Meet the Press NOW – July 13

Drive off in a new Hyundai Launcher today with $0 down during the Hyundai Advantage Sales event. Take advantage of the $1,000 spring drive bonus and lease the 2026 luxury essential for just $73 a weekly at 4.99% for 60 months. And you're covered by launch's best in class five year new car warranty. Now that's the Hyundai Advantage.

Conditions apply. Offer includes 1% loyalty rate reduction for qualifying customers. Visit hyundaicanda.com or your local deal for details. If it's Thursday, President Biden closes out a critical overseas trip, declaring that Vladimir Putin has already lost the war in Ukraine as he tries to reassure allies of America's support amid political volatility here at home.

Plus the cocaine who done it deepens after the Secret Service brief lawmakers claiming that the agency just simply cannot identify any suspects in its investigation into who brought the illicit drug into the West Wing. The in a secure entrance. The investigation is now clear and the FDA has approved the first ever over the counter birth control pill available without a prescription, marking a potentially enormous expansion for contraceptive care in America. Welcome to Meet the PRESS now and Trust out recording from Washington, where President Biden will be returning in just a few hours following a whirlwind week on the world stage, closing out yesterday's native summit with a speech reaffirming NATO's relevancy and importance.

Today the president sought to reassure the world and our native allies about the stability of his own government here at home. The the US's commitment to the alliance in general and the fate of the war between Russia and Ukraine. At a news conference today in Helsinki, alongside The leader of NATO's newest member, Finland, President Biden responded to questions about political volatility in the United States ahead of the 2024 election. It's a topic of major importance and concern for US allies, particularly in Western Europe, considering the last president, who is now the front runner for the Republican nomination, openly considered pulling out of NATO's hiring.

Here's President Biden today. I absolutely guarantee it. There's no question there's overwhelming support from the American people. There's overwhelming support from the members of the Congress, both House and Senate, and both parties, notwithstanding the fact there's some extreme elements of one party, we will stand together.

Let me be clear. I didn't say we didn't guarantee, we couldn't guarantee the future. You can't tell me whether you're going to be able to go home tonight. No one can be sure what they're going to Do.

I'm saying as sure as anything can possibly be said about American foreign policy, we will stay connected to NATO, connected to NATO, beginning, middle and end. We're a transatlantic partnership on the future of the war in Ukraine. President Biden also responded to concerns about Putin's potential ability to simply outlast Ukraine on the battlefield. Putin's already lost the war.

Putin has a real problem. How does he move from here? What does he do? What agreement is ultimately reached depends upon Putin and what he decides to do.

But there is no possibility of him winning the war in Ukraine. He's already lost that war. Those comments made after President Biden, President Zelen Zelensky assured him of the US's unwavering support and NATO's commitment to have Ukraine join the alliance after they win the war. And this also comes following a two day summit with the US and its NATO allies highlighted additional weapons packages that they are sending to front lines, including long range cruise missiles, air defense systems, armored vehicles and of course those controversial cluster bombs that the US reluctantly agreed to send over.

On the Russian side of the war, there's no reporting on the fate of some senior military officials following last month's failed mutiny rebellion. Attempted a coup, however you want to describe it. And it's all raising new questions about the control of Russia's military and Putin's own grip on power right now inside the Kremlin. So we're going to pack a lot of this journey now and see why this corresponds.

Monica palace covering the President's trip in Helsinki. Mike McFall here, former US ambassador to Russia are of course our internal Kremlin nologist here and also NBC News international affairs and list. But Monica, let me start with you. Look big picture.

The United States is in Helsinki, you're in Helsinki and Helsinki is now a capital of a country that is a NATO ally. This at one time would have been a red line for Vladimir Putin. So I mean just the setting today here is pretty unprecedent that. Absolutely Chuck.

And it really just send a very strong message here from the United States and its NATO allies. The Nordic leaders that were gathered here in Helsinki which does share an 830 mile border with Russia. And at one time Finland was a pretty neutral party between Washington and Moscow, especially of course during the Cold War where this would be considered very unthinkable for them to want to then join the NATO alliance. But of course it was that invasion of Ukraine that prompted their application for membership and Finland was approved in record time.

No country has been able to ascend into NATO in around a year or so, the way that they have. And of course, soon behind them, we expect Sweden to join the alliance formally, given that Turkey finally got rid of their opposition to that pathway continuing. Something that was a big question mark heading into this week overseas, something that the president really wanted to see happen, was delighted that it was able to actually be confirmed while he was in Vinnia, Lithuania, just over the last 48 hours or so. So today, this was a really clear, intentional message that President Biden wanted to send, that he was able to be here in Finland with the president celebrating this and celebrating just the regional resonance.

When you look at that map of how important it is that now those two countries here can send the strongest message to Russia and to President Putin really directly. When you're on these foreign trips, you run into foreign press corps, you talk to other diplomatic diplomats from other countries that are associated with other administrations to hear that question about the U.S. political, how the U.S. domestic political issues could impact NATO.

