Meet the Press NOW — February 11

Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Melanie's known in Washington where Attorney General Pam Bondi was defiant as she testified before the House Judiciary Committee today, the hearing at times becoming confrontational, especially as Democrats pushed for more accountability on the Justice Department's handling of the Epstein files. Interopening statement, Attorney General Pam Bondi defended the administration's handling of the case. I am deeply sorry for what any victim, any victim has been through, especially as a result of that monster.

If you have any information to share with law enforcement about anyone who has hurt you or abused you, the FBI is waiting to hear from you. Despite that Bondi clash with several Democrats on the committee, including Congressman Jayapal, who asked the Attorney General to apologize to the Epstein survivors who were in the room for the hearing. Take a listen. It is about you taking responsibility for your Department of Justice and the harm that it has done to the survivors who are standing right behind you and are waiting for you to turn to them and apologize for what your Department of Justice is.

Members get to ask the questions, the witness get to answer in the way they want to answer the Attorney General. That's not accurate, Mr. Chairman, because she doesn't like the answer. So, Mr.

Chairman, why? I have asked Mr. Chair at Garland this, twice. I reclaim my time.

I will claim my time. I will claim my time. I don't determine the judge. I'm not getting the gutter for her theatrics.

How many of Epstein's co-conspirators have you indicted? How many perpetrators are you even investigating? First, you showed it. How many have you indicted?

Excuse me. I'm going to answer the question. I answered my question. No, I'm going to answer the question the way I want to answer the question the answer to the question the way I asked it.

Chairman Jordan, I'm not going to get in the gutter with these people. Bondi ultimately did not offer a direct apology to the survivors, and while most Republicans on the committee did not ask about Epstein, Republican Thomas Massey, one of the lawmakers leading the push for the Epstein files, was a notable exception, criticizing Bondi over handling of the files and some of the redactions and what was released, including redacting the name of billionaire businessman Les Wexner. Within 40 minutes, Wexner's name was added back. Then 40 minutes of me catching you red-handed.

Red-handed? There was one reduction. I was over 400. And we invited you in.

This guy has Trump arrangement syndrome. This cover-up spans decades, and you are responsible for this portion of it. Throughout the hearing, Bondi also repeatedly came to the defense of President Trump, accusing Democrats of using Epstein to try to distract from the White House's accomplishments. Joining me now is NBC News Chief Capitol Hill correspondent Ryan Nobles Ryan.

Thank you so much for joining us. I know you've been watching this hearing all day. What were your biggest takeaways from that House Judiciary Committee hearing today? Well, it was full of theatrics and very light on substance.

There was a lot of back and forth between Bondi and Democrats on the panel where she refused to just even accept the premise of any of their questions and often diverted and talked about past Department of Justice's and their lack of looking into the Epstein files without specifically addressing what her department has done. Perhaps the most notable thing that happened in this hearing maybe went under the radar, Mal, and that's when Chip Roy, the Republican from Texas, asked her to clarify about whether or not there have been any pending investigations into those involved with Epstein. Let's know what she said. Whether another individual.

Well, perhaps they were asking that and they never wanted to hear the answer to that. We have pending investigations in our office. That's a pretty remarkable revelation, Mal, because you'll remember that their narrative on this has changed multiple times back in the summer when they initially released the kind of a small tranche of Epstein files, which were really a bunch of publicly available documents to conservative influencers. They said, this is it.

There's nothing else to see here when Todd Blanche initially said that they were releasing the files. He said there were no pending investigations that they were talking about. So the idea that there actually are other people that they're looking into is a pretty significant development, whether or not manifest itself into anything is something that still remains to be seen. Yeah, that seems like a huge development.

Given that revelation, learn to get the sense of the questions over Bondi's handling of the Epstein files is going to go away anytime soon or do you think this is going to be continuing a thorn in the side of the Trump administration? I mean, I definitely think it's something that is going to continue to dog the administration and dog Bondi in particular. She had an opportunity here today to come and be transparent to answer these questions with a clear understanding of where this process was going. There's no doubt that Democrats were going to try and make her look bad.

That's part of the purpose of these hearings from both sides to use it for political purposes, but she didn't even attempt to answer most of the questions that were posed to her from Democrats on this topic. She turned away an opportunity to apologize to the survivors for everything they've gone through. And one of the other things that I think is an important point here beyond the questions that were asked by the Democrats on the panel is the fact that survivors themselves have a real lack of trust with the Department of Justice and with Bondi specifically, they've asked to meet with her. They've asked for her to answer their questions and they have said time and time again that they feel as though those questions are not being answered.

So until there is real progress around holding people actually accountable, which goes above and beyond just the release of the files, this is going to continue to be an issue that the Department of Justice is going to have to deal with. I do want to shift gears a little bit because we're getting some reaction to the DOJ's failed attempt to secure an indictment against those six Democrats who released that video saying US troops should refuse a legal order. So what are we hearing here? Yeah, this is a raging controversy here on Capitol Hill.

