Meet the Press NOW — February 13

If it's Tuesday, President Biden rebukes former President Trump and calls on the House to take action, a speaker Mike Johnson vows to jam the Senate after an overnight mad dash to pass emergency funding for Ukraine and other U.S. allies. Plus, voters head to the polls in a special election to replace disgraced New York Congressman George Santo with a bellwether contest that could give both parties major clues about the fight for control of Congress and the White House. And former President Trump wants his daughter-in-law to help lead the Republican National Committee in a new push to transform the party in his image, with primary rival Nikki Haley ramping up her attacks and time running out.

Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Gabe Gutierrez in Washington. Where this afternoon, President Biden spoke from the White House, delivering some of his sharpest attacks yet on former President Trump, while also demanding House Republicans take up a foreign aid bill that overwhelmingly passed the Senate overnight to supply Ukraine with critical wartime aid. In his remarks, President Biden called and House Speaker Johnson to bring that bill to the House floor, saying it would pass even his House leadership signal the legislation is dead on arrival.

Here's the President. I urge Speaker Johnson to bring it to the floor immediately, immediately. There's no question that a Senate bill was put on the floor in the House of Representatives. It would pass.

It would pass. And the Speaker knows that. Republicans in Congress who think they can oppose funding for Ukraine and not be held accountable, history is watching. History is watching.

History is watching. Failure to support Ukraine. This critical moment will never be forgotten. The Senate passed that bill early this morning with 70 votes, well over the 50 vote threshold it needed.

75 billion dollar package includes critical aid for Ukraine and Israel, but no border security provisions. In his remarks, President Biden reserved some of his sharpest attacks for his likely general election opponent criticizing comments former President Trump made at a recent rally that he'd encouraged Vladimir Putin to potentially invade NATO members if they weren't meeting the Alliance's security obligations. The former president has said it dangerous and shockingly, frankly, un-American signal to the world. Just a few days ago, Trump gave an invitation to Putin to invade some of our allies, NATO allies.

No other president our history has ever bowed down to a Russian dictator. Let me say this as clearly as I can. I never will. For God's sake, it's dumb.

It's shameful. It's dangerous. It's un-American. When America gives us word, it means something.

When we make a commitment, we keep it. And NATO is a sacred commitment. President Biden's remarks this afternoon, of course, also comments the White House tries to dispel concerns about his fitness for office following last week's scathing special counsel report, which said he's struggled with memory issues. And joining me now, he's seen a White House correspondent, Kelly O'Donnell and NBC's Ryan Nobles.

He's on Capitol Hill. Kelly, I want to start with you. We heard that strong review of former president Trump over his comments on NATO and Putin. Did those drive the comments that he'd drive the president's decision to come out today on the supplemental?

I think very much so. And there are lots of days when we hear from the president or the former president in the campaign space, and it is a level of normal rhetoric that will not be remembered. This is different and it is notable and it stands out. And that's why it is so newsworthy today, because President Biden is coming forward and very clearly setting a line that is about more than just the current vote, more than just this election, but a more sweeping argument about the place of U.S.

credibility in history when he's talking about the NATO alliance and when he goes after former President Trump so conspicuously, forcefully and deliberately on this issue. It really sets today's remarks apart from a lot of the other things we see day out, day and day out here in Washington gave, as you know it. And certainly the president is trying to accomplish getting that funding as the outline that it is important for those members, especially in the House Republican conference, not to bow to the electoral wishes of Donald Trump, but to take a more serious sober and big picture of you on this vote. But the direct attack of President Joe Biden against his predecessor in ways that we would rarely have ever here ever discussed that no president would use that language, that it's dumb, that it's un-American.

It's easy to be numbed by all of this in the day in, day out of sort of crazy rhetoric that happens in the political space. This is distinctly different. The president made these remarks from the state dining room in the White House, not caught up in the fervor of a campaign event. It was pointed, it was planned, and it was meant to deliver a signal, not only to lawmakers today, but a much bigger message about what America stands for and the country's obligations to allies and other powers around the nation and around the world.

So, Kelly, this was Plan B on foreign aid funding. This bill was, but as you know, House Speaker Johnson says the House won't take it up, so does the White House have a Plan C here? Well, the president is trying to use ineffectively public today to compel the House Speaker who has the power here about bringing this forward. If that fails, there's a real serious problem because this is where divided government and co-equal branches of government really come into a potential gridlock.

There is broad bipartisan support for this funding, and the border piece that was at issue have been presented, and that has also been ignored largely because former President Trump discouraged Republicans to be in line with that. So, there isn't an obvious next play except to push for this to go forward and then to regroup if it doesn't happen. The president was literally trying to set the stakes today in bigger terms than the ordinary, than the everyday, than just another bill on the floor to make it bigger, brighter, and more critical of a choice, and that will put pressure on lawmakers. Historically, when there's an overwhelming majority in a Senate vote like this, typically the House does act and calls on members to vote.