What would you say the level of concern is within the Western alliance? How often does it come up on these foreign trips when you're talking, when you're interacting with foreign media, how much front of mind is this? It's a really frequent topic of conversation, Chuck, and you can look no further than just five years ago this week in that exact same room where a Finnish reporter presented this question to President Biden. That is where we saw former President Trump standing shoulder to shoulder with President Putin and siding with him over US Intelligence agencies about Putin's own denials over Russian intelligence in terms of the election interference.

And what's significant there, of course, is the backdrop to all of this, which is that former President Trump could become future President Trump once again as the GOP front runner now. And yes, there's a lot of time left until the election, but everybody here from other press corps certainly is looking to this, looking back five years ago and thinking that doesn't mean that that couldn't be the future. So it is something that comes up a lot. I think that's why you saw President Biden talking about the commitment to NATO from the U.S.

regardless, he says of whose president will continue, but having to acknowledge that he can't predict the future, and certainly with someone else in office, a lot of this could change really quickly. Chuck. Monica, you're in the actual land of the midnight sun right now. It's 11 o' clock there, and the sun is still out behind you.

That is how far north you are. It's always, it absolutely is an amazing backdrop. Terrific reporting. Get home safely, Monica, thank you.

Let me turn to Mike McPaul, of course, former pastor of Russia and our resident criminal analogist is here. And I want to get to the what the heck is going inside the Russian military? But let's step back here a minute. A lot of historians this is.

First of all, I want to talk about the contrast of the setting five years ago in Helsinki. It's Trump and Putin. Here we are five years later. Oh, by the way, Finland's a member of NATO.

I mean, this is just a stunning development in so many ways, is it not? Like Chuck, it is. Absolutely. By the way, I was in Helsinki in 2018 working with the NBC team, and not only did Trump side with Putin about our intelligence, he also said we should hand over a bunch of Americans to Putin to be interrogated.

I was one of them. So I remember Helsinki very well. This is a very different event, but historically, I'm glad you brought it up because I think we have to appreciate just how big a deal this is. Throughout the Cold War, we had a noun for it was called Finlandization.

And it was what the Soviets achieved in their relationship with Finland to keep them out of NATO, to keep them neutral. Sweden. Two centuries of neutrality. Think about that.

Two centuries of neutrality and now Finland is in NATO. And in the run up to the Vilnius summit, the Biden administration got the deal they needed with the Turks to bring Sweden in. This will be remembered as a very historic, historic moment for the NATO alliance and as a big setback for Putin's foreign policy. Are we about 10 years away?

Is there going to be an Eastern European country that isn't going to be a NATO in 10 years if Ukraine wins this war? Mike, I don't think there'll be a democratic country in Eastern Europe that won't be a NATO. I mean, look at that map that you keep showing. It's quite intense with all that green.

Of course it matters how the war ends. And will Ukraine prevail in this war? I think they are. I agree with the president when he says Putin is losing the war.

But you don't judge wars in the first or second year. You judge them by the last year. But I do think momentum is on the side of the democratic countries in Eastern Europe, and the autocratic countries are on the losing side. Let's talk about what's happening inside the Russian military.

I know you monitor. You got your own sources. You monitor what's going on. Telegram.

We have our own reports here. It's always very hard to confirm who's in and who's out. But generals are being sacked, it looks like. Is Prigozhin being treated better than those that supported him?

Pretty murky picture. But the fact that it's murky and confusing, I think it's bad for Putin. So if you go back and we talked about it, you go back to the Prigozhin mutiny. Some said, I was one of those.

I said, this is a bad luck for Putin. Others said, no, this is a sign of strength. He's getting rid of all these guys that don't support him. But look at where we're at now.

We have generals residing in General Popovy. Right on telegram. I did watch it. I listened to it several times.

Who just was kicked out. He's one of the main commanders in this war. And he said, we stopped, and I'm paraphrasing, of course, but he said, we stopped the Ukrainian armed forces in Ukraine, but then were stabbed in the back by our own generals back in Russia. That is not a message.

If you're fighting a war that you want one of your most popular commanders saying. And secondly, we don't know what his status is right now. Right. Putin called him a traitor, said there will be consequences, then said he'd be in exile in Belarus.

And none of that appears to be true yet. So I think there's a lot of instability inside the armed forces that can't be good for Putin's ability to fight his war in Ukraine. Were you surprised that Putin and Prigozhin face to face? Yes, I was surprised by that, given that emotional speech that Putin gave.

And he didn't have to give it, Jack. Right. He could have done this privately. He chose to go on national television.

Think about it like an Oval Office address to the entire American people where he called this guy a traitor, and then he's meeting with him. That is not a signal of strength. There's just no way you can spin that other than he just hopes that people are not paying attention. I suspect, however, that they are paying attention because Prigozhin does have a following within the Russian military.