The six Democratic lawmakers are very upset with the idea that the Department of Justice would try and come after them for what they believe was just their attempt to act and use their first amendment right. And also the fact that they were just reiterating something that already exists in the military code of conduct. But there are obviously Republicans who feel that at the very least that this video could be used to mislead rank and file military members who are just doing their best job to follow orders and make it confusing for them in their day-to-day jobs. Among the people that have been critical of the fact that they produced this video is the Senate Majority Leader John Thune.

But when he was asked by our Frank Thorpe today about whether or not they should be indicted over it, he had an interesting response. Take a listen. Do you feel like what DOJ did in trying to indict these lawmakers was the right decision? Do you support that?

Do I support it? I don't think that the one, I don't think what they said was federal grit back. I think what they said was I've said this before ill-advised provocative. And frankly, a really dumb move.

But no, I don't think so. So that's a pretty significant admission by the Senate Majority Leader that they should not be indicted. And these Democratic lawmakers want to take a step further. Mel, Senator Slockin, Senator Larkin, Senator Larkin and a letter to Pam Bondi, which we obtained exclusively that specifically calls on the Attorney General to state publicly that their investigation into these lawmakers around any criminal activity related to this video should come to an end.

And she should publicly declare that whether or not Bonnie takes that step. We don't know quite yet, Mel. Yeah, right. Those comments from Thune, so striking.

We do have Jason Crow, one of those six Democrats later in the show. Thank you for joining us, Ryan. Turning now to the latest in the search for Nancy Guthrie, mother of our NBC news colleague, Savannah Guthrie, after a series of dramatic developments in that investigation. Overnight authorities obtained a subject during a traffic stop south of Tucson and later released him.

A man who identified himself as Carlos Pelasuelos says he was questioned for several hours before being released. The Pima County Sheriff's Department has not yet confirmed if Pelasuelos is the man they detained. Pelasuelos also says his home in Puerto Rico, Arizona, was searched by police. That development, coming hours after those chilling images and videos you see there, were released by the FBI showing an armed person in a mask and carrying a backpack outside Nancy Guthrie's home.

And today, the FBI says it is conducting a quote extensive search along multiple roadways in the area near Nancy Guthrie's home. NBC News Chief Justice and National Affairs correspondent Kelly O'Donnell joins me now from Tucson. Also with me is NBC News National Enforcement and Intelligence correspondent Tom Winter. Kelly, I want to start with you.

What are authorities saying about the search of this home in Rio Rico? And what do we know about what led them to this town which is about 60 miles from Nancy's home? We don't have specifics on some of those good questions. What we do know is that the man who identifies himself seems to match up with the events as they unfolded.

But because he has not been formally charged or held for this, it would be appropriate for the Pima County Sheriff's Department not to engage in naming him publicly. They typically only do that when someone is in custody and facing potential charges. So that may explain if that's confusing to people. What we know is they're doing the work of law enforcement chasing leads and they have the ability to track him to spend time talking to him and to do a search.

This may happen again with others. We would expect that as a part of the investigation. And so it is because of the high profile nature of that, there's more visibility into these kinds of actions than we might otherwise be aware of. Because we're now more than a week of intense national concern and angst, concern for the Guthrie family that is so deeply worried about their mother, Nancy Guthrie, and of course the larger community has a vested interest in this as well as both state and local law enforcement and the federal government's very large scale infusion of resources here.

We also know that the FBI and their law enforcement partners are doing the basic searches, grid searches, things that are again, the bread and butter of law enforcement work in the areas near Nancy Guthrie's home, near the surrounding areas, looking for anything that might be related to this case. And now they have that additional information from the video and pictures that were released yesterday, which really gave a jolt of energy to this investigation. There are things that we have seen in that image that if you were to encounter a backpack or the ski mask or any of those kinds of things, that would certainly be of great value to investigators or anything else that law enforcement as they approach these searches, if they see something that has potential evidentiary value, they are collecting that. And then at the same time, they're marking off terrain to be able to acknowledge what they've done to move on to the next and what seems to be a very large to-do list.

Now, like you mentioned, you mentioned leads have investigators seen an uptick in leads since yesterday's release of the video from Nancy Guthrie's home? That is the guidance we are getting. Not only leads but tips and the tips are voluminous. We have been told that it's been a dramatic increase in the Pima County Sheriff's Department, put some real numbers on it.

They said they've received more than 18,000 since February 1st when Nancy Guthrie was known to be missing. And in the last 24 hours, 4,000 and counting, gives you an idea of how the jolt in this case of those images and video have certainly prompted people in the community, people who might have some piece of information to come forward. The Pima County Sheriff's Department has also said, reminding the public that using the tip line is really meant for people who have some bit of information that relates to the case, not general commentary, those kinds of things. When you have such widespread attention, it's going to attract a lot of response that may not help law enforcement get there, but at the same time, they now have some more specific details.