We'll see if Speaker Johnson does that. And Kelly, speaking of pressure on lawmakers, I want to turn down to Ryan Nobles on the Hill. Ryan, there's a fact that this passed with 70 votes put any more pressure on Johnson to take up this bill. Well, Gabe, I spent the afternoon talking to House Republicans asking him that same exact question, and it doesn't at this point.

They do not seem to be moved at all by the fact that there were 22 House Senate Republicans that voted for this measure. But that's not stopping Senate Republicans and the House majority leader Chuck Schumer from making that point to these House Republicans who may be a little bit wary about supporting this package. Listen to the argument they're making about why they believe there's enough support in the House to make this bill a reality. I am confident there are many Republicans in his caucus.

I know I've spoken to a whole bunch of them who feel strongly we ought to pass this bill, and I will urge Speaker Johnson to step up to the moment and do the right thing. We get it out of here, and now the Speaker's going to have to decide where he wants to be in this chapter of history. People that are opposed to this, I would expect anybody to take one position on the other. But for a long time in the Senate, if it goes down that path, the bad things happen in Ukraine, I'll remind them every single day that I'm in the US Senate.

And you can sense the frustration there from Senator Tom Telesov, North Carolina, who was one of the big proponents of getting this supplemental over the hump. They really do believe that there are enough votes in the House if this were to be brought to the floor to pass. The problem is they do not believe in Speaker Johnson has signaled that it won't even make it to that point, and the Speaker is the one who really controls all the floor action and can decide whether or not this even gets a vote. Right now, it's a roadblock for this piece of legislation, and there are no signs that the bill will find a way around it.

And Ryan, Senator Graham, a long time supporter of Ukraine voted no on the supplemental saying instead that the money should be loaned to Ukraine. How significant of a shift is that? And what's the reaction to that? I think it was a collective shrug, particularly for members of the Senate that worked to get this particular piece of legislation passed.

I don't think there's anybody that really believes that a loan under circumstances like these, to these countries that are literally at war, is a really practical exit strategy to this process. And furthermore, it's not likely enough to bring along skeptical Republicans who don't believe that there should be any funding for Ukraine in any way, shape, or form, loan or no loan. Now, maybe you could convince some of them. I know I talked to Congressman Ralph Norman of South Carolina a few minutes ago who said maybe if it had offsets, if it weren't just something that was adding to the national debt, at least consider it.

But the idea that you could come up with some sort of structure whereby this aid package could be paid back in the future, no one believes that's based in reality. And even if it were, the likelihood that it would bring enough to the table to get the bill passed really seems like a fantasy. Kelly Donner, the White House and Ryan Nobles on Capitol Hill, thank you both so much. And as we noted, President Biden warned House Republicans that opposing the bill that would send $60 billion in aid to Ukraine would be, quote, playing into Putin's hands.

The president referenced reports of Ukrainian troops running out of ammunition on the front lines. So joining me now from Nikolay Ukraine is M.C.'s chief foreign correspondent Richard Engle, Richard Engle reporting today or earlier today you were in her son, which at one point almost two years ago was under Russian control. How are Ukrainians reacting to domestic politics here in the U.S. and this impasse that Congress is in?

They're watching extremely closely. And I think the American audience is watching most closely what is happening in the United States because it impacts Americans directly. The second place in the world where they're watching it as closely or maybe even in some cases more closely is here in Ukraine because their fate is totally intertwined with American politics. This country is dependent on American military supplies, it's dependent on the missile defense systems that arrive.

It's winter here and generally across the country the power is still on, people's homes are still being heated. That is because more missile defense systems have been arriving. And that's just one example. In the city of Herzog, which is about an hour's drive from here, Russian troops are trying to advance.

They are outgunning the Ukrainians about five to one. In some places along the front line, the Ukrainians are outgunned ten to one. And the Ukrainians told me today and are quite open about it, if more weapons don't arrive, they will not be able to hold on to the city. They are outmanned, they are outgunned.

Already many people in Herzog, 70% of the population, has fled the city. So they need assistance and they need it quickly because Russian troops are just a few hundred yards away from the city center, from the downtown center of Herzog. And that's just one example along the long front line that stretches from here in southern Ukraine all the way to the Far East. Clearly outgunned.

Richard, I want to ask you about this complicated relationship that Donald Trump and President Zelensky have had. Of course, it led to the first impeachment of the former president. So how are Ukrainians reacting to the possibility that Trump could return to the White House? With deep skepticism, a lot of fear, like I said, they follow American politics very closely.

So they follow all the statements from former President Trump, particularly when it comes to Russian, when it comes to Ukraine. They heard him say that he could settle this in moments after taking office here in Ukraine. People believe that means making a deal forcing Ukraine to make a deal, giving up lots of territory to Russia, which Ukrainians believe is a piece of. They think that if you give away roughly 20% of the country, which is what Russian forces are occupying now, to Vladimir Putin, that he'll take that, he'll put it in the bank, and then he'll push for more.