So maybe not all of Russia are, but the soldiers fighting in Ukraine, my guess is they're probably watching this. What do you think happens? Shrogu and Karasma? I don't know.

I think I should say, for those not following along, the two leading military commanders right now, for the Russian military, Uber Gozin was basically going to try to go to Incense, who was Prigozhin's target. Sorry for trying to bring Folks up speed. Yeah, yeah. Defense Minister Shraga and General Gerasimov, who's the head of the armed forces in Russia, just a couple days ago was on TV walking around doing things that was obviously a signal that he's still in power.

That gets him thrown under the bus. I don't think Putin can do that right now, pull either of those people out. That would look like complete capitulation to Prigozhin because of the critical things that you said that he said that you just talked about. But down the road, six or seven months from now, I would not be surprised if both of them were removed.

Microphone. Former ambassador to Russia for the United States. Appreciate you coming on. Good to talk with you.

Let me go down sing. She's a deputy press secretary for the Department of Defense, Srini Singh. Thank you for joining me. Let me ask, I want to pick up on a quick Russia question here, specifically with whether our Secretary of defense, Secretary Austin, what would you describe, what was the last time he said military to military contact with either Grassman Offer Shoegu well, thanks, Chuck, for having me on again.

As secretary has said before, we believe that contact with the Russian military and as you said, military communication is extremely important so that we reduce risks and we operate in very, in very similar areas of responsibility. And so it is important to have those multiple conversations. I'm not remembering the exact date when the secretary has his last conversation, but it was certainly not recently. We welcomed those conversations.

We're open to having a dialogue with the Russian military, but there would be no negotiation in those conversations. Again, this is a fight that Ukraine is in against Russia that invaded their sovereign territory. And as a department, we are doing everything it takes and everything we can to support them in their military fight. No, no, I fully understand the military military communication is sometimes much about making sure bad things, accidents don't happen and turn into bad things.

And so what you just described, we're months along our two biggest adversaries, our military military contacts have dried up almost completely in both China and Russia. Is that fair to say? Well, just this week, actually, one of our leading policy heads here at the department did engage with the Chinese here at the Pentagon. And again, we are welcome.

We are welcome and open to ongoing dialogues with Russia and the prc. That is something we want, again, just like you said, to avoid any confusion, to avoid any conflict. And it really should be used as a way to deconflict so that tensions do not escalate. And so again, we are open to having this conversation.

Our lines are certainly open and the Secretary welcomes at his level and at all levels throughout the department. I want to ask something about of ammunition we had to send over this cluster bombs, frankly, because everybody's running low on ammunition, including the United States. Can you just walk the viewers through the difficulty it is to ramp up munition production right now? What is, what, what is the struggle here that put us in a position where we had no choice but to send over these cluster bombs?

Well, early on in the war, when Russia invaded Ukraine, we contacted our defense industrial base and engaged them because we knew this was going to be an artillery fight. And it continues to be just that. We're seeing the Ukrainians and the Russians expend artillery rounds at high rates. And so we knew that we would have to ramp up our production of 1.5 millimeter rounds.

Now, it's not just us that is providing Ukraine with this type of ammunition. Excuse me. We also have our partners and allies all around the world providing that type of munitions to the Ukrainians. And so the cluster munitions that we did provide to Ukraine serve as a bridge so that our defense industrial base can continue to produce these 1, 5, 5 rounds.

And again, we did not want Ukraine to be without artillery in this artillery fight. So it's something that, while you heard the President say it was a very tough decision for him to make, and he was consulted by the Secretary of Defense and his national security team, it was ultimately the right decision to make so that the Department felt that Ukraine could remain in the fight with the artillery that they need against the Russians. Does the United States plan to backfill the cluster munitions we sent over with. With more cluster.

With more cluster bombs for our stockpile? Well, we have thousands of rounds of cluster munitions, but again, our focus right now is getting the Ukrainians what they need on the battlefield to not only conduct their counter offensive, but continue in the long term. So whether it's more cluster munitions or unitary 1.5 rounds, we're going to continue to supply Ukraine with what it needs on the battlefield? No.

But are we going to continue to produce and buy and stockpile cluster munitions? Look, that's a decision that, again, I'm not gonna get ahead of what we have right now in our stocks. As we have thousands of rounds of these cluster munitions, we're always focused on refilling and also modernizing our stocks. And right now, the focus remains on getting Ukraine what it needs in its current fight.

I want to Senator Tommy Tuckerville, who's been holding up all these promotions in the Pentagon, including Right now we have a Marine Corps without a comment on. He said today that he spoke with Secretary Austin on the phone. What can you tell us about that conversation? Any progress made?

Sure. So the Secretary initially had reached out earlier this this morning, or I should say early afternoon, to engage with Senator Tuckerville's office. We view these holds as a risk for national security. These holds are incredibly damaging.