They have a sense of who at least one perpetrator would be a man or one, well, we think it's a man. I mean, the bearing and the appearance looks like a man, although we don't have a specific identity, dressed in a way that looks like preparing for a crime going up to her door. That gives people a lot of new information. And so we've been checking with sources today.

Basically, the read that I'm getting from the people that I've been talking to is the work goes on, no definitive breaks, no big steps forward that they're willing to publicly share at this point. Melanie? Thank you. Tom, I want to bring you into this conversation.

What is the latest that you're hearing here? Yeah, it just was on the phone and I was looking down when you first started to talk to me. I think one of the things investigators are just a pick up where Kelly is, excuse me, besides these physical searches, they're going to have a lot of evidence to go through here. And one of the things that happens is they're going to have to take these tips that are coming in that Kelly just described.

You're going to have to prioritize it. There's ones that can help investigators with the evidence. In other words, hey, I know that backpack or I just sold a bunch of those backpacks in the Tucson area. It's this specific brand or I know that gun or that particular holster.

Fine. That's all very helpful. And in column two, are the types of tips of, you know what, I think I know that person. That person is John Doe.

And John Doe is the person who I recently know that they purchased that backpack. They have same type of clothes at home. They have a gun. They have this.

They have that and that can be prioritized as well for investigators. So really all those tips are going to be broken down into those two helpful categories. There's a third category of kind of the unhelpful people just kind of calling in conspiracy theories. And that unfortunately happens on these types of large high profile cases as well.

Yeah, absolutely. Can we expect any additional video or footage releases of the coming days? That's a good question. I mean, they had pretty much ruled out the idea that we'd get any video several days ago.

And then obviously there was this kind of Herculean effort on behalf of the private technological companies, including Google, which is nest is part of its brand, the FBI, of course. So there was that. But they did say yesterday that actually was the tweet from FBI director, Cash Patel, which noticed that apparently there were some recording device or devices that had been removed from the home. So it might be difficult to get that media at all.

And of course, that's something that'll obviously raise some question marks as to how this individual knew what was there, how long did they spend inside the home? Were they able to do any sort of reconnaissance ahead of time? Just a lot of, a lot of questions, seemingly every time we learned something new in this investigation, it leads to more questions. Are they able to use that video as a cross-reference video from other cameras in the area?

Well, that's a great question, because I think if you were able to find now, you generally know he kind of approaches from the Southwest, just given the orientation of that camera in the street. So if he's approaching from that direction, you might now want to go back and look at other cameras. You might want to look at trail cameras. You know, Kelly mentioned the search and the Catalina foothills.

And you'd see if this person arrived on foot. You don't see a car in those videos. And so that's a big question. Is it because this individual, there was a driver that was with him?

Did this person arrive on foot? Had they been camping out as our colleague at NBC News, law enforcement analyst Jim Kavanaugh, former special agent in charge of the ATF is suggested. Perhaps this person was camping out. We see that backpack awfully loaded, really, to the seams there.

So again, more questions. But yes, if they now have this description they can look for, they can also look for it in any sort of traffic cameras to see if they're in a car or if they're seeing out any surveillance cameras from your businesses. Kelly and Tom, thank you both for all of your reporting on this just incredibly difficult subject. And we, of course, are following the story very closely and will bring you any major updates as we get them.

And of course, if you have information at all, please, please call the number on your screen now, 1-800-Call FBI. Coming up, brand new NBC News and death polling shows a growing problem for President Trump as support for his immigration agenda creators, especially with key independent voters. Steve Grenappi is standing by to break down the data next. You're watching Meet the Press Now.

Welcome back. Congress is barreling towards a partial government shutdown in just two days. Negotiations appear to have stalled as Democrats demand reforms to immigration and customs enforcement in exchange for funding the Department of Homeland Security. Yesterday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer calling the White House proposal insufficient.

As Majority Leader Thune suggested, a solution wouldn't be found before the looming deadline. The bottom line is it was incomplete and insufficient. We need legislative language that will rain in ice and end the violence. Their proposal didn't come close to doing that.

I would say again, it's a work in progress, but I would hope that the Democrats here in the Senate, if it takes more time, which I believe it will, would be amenable to allowing us to get an extension of the continuing resolution to allow more time for those negotiations to continue. It comes as new NBC News and death polling shows the President's approval on immigration issues falling, and Americans largely supporting the idea of reforming ice. NBC Chief Data Analyst Steve Cornappi joins me with more from the poll, Steve. So great to see you at the big board in your element.

But what does this poll tell us about how Americans view Trump's handling of immigration in his second term? Yeah, I think something we're seeing here is it's taking a toll maybe on his broader standing. Start with that. Maybe this is the overall job approval rating for President Trump in this new poll.

