Meet the Press NOW — July 2

If it's Wednesday, it's the final countdown to an historic and politically perilous vote in the House to send the President sweeping legislative agenda to his desk to become the law of the land. That's if the White House can't convince a group of conservative holdouts to get on board. Plus Democrats begin to plan their midterm messaging in response to today's expected vote, hoping that the President's policy ID is backfire and help with them back in control of Congress. And the Justice Department wants Sean Diddy Combs to remain in custody after jury clears him of the most serious charges of racketeering and sex trafficking, but does convict him on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution.

Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Kelly O'Donnell in Washington, where it's all hands on deck as the President and House Speaker Mike Johnson try to deliver the votes to get his signature domestic legislation passed. Right now, action on the House floor is stalled. We are still waiting on this current vote to get to another vote to tee up the big vote on final passage.

Bottom line here, the delays suggest leadership does not think it has enough support to pass the bill right now. It comes after a day of furious behind-the-scenes negotiations with President Trump meeting with multiple Republican coalitions from deficit hawk conservatives in the House freedom caucus to the more centrist members who are concerned about the bill's steep cuts to Medicaid. Publicly, the President took to social media to urge the bill's passage, saying extending the tax cuts and reduced spending would lead to a quote, economic renaissance. Speaker Johnson also touted the bill as he huddled with Republican holdouts.

Here's some of what he told reporters today about his message to the Republicans on the fence. When you have a piece of legislation that is this comprehensive and with so many agenda items involved, you're going to have lots of different priorities and preferences among people because they represent different districts and they have different interests. But we can't make everyone 100% happy. It's impossible.

This is a deliberative body. It's a legislative process. By definition, all of us have to give up on our personal preferences. I never got to ask anybody to compromise core principles, but preferences must be yielded for the greater good.

House Democrats meanwhile came out in a show of unity against the President to make a bill, holding a press conference on the steps of the Capitol highlighting the potential impact of the bill, which the nonpartisan congressional budget office estimates would lead to nearly 12 million Americans losing their health insurance. Every single House Democrat will vote hell no against this one big ugly bill. The hospitals will close, nursing homes will shut down, committee base clinics won't have the ability to operate and as a result, people are going to die connected to this one big ugly bill, tens of thousands of unnecessary American deaths per year, shame on Republicans while even bringing this bill. Democratic leaders also taking aim at vulnerable Republicans in competitive districts calling them out by name.

Why would Scott Perry vote for this bill? Almost 25,000 people in his community will lose access to health care. In his community, in Pennsylvania, almost 40,000 households would lose access to nutritional assistance. They're at risk of going hungry.

Why would Scott Perry vote for this bill? Why would David Valadea vote for this bill? Over 65,000 people in his district will lose access to health care if this has 60,000 households will lose access to the food assistance. Why would Young Kim in California vote for this bill either?

Over 31,000 people in her communities will lose their health care and 15,000 households could lose access to food assistance. Speaker Johnson can only afford three GOP defections. That's if the entire House votes with Congressman Massey of Kentucky already declared no and joining me now is NBC News Capitol Hill correspondent Melanie Zenona and NBC News White House correspondent Monica Elba. Mel, let's start with you.

What is the state of play this afternoon and could we see a final vote today? That is a great question, Kelly. The House is at a standstill right now. The GOP leadership was attempting to move through some key procedural vote in order to get on to final passage of the big beautiful bill, as Trump likes to call it.

But they have held that vote open for over an hour and they even started to send members back to their offices because they don't have the votes at this very moment. And there's a couple of issues at play here. Number one, there's an attendance issue. Remember, lawmakers were being dragged back from their districts.

They were all throughout the country, back home for the holiday with their families doing constituent events. They weren't supposed to be here this week. And there was a number of severe weather events and flight cancellations that have really made it difficult for some members to get back. So we know of at least two Republicans who were expected to be reliable.

That's what's on this bill, who have not been able to make it back to Washington, D.C. But we are hearing that they're expected to be here within the next hour or so. The bigger issue though, Kelly, is that there is still a group of holdouts, mostly conservative hardliners who still are not quite there yet on this bill. They've been meeting over the last three hours.

They're at the White House meeting with President Trump. And they've also been meeting with Speaker Johnson in a room right outside the House floor trying to get to, yeah. So that's where we're at right now. It is a stalemate.

There is still a lot of optimism and hope that they can get there today. But there's still going to be a lot of arms to do and a lot more work to do before they can get to, yes, here. And the getting to, yes, is one of the longest journeys in Washington when these big bills are in front of lawmakers, and it's a difficult choice. Do you think that the talks today have given any signals that they've been productive?

There have been some positive signs. I've also spoken to some moderates who had some concerns over Medicaid cuts, Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey being one of them. He has been really on the fence about this bill. He said today he is leaning strongly, yes, so that's a positive sign.