It's been more than a century since we've had an acting commandant of the Marine Corps. And right now we have an acting commandant doing two jobs, both the Commandant's job and the Assistant Commandant's job. That's a dual headed rule that really requires two position. And so the Secretary reached out to Senator Tuckerville to see, you know, to explain how detrimental these holds can be.

It was a brief call, but the two agreed to continue communication into next week. So we hope that this ongoing engagement from the Secretary and Senator not only continues, but does encourage Senator Coverville to release his hold on our nominees. Is the Secretary going to engage with any policy negotiations with Senator Tuckerville? Is that something the White House will do?

Well, we're not making concessions or changing our policy. Our policy is very clear. We're trying to ensure equity across the service and all of our service members who live in states that they have the same rights as service members that live in other states. And just a reminder, our service members don't choose where they are stationed.

They're given the assignment and they do fulfill that assignment in the state that they're in. So we're not changing our policy. We've ensured equity that can exist across the services. Again, this is not a political fight.

This is about our general. Flag officers are nominees from four star generals down to one star generals who deserve to be in the position that they've been selected in because we believe they're right for the moment. And at this time, at a time when we're facing the acute threat of Russia in Europe and the rising challenge of China, we need our best team on the field and those are our officers that are currently up for nomination and being held. So the bottom line is, Secretary, the Pentagon's not going to be negotiating with the Senator.

Anything like that happens, it's Congress or it's the White House. Again, this is if the Senate or if Senator Tuberville wants to change any type of policies, we leave that to the Senate to decide how best to go forward with that. Right now, our policy is in place. It is ensuring that our service members have the reproductive health access that they need.

And we are encouraging the senator to drop his holds. Sabrina saying the deputy press secretary over the Pentagon. Really appreciate you spending some time. Thank you.

Culture wars and Congress. The passage of a key bill on national defense is in jeopardy as House Republicans push for some changes to the Pentagon policies on portion we were just talking about as well as gender affirming care diversity initiatives and more. Let's talk the top Democrat on the House front surface today next. Plus, DeSantis in damage control.

NBC News of paints a potential campaign that aims to reassure skeptical donors as DeSantis struggles to gain momentum. You're watching me press now. Drive off in a new Hyundai Launcher today with $0 down during the Hyundai Advantage sales event. Take advantage of the $1,000 Spring Drive bonus and lease the 2026 Liar Essential for just $73 weekly at 4.99% for 60 months.

And you're covered by Elantra's Best in Class five year new car warranty. Now that's the Hyundai Advantage. Conditions apply offer includes 1% loyalty rate reduction for qualifying customers. Visit HyundaiCanda.com or your local dealer for details.

Welcome back. Passage of the yearly bill that funds the US Military is potentially in jeopardy. The bill, known as the National Defense Authorization act, passed the House Armed Services committee by vote 58 to 1. But things have turned a bit contentious as McCarthy gave the Green light for the fringes of the Republican caucus to add a series of controversial cultural amendments to the bill.

Those amendments include restricting Pentagon policy on abortion, gender friendly care diversity initiatives, as well as amendment that would bar renaming military bases named for Confederate soldiers. There are also amendments to cut Ukraine funding a ban on the transfer of cluster munitions. Speaker McCarthy defended the amendment process this morning. I don't think there's a problem to let members of Congress who are elected by their constituents that have a voice and a say, it can go either way.

What's interesting to me is you think it's a problem that now I have opened up Congress. Now these amendments pass and are included in this bill, it sets up a likely impasse with the Senate which is working on its own defense spending bill right now. So joining me is the top Democrat in the House on social committee is Washington State Congressman Adam Smith. Congressman Smith, look, I am not one to get too dramatic about the defense bill because we've been at these moments before.

You've been around this town long time. The amendment process gets creates some, oh, shiny metal objects, you know, clickbait headlines. But ultimately this gets worked out. But let me ask you this.

If some of These amendments pass, and politically they might. Does that jeopardize your vote and your support for this? Yes. And there's.

There's two important things to your question there, but number one, most important is to understand that Republicans are bringing their culture war to the Pentagon, and it is harming our national security. It's harming our national security by passing policies that make it less likely that women, people of color, and the LGBTQ community will want to serve in the military, undermining our ability to recruit and support the best people available at a time when we have a recruitment crisis. These amendments that they're offering, if they pass, will present us with a bill that would significantly undermine the ability of the military to recruit and support their service members. So, yes, I would wind up voting against that.

As far as how it impacts the larger process, it puts Speaker McCarthy in a position where he will have to get 218 Republican votes in all likelihood to pass the bill. And he might be able to do that, but it certainly risks process, and it undermines the idea that we're trying to pass a bipartisan bill. That's what Chairman Rogers did out of committee. I commend him for that, that we worked on this to make sure that we worked on the stuff we agreed on, disregard.

We got by parson bill. This definitely is in jeopardy on the floor right now. How much do you trust the Senate to sort of get rid of some of the extraneous amendments in here? That's hard.

Anytime you start setting off with, how much do I trust the Senate? You guys are all the same. It doesn't matter the party. I could have a general R.