If he doesn't push for more on the first day, it'll be a year or two that he will take what he's been given and then try and take more territory. So they are not convinced that they have a solid and reliable ally in Donald Trump and they're worried about it. I spoke to a woman I've known from from Harrison for over a year now, and she was part of the resistance movement against the Russian occupation and was working in secret while Russian troops were occupying the city and a story of incredible bravery. And she told me that at least with Vladimir Putin, they know where they stand.

They know what to expect from Vladimir Putin. He has said, and he recently just told Tucker Carlson the same thing that Ukraine doesn't exist. It's a historic anomaly that Ukrainians shouldn't believe this fantasy that they have an independent country and their own history and culture that that should all be dismissed and that they should become Russians again. They said that Ukrainians know what Putin thinks, but they expect unpleasant surprises from a potential future of President Trump.

Richard Engle and make a live Ukraine, Richard, thank you, and with the White House pushing Congress for more aid for Israel as well as head out of the Middle East where CIA director Bill Burns is back in Cairo to continue talks towards a deal to secure the release of more hostages in exchange for a pause in the fighting in Gaza. And joining me now is Raft Sanchez and Tel Aviv and Raft, what level of confidence do Israeli officials have that a deal can be reached at the least those hostages? So okay, if I spoke to a senior Israeli official earlier this morning, they are saying there's not a lot of optimism on their side about these talks going on in Cairo. You'll remember two weeks ago, CIA director Bill Burns was in Paris meeting in a similar format with officials from Egypt, Qatar, and Israel, and they hammer out a broad framework of a deal which would pause the fighting temporarily, it would lead to the release of some of these hostages.

And then when they submitted that proposal to Hamas, Hamas took about a week to study it. And last week when Secretary of State Anthony Blinken was here in the Middle East, us came back with their counteroffer. And according to this Israeli official, it basically was completely divorced from what was agreed in Paris. The Israeli official saying Hamas basically just wrote their own proposal.

So he is saying there are still major gaps. It is worth stressing game that this is a negotiation. The Israelis, like Hamas, do not want to appear like they want this deal more than the other side does. They don't want to have to make concessions.

So a grain of salt with all of these briefings that we are getting from senior officials. But the level of optimism from the Israeli government, at least what they're telling us is not high for breakthrough in Cairo today. And Raft, I was at the White House briefing this morning and the White House is reiterating its call for Israel to present a credible plan to protect the civilians in Rafa is such a plan, even in the works. So I asked the Israeli military about this yesterday.

They said they are drawing off that plan. It has not yet been finalized nor has it been submitted to the Israeli government. But you ask humanitarian organizations and they say the Israeli military can drop all the plans that likes. There is nowhere safe for these some 1.4 million Palestinians who are sheltering in Rafa right now more than half the population of Gaza to go to.

They have the sealed Egyptian border to their south. They have Israeli forces to their north with very intense fighting going on in the city of Hanyunas. I think that maybe they could flee to the beach, which is west of Hanyunas. But UN, other humanitarian organizations are saying there is simply no shelter there.

You cannot ask a million people to sit on a windy beach for an indefinite period of time. There's also a lot of concern, Gabe, that any Israeli attack on Rafa will disrupt the flow of humanitarian aid through the Rafa border crossing, which of course has been the absolute lifeline for the 2 million Palestinian civilians in Gaza. I'm fleeing to the beach. That would be extremely chaotic.

Raft Sanchez, live for us in Tel Aviv. Raft, thank you. And coming up, all eyes on the high stakes race to replace, Congressman George Sanchez were live on Long Island, with the view from voters as they cast their ballots. And Steve Kornacke lied at the big board to break down white and ninths results that be so consequential for both parties heading into November.

You're watching. Meet the press now. Welcome back, as we like to say around here, if it's Tuesday, someone somewhere is voting. And right now, that somewhere is on Long Island, where Democrat Tom Swazian, Republican Mazi Pelop are on the ballot in a special election that will have significant implications for the current Congress and could offer major insights into each party's messaging strategy heading into this November's general election.

At stake, New York's third congressional district, a seat held by George Santos until he was expelled from Congress in December. The parties have spent to combine $22 million on ads ahead of today's election, with Democrats shelling out $14 million, with the hopes of making Republicans already slim majority in the House even slimmer, and the issues that have shaped this race will likely be the same issues that shape races across the country this November. Republicans are hammering Swazian immigration, accusing him of rolling out the red carpet for undocumented immigrants, while Democrats have portrayed Pilop as an extremist and elevated the issues of abortion and guns. For more now, I'm joined by NBC News senior national political reporter, Sahil Kapoor on Long Island.

Also with me at the big board is NBC News national political correspondent, Steve Cornakin. Sahil, I want to start with you. You gave us a preview yesterday of this race. How's it shaping up this election day?

And I noticed you're indoors, who was snarling a lot on Long Island earlier today. Has that affected turnout at all? Well, Gabe, there's certainly a fear within both parties and a real anxiety about turnout diminishing as a result of this. No storm, how exactly that materializes remains to be seen, whether one party or the other faces more diminish turnout also remains to be seen.