And then even the conservative hardliners have said that they want to get to, yes, that they're having some productive conversations, that there's a few more things that they need to work out behind the scenes. The question here though is what can they be given or what can leadership and Trump assure them of short of changing this bill, because the trick here is that GP leadership does not want to nor can they change the House bill or else they would have to move it back to the Senate. So that would really delay their entire timeline. So there's a number of conversations going on behind the scenes.

We'll see just how effective those are though. We should have a better sense in the next couple of hours or so. And Monica, let me turn to you now, and of course the president has a lot on the line here. He's been involved in conversations.

What are you learning about how that has gone in some of the direct diplomacy or perhaps arm twisting that he's been engaged in? Yeah, a lot on the line, Kelly, but nothing on the public schedule and that is by design so that you can have these private meetings behind closed doors with these lawmakers. We know he was meeting with House Freedom Caucus members and then he was also meeting with some more moderate Republicans. So you had both the hardliners and the moderates that he was having these group meetings with where he is trying to both apply some political pressure.

The president has been pretty open about what he says will be severe consequences for Republicans who don't get in line and vote for this bill. So maybe a little bit of that in addition to here's how he views this being sold to their constituencies. He's been trying to talk about this as an issue of economic growth and trying to make this idea that investing in his top priorities like border security and in the military that those are positives. At the same time, this is a White House administration that knows that it's those final votes that are going to be critical and that there will likely have to be some give and take.

So the president is trying to have those conversations again in private knowing that the battle is spilling out in public. Kelly. And the president likes to say flexibility is a tool for him. So would that suggest that he could live with this going beyond the July 4th deadline that he sent?

It seems like he is okay with that deadline sliding if it means that more time will get them to final passage yesterday. He sort of indicated that was the case he said I'd love to have it by Friday by the 4th of July where he's having a big celebration at the White House for the holiday and where he wanted to tout against some of these agenda items and priorities but that if it had to slide a little bit, it was okay because this was an imposed deadline of his own making but he does fashion himself the deal maker in chief and I think according to some White House officials I was talking to earlier, they still think this is possible even though it is getting really down to the wire to be turned in the next 48 hours or so. Well, deadlines often move people in Washington as well. So let's see how that goes.

And Mel, if we look at this, can we jump beyond the vote itself and are you finding that Republicans are weighing the potential impact on the midterm elections, which of course seems like a lifetime from now, but is that playing into some of these conversations? Oh, absolutely. This is definitely something that is weighing heavily on the minds of Republicans. In fact, and we had reported this in the Senate debate, there were a number of Republicans who behind closed doors were warning if changes aren't made to this bill that these members are worried they're going to lose their seats.

One member even liking to the debate in 2017 when Republicans tried and failed to repeal and replace Obamacare, but even just the threat of taking away people's healthcare was something that cost Republicans in a big, big way in the following midterm election. Now, I've been asking the GOP leadership about these concerns, they're really brushing them aside. They are confident that there's going to be enough in this bill that people like they're going to have to get out on the road and sell it though and they have a huge messaging challenge ahead of them because the centerpiece of this bill is this extension of the 2017 tax cuts. It's really just an extension of the status quo.

These Medicaid cuts, people are going to feel those and there's a lot of moderates in these really tough purple battlegrounds who have a lot of constituents who rely on Medicaid. No doubt Democrats see this as their centerpiece of what they're going to focus on in the 2026 midterms. Republicans feel so too. We'll see actually who's who's going to be right here, but that remains to be seen.

We know you will both be tracking this force. We'll check back with you if anything changes. So thanks for being at your post. Appreciate that very much.

And now let me welcome our guest here delighted to have you joining me as North Carolina Republican Greg Murphy, who is certainly a part of the Ways and Means Committee, is also one of those people who has to make a decision here. And so thank you for being here and coming from across the street to join us. Notably, you told Punchbowl News today that you were having a hard time getting to the point where you could be a yes for this package. And that makes me wonder, does that mean you're a no?

Well, Kelly, I think you have to frame things. I've been a physician that's worked in rural eastern North Carolina now for over 30 years. I actually saw Medicaid patients yesterday. So I've seen it.

I see it on the ground of what's going to happen. We have a system that's broken. We had an enrollment during the last administration where the CMS director or her job was to enroll as many people in Medicaid, whether they're eligible or not. You have government programs that are for the most distress for Medicaid, it's supposed to be for impoverished child, impoverished children, pregnant women, disabled disabilities.

These are the programs supposed to be for it. It's not supposed to be everything for everybody. What we want individuals is to be able to go out and get insurance from their companies. That's really the best.