It's like, no, no, no. The Democrats are the adversaries, the Republicans adversaries. The Senate is my enemy. Right.

I think I. You know, actually, in this case, I do trust the Senate to fix that. I guess the larger question of, okay, so if we fix that, if we move this stuff out and we bring the bill back, what does Chip Roy and the other far right people in the Rules Committee do to block our ability to pass that bill? They've not been known for accepting defeat gracefully.

So that's what I would. If you set the precedent, if you pass these things, if you put them in the Bill, will Speaker McCarthy bring back a bipartisan, bicameral bill and put it on the floor for a vote? Are you working on that front? You've got a lot of Republicans you served with a long time.

There are 19 House Republicans that are in Biden districts. One would assume they don't want to go too far in one direction. Do you guys have a whip operation to work on these folks? Yeah, absolutely.

Look, this is not good for the public. They're living in a bygone era. They want to pretend that we live in a world where bigotry and discrimination don't exist, that if you are a person of color or a woman or an LGBTQ person, you have nothing to worry about. About the armed forces discriminated against you.

And that's the purpose of these. These diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, is to make it clear that history notwithstanding, we will give you a fair shake in the military now. But I remind people, just 13 years ago, we finally allowed gay people to serve openly in the military. And when we did that, every single Republican voted against doing that.

And can we really say that our military would be better off if we had no gay people in it? So we need to work to be inclusive. And what the Republicans are doing today, they're trying to block that inclusion for women, for people of color, and for the LGBTQ community. And it's.

They're on the wrong side of the country, and they're certainly on the wrong side of what's in the best interest of national security. I'll shift to another amendment, though, here that's actually more about. That has not to do with the culture wars, and it's the idea of. Of clawing back the cluster munitions.

Do you think we should restock our stockpile of cluster munitions that we just gave to Ukraine? I mean, if 100 countries think this is. Should be banned, should we keep asking the defense industrial complex to keep making them? No, we shouldn't.

That's not what we're doing. I don't. We have. And the actual number is classified, so let's just say a lot of cluster munitions that were made as far back as the 70s.

We are running out of excess ammunition to give to Ukraine. It's wrong to say that we're running out of it, but we're preserving what we need for our national security. But the excess to provide Ukraine to continue that fight is getting low. And so the cluster munitions are the only realistic option.

But please understand, the reason we're post cluster missions is because of the unexpected ordinance that they leave scattered across the battlefield. The Russians have mined the living hell out of Ukraine. They're going to be pulling that unsloaded initiative out for a long time to come. These munitions are being used to help Ukraine gain back their own territory.

So it's a different situation. But, no, we should not be building more costume munitions. And we're not. You, like I said, you spent a lot of time on these issues.

President Biden was asked a question today, sort of, hey, can the west, can NATO count on essentially America and its current political polarization? The last president was a big fan of NATO. He could become president again. There's certainly some House Republicans that aren't big fans of NATO, big fans of this war.

What would you say to our Western allies? Is there a durable majority to support the war in Ukraine? In the US Congress? Absolutely, there's a durable majority.

And you saw the vote in the supplemental package we passed last year. There is a very small minority in the Republican Party who want to undermine that support. But the overwhelming majority of Republicans in the House and the Senate support our policy in Ukraine, and they support NATO. And by the way, the overwhelming majority of the American people do, too.

It's pretty close to two thirds in the most recent polling that support us supporting Ukraine. Now, they don't support going to war with Russia, and we should not do that, but we should support Ukraine's ability to defend their sovereign, democratic country. And that's what we are doing. Do you believe Ukraine has earned the right to be in NATO once this war is over?

Once this war is over, I think we should have that discussion. I think that is a discussion at this point that is more problematic than helpful in the current fight. Certainly we're not going to bring Ukraine into NATO right now. We remember my point about we're not going to war with Russia, bring him into NATO Article 5 for it or with Russia.

So we're not going to do that once the war is over. The one thing we have to have is robust security guarantees for Ukraine. That's right. Does that require NATO membership?

That's more debatable. But they need robust security guarantees to make sure Russia doesn't just do this again. So if not NATO, they become Israel too, if you will. The way our security agreement with them.

Fair. We have a lot of security relationships with a lot of different countries that are short of an Article 5 commitment. So we have options to choose from. So, yes, I think Israel is one potential model.

There are others. Congressman Adam Smith, Democrat from Washington State, the ranking member on chairman. You should check them out, share your perspective. Thanks, Chef.

Thanks for chance. Up next, some unsolved mysteries. The Secret Service to brief House oversight, Homeland Security lawmakers after closing its investigation. The dude brought a dime bag of cocaine into the White House.

They say there are no leads and that there are no Suspects. You're watching the person now. Welcome back. The investigation into that dying bag of cocaine that spinal blind house earlier this month is over.

