know, the interests of the people is, you know, in the forefront of their thoughts as well. So do you see the gridlock, you know, loosening up at all? Look, I see that they have control of the House. I see that they have control of the Senate and now they have the presidency.

So if they can't pass a budget, that is on them. And so we started the hour with some reporting on President Biden considering preemptive pardons for folks that may find themselves prosecuted by the Trump administration, including your state Senator elect Adam Schiff and Dr. Anthony Fauci. Is that something you'd support?

You know, I think when it comes to what may happen in speculating these things, I'm not prepared to answer one way or the other, but I do know that Adam Schiff has dedicated his life to making sure that democracy and freedom is protected and no president should go after that. If offered, would you encourage Senator-elect Schiff to accept the pardon or reject it? You know, I do not have the Senator-elect's ear, but you know, I think he's going to do what's best for him and his family and his constituents. Congressman-elect Derek Tran, thank you so much for joining us and congratulations on your victory.

Thank you. And we'll be right back. You're watching me the press now. Stay with us.

And welcome back. It's time for the panel. Join me now. It's Cadia Goba, political reporter for Semaphore.

Donna Edwards, former Democratic Congresswoman from Maryland and an NBC News political analyst and Stephen Hayes, editor and CEO of The Dispatch, and also an NBC News political analyst. Thank you all so much for joining me here. Cadia, I want to start with you and I want to start on the Democratic Party. Texas' Greg Gessar is the new head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and this is what he said to my colleague, Sahoka Poor, just yesterday.

Let's put that up on the screen. The progressive movement needs to change. We need to re-emphasize core economic issues every time some of these culture war issues are brought up, and we need to connect the dots for people that the Republican Party is- Party's obsession, excuse me, with these culture war issues is driven by Republicans' desire to distract voters and have them look away while Republicans pick their pocket. What do you think of that?

Yeah, I think it's smart. I think both parties will be vying for the working class. Republicans are inching in and saying that they are the party of the working class, and I think Democrats recognize that now, and they need to respond to that specifically targeting the economy, which as many people criticize that Democrats really didn't do that during the election. They focused on abortion and thought that that would be just enough and ignored the economic part until about the end of the election.

Donna, I want to get on your take on that. Is that an admission that the Democratic Party is- that their stance is out of step on cultural issues from much of the U.S.? Well, look, I think certainly from the standpoint of the progressive caucus, this has always been a debate in the progressive caucus among progressives. You focus on some of these- what turns out to be trendy kind of cultural issues, or do you focus on issues across the board that slice wherever race on gender around economic issues?

So I'm not surprised that the debate is coming to a head right now. That happens when you have an election and there's an assessment, and I like this strand of the Democratic leadership in the progressive caucus really zoning in on focusing on issues that cut across the board for working people, whether you're a working person in a rural area or an urban urban area. And, Donna, I want to play something that when your former colleagues Adam Smith told her Ali Patel earlier this week on the program, let's just- The far left, their ideological approach and their ideological rigidity on a number of issues, on immigration, on identity politics, on crime, on drug abuse, I think is a major problem and just papering over that and say, well, we don't run on those things anymore. So it's not a- it's still a problem.

It's still the way the people perceive the Democratic Party. And look, I'm a progressive. I just want the progressives to update their thinking a little bit so that their message and their policies work. I live in Seattle King County.

The land of very far left government. It ain't working. Okay? So Donna, do you think some of the more progressive governments in some cities across the country are giving the Democratic Party a bad rap?

Well, look, I don't think that you can paint with a wide brush the way that Adam Smith has done the policies that are coming from the left. And I think this notion of the far left driving the Democratic Party is a little bit ridiculous. Kamala Harris ran a very centrist kind of campaign. And so, you know, I think it's a little backseat driving money morning quarterbacking to make this assessment of the party.

And Donna, that exact point was what I was going to come to Stephen with. You know, Kamala Harris did move towards the center and she campaigned with Liz Cheney for goodness sakes. And that didn't work. So what, you know, what is left for Democrats to do?

I think the fundamental problem is that she ran as a centrist in 2024 after having run as I would say a radical progressive in 2019 and in 2024, she had to explain or ignore the things that she said in 2019 and unfortunately for her too many, you know, would be getable Republicans, centrists, moderates, independents said, I don't trust her. I think she's, but I think the Democratic Party is fascinating to watch this debate happen in the Democratic Party. It's sort of nice as somebody. I mean, I'm not a Republican, but I'm a conservative.