We also had a system that has happened with this provider tax, which is in the 80s, that has turned into this massive rebate program from the federal government drawing down more dollars. When I was in the general assembly in North Carolina, they talk about how well we did this. We can pull more dollars down from the federal government. That's why we're at $37 trillion in debt.

This is threading a difficult needle. I've been on the phone nonstop for the last 96 hours, talking with hospital presidents, talking with other individuals, HHS members from North Carolina. How do we thread this needle? The good part here is that Senator McCousey was able to get a $50 billion rural fund in there.

The devil is going to be in a detail. Do you have questions, though, right? How that would be dispersed and who would qualify? Sure.

Are you getting any assurances that you think are enough to result in a vote? Well, I have good relations with lots of folks across the state of North Carolina. What this has to be funded for is we don't need systems that just get money just because they have Medicaid patients. I'm in a district in Eastern North Carolina where if you took the 29 counties that we serve, if you made a mistake, we'd be one of the poorest in the country.

Then you have other places in Charlotte while they still have the same number of Medicaid patients. They have a lot more insured patients, which actually pay the bills. We have to find a system working with our state government that puts that money where it needs to be. So are you seeing patients in the last few weeks perhaps who would in fact lose their insurance?

Well, you see, this is a misnomer by Democrats because they're talking about people losing insurance. These are people who should not be on Medicaid to begin with. I understand that argument that you say they wouldn't qualify under new rules or rules. No, no, they don't qualify under rules.

On President rules. So that leads me to believe that they would in fact lose their insurance. Well, they shouldn't have had Medicaid to begin with. And so this is, again, we have programs, you know, I'm not a veteran.

Does this mean I qualify for veterans benefits? No, it shouldn't be that way. And so let's get government back to what it's supposed to be doing for the people who need it. So that sounds like a yes to me.

Have you made a decision yet? I've not made a decision yet. And what will it take to find myself? I hope to talk to the president this afternoon because I want to tell the story of Eastern North Carolina, the system where I've worked for 30 years, how it will affect it and how do we navigate our way out of this with this other fund?

One of the things that struck me as Senator Tillis, the senior senator from your state, had raised the issue of is the president getting all the best information about what is happening on the ground level and what would happen to this as reporters when we've talked to the president. He says, no one is losing their benefits. It sounds like there's somewhere in between in what you're saying. So what do you think the president needs to understand and do you expect him to be open to that?

Yeah, absolutely. Look, our president cares about this country. He really, I mean, honestly, I wish people and Democrats would see how much this president cares about this country. He wants to know things, but he also understands we are careening towards a financial cliff that will literally destroy this country.

We cannot do business as usual. Yes, as part of this Medicaid, as part of this other programs, absolutely. I think he does care about the average American and where we are in trying to deal with these issues. One of the things I'd like to do is get a sense from you about what Senator Tillis did say on the floor.

I believe we have that clip. If we could just look at that. Our memories here about what he says is likely to be a result of this bill in your state. Yeah.

Let's play that. So what do I tell 663,000 people in two years or three years when President Trump breaks his promise by pushing them off of Medicaid because the funding's not their publicans are about to make a mistake on health care and betraying a promise. It is inescapable that this bill in his current form will betray the very promise that Donald J. Trump made.

Do you see it as a betrayal, sir? Well, I think you have to look at a full equation here and look, I get along great with Tom Tillis. I think he's a patriot that cares a lot about his country. I don't agree with all of his calculations, though.

You have to look at what happens with other payments that go. Medicare advantage, for example, is a fraudulent system within federal government as far as Medicare. There are a lot of reforms that we need to do that will plus up a lot of the systems of hospitals that where they get money, which help out with this tremendously. We focused a lot on the Medicaid piece of this, but you also have concerns about the deficit.

You were a guest on this program back in May. I want to play something you said when you were with us then. The most important thing I'm concerned about right now is the growth of our deficit. You know, barn markets across the world are saying, well, gosh, in the United States, pay back its loan.

And if so, 1929 looks like a spring holiday. We cannot allow that to happen. We want pro-growth policies that allow companies to invest, and guess what? They employ more people giving meaningful work, but at the same time, we don't want to, you know, grow on our deficit.

So you remember that. And of course, this measure according to the CBO is going to expand the deficit by as much as $3 trillion. I know there are some criticisms of the CBO. How do you swear that?

Yeah, you know, look, I would love to be able. I'm a scientist by nature. This is a surgeon. I'm sorry.

I take things for a fact. The CBO is right often as they are wrong. That said, you know, you can't look at the deficit just as a single number. You have to look at the delta between the growth and the GDP ratio between our debt.

If we can grow this economy greater, the CBO estimated our growth to be a paltry 1.8%. That's absurd. That's ridiculous. We grow the delta between our GDP and the debt.