But there's no conclusion on who's responsible. Secret Service and this morning no forensic video evidence was able to clearly identify anyone potentially responsible for bringing this down sized baggie of the drug into the White House. Secret Service did brief members of the House today three sources familiar with that briefing, county scenes. They had narrowed down the list of individuals who were in the area in question 40 hours before the cocaine was found to between 500 and 600 people.

Of course my Tyler Bal has all the story. She joins me now. There was something notable in the, in the reports of this. Did they interview anybody?

Not that we know of. And basically what we've been told is they looked at the surveillance video, they went through the visitor logs and I suspect they would have done interviews if they had some sort of forensic evidence that they could try to match to someone. But no one talked about interviews in the time that I've been working on this over the last 10 days. So the surprising thing is people would expect, of course they can solve that.

The FBI crime lab was involved for Dietrich, which does very sophisticated testing of things that could be anthrax or ricin or biological agent. In this case, what they're saying is it was a very small plastic baggie. They could not get fingerprints that were usable off of that. It's an advanced testing, expensive process.

And DNA didn't have enough material to do a comparison. If they had found something, then you would need to figure out, well, how do you compare it? And if you're talking about visitors, people who are coming in on a tour, a staff led tour, not a problem. I was just going to say we should remind people this is, this is why I'm a little skeptical of whether they could find it or not because this is not the most trafficked entrance and this is the VIP entrance in some form or another.

The VIPs go through there. But there are a lot, I call it a working entrance, meaning not necessarily you and I don't get to go through here. I've only been through there if I've been escorted. Because it's not a process, it is not a press sentence.

But those who are right now there's a lot of construction being done, remodeling being done. So there are contractors, military personnel, staff will go through there, president will go through there, going over the eeob. But in terms of visitors, it was a holiday weekend and there are a lot of staff led tours that happen after work hours and on the weekend. And so some officials are saying the leading theory is the visitor, but we don't know that's the occupant choice.

The most likely thing is somebody that wasn't thinking. And if you're not knowing, you're like, I don't know what happened. And that's a drug policy and drug testing requirements for employees of the White House. They still do drug testing?

Yes, they do. And so one of the Congresswoman Marjorie said test all 500 of the names on the list. Of course, you need probable cause to do that. You can't just massively test people who might have been visitors.

So it's an unsatisfying answer for a lot of people. What do you sense? Congress, you know, we know there's a few members of Congress are going to try to use this as a high horse. What do you sense?

What could they do here? Enforcing more focus on I think one of the questions was if this can get through, is there a vulnerability in some other way? And people I've been talking to say when it comes to agents that might have been a powdery substance that could be used in a weapon form, that they have mechanisms to test for that. But they don't test for contraband.

They don't test for illegal drugs that don't pose a threat to the president or others inside the White House. It certainly is not a good look. And no one feels good about that. White House doesn't like that.

There's no answer. Oh, it's unsatisfying. It only feeds the beast, the conspiratorial beasts that we know of like trying to destroy. And to answer that, family members typically don't use this entrance.

Not that they couldn't. They typically don't. And they're not asked to put their stuff. And this is.

Yeah, yeah. Nice to see you. What a strange stories. Watch.

Thank you. After the break. Trouble on the trail. Rosa spaces slug support polls, new cash concerns, crowded field of GOP contenders all struggle to catch up to thunder painless X towards me.

Chris, welcome back. We got fresh new evidence today of trouble in Florida Governor Rona census campaign as it deals with blagging polls and flagging donors. NBC News has exclusively obtained a confidential memo. Campaign is not stalled.

It only quote, looks stalled. They argue the July 6 document lays out campaign's path forward and argues that the census has a plan to pry away Trump voters. It comes in the headline suggesting voter doubts about the census bid. It's a concern that's been building since even before he officially entered the race.

We reported back in March that both donors and allies wasn't ready for a fight with Donald Trump. They were getting anti grip again, they said. And then DeSantis continues to tell the former president by more than 2,000 points in the first qualifying four for New York's debate. DeSantis has employed a commonly used strategy to deflect from the headlines by of course blaming the media.

Well, I think if you look at the people like the corporate media, who are they going after? Who do they not want to be the nominee? They're going after me. We got a long way to go.

I'm looking forward to being able to participate in the debates. But this is not something that, you know, I expected to just snap fingers and all of a sudden, you know, you win seven months before anyone happens. I tried to create a narrative that somehow the race is over. This is going to be a state by state contest.

Well, they're trying to create a narrative because they do not want me to be the nominee. They don't want me to be the nominee because they know I beat Biden handle. As you saw, three of those appearances were a network of parents companies called News Corporation Corporate media there desensis also trying to put some heat on this Republican opponent. In an interview with conservative radio this week, Stantis said Trump was not, quote, entitled to the nomination, criticizing Trump for suggesting he might skip the August primary debate.

So let's have that. We have a great panel have this discussion. Betsy Wilter Swan national correspondent, Politico, NBC News contributor Also with the former Democrat congressman for Marilyn Edwards, former Florida Republican congressman Carlos Corbell. Florida did it.