Now, again, keep in mind on this. This is a little bit different here. We're looking at all adults, not just registered voters, a little wider net than we usually cast in polling. But still, I think it captures something here.

I think pretty significant. 39% among all adults is President Trump's job approval rating. That's one of the lower numbers that you're going to see out here. That's one of the lower numbers.

I think you've seen since Trump came back to the White House to start his second term a little bit over a year ago. And I think that low number there is clearly related to this number. This is more issue specific. This is getting into immigration border security.

Trump's approval rating there. 40% in this poll. That is down from where it was earlier in his presidency. He's down from where it's been in other polls throughout his presidency.

Remember when Trump came back to the White House in the 2024 campaign, immigration in the border were relative strengths for him. Now that number is coming down for him. And I think that's also exerting it seems to be a broader effect on his overall job approval rating. And then you look inside that number there on his handling of immigration in the border.

And that's the big problem. You see, I've read on red there. I know if it shows up, but I'm circling the 72. That's basically three quarters, almost three quarters of independence here in this poll saying they disapprove of how the president is handling border and the immigration.

So and also there, if you if you looked among independents here too, a large number have shifted, not just in opposition saying they disapprove, they strongly disapprove. So that depth of opposition there too, I think, thickening a little bit to the president on this issue, asking about that issue there, then of tactics used by ice and border patrol agents again, why consensus there two thirds in this poll saying those tactics have gone too far again, this conducted really immediately in the wake of the events in Minnesota recently. And then a question, I think here, you showed this at the start of the segment, but going into that DHS funding fight here. What do you think we're asking folks?

Do you think should happen here with ice? The plurality saying reform now reform, obviously, that's a broad answer that could mean a lot of different things. But the plurality are basically saying they want to keep it, but they want to change it. There are 29% here.

This is heavily Republican who say keep it in its current form. And then there's this answer right here, abolish ice. And you hear that slogan from the political left a lot, 29% here, you know, a little bit less than one third choosing that. I think what's interesting is a lot of that 29% is coming from democratic voters.

Almost half of democratic voters say that what they think should happen to ice is that it should be abolished. So as you look at Democrats in Washington, navigate that DHS fight as you look at democratic candidates in primaries on the campaign trail this year, getting ready for 20, 2028. I think one of the things they're increasingly looking at, we've seen this on a range of issues, is their own base is pushing them more and more into sort of maximalist positions and confrontation. And again, half of the democratic base wants, they say in this poll to abolish ice.

Steve getting warmed up for November. Thank you. Let's bring in our panel Eleanor Mueller, White House economics reporter for Semaphore, Ashley Etienne, former communications director for Vice President Harris and former senior advisor to Nancy Pelosi and Sarah Chamberlain, president and CEO of the Republican Main Street Partnership. Ladies, thanks for joining us.

I'd love to see a panel of all women. I'm always an Eleanor. Let me start with you because Steve just walked through all of that polling. What is your sense for how this could potentially impact the White House calculus when it comes to these negotiations over DHS?

I mean, this is why we're seeing them engage at all, right? In a way that they did not when we were talking about affordable care accessities earlier this Congress. I think they know that there's a lot of public sympathy for what happened in Minnesota and that Democrats really have the one of their back here as far as demanding real changes to immigration enforcement. We're going into this shutdown because Democrats didn't want to take more than two weeks to have these conversations and I think that they're confident and the White House is well aware that voters are potentially supportive of that.

Yeah, it seems like Democrats are pretty done in here as well. Sarah, 72% of independents disapprove of the president's handling of border security and immigration. You're so plugged in to some of these really key races across the country. Do you think that should be a warning side to have them in terms?

Absolutely, yes. We're starting the poll and a lot of our congressional districts. It's a huge issue and what happened in Minnesota and the deaths of the Americans is a problem. But you know what this suburban women are focusing on is that little five-year-old boy that went to Texas with his father who shouldn't have.

I mean, let's just call it what it is. So we need, I agree with President Trump, we need to be softer on immigration. We need to explain. We have shut down the border and we have deported a lot of criminals, but that they're not saying that what they're saying is what's happening on the streets.

So we have to roll that back. Do you think it's possible to turn these numbers around before November? Absolutely. Yeah.

As long as we're explaining our story and we stop, you know, we calm down a little bit. We got to stop. We got to roll it back. The President Trump is right.

We need to roll back and be nicer. Actually, I want to bring you to the conversation because despite that polling, do you think Democrats, there's a risk of them overplaying their hand in any way on this debate? Because healthcare, we saw that was the last shut down. That was their strong state of self-care.

Immigration has not always been the strongest issue for Democrats. So is there any risk here? I don't see them running in a huge risk primarily because you look at your NBC poll, you know, the terms in which they're arguing and debating on mask investigations, a large majority of the American public support, those positions. They don't think the ICE agents are wearing these masks.