This race is between Tom Swazian, the Democratic nominee, who's a former congressman in this very district, represented for six years before he left to run a failed bid for governor in 2022. The same year, George Santhos was elected, he used to be the mayor of Bleng Cove, he's got deep roots in this area. The Republican nominee is Maasie Pilop. She's a Nassau County legislator for just the last two years, relatively new to politics.

Her life story has taken her from Ethiopia, where she was born to Israel and eventually to the United States just under two decades ago. That's the battle line in this race right now, it's these two candidates and it's still all to play for. This no storm has slowed down in the last couple of hours and just anecdotally, I've seen this polling location inside, I'll pick up in terms of voters coming in. And Sahil, we've been talking about how, you know, this could impact Congress and the razor thin majority for Republicans there.

What do you think? I mean, how critical is this race for the House? Yeah, it's very important. Currently Republicans have a tiny majority, 219 votes to Democrats, 212 votes.

That's paper thin. Just last week, we saw they tried to impeach the secretary of the 100 Americans and it came down to one vote. If the Republicans had this vote in the seat, that historic spectacular failure would have ended up being an unusual success in terms of impeaching a cabinet member for the first time in 150 years. So what's thinner than paper thin?

Speaker, my Johnson would not like to find out, which is why Republicans are so eager to hold on here. I believe we have caught up some voters in terms of their issues that they talked about were most important. Most important right now, I would say normalizing our government again, getting people back to work that lost their jobs during the pandemic like myself, and making sure that my children have safe streets to go out and play on. The abortion issue, the immigration issue, the economics, the ability to be partisan, to be open, to be able to bipartisan, right, to be able to communicate so that maybe we can get something done.

Now, the issues you just heard there from those voters, immigration, public safety, crime, abortion, those are very much the issues that are playing out in other similar bellwether battleground districts all over the country. So what happens here? And tell us a lot about what the battle for the House and maybe even the presidency is headed again. Saha Kapoor, live for us on Long Island.

Saha. Thank you. I want to turn now to Steve Cornaki at the big board and Steve, I know you live for the stuff. So give us a rundown of how to watch tonight's returns.

It's going to be interesting here. This third congressional district, this is a suburban district and it actually takes in more than 80%. I don't say about 80% of the vote is going to come from one county and that is where Saha Haldis was, Nassau County, Long Island, quintessential suburb, commuters, higher incomes, housing developments, all of this. About 80% of the votes that come out of Nassau County and the rest, about 20%, this is actually a part of New York City here, a part of the borough of Queens, but it's sort of far edges, the far eastern edges of Queens.

And it really is kind of a lot of this more suburban in character even in the New York City portion of this district. What's significant about the third congressional district of New York is there are fewer than 20 districts in the country that did this. In the 2020 presidential election, New York's third district voted for Joe Biden had voted for him by eight points. And then in the 2022 midterm election, George Santos obviously won this district and he won it by eight points.

So it went from being a Biden district in the presidential race to the Republicans taking it by the same margin, a swing of 16 points there between those two elections, Republicans taking it in 2022. So this is one of these places where, look, Republicans at Saha was saying, those are the issues they're running on. They think they can keep the voters that they gained here in the congressional race in 2022, and they can keep them with that message. The Democrats are counting on, obviously, a style set abortion.

They're also counting on the fact that Swazi was the congressman from, the district was a little different when he represented it, but he was a congressman from this area. He has deep political roots on Long Island going back 30 years. They're hoping the familiarity of the Swazi name can offset what has sort of been a Republican trend in Nassau County and on Long Island over the last five years or so, a pretty strong Republican trend. They're hoping Swazi's name, familiarity of voters can overcome that.

They're also hoping this is going to be interesting to watch. We've seen in special elections in the last couple of years, Democrats have really kind of been overperforming in special elections. Their voters have been more mobilized and energized to go out and vote in special elections than Republicans. Is that going to be a storyline that emerges here tonight because Democrats are hoping it will, obviously, tonight, and that that will be a feature of the November race, a more motivated Democratic base than Republican.

And see, if you mentioned that huge swing from 2020 to 2022 from Democrats to Republicans, what do you attribute that to? It's interesting because we all talked in 2022 about the red wave that didn't happen. It did in Nassau County and it did on Long Island. This was one of the, there were a few parts of the country where what Republicans were counting on happening in 2022 actually did happen.

And this is one of them. Suburbs of New York City, especially on Long Island. I think one of the things that worked here for Republicans is, first of all, this is every state. This is right outside New York City.

Obviously, there's been a lot of attention in the last few years to crime in New York City, to equality of life, changes in the New York State bail law here, and a state and a city that are overwhelmingly run by Democrats. And it seems there might have been a reaction to that in the suburbs of Long Island. So that's another factor here. Are we going to see a reaction to New York City, New York State politics and sort of both the some issues in New York City here in the suburbs tonight?

Steve Cornanke, I know we'll be watching, and so will you. Next. Age old questions for Democrats. Congressman Dean Phillips will be here on set that discuss the future of his long-shot primary campaign against President Biden.