We're not going to be able to pay back. But there's a leap of faith in that as well. But it's also a very, very educated guess on pro-growth policies that are put forth in the other parts of this bill that we can get there. And by the way, when we do that, we employ people.

We give them jobs. We give them self-esteem. Most of all, we give them health insurance. Things that Medicaid doesn't need to be supplied.

When we look at the political picture of what all of this may mean on the campaign trail, we've seen how Tom Tillis and Don Bacon have both decided to step away after they've been targeted by the president or disagree with the president, but feel they want to engage politically anymore. Do you think this is something that will have an impact on your party and doesn't affect how you feel about your own vote? Well, I tried honestly. I don't have to do this job.

I can go back and be a lowly surgeon. I still love being a physician. That's who I am more importantly. I really, truly, truly try not to make politics as my decision.

I know some other members have to do that. We're here to do the right thing for the right reason. Sometimes it's difficult. Sometimes you have to hold your nose and vote for things that you don't want to look at the bigger picture.

I don't know if Tillis wasn't. That's wrong. I don't know what Don Bacon's issue was. We have to do the right thing for the American people because sometimes it's difficult to take medicine that you don't like tasting to make yourself better.

The nation does not understand how we are as a nation as far as our finances. They don't have a clue. It's beautiful outside. People are driving and enjoying getting ready for a holiday.

We are careening towards a fiscal cliff. We have to do something about that and hard and difficult decisions must be made. I hope we can touch base with you after you have your chat with the president and see where you land on this because obviously the speaker and the country, everybody's waiting for a vote like yours. Great.

Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate your time. Efforts to Holshupman of U.S.

made weapons to Ukraine. And that's of concerns about the Pentagon stockpiles and what it could mean for that war. But first, it hasn't passed yet, but Democrats are already strategizing their midterm messaging around the bill. Representative Susan Del Bonnay, who runs the Congressional ARM4 Democratic Campaign ARM, shall join us next and you're watching.

Me The Press Now. Welcome back. All eyes are on the House floor as we await some potential action on the Trump agenda bill that passed the Senate yesterday. As we noted earlier, right now things are a bit of a standstill.

Joining me now is Washington State Democratic Congresswoman Susan Del Benadish, challenger of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. That's the group that tries to elect Democrats to the House. And so that's a big responsibility. Congresswoman, thank you for being with us.

Absolutely. Thanks for having me. So Senate Leader Chuck Schumer said that after this bill passed the Senate that he thinks it will haunt Republicans. And your role is to get Democrats elected.

If this bill does pass the House, do you want to see this be a referendum for the midterm elections? Do you think this bill carries into the election year? Absolutely. It already is having an impact.

I mean, remember the bill went through the House already once. People voted for this terrible bill, cutting health care for millions of people. It only got worse in the Senate. Now it's coming back to the House, but Republicans already voted for this.

We're voted to just take away health care, to raise energy costs, to take away food assistance. They promised to lower costs on day one. And that's been a big broken promise. And now they're extending on that with this big, ugly bill to raise costs, hurt families.

And absolutely, we're going to hold them accountable for it in 2026. And when you talk about health care, one of the things I want to point to is what the Vice President J.D. Vance said, and how he is framing this argument. He is viewing this as massive tax cuts, especially no tax on tips and overtime.

And most importantly, big money for border security. This is a big win for the American people. Those issues poll well, especially with groups of working class voters. And we know that Democrats are trying to win back those voters.

That's how J.D. Vance framed it as making it about the border. Do you think that is an argument that has traction? And do Democrats need to address that piece of it?

Well, in that same statement, I think he talked about the changes to Medicaid as being minutia, as being insignificant. This is a $1 trillion cut to health care, 17 million people across the country losing their health care. This is working families across the country, shutting down rural hospitals, shutting down nursing homes, all the pay for tax breaks for the wealthy and the well connected. And anything that they're doing for working families is only temporary.

Their focus is on permanent tax cuts for the wealthiest and on gunning important programs that people depend on, gunning health care, nutrition programs, raising energy costs. This is a working families across the country. And people see it in poll after poll. When people learn about this bill, they hate it.

And the more and more they learn, the more and more they dislike it. And I think a lot of people would agree with Alon Musk's statement that this is a disgusting abomination. You've heard the President say that this is not going to be cuts to those who are on Medicaid. Certainly, Congressman Murphy also said this is about those who are eligible for Medicaid being able to remain on the program, but that it had expanded its acceptance of recipients patients too broadly.

How do you respond to that? Just look at the numbers. A trillion dollars in cuts, 17 million people being kicked off of health care. Those are independent analysis from many folks looking at the impacts of the legislation that just came out of the Senate.

In fact, it got worse in the Senate. I guess 14 million people being kicked off of health care wasn't enough, now 17. And to be clear, this will shut down rural hospitals across the country. It will raise costs for everyone else, because premiums will blow up.