They don't trust the administration to do investigations into the execution of these two American citizens. So they're currently bolstered by public sentiment right now. We saw that poll, I mean, part of the poll that 43 Americans think that the President is going in the wrong direction as it relates to this particular part of the larger issue of immigration. So I think that they're going to remain dug in.

That's what I'm hearing from the Hill. It's going to be a long shut down because they believe, as you said, they got the window back and public sentiment is with them on this issue. And it's a good wedge issue for Democrats to use against the administration against these vulnerable Republicans. I do want to get your take on the abolished ICE messaging.

We heard that a little bit. It kind of went away. It seems to be coming back. What do you think their Democrats be leading into that or do you think that's a risky strategy?

I do think that, I mean, all we have to do is look back at history when we did this with sort of defund the police, right? At the end of the day, that became an internal war among different factions within the Democratic Party. And at the end of the day, we did not get the passage of the George Ford Justice and Policing Act, which also contributed to the death and the execution of the two people that we saw in Minnesota. So I do think that that runs risk.

But what we should not be confused by is this is not an immigration issue. We shouldn't be making this about immigration because it's not about immigration. The most of the people that you've deported are not illegal immigrants. They're American citizens.

They've been the main target of the Trump administration's tactics. And that's why the American people are disapproving. So the more we make this about immigration and less about egregious tactics on the part of DHS, the more we run risk. Eleanor, I want to ask you because a corner of Boeing's administration, there are voters that 57% do not blame the Minnesota leaders.

It's actually blaming the administration saying they deserve the most blame. I mean, how do you think that is going to play into these ongoing conversations on Capitol Hill? I think the connection is pretty clear that this was the administration's decision to bring in these immigration enforcement officers and that's what led to this situation. And we saw a Texas, Texas State Senate race a couple of weeks ago that the Democrat won.

It was the first on a long time that Democrats won at that state Senate district. And I spoke with the Texas Republicans on the Hill, including Pete Sessions. And he said basically that he described it directly to the fact that the election happened just days after what happened in Minnesota. And so I don't think there's any real doubt in people's minds as to where to place the blame or what happened.

And again, I think that's a big part of why Democrats feel that they have the power to negotiate directly with the White House and the White House is responding. I do want to shift gears to the other big story today. That would be Attorney General Pambondi, testifying Capitol Hill. Let's take a listen to some of the pushback during the questioning, and then we'll talk about it on the other side.

The Dow has shattered 50,000 for the first time. This is crazy. They said it couldn't be done in four years yet. President Trump has done it in one year.

National media and rents have fallen to a four-year low thanks to Donald Trump. That's why they want to focus on Epstein and our most transparent president in the nation's history. I find it interesting that she keeps going after President Trump, the greatest president in American history. This is so ridiculous and that they are trying to deflect from all the great things Donald Trump has done.

And she also attacked Congressman Massey and rasping as having, quote, Trump derangement syndrome. So Sarah, what's this for an audience of one here? Absolutely. And it's become like reality TV.

This is not legitimate, testifying like it once was in the United States Capitol. It is really for TV and for President Trump. And the Democrats, those might be running for president. They might be running for Senate.

So they have their own agenda. So I would like to see this go behind closed doors and really have a real discussion. Actually, I want to get your take on this because we were talking before we came on air about how there's this brain drain on Capitol Hill of these people who work behind the scenes. It seems more and more people are incentivized lawmakers to just try to get attention at hearings.

Is that what you saw playing out today? Absolutely. I mean, it's laughable that she would even use the word transparency when she's withholding 200 plus thousand documents violating a subpoena and violate a congressional subpoena and violating the law. So here's what I think needs to happen.

The Democrats need to continue to pressure Republicans. They held the Clintons in contempt in a bipartisan fashion. They sort of throughout this throughout the notion of a privilege and insisted on complete transparency and compliance with the subpoena. That's the same bar and measure they need to hold against Pam Bondi.

I mean, she's violating a subpoena just as the Clintons did. And so what Democrats did is we put the victims ahead of politics. That's what the Republican Party has to do right now. And if they don't, they are playing continuously to a party of one and, you know, and spitting in the face of those victims that are really still dealing and grappling with their victimhood.

Yeah, those victims are so important. They had a press conference on Capitol Hill today. Some of them in the room. Eleanor, what did you make of Pam Bondi's performance?

Do you think it's going to be satisfying to Trump? Or do you think Democrats actually landed some blows here? It's so hard to say. I mean, this is the playbook we've seen.

Other cabinet secretaries used over the past Congress as secretary of president when he was here last week, did the same, you know, opposition research, almost bringing up facts about the members who are questioning, although not quite the ascent that Bondi was. And so I do think that will resonate with Trump. But in terms of usable information, I mean, we don't have a ton to show today, at least when Secretary Lutnik touched about yesterday in the Senate, you know, he said that yes, he did go to Epstein's island for lunch. There were a few pieces of news that came out of it.