You're watching. Need to press now. Stay with us. Hey, welcome back.

Most Democrats have been rushing to defend President Biden's fitness for office after that scathing special counsel report, but not Minnesota Congressman Dean Phillips, who's running a long-shot primary campaign against the president. In a statement, Congressman Phillips writes, the report simply affirms what most Americans already know that the president cannot continue to serve as our commander-in-chief beyond his term, ending January 20th, 2025. It comes as Phillips' struggle to win over Democratic primary voters in the early contests, most recently in South Carolina, where he placed a distant third behind President Biden and Marianne Williamson, who dropped out of the race last week. And joining me now, here on set is Minnesota Congressman and Democratic presidential candidate Dean Phillips.

Congressman, thank you so much for joining me here. I'm here again. I'm here to press now. Congressman, with all due respect.

Why are you still in this race? Because someone had to do it again. That's what this is all about. I'm a realist.

I know my party has not celebrated this, if anything, just the opposite. That does not make it an unworthy pursuit. And as evidenced by the fact that 70% of our country wants neither Donald Trump nor Joe Biden, 86% of the country believes our president is too old to serve another term. And I want to make it clear.

I love the president. I've campaigned for him. He's been in my home. I supported his work.

This is not about him right now. This is about serving until January of 2029. And I know, saying the quiet part out loud, is unusual in Washington. I also know telling the truth, generates no political rewards.

It surely hasn't to me. It didn't for Liz Cheney. That's the culture I'm trying to change gave. It's important that somebody had the audacity to challenge this ridiculous status quo.

Congressman, look, I don't have to tell you. It's a tough message to sell because you're saying you love President Biden yet you're running against him. What is your path forward here? Actually, I'm running against President Trump, former President Trump.

That's the whole point. You're in the primary. The gay part of our system. Our atrocious duopoly, the one that George Washington warned us about when he warned us about factions.

It's proving very true right now. It is not serving the country's interest. You go into any street in this country, any town, any village I've been in. In fact, the report right now from Sejil Kapoor in New York.

Same thing people are dismayed and disgusted with how our government is working. They know that nobody in Washington is listening to them. They also know that the both parties are not elevating people that people want to vote for. And the worst part about it is we have a crisis of participation where Americans are not coming out and voting in primaries.

They haven't come out. Low percentage. Oh, no. And that's, like I said, I'm not a fool to not recognize that the Democratic Party is not thrilled to buy me right now.

So that's not what this is about. So why not run as a third party? Why run as a Democrat? Because I'm trying to help my own party.

I'm trying to wake it up. I'm trying to wake it up to people to listen to what's going on. Cost our control for families. Chaos our border.

I've been trying this for years now. It's been a crisis for years. A lot of people though say you're hurting your own party. And the fact is if we continue this way, operating this way, we're going to continue to lose to people like Donald Trump, like we did in 2016 by doing exactly the same thing.

Look, I didn't come to Congress thinking this would be a long career. I had a very nice life. Woke up the morning after the 2016 election. My daughters were in tears.

I promised them I would do something and I flipped a 60-year Republican district. Well, but Gabe, this is what this is about. My party is not listening to America. My party is actually suppressing debates, suppressing voters and suppressing candidates.

I'm trying to wake it up. And there's a whole generation of outstanding Democrats that are able to serve, ready to serve. I asked Gretchen Whitmer to run. I called J.

I called J. I called J.B. Prisker. It's time to meet the moment.

I've been doing this for a year and a half, Gabe. It's an important, very, very important mission. Congress, when you said America, your party is not listening to America, but is America listening to you so far? No, no, no.

In fact, I'm glad you asked the question. No many invitations I've had to MSNBC in four months. One. CNN did a town hall for every one of the GOP candidates.

Not one for me. So of course, does that make it hard for someone who's not well known a force? And that's part of the problem. This country or no.

There are a handful of people picking and choosing who America is exposed to. I'm trying to say it's time to change that. We need competition. We need a new generation.

That's my legacy. And if I inspire one young person in this country to actually be adacious once in a while, to speak the truth when nobody wants to hear it, then it was a success and it already has been. Congress and I want to move to the special counsel report. We mentioned your statement.

They're off the top. A lot of President Biden's allies have called the report gratuitous and politically voted it. You agree? I think we're going to hear the, if we get the recordings of it, people can listen for themselves.

I think that's important. Okay. I have to say, you know, he was appointed by the, by a Democrat, with a Democratic president to conduct this special counsel. He was first appointed by a former president Trump, and Trump, and Eric Garland appointed him to do this.

I don't know. This is not, I want to make it really clear to people watching. The president is not suffering a cognitive decline right now, but clearly he's suffering a physical and communicative decline. Everybody who looks at television and sees him can know that.

The issue is not right now. He's going to serve for another year until January of 2025. We all know the issue is do we feel comfortable with him serving until January of 2029? Should we feel comfortable with Donald Trump?