People will be using the ER again for primary care. We've heard this story before. We know how devastating it is for people. And that's why people all across the country, in a bipartisan way, I might add, reject this bill, because they know the damage it would do.

And that's just health care. Another component of this is maintaining the 2017 tax cuts at that time. So now it would be a matter of maintaining that, not new cuts for most Americans. The Democratic Party in 2024 did talk about wanting to make sure that those tax levels remained low for those earning under $400,000 a year.

But I don't hear Democrats talking about the tax cut piece of this much. What's your response to that? Well, I think maybe we would be in a different place. We're actually coming together to talk about what we can do to help make sure families across the country can thrive.

We would talk about putting together a tax policy that is fair, that puts working families first. This is tax policy that puts billionaires first. All of the permanency in the tax bill that they're putting forward is for the wealthiest and large corporations. It's not for working families.

So let's have that conversation. Let's have that be the priority. Let's expand the child tax credit and help, again, lower childhood poverty across the country. These are important priorities.

Something we could be working on in a bipartisan way. But there's been nothing bipartisan about this. Republicans don't even know what's in the bill. They're just doing whatever Donald Trump told them.

And to be clear, for all the national teeth that we hear from Republicans, they're probably all gonna fall in line and do whatever Donald Trump tells them to do. And as we mentioned, you have a campaign rule for your party. So I want to broaden this a little bit to bring up a political moment that comes from Virginia's governor, Glenn Youngkin, who said about your former house colleague who's now the Democratic nominee, Abigail Spamberg, last night, he said that, well, let's play the clip. We have a clip of Governor Youngkin.

She supported Joe Biden in Kamala Harris' every bill. And my friends, we will not allow Virginia to be led by someone who reminds me very much of our mayoral candidate for the Democrats in New York. So there you have Governor Youngkin comparing Spamberg or to the New York City mayoral candidate. And he's, as you know, a self-described Democratic socialist over in Montdani.

Are you concerned that there will be similar attacks against Democratic candidates across the field where you have a responsibility to get them into office? Well, first of all, repulsive to do everything to distract folks from the damage they're doing to this country. They want to talk about anything about the work that they are doing right now that is going to undermine families and create long-term damage in our country. Abigail Spamberg, an incredible member of Congress, standing up for working families.

She will be a great governor. But reason she's an incredible representative is she was on the ground talking about the issues that mattered in her community and was independent-minded authentic voice for her community. We actually picked up seats in the House last cycle because we had strong candidates in these purple districts across the country. We have 14 Democrats who won in districts that Donald Trump won in.

Another big reason why we're gonna take back to the majority is because we know what works. Do you see candidates who have the top of mind, the issues that matter to their voters? You're coming to Washington DC to get things done. When you run a strong campaign and you talk about the issues that matter, your incredible opportunity.

And now you got a lot of attention. And obviously New York City gets plenty of media attention and it certainly suggests that there is a vibrancy among young voters in particular to support him. And his idea is, do you see that being a factor in races? Having a candidate who is working hard and talking about the economy issues that matter?

Again, that makes a huge difference and I did there. And I can tell you, when I talk to folks across the country, they're not worried about who the mayor of New York is. They wanna know who's going to stand up for them and watching in DC. You have a big job to do there.

Thank you so much, Congresswoman. We appreciate your time. Thank you. And joining me now is our panel, Deepa Shriveram, the White House correspondent from NPR, making Hayes, former special assistant to President Biden and Mark Bedner, former communications director for speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Welcome, welcome. Plenty to time. We like a busy day like this because you all bring important perspectives. Deepa, let me start with you.

We know there's arm twisting. We know there is late phone calls to key members. Where do you think things stand? What is your expectation?

It might take some more arm twisting and more phone calls, right? It has been at the White House all day today, taking part in these phone calls, trying to appease some of these members who have concerns about this bill. It passed the House and went through the Senate, now has to change this process, right? We're seeing how the sausage gets made essentially.

But there are some heightened concerns about Medicaid cuts, right? A very popular program that if this bill passes, we're probably gonna have to go back to their districts and sort of explain some of the workings of this bill. So there's concerns there that deficit talks folks who are concerned about adding to the debt. So this isn't exactly a clean cut thing.

That being said, that self-imposed a life-worth deadline that the president said, coming very soon. So at this point, it's kind of hard to see if that gets met. And we know without a deadline but there's still a lot of work to be done. Mark, take us inside what it's like in the room during these times.

We know that Speaker Johnson does not want changes to the bill, so the arm twisting or the conversations are not about negotiating changes to the Senate version. So what could be offered? What is the ask? Well, first and foremost, I think it's perfectly poetic that we're doing this right now as we're getting close to the 4th of July holiday, because this reminds me a lot.