And this was really just hours upon hours of bickering. So maybe it'll be a different result if slash one she touched eyes in the Senate, but I just don't know that we know yet. Yeah, it seems like president Trump sticking by his cabinet, no matter what, even if behind the scenes, maybe he's not happy with them. Ladies, thank you so much.

Up next, chaos and confusion after the FAA ordered the airspace over El Paso, Texas, closed for 10 days, only to rescind the order 10 several hours later as administration officials offer conflicting explanations over what happened and why keep it here on Meet the Press Now. Hey guys, Willie guys here reminding you to check out the Sunday sit down podcast on this week's episode. I sit down with one of the biggest bands in the world, Mumford and Sons, as we get the boys together to talk about their new number one album, prize fighter, and the evolution of that irresistible foot stomping sound. You can get our conversation for free wherever you download your podcasts.

Listen daily on Sirius XM 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 interruptions, including ad free articles, podcasts and full NBC News shows, plus deeper access and exclusive content.

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

We are learning more right now about why the FAA imposed a 10 day closure of the El Paso International Airport in Texas and then abruptly lifted it just hours later. Sources tell NBC News the ground stop was caused by military testing of counter-drown lasers in the area, which prompted the FAA to close the airspace. The FAA's abrupt decision causing widespread confusion from airlines, travelers and lawmakers who say they were left in the dark about the decision. This unnecessary decision has caused chaos and confusion in the El Paso community.

I want to be very, very clear that this should have never happened. The administration hasn't officially confirmed the reason for the ground stop and its quick reversal with officials offering conflicting explanations throughout the day. Thankfully, we have NBC News, Tom Costello, who covers aviation and is joining me now. You've been following this unfolding situation all day.

What more do we know and what led to this ground stop? Well, I'll tell you, it's been one of the most confusing aviation stories I've been dealing with. I have dealt with over the past few years because what happened was we had the FAA come out early this morning, essentially was early this morning here in the east. It was mountain time just before midnight saying we're closing the airspace around El Paso because of an issue with national security and it's going to be closed for 10 days.

What? 10 days. Think about that. That's longer than we close the airspace around the 9-11 period.

And then they said, well, it's because our drones, drone activity, Mexican drug cartel drones. The White House put out a statement saying that in fact they had to target Mexican drug cartel drones, and they did in fact target them. And then we had the FAA chief, the DOT secretary, saying as you can see there, the FAA and Department of War acted swiftly to address a cartel drone incursion. The threat has been neutralized.

There is no danger to commercial travel in the region. Okay, he said that after the FAA notified all pilots of that, they were closing the airspace. The pilots were taken by surprise, air traffic control, taken by surprise. Listen to the radio transmissions.

Yeah, totally close. Again, that was about midnight, mountain time. Then they reopened at seven o'clock, a mountain time. What happened?

Wasn't 10 days. Something hit the fan. People were very upset, right? Airlines had to cancel reservoirs of flights.

Passengers were completely displaced. Medevac flights in El Paso, not allowed to fly. Chopper flights for the police and border patrol, not allowed to fly because the FAA was playing, we think, hardball with the military. And the reason for this is that the military was we now have learned testing anti drone laser technology at Fort Bliss.

Now, if you know El Paso, I used to live in El Paso, actually, if you know El Paso, Fort Bliss is right next to the airport, right next to the airport, right? When you land at the airport, you see Fort Bliss. So the FAA has been concerned about that testing of the drone technology, laser technology, right next to commercial aircraft. Apparently, there's been a lot of back and forth, people upset with each other about not communicating and coordinating.

And so the FAA overnight said that's it, lids down, didn't take long before they raised the lid again. Wow. Okay, you said counter drone lasers. First of all, what is a counter drone laser?

And how big of a problem is it this idea of these drones possibly from massing cartels coming over in our airspace? Well, as we know, drug cartels are very active in Northern Mexico, right? In Chihuahua, in Sinaloa, when I worked there many moons ago, they were very active. They've only gotten more active.

And yes, we know that they have some drug cartel drones that are in the area. The American authorities have been concerned about the military has been concerned about. But to answer your question, what exactly is anti-drone laser technology? We don't know.

I think that's part of the issue here, right? This appears to be cutting edge new technology. It may be secret technology. Now, here's what's interesting.

We also learned today that the military had targeted what they thought was a drone and took it out of the air. But in fact, it was a party balloon. Oh my goodness. So there and that was in El Paso.

So you've now got the people of El Paso, the citizenry, but also the elected officials very angry that without consulting with anybody, the FAA comes in and says we're shutting you down for 10 days and you've got a lot of distrust with the politicals. Let me just make the point again, having worked there and lived there. El Paso is really landlocked, right? I mean, the nearest next big city from El Paso is Albuquerque, 225 miles away, Tucson, 300 miles away, Midland, Texas, 250, San Antonio, 500.