No. Neither of them. I want to highlight something you just said, though. You said that you want to see the transcripts here.

No, not the transcripts. I want to hear the recordings. I think that's what I mean. Look, not.

So you want to hear the transcripts. You want to hear the recording. Several House Republicans have asked for that. The White House has not said one way or the other.

They talk about there may be classified information in these recordings, but you say for sure that it should all be released. Okay. We live in the United States of America. Why?

Why is transparency such a problem right now? Why is the president not debating? Why is he not answering questions? Why is he not doing press conferences?

Why didn't he do the Super Bowl interview? Why is he not in front of voters? Unscripted. Yes.

Release the recording. Let Americans at least become confident. All I'm asking is that we not lose to Donald Trump. That's all I'm asking.

And my party right now is the facilitator of bringing Donald Trump back to the White House. That's my contention. And frankly, most Democrats know that other than the ones that are protecting their own interests. And since our time is short, I want to move to your day job on Capitol Hill, the Senate, as we've been reporting, just past that supplemental, and now heads to the House.

You're Mike Johnson signaling that he probably won't bring it to the floor. Do you support this supplemental as it stands? Now that it has the humanitarian aid in it, and also Ukraine and Taiwan, yes, I do. But there's truth that we should absolutely be addressing the crisis that are borders, a human crisis.

It's a national security crisis. Now a constitutional crisis. The fact that our Congress has not addressed that since I've been in Congress for five years is atrocious. And quickly, are you aware of any efforts that force of Florida?

There's a likelihood of a discharge position, but that takes some time. Likelihood. I think you can discuss right now. It imagines Leader Jeffries.

I know it's on his mind. At the end of the day, at least, given an up and down vote, that's the job of the Speaker of the House. It's not the Speaker of the Republican Party. It's the Speaker of the United States, House of Representatives, and right now, the world is laughing at us.

Congressman Dean Phillips, thanks so much for joining us here. I really appreciate you. Thank you. And after the break, Nikki Haley fires back at front runner Donald Trump, as the former president takes aim at her active duty husband, part of the latest campaign trail, you're watching me to press now.

Stay with us. Welcome back, turning now to the 2024 Republican primary race, where Donald Trump appears emboldened as he moves closer to securing the Republican nomination, ahead of the South Carolina primary Nikki Haley is increasing her attacks on the former president saying Trump is not qualified to be president after his recent attacks on her husband was deployed overseas. Now, let's make one thing clear. Donald Trump's never come anywhere near a military uniform.

He's never had to lay on the ground like a military man or woman would. He's never had to fight for survival, like so many of them sacrificed to go do. The most harm he's ever come across is whether a golf ball hits him on a golf cart. This wasn't a slip of the tongue for Trump.

When he goes off his teleprompter, that's him speaking from the heart. And it's a pattern. But even as she blasted Trump, Haley dodged a question of whether she would vote for him if he's the nominee. Yet another reminder of Trump's power over the party, meanwhile, the former president appears to be literally trying to remake the Republican Party in his name, endorsing the North Carolina GOP chair to replace current RNC chair Ron McDaniel, and calling for his daughter-in-law to be the RNC's number two.

Joining me now is the panel, NBC News Capitol Hill correspondent, Ali Vitale, who's been following the Haley campaign. White House correspondent for NPR, Deepra Shivram, Democratic strategist, Amisha Cross, and former Republican congressman from Illinois, Rodney Davis. Thank you all so much for joining us here on set. So, Ali, let's turn it over to you if I can get that out.

So you cover the Haley campaign. Have these recent attacks from Donald Trump essentially invigorated her campaign. Look, I think the fascinating part about the way that Nikki Haley chooses to go after Trump is she takes the openings that he gives her, which is to say when he confuses her with Nancy Pelosi, she will take that as an opportunity to attack him on mental health and mental acuity and his mental fitness. When he goes after her for her husband being deployed overseas, she will use that as an opportunity to highlight the fact that he has many, many comments going against veterans in the way in which they've served this country.

And all of us remember when he went after John McCain saying he preferred veterans that weren't captured. And Ted Cruz. And Ted Cruz. This is also the other parallel here, too, right?

Is it's not just the attacks on veterans. It's that we've seen him go after his rivals spouses before, of course, going after Heidi Cruz, as you mentioned there, Gabe. But the fact that Nikki Haley is now at the center of it, it's another opening that she can take. But I do think that it's really stunning when you listen to her be asked, well, would you still support the Republican nominee?

That's where it all tends to be. And that was the point I was going to make. But why do you think Trump does this? I mean, this is who Trump is.

We were just talking about this. I mean, this is not new rhetoric that we've heard from him. This is exactly what kind of campaign he has from the past and the campaign he's running now. He could have done nothing this weekend and written, you know, the special counsel report through the weekend.

And yet he decided to make these comments about Nikki Haley's husband and also NATO. Right. And you know what? This is a kind of stuff from Trump that we hear from him that makes his base excited.