When you take that family road trip and you're almost there, but everyone's starting to argue about like when you go to the bathroom, about the directions about the air conditioning, that's where we're at. So I think we're really close to the finish line here and it's gonna be important for both the speaker and President Trump to stay intimately engaged with these numbers because a lot of them, they want their moment in the sun. They might wanna have a little grievance here or there but at the end of the day, this is a massive legislative priority for the entire party. And we've heard it before that failure is not an option.

Is there anything that can be offered that is not a part of an actual bill, some future promise that is considered even effective? If the President were to say, we'll take care of you on this or we'll help you with that? I would think that a promise from the President that I will primary you, if you vote for the bill, it would be a pretty legitimate promise. I get some attention.

Yeah, I'll get some attention. But yeah, there's always different things that Congress is doing whether it's perhaps a committee assignment in a future Congress or everyone's gonna try to leverage their vote in a different way. We saw that in the Senate when the more no votes you have, the greater individual leverage that members have. So this is gonna be really incumbent on the speaker and the leadership team to actually work out these individual kinks with members.

But then ultimately say, we need to get this done to the American people. If I take your analogy further, then eventually there are fireworks, Democrats are looking for a big display to shine a light on this bill in ways that they think can be effective and to hold the public's attention for some time to come. What do you think Democrats can do since they don't have the votes to stop it? What is the best play they have?

I think they're continuing to remind the American people what this is doing, Sam. If you look at Pennsylvania, there are four districts that either a toss up or lean Republican. It's over 100,000 people who are gonna lose access to healthcare, 150,000 people who are losing access to their food programs. So I think that when people go back to these elections and in the terms, those are gonna be the commercials that are on air.

So that is where we're gonna really see the fallout here and where Democrats have the most power is when they're going to, that is their opportunity to take back the house so they need to be Republicans to take these tough votes. And it's interesting that you say what they can get because it doesn't committee assignments and talking to the president, those are not things for the American people and it just makes people, the American people look at the Republican party saying, you're doing this for your policies and not for our own benefit. Right, yes votes should be, I'm out for the yes votes. I don't dispute the fact that leveraging individual attention right here is a positive sign for the American people or for the party itself.

And given the fact that border security and immigration enforcement has been a giant priority for the president and many in polling indicate that they believe in that to a degree. Some of the tactics that have been used that there's been some erosion of that. But do you think that Democrats have an opportunity to talk about border security in a different way or is it at this point, it is all a focus on the healthcare-related cuts? It's hard to say because we're talking about the midterm elections, but it's still July 2025.

So this is months and months and months of attention for the American voters that Democrats will have to hold onto. That being said, I think healthcare is one of those most tangible things, right? I covered during COVID when rural hospitals were closing down and that was a huge threat for so many people in this country. When you have to drive more than hour to get to the closest hospital, the closest doctor's office, you feel that every day of your life.

So that is something that is very tangible for a lot of people. That being said, we know that the Republican party has had a hold on immigration messaging for a very, very long time. That's one of the president's favorite things to talk about, favorite things to turn back to. So it's very possible that in the months and months and months before midterm elections, really start kicking off and grabbing people's attention that there's a lot of your time to fill on other topics here.

And Mark, when you talk about the sort of the reactions we're getting from different members, Derek Van Orden told reporters something earlier today that I think is interesting because there was some colorful language associated with it. Let's take a look. So people need a little me time and self-actualize. I'm not one of them.

I'm at the Green Commons. Did I say that? Yeah, but I mean, Trump is, Trump is sort of a bad fact. Do you guys have an entire leader?

No. No, I'm not going to allow you to get a leader down. The president of the United States didn't give us this time to have a total of victory. If you're a member of Congress, there were almost 800,000 classmates.

Is that clear? Do you work together? That's how the government's supposed to function. We're really in a different era.

Where language has certainly changed. But there's some intense feelings there. What is your takeaway when you hear that kind of frustration in a member? Well, first of all, Derek Van Orden, despite that clip, very Wisconsin-nice, great number of great guys.

Do you see him with a cheese head on a weekend? Exactly, yep. We're drinking a Miller light, yes, of course. But you can see right now, like, this is why you need to keep the floor, keep everyone nearby, keep the cauldron heated so that we can actually get this vote.

But his broader point, I think, is very important that your viewers have kind of taken into account here, is that the Senate and the White House, they all want their fingerprints on this bill in different ways. Sometimes that manifests as frustration, as, oh, we want this part of the bill versus that part of the bill. But ultimately, they just want their say within their respect of chambers. And do you think that President Trump is likely to share?

The credit, if he was able to get this through, or is this really going to be the Trump definition of his agenda going forward? All the above. This is very important for the president and his legacy and his vision for the country. But it's also, you know, he's the most popular member of our party.