So if you shut down their airport, people are going to have to drive two to 300 miles to get a plane and you gave them no notice. They literally said it's shut down right now. People were stranded today already over the country, couldn't get into El Paso, couldn't get out of El Paso. That's why it didn't last long.

And not to mention the concern about supply chain and cargo shipping and medevac flights. So this quickly spiraled out of control. And as I said, something to the fan, you can decide what that was, but they decided that it was not working for them. Wow, just a wild story, Tom.

Thank you so much for joining us. After the break, talks, tensions and Tehran will take you inside President Trump's meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House today. And what it means for relations with Iran. Stay with us and meet the press now.

Welcome back. President Trump says his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not lead to any breakthroughs on negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. Netanyahu tweeted this picture from the start of today's meeting between the two world leaders at the White House. President Trump later describing the meeting as quote, very good, but posting on social media, there was nothing definitive for each other than I insisted that negotiations with Iran continue to see whether or not a deal can be consummated.

NBC News White House correspondent Julie Serkin joins me now. Julie, what was the White House hoping to accomplish in this meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu? Well, it was really Mel, what Benjamin Netanyahu came here to hope to accomplish with this meeting with the president. And that is to try and move the president in his negotiations with Iranian officials to get them to abandon their nuclear program, to abandon their ballistic missile program, the stockpile, and Netanyahu also wants Iran to stop aiding its proxy partners in the region, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza.

And the president's post speaks for itself. That's what the White House told me. He also teased back to the operation that they conducted back in June when the administration targeted nuclear facilities in Iran, suggesting that more military action and pressure could be on the table if Iran does not agree to a deal. But so far, no progress has been made between the U.S.

and Iran. And remember, it comes after the Iranian government killed thousands of protesters in that uprising that we saw and the president threatening that military action is on the table because of that. And Joel, as we did get a January jobs report also today, what were those numbers and what has been the reaction of the White House? The White House is very happy to tell those numbers, Mel, because they were much higher than expected.

Look at that on your screen. 130,000 jobs graded. Only 55,000 were expected. That's something that Treasury Secretary Scott Besant, President Trump's economic advisor Kevin Hasett touted all day long today, suggesting that this marks a new change in the economy.

You'll remember that the president said he owns the economy in the interview with Tommy Amis that he conducted last week. So this is a shift for the White House and one that they're happy to embrace. The president's economic numbers have been slipping. It was one of his key areas as he ran for president in 2024.

So this is something that they really want to keep owning and hopefully keep building on because in 2025, not only were his poll numbers dropping, but also those job numbers barely exist in terms of the ones that were added to the economy. They're hoping that this signals a shift and a turnaround for the year to come. Mel? Julie, sir, again, thank you.

Still to come. One of the six Democratic lawmakers at the Justice Department tried and failed to indict over their appearance in the video urging U.S. troops to refuse illegal orders. Congressman Jason Crow is standing by, keeping it here.

I'll meet the press now. Welcome back. On Tuesday, the Justice Department tried and failed to secure indictment against the six Democrats who released a video last year telling U.S troops they can refuse illegal orders. At the time, the president accused those lawmakers of seditious behavior punishable by death.

NBC's Ryan Riley reports that according to two sources familiar with the matter, none of the grand jurors believe the DOJ met the threshold of probable cause necessary for an indictment. Today, some of those lawmakers speaking out. Folks, this is the master alarm flashing for our democracy. It is threatening the very foundation of our system that we have a right to free speech.

Let's call it for what it is the president has using our justice system to weaponize against his perceived enemies. Joining me now is Democrat Congressman Jason Crow of Colorado. He was one of those six Democrats of the DOJ tried to indict for that video telling troops to refuse illegal orders. Congressman, thank you so much for joining us.

Are you kind of warning for the Trump administration saying that you will seek accountability for those abusing the system of justice? And you also put the DOJ on notice saying there's going to be costs. What did you mean by that? Well, that's right, Melanie.

What I'm unwilling to do is to sit back and allow this administration to abuse the law, to abuse process, to abuse the American people's justice system, a justice system that should be serving them to keep our communities safe, to go after violent criminals, to go after organized crime, to go after health care fraud, to go after cyber crime, all the things that are difficult for American people that's instead being used by Donald Trump to go after a political opponent. So we're not going to sit back and take it. Well, my message to the Trump administration is very simple. If you're going to abuse your duty, we're going to seek accountability and justice against you.

I'm taking names. I'm making lists. And we're going to make sure that we pursue that accountability. Can you expand on what that accountability actually looks like?

Does it mean when Democrats get the majority if they get the majority, there would be investigations or any sort of consequences? Well, right now my lawyers were very clear. They sent a letter to the DOJ today saying that they continue to abuse the process and pursue frivolous baseless claims and prosecutions against us that we will litigate. And we will not sit back and just take their abuses that we will go after them.