They want to hear this kind of flagrant rhetoric from him. They want to hear him going after his opponents. And when I go out on the trail, I hear from voters, you know, this is what I like about him. I want him to say these things.

I want him to go after his opponents. It's like, even though he's so far ahead of Nikki Haley, even though we already kind of know what's going to happen in two weeks in South Carolina, you know, they still want him to speak like this. And he knows that. Congressman, Donald Trump is literally remaking the party in his name.

Now he's endorsing his daughter-in-law to be co-chair. Is this party just getting Trumpier and Trumpier? And how far does it go? Well, the party clearly has gotten Trumpier and Trumpier since 2016.

That's one reason I'm not in Congress right now. But you've got to remember, this is the RNC we're talking about. Outside of Republican politics in Washington, nobody knows what they do. This is something that is small potatoes, but what is big potatoes is the upcoming presidential election.

And that is where we're going to have a rematch. But what gets me is a lot of Republicans like me, we've been asked, are you going to support President Trump? When there's a binary choice, Democrats were asked the same question, even though they're frustrated with Joe Biden, like my good friend Dean Phillips, who just left the studio, they're going to say yes. So don't be surprised when Republicans say we want Republican politics.

But is there any way to put the genie back in the bottle? I know you're no fan of redistricting, but where do we go from here? Is there any way to go back? What made you say I'm not offended?

I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know.

I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know.

The genie bottle in politics never goes. Nothing ever goes back in. It becomes the status quo, it becomes the situation you're dealing with. What we can hope for is the ebb and flow of our nation's history when it comes to political violence and political rhetoric that's really focusing on the far ends of the spectrum.

It happened when we had many political bombings in the late 60s and early 70s. God, we don't have those now. I got a feeling that after an election like this, where you're going to have the far right and the far left converge against each other, maybe we'll get back to a little normalcy. I mean, we heard from President Biden today, he came out forcefully for the supplemental funding request.

He blasted former President Trump yet again. How do you think he did? Well, I mean, President Biden has a lot that he's up against right now. Obviously, the age question isn't going away even though four years ago to today, all of us are four years older than we were in 2020.

However, I think it really matters that he's leading into this conversation, that he's positioning himself as a strong leader, that he's talking about the things that matter and quite frankly, coming off of a weekend where what should have been a news headline was quite frankly Donald Trump trying to get rid of trying to get rid of all of our treaties related to our processes in the Middle East, but also protecting Europe and our allies. That should have been something that people cared about more than the documents case. But now I think that the thing that he has to prove quite frankly is that he's with it. People who work with him and DC get it, even certain Republicans get it.

We heard from Mitt Romney. We heard from several other Senate members as well that he does. However, the frustration is on the campaign trail, the age question doesn't get away. So he's got to prove himself.

And look, I don't know if he saw the Daily Show last night in John Stewart. And he made this point. Look, a lot of people behind the scenes are talking about how sharp President Biden is. And look, I've seen some of his speeches.

He can be very sharp. But is it a question of, is it a messaging question? And John Stewart was talking about, well, if he's so sharp behind the scenes, why does somebody film that? So does his team need to do a better job of getting that message across?

We're seeing that happen. He just started TikTok this past week. I mean, he just did that. He's meeting with families.

He's talking to individuals. He's going to win the Super Bowl. He's going to win the Super Bowl. I mean, he needs to be in front of people.

I think that for Joe Biden, that is one of his top, you know, gold stars. When he is meeting with people individually, he does an amazing job, getting him to go to and having those conversations with folks on the ground in the battleground states. That's where he needs to be. And Ali, I want to turn to you because you can cover Capitol Hill.

I want to play something Speaker Johnson said this afternoon. Let's take a listen. You want to find Ukraine? National security begins with border security.

We have said that all along. That has been my comment since late October. Here's my comment today. Ali, you cover the Hill.

Where does this go from here? And do you think Speaker Johnson is going to budge in any form? This feels like a really bad game of who's on first because first they put forward a supplemental that has no border in it and Republicans say we need the border in it. Then they do a lot of controlling and a lot of negotiating behind the scenes to put the border in it and they're like, no, no, it's not enough border.

So we're not going to do it at all. Now they're here with a supplemental package that they all say they want in the first place, but it doesn't have the border in it because they said they didn't want the border in it. It's really confusing. I think to the extent that our conversation here is a conversation about what happens in DC versus what happens in the minds of voters, this is something that could have really palpable impacts in the minds of voters, not just to the extent that they would see the impacts of border changes or the impacts of America's role on the world stage, but also just the idea that immigration is one of the key things that we all hear about when we're out on the campaign trail, knowing that Washington could do something about it could be a real moment in the American electorate.

And of course, that's why former President Trump is saying don't do anything about it. But I think that that's one of the key things here is when you look at Washington and just how feckless this House Republican majority has been. Many of your friends there. I'm sure they're tearing their hair out because that's what we do when we cover this building because everything is always moving forward.

The goalposts are never the same. And that's why you can never actually see success legislatively. And I was speaking of the immigration issue deeper. I want to bring you in.