He's the most popular politician in the country. And so it's going to be important for Republican members and Republican senators to stand with him as he goes through this agenda. How do Democrats keep the attention span elastic on this? If it is, in fact, passed and signed this month, as Steve has said, it's a long way to the midterms.

And it's just like you were saying, when people start losing their health care and people start losing their food assistance programs, they have no one to blame but their representatives and the president. So everyone wants to take credit for it, but they will also have to take credit for it, the failures that they are causing to the American people. And I think that's going to be a real issue in the midterms. But when people start to feel that and feel it in their pocketbooks, and these are the kitchen table issues, we always constantly talk about the economy, the only thing that matters to people in their vote.

And it will really ring through in 26. I was so decisive in 2024. Well, I thought we wouldn't have a favor. I thought it might be resolved, but instead we do.

Thank you panel, appreciate it. Glad to have you here, and we'll wait for the real answer from across the street. And up next, Sean Diddy Combs could be released on bail today after a jury found him guilty on two counts, but cleared him of the most serious charges. We're live at the courthouse next.

You're watching Meet the Press Now. For more information on NBC News, please subscribe and share. Stay informed with the NBC News app. Breaking News is just coming in moments ago.

Watch, read and listen throughout your day. And now unlock even more with the subscription. It's the best of NBC News with fewer ad interruptions, including ad free articles, podcasts and full NBC News shows, plus deeper access and exclusive content. Let's just take a step back.

It's more context and clarity from the reporters you trust. Download the NBC News app now and subscribe for more. As the day wraps up, get this scoop on what's been happening with Here's the Scoop, but new podcast from NBC News with Meet Your Host, Jasmine D'Souguio. We'll take a deep dive into the day's top stories with NBC News's trusted journalist.

It's a fresh take, a sharp, thoughtful, and informative for you closer to the headlines and conversations that are shaping our world on the front page of the Zeitgeist. Here's the Scoop from NBC News. Listen daily on SiriusXM. Welcome back.

We're following Breaking News out of New York where we could soon learn if Sean Diddy Holmes will be released on bail, a jury acquitted the music mogul of racketeering and sex trafficking charges earlier today, but did convict him onto lesser charges. The verdict is seen as a victory for Holmes, who had faced the possibility of life in prison and who has been in custody since his arrest last September. NBC News correspondent Rehema Ellis joins me now from outside the federal courthouse in Manhattan. Rehema, great to see you.

And help us to understand this mixed verdict. What was Sean Cone's actually convicted of doing? As you mentioned there, Kelly, the charge was found guilty on. It was count number three, and that was against Cassie Ventura, his longtime ex-girlfriend, they had a relationship for on and off for 11 years, and it was a charge of transportation for the purpose of engaging in prostitution.

She also found guilty on the same charge involving a woman named Jane, that is a pseudonym because she wanted to maintain her protection identity. And this was basically saying that on the stand, Cassie Ventura and Jane both indicated that they had traveled to different parts of the country. As far as Cassie is concerned, they had traveled internationally, and that there were times there were these sex parties, if you will, drug-induced drug-fueled sex parties that went on for long times, periods of time, sometimes days that became known as pre-offs. The jurors found that he was guilty of that, and it seemed as though that night had been two of the easiest charges to convict him on because the evidence clearly seemed very clear.

Coming up at five o'clock, I understand there will be a bail hearing, so this is acknowledging he has convictions, but given the type of convictions, not the most serious charges, what do you expect will happen? Obviously prosecutors would like to keep him detained, but his own counsel, I'm sure, will make an argument that he is not a flight risk. What do you think will play out here? Well, it's interesting, but we don't know yet.

In as much as he has been found not guilty of the most serious charges to what your point was that he was just making. The defense is saying he has been a model prisoner since he was incarcerated back in September. He's been there now for nine months. They say that he is not a flight risk.

He's willing to put up a million dollars bond. He is also surrendering his passport. He also has said that he would not have access to his private plane that he wouldn't make it possible for him to flee the country. So they say there's no reason for him not to turn back up in court for the sentencing.

But the prosecution, on the other hand, paints a very different picture, saying that these crimes that he has been convicted of, they're very serious crimes. And even during the time that he had been informed of the charges against him, he knew the police were looking for him, that he was continuing with this kind of bad boy behavior, if you will, that even the defense had admitted to you from the very beginning, saying this is behavior that you don't like, but it is personal, it was consensual. And it was not guilty of some of the crimes that he was charged with in the federal court. Kelly?

Rahema, we will wait for the outcome of that bail hearing. Thank you so much for your reporting. Good to see you as well. We are also following breaking legal news in another closely watched case, and this one is out of Idaho.