It's sort of nice to watch this happen on the other side. I find it astonishing that Democrats can look at what happened and look at the way that sort of independent gettable voters, people who don't like, they're not obsessed with politics the way that we are. They're not the insiders. They don't follow every trick and turn.

Look at the Democrats and say, like, that's not for me, they're too radical. And now there's a debate about whether they maybe weren't radical enough. I find that a fascinating development. And I think Democrats would be wise to listen to people like Adam Smith.

Oh, give me a break. It was a 2% election for Pete's sake. We would be having a completely different conversation. Had that been that sway in the electorate.

And so I think it's a little bit of an overreach to say that the Democratic Party has gone all wrong in the face of that kind of close election. Things could have been radically different, but for a few votes in one state or the others. Democrats lost to Donald Trump. It's not like Democrats lost to a conventional Republican moderate candidate.

They lost to Donald Trump who had negatives who's underwater by 10, 12 points. It takes a lot to lose to something like that. In a deeply divided country and those divisions haven't changed in the last decade. But Donna, she did lose every single swing state.

Absolutely. Look, I'm not going to make an excuse for the campaign. I'm just saying that we can overanalyze a campaign that was decided by very few votes and where so many voters didn't even get off the couch to vote at all. And we have a challenge as Democrats of going to those voters and giving them a reason to get out of their living rooms away from the television and into the voting booth.

And Kadi, I want to turn to you on another topic. The captain picks that are before the Senate. Donald Trump is sticking by Pete Hexett. Why do you think that is?

I mean, who wants to, of all people, Donald Trump admit that they have made an error, right? I don't think that that is going to happen. If for somehow he does slip away and doesn't become the nominee, it will not be because Donald Trump made the mistake. It will be something else.

But yeah, this is something they said three days ago. He was on the House side. He was talking to Republican Study Committee members and he said, I just talked to Donald Trump and he told me to keep pushing. So I think I expected this.

I'm not sure where it's going to go, but I don't expect Donald Trump to take responsibility about a bad choice. Stephen, if Hexett or Gabbard stick with it, don't drop out. What are these hearings? Confirmation hearings are going to look like.

The hearings are going to be amazing no matter what, I think. Look, I mean, to Kadi this point, you can't expect Donald Trump to do anything differently, right? You put forward a nominee. You say you're going to nominate this person.

You fight for the person until he's not your nominee anymore. And so I would expect even as we, you know, we're all hearing reports about Donald Trump looking at other people, maybe considering Ron DeSantis, maybe broadening his search, those reports are true. I've talked to some of the same people. That's all happening.

But he's not going to cut the legs out from under Pete Hexett in the middle of the process until that moment. It'll happen fast. It'll be in a moment. And then it'll be done.

And Donna, as we begin to wrap up here, I want to point out something interesting I saw. Our political unit crunching numbers and Elon Musk spent some $250 million on boosting Trump this cycle. What Republicans have had the richest man on their side and, you know, several billionaires are set to serve in Trump's cabinet, how is it Democrats that have been branded as the party of elites here? Well, I mean, it really defies imagination that one multi-millionaire billionaire can spend that amount of money on a campaign and not even make a dent and you have an administration that is going to have more multi-millionaires than any other, the history of any other administration that we've known.

It's really extraordinary. The only thing that Democrats have to do is point this out to the American people. I'm Donna. We're out of time.

We'll have to leave it there. But thank you all so much for joining me. Cadia and Steven as well. I'm Dave Gutierrez and we're back Monday with more Meet the Press now.

And if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press on your local NBC News station. Kristen will have that exclusive one-on-one interview with President Elect Trump. Don't miss it. The news continues with Tom Costello in for Halley Jackson right now.

Hey, it's Kate Snow, NBC News anchor and host of The Drink. This month, Demi Lovato is my guest. The global superstar tells me that she is the happiest she's ever been right now. But getting there, it wasn't simple.

Demi opens up about starting in Hollywood young and why she now thinks she may have started too soon. She talks about recovery, her new marriage, and the deeply personal reason behind her new cookbook. The drink is always about the journey to the top, and this was an honest conversation about what that takes. Hope you'll listen and follow the drink wherever you get your podcast.