And leadership has been very clear on the Democratic side that we will also pursue accountability. We will look for evidence. We will look for records. We will hold hearings that we will be unrelenting in going after folks who have abused the American people who have covered up murders, in the case of ICE and Minneapolis, who are part of the conspiracy to cover up the release of the Epstein files, that there is so much corruption in this administration that it's going to take some time to unravel it.

But we are absolutely dedicated to that project. I did want to ask you yesterday, Speaker Johnson suggested that you probably should have been indicted. But then he appeared to walk that back today. Here's what he said.

It's a very dangerous gambit. They were playing. Should they be sent to jail? Probably not.

But we need to call it out as being wildly inappropriate. And they needed to pursue it. I don't know what the terms that were. I think we should also guard a first amendment.

But I also believe that people here have to use their responsibility, use their platform wisely, and sending a message to young servicemembers. They should invite words is crazy. Congressman, what's your response to that? Well, it's too bad that he actually has never served a day in the life in the military.

And doesn't actually understand what military life is like and the training that our servicemembers go through. You know, I have I did three combat tours Iraq and Afghanistan. I led paratroopers. I led Army Rangers overseas.

And what I know is that this is drilled into you from the first days of boot camp. What your obligation is to follow the law. What the law of war requires you to do and not to do what your constitutional duty and your oath requires you to do. This is so essential to military service that when folks talk about this problem, it just shows their ignorance and their lack of understanding of military life and what our obligation is in the military.

And it also shows how they're walking away from their duty as members of Congress, right? I want to be really clear that this is not just our right as members of Congress to remind the executive branch to follow the law. It is actually our duty. It's what Congress exists for.

We were put into the Constitution to make sure the government served the American people and followed the law while doing it. On the other end of the political spectrum inside the GOP, I do want to read something that Republican Senator Tom Tillis said about this failed indictment. He said, political law fair wage by either side undermines America's criminal justice system. Political law fair is not normal, not acceptable, and it needs to stop.

So what do you think for Republicans who haven't spoken out about this and what is your message to Republican colleagues? Are you giving any private words of support from some of them? We're shockingly little support from my congressional colleagues, but Senator Tillis is absolutely right. He's right.

And I couldn't agree with him more. What's really, really too bad for the lack of a better word is that it takes someone who's retiring to show courage and to speak up, right? And it shouldn't take a retirement for somebody to actually do the right thing and to do their duty. So where does that leave us as a country and the American people?

Well, we need to send people packing who have turned their their back on their duty and we need a new generation of leaders to step up and to take over and to do the right thing for America. While I have you, Congressman, I do want to turn to some other news of the day because DHS runs out of funding in less than three days now. Where do you stand on passing another CR to allow negotiations on DHS reforms to continue? Oh, hell no, Melanie.

You think I'm going to give another blank check to a runaway lawless agency that's murdering American citizens without accountability and investigations that's yanking Americans off the street, denying them due process, deporting people without hearing people who are dressed up like commandos. I call it commando cosplay on our streets around our country. The same type of stuff I wore in Iraq and Afghanistan, you think I'm going to allow that to continue? Americans deserve better, but they want as a federal law enforcement agency that's going to go after violent crime that's going to restore trust that's going to work with local law enforcement and do the right thing.

What they've been served by this administration is a bunch of folks dressed up intimidating and abusing Americans and I'm just not going to stand for it. DHS shutdown, though, would largely not impact ICE. It would be blocking funding for other agencies, though, like FEMA and Coast Guard and the TSA. So are you willing to shut down those agencies and for how long?

Well, let's talk about FEMA. I'm glad you actually raised FEMA. Let's talk about what this administration has done with FEMA. Right?

They've cut funding for FEMA. They've denied emergency declarations for democratic states just for political reasons that need critical emergency funds. They have actually not reimbursed states for emergency funds through FEMA. This administration has gutted FEMA and we have fought that we have resisted that and we will continue to.

So I'm not going to sit here and listen to them talk about FEMA when they're the ones who are turning the back of the American people and the needs of everyone regardless of their political affiliation. Just quickly here, I know Democrats put forward their list of 10 demands. Minority Leader Jeffrey says these aren't negotiable. So is that a good faith negotiation of Democrats aren't willing to compromise on some of those demands?

Yeah, well, we're trying to enforce the law in the Constitution. That's what those demands are. We're trying to protect Americans and the Constitution is not negotiable. Following the law is not negotiable and protecting the American people is not negotiable.

Congressman Crow, thank you so much. We're back tomorrow with more Meet the Press Now. There's more head on NBC News Now. He was a young Marine.

She didn't care about convention. They made a life together. Then one night the Marine died and then the death investigation took a wild, unexpected, and utterly bizarre turn. I'm Josh Maguetz and this is Trace of Suspicion, an all-new podcast from Dateline.

Listen to all episodes of Trace of Suspicion Now, wherever you get your podcasts.