No with Mr. DeSantis both for political analysts. Let me start with Ron DeSantis here. It's been about it, it's been sincere.

A week doesn't go by where there's not the hammering story, there's not the blind quote from donor X or there's not the story that donor gets named who says sources close to him are still shopping around. This has been two months of this. I guess they finally felt like they had sent them in. That's right.

There's clearly lots of agita in the desantis camp. The most fun to read this memo is as a secret message from the DeSantis campaign to DeSantis Super PAC, which basically a wish list of things that people on the campaign certainly seem to want the super PAC to be doing. For instance, it talks about themes for every month in terms of DeSantis messaging. It says DeSantis might benefit from ads highlighting that he's a dad and a veteran.

This seems to be a helpful strategy for us. And then buried in this memo, count Contra, which DeSantis is saying publicly. The memo's anonymous author lays out the extreme importance that the DeSantis camp is putting on what's called earned media, meaning coverage in mainstream media rather than purchase campaign ads. And this memo says earned media is king.

How do you blame the corporate media for your troubles and then say you need and then say you need as much of as possible? And specifically, says DeSantis, supporters and circuits need to do as much media as humanly possible. At the Same time, though, DeSantis himself has been totally gunshot when it comes to talking to mainstream media outlets. He's going on just about every Republican or conservative podcast you can find flooding the zone when it comes to that media.

But mainstream, you follow this a little more closely. He's not doing it. He's staying away from it, which is very much in contrast to what he's asking his supporters to do. I think Guillermoire is kind of like one whole side, you know, and they.

He had a fight for that. Like it was. They orchestrated, you know, as far as the citizens that they would be will give you this, you know, Carlos, what's the bus in South Florida in particular, where there's a lot of people and some other big donors down there who went down there thinking they were going to DeSantis? Well, and one of the reasons some of those donors are so disappointed is because they wanted someone who was different than Donald Trump.

And everything Ron DeSantis has done maybe for six months is either copy Donald Trump or try to out Trump Trump on issues like immigration and like abortion. When was Ron DeSantis at his best? His first year's governor, he actually focused on the environment. He had a libertarian streak to him.

A lot of people took an interest in him during the pandemic. He charted his own course. He was rewarded for that. In the 2022 re election, got a lot of support, not just universal support from Republicans, but independents, Democrats.

After that, he started trying to outdo Donald Trump. And another Floridian named Marco Ruba can tell you that it's impossible to out Trump Donald Trump. So that's why the strategy's failing. As a Democrat wants to see Joe Biden reelected.

Is this development that DeSantis is struggling, do you view that as good news for Biden or bad news? Because maybe Tim Scott becomes the alternative and Tim Scott as A Republican nominated Joe Biden. Well, I do think that Republican donors taking a closer look at Tim Scott is a sign that Ron DeSantis is just losing his sting really quickly. It's unclear to me whether that would make a stronger fight for Joe Biden at all.

Because in order to get the nomination, ultimately, somebody like Tim Scott is going to have to go farther. Right. Than he has been. And I think that that goes against his brand.

I think where DeSantis really kind of loses out in all of this is that it's not just taking a second look. It's saying we just don't think you can cut it on your extreme issues to the right. So it is interesting. It does feel as if there are some that want to do the control over the leader and say, let's restart this campaign.

Let's have a real announcement that Twitter thing was a disaster and all this stuff. And then there are some that don't want to show too much weakness. Like where is that tension coming from that Casey Desensitis is that Jeff Rowe, what have you sincere. It's what Stacense has going through the course is that he has just owed a person out of money, both his campaign and the super PAC backing him.

So he's going to be able to another former floor governor who went for President 23. He can mail out TVP players or something to every single person in New Hampshire the way the way Jeb supporters did. The fact that they have tons of money gives them a certain level of cushion and comfort, but at the same time, the fact that their expenditures are not correlating to the poll numbers they want to see no doubt creates a massive amount of friction for DeSantis. What this memo highlights is that they think Trump has basically 25% of the Republican electorate baked in.

So they need to wrap up. If they wrap up a significant bulk of the rest of it, they're going to be fine, mathematically speaking. What they also point out, of course, is that they view Tim Scott as a real problem or rising threat and however, they don't think anybody else really matters. That said, that's just not blown out by the polls.

Carlos, you guys said that they regret not announcing January. Yeah. And what to be fair, I thought the announcement, the timing of the announcement was perfect. And Florida candidates tend to announce in May after legislative session.

It just in hindsight, nobody else got it in November before and when, when Ron DeSantis was on top of the world after his reelection, he was the big primer for Republicans of Congress that would come out and endorse him on day. He's got six total endorsements. Yeah. In hindsight, that would have been the right decision.

I can't say that I would have recommended it at the time. I have to say I would have. He would have captured so much momentum. He would have gotten some of those Florida delegation members to endorse him, many of whom have endorsed Donald Trump now.