Just tonight, the House is getting ready to vote to impeach 100 Mallorca's at DHS Secretary. Again, where do you think this gets them? I mean, probably nowhere from what we've seen. And what it does get the White House to your point about talking about, you know, we're kind of running in circles here when it comes to this border bill, when it comes to, you know, A for Ukraine and also this impeachment process, it really does give the White House and we've seen this A with the White House all the time, the President and his team, the ability to point to all of this matter.

And so what are we getting done here? Congressman, I want to give you perhaps the final word. What do you make of this fight? This immigration fight?

Does it make any sense what Republicans are trying to do? I understand why they make political sense, but I want to get your take on it. Well, I've said this publicly for years. I think immigration is a new third-rail of politics.

Look, you want to talk about the Democrats when President Obama was in the White House, they had 60 vote majority. They had an overwhelming majority in the House of Representatives. The Obama administration of Democrats wanted to use immigration in the 2012 election. They didn't anticipate losing the House in 2010 as badly as they did.

But they didn't anticipate losing the House in 2010 as badly as they did. And they didn't anticipate losing the House in 2010 as badly as they did. The Obama administration of Democrats wanted to use immigration in the 2012 election. They didn't anticipate losing the House in 2010 as badly as they did.

This is a bipartisan failure. Look, we had opportunities when Republicans controlled the House, the Senate, and the White House, and we couldn't get out of our way. And then, in fact, those Democrats did nothing to help us pass those bills. I take your point.

It's been a bipartisan failure for many decades. But right now, is it a bipartisan failure or is it a Republican failure? What's a huge bipartisan failure? Look, if there's any issue when it comes to executive orders being ruled by the Supreme Court to be valid, Allah, Obama, Eradaka, it's now.

It's immigration. The Republican administration through executive actions could do something. If Republicans actually came to their census and passed an immigration package, a border security package, you know who they'd be saving? Joe Biden from himself and his fellow Democrats.

But you just said if they came to their census and passed it, shouldn't they pass it? And therefore, it's a Republican failure at this point. No. It's a failure, too, if it's not being addressed in a legislative way in split government, which you can always understand that there could be a chance that they're not going to come to an agreement.

The Biden administration with a stroke of a pen through executive actions can fix this. A leading Republican who opted this. What do you mean? Also Republican governors have been asking for this for quite some time, particularly in Texas.

They haven't been, but does it take legislative action to fix some of the executive actions that the Biden administration implemented immediately upon becoming president? Why doesn't he re-implement the Trump-renaded Mexico policy? Why doesn't he re-implement some of the executive actions that he and his administration took away? He can do it.

Rodney and Misha, look, we could have this debate for quite some time. But thank you all for joining me here on the panel, Ali and Viva. Thank you so much. Instead of coming, election year inflation in America remains stubbornly high in World Day.

The more key takeaways from today's report and what it could mean for interest rates, the economy and the prices you pay. You're watching. Meet the press now. Welcome back.

This is a volatile day for Wall Street with a Dow falling more than 500 points in response to some hotter than expected inflation data, which has investors questioning whether the federal reserve might have to reassess its strategy. The consumer price index rose 3.1% year over year. That's down from December's 3.4% increase, but still higher than the 2.9% economists were expecting. Prices ticked up from December to January by 0.3%, also higher than expected.

Driving the increase is essential goods, like housing costs, which have risen 6% year over year, and food costs, which keep going up as well. Joining me now to break down the report, as any senior business correspondent, Christine Romans. Christine, take us inside today's numbers. Yeah, that shelter number, housing costs, that was a real surprise.

Economists have been saying they were hoping those numbers were going to start to soften heading into this year. And that's like two-thirds of the overall headline reading was that housing number. And then food prices as well. You've seen grocery prices start to moderate.

Restaurant prices up, though, pretty big. And that's just still continuing this trend of inflation that has caused the American public to have just such a sour mood overall about the state of things. I mean, the grocery prices over the past four years are up 25%. So even if grocery prices just go up a little bit.

I mean, that's on top of three, four years of price gains. So that's just another stubborn number here. Yeah, no kidding. 25% is a huge number, even if inflation is cooling somewhat.

Christine, I want to ask you, how might the Federal Reserve respond to this report? Well, and that big reaction you saw in the stock market today is your clue here. I mean, the stock market and investors have been hoping the Fed would start lowering interest rates soon. But you have an overall strong economy and inflation that is still well above the Fed's 2% target.

So the thinking here is that Fed's not going to be in any rush to lower borrowing costs. Of course, that affects all of us. Credit card interest rates are at record highs. Forgages are back above 7%.

Companies, it's expensive for companies to borrow money. So all of this sort of feeds into the economic outlook for the year. I think a Fed rate cut is out for March, maybe later in the summer. Christine Romans, thanks.

Thank you so much. Good to see you. And I'm Gabe Gutierrez. I'm back here tomorrow with more Meet the Press Now.

The news continues with Holly 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 of 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.