So. Yeah. But he ended up having to go through a legislative session where he had to dig even deeper on the right, which is something that he would not have had to do in January, which I don't understand. He didn't need to.

That is the part of this, that is the head scratcher. He had already proved his conservative bonfia well. He did, but he thought that he was going to try to capture some of that Trump base. And what he should have been doing is making it so that everybody else would eliminated out of the field.

And it was a one on one contest. The other problem with this strategy is they still seem to have Iowa. Iowa's first but not a single Iowa winner on the Republican side has gotten a nomination in the 21st century. Not one.

Okay. Statistically speaking, you should try to lose Iowa. You have a better chance of either keep going back. Right.

Losing Iowa on the Republican side has been a ticket to winning. It's pretty. There's a real question of why bother? There's a real question of what does this mean?

Now, DeSantis also says he's not speeding to hamper. Look, what it takes to win that on the Republican side. You have to go further to the right. This is not a Republican primary electorate.

This is a caucus going electorate. That means it is the most fervent people among the most fervent people. Yes. Something I think a lot of casual observers of politics don't understand is just how bizarre the caucus process is.

The fact that it can take hours to participate in caucus. It's demanding though. It's way more challenging than voting regularly. And that gives this hugely proportionate influence to people who are on the ground in Iowa.

People who can find those folks who want to stand around in high school gym on one evening instead of putting their kids to bed or standing down with their neighbors or whatever. And that and success in that contest just doesn't correlate at all to success in the Republican primary. Broadway. So let's talk about plan B on the Republican side.

Carlos, what's your plan B? Who'd you like to see? Well, thankfully, I don't have to have plans these days. But look, I think someone like because you hear some donors out there and look, Youngkin has a very, he is intentionally waiting until the seat for number one that he's waiting to see if DeSantis flails and number two, does he have something he can run on if he wins in the Virginia midterms this November, then he can say, hey, look, I'm going to lose it.

So if DeSantis continues to fail to fill the other than Trump lane, I think Tim Scott stands to benefit. And it certainly opens the door for perhaps a September announcement for someone fresh, different who can distinguish themselves from Donald Trump without being locked into this anti Trump, pro Trump, you know, paradox. Honestly, you know, as much as wheel like, hey, you're not doing this right. Nobody's figured out how to beat Donald Trump.

And it's still early because Donald Trump got in early. So there's plenty of time for Glenn Youngkin. It's getting late. Early or is it getting really late?

Betsy, Donna and Carl, thank you all still come. For the first time ever, the FDA approved a birth control pill that American men will be able to buy from the aisles of their local pharmacy without talking to a pharmacist. The details next. Watching the president.

Welcome back. A potential game changer for women's health care and contraceptive access. The FA approved the first counter birth control pill this morning. When the pill called O pill hit drugstore shelves, women will be able to access hormonal contraception without needing to visit a doctor for prescription.

The FDA approval comes and made renew legal fights over women's reductive rights, specifically the agency's authority to approve a common medication abortion pill, mifepristo. NBC news correspondent Ann Thompson has more on this news of the over the counter pill. And I gotta ask first, one pill does not fit all women here. So this is one pill.

How soon before you know, because different, different pills work better for different, for women depending. When will we start to see a variety of this on the shelves? That's what advocates hope that we will see eventually. This is just the first contraceptive that we will see on an over the counter basis, Chuck.

But the key here really the issue, Dr. Is all about access. And the belief is that this pill called Opill, which is a mini pill, it's just one hormone, progestin. It is, well, it is approved for women of all reproductive ages.

That includes teenagers. And the hope is, is that this will help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies in this country. There are 6.1 million pregnancies every year in this country. About half of them are unintended.

And the belief is now that you can go to, you will be able to go to the drugstore, the grocery store or order these pills online. That will help reduce that number. That should happen at the beginning of next year. But the big question tonight is how much will these pills cost?

And the manufacturer has not put a price on it, only to say that they will be affordable. What took so long? I mean, if we got the bill in the 50, right, why did 60s what took so long? Well, we got the pill in the 60s.

This formula was actually approved for prescription in 1973. So it's been out there for a long time. But I think it's been, it's like anything else. It's just taken us a while.

And now that you have all these doctors saying, look, we need to have contraception, be more widely available and effective contraception, and that's the difference here between other forms of contraception. This is, this, this is 93% effective up to 98% effective. That's if you use it correctly. And that's taking the pill every day, the same time, every day.

So it's here. It's taken a long time, much longer than a lot of people thought it ever should. Still an important milestone that we need to hit. Ann Thompson reporting the story for us.

And thank you. And thank you all for being with us this hour. We'll be back tomorrow with more into press now and be News now. Coverage continues with Hallie Jackson right 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 Mankiewicz and this is Trace of Suspicion, an all new podcast from Data Lab. Listen to all episodes of Trace of Suspicion now, wherever you catch your podcasts.