This afternoon, Brian Coburger pleaded guilty to four counts of first-degree murder and burglary for the fatal stabbings of four college students in 2022. Are you pleading guilty because you are guilty? Yes. Have you had enough time to decide whether or not to be guilty?

Yes. You are pleading guilty freely and voluntarily. Yes. Given your choices, do you believe it is in your best interest to plead guilty?

Yes. With that plea, Coburger admitted to stabbing and killing the University of Idaho students in their off-campus housing in November of 2022. As part of the plea deal, he will avoid the death penalty in exchange for a life sentence. We will be back with more Meet the Press now, right after this break.

Welcome back. We are turning now to the Middle East. Hamas says it is considering new ceasefire agreements that could bring a potential pause to its war with Israel. President Trump posted on social media yesterday that Israel has agreed to the necessary conditions to finalize the 60-day ceasefire during which time we will work with all parties to end the war.

Those are the President's words. But Israel did not confirm that announcement. Earlier today, Prime Minister Netanyahu repeated his insistence that, quote, there will be no Hamas in a post-war Gaza. It comes as President Trump is said to host Netanyahu next week at the White House.

Meanwhile, Iran announced today that it will suspend its cooperation with the UN's nuclear watch-up in the aftermath of U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on its nuclear facilities. NBC News Chief Warren correspondent Richard Engle has made his way to Tehran and filed this report for us. I'm now in one of the biggest mosques in South Tehran.

The reason here is there is currently a religious festival going on in the city in this country all across the Shia Muslim world to honor and mourn a Shia martyr who was killed 1400 years ago. And this year, it has a special resonance because of the recent war between Israel and Iran. In fact, these are some of the nuclear scientists who were killed by Israel, and several of them are buried inside this mosque. Those who thought, and there are many who have been discussing this, that the 12 days of Israeli strikes would topple the regime, would create so much instability and unrest that the people would rise up.

We've been in here in this country for about 24 hours now. It's not easy to get in here. There are very few foreigners here, very, very few foreign journalists. The airspace is largely closed.

We had to fly into right along the Afghan border, the city of Mushad and then drive all the way into Iran. And I can tell you, the government is still absolutely in charge. There were checkpoints along the road coming into Tehran. There are police on the streets.

The security services and intelligence services are on full display. And we have not been seeing any signs of unrest. In fact, when we talk to people, many of them say, because the Israeli bombing was so intense, because it was a surprise, and because the Iranian government was in the midst of negotiations, Iranian say, in this case, they're standing with their government, and they don't want to see a dangerous kind of regime change imposed from afar. Many Iranians don't like their government.

Many have serious issues with their government, with the Islamic Revolutionary government that has been here since 1979, but they don't want civil war, they don't want bloodshed, and they fear that if Israel, the United States continues to bomb in order to try and change the politics from afar, it could not lead to, might not lead to regime change, but regime destruction, which is something that they do not want at all. And thank you to Richard for that report taking us inside Iran. And after the break, the Pentagon says it is halting a shipment of missiles and ammunition to Ukraine over concerns for the U.S. stockpile.

What could that mean for the war when we return? You're watching me the press now. Welcome back. The Trump administration is defending its plan to pause weapons shipments to Ukraine.

Multiple officials with knowledge of that decision tell NBC News that Defense Secretary Pete Higgsith ordered a pause in sending missiles and ammunition over concerns about the U.S. military stockpiles. Officials say the stockpiles of munitions had been depleted from the U.S. support for Ukraine, as well as military operations in the Middle East.

A White House spokesperson said in a statement, this decision was made to put America's interests first, following a DOD review of our nation's military support and assistance to other countries across the globe. The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned. Just ask Iran. That's from the White House.

NBC News senior national security correspondent, Courtney Kupi joins me now. And Courtney, when you see a pause like this, what kinds of munitions are involved and what's at stake? Yeah, so it's not uncommon for the U.S. military to look at their stockpiles and then look at the potential threats around the world and say, where are we?

Are we getting too low in certain munitions that the United States may need for other future potential threats? Namely, right now, is there any concern that the U.S. could need things like offensive munitions or defensive things if, in fact, the U.S. were to be in some sort of conflict with China?

That's what's happened here is this review. But what's notable is exactly what you asked about Kelly, the types of munitions here. We are told that they include things like patriot interceptors. Now, our viewers may think why they've been hearing a lot about patriots.

That's because the U.S. has been using them to defend against attacks by Iran, not only at Al-Yudid Air Base recently, but also helping to defend Israel against attacks from Iran. It is a critical munition to Kelly. There are not a lot of them made every single year.

The U.S. has been using a lot of them over the last several years, specifically since October 7. That's one of these. But at the same time, it is critical that Ukraine have air defenses like patriot interceptors right now.

Just this week, we saw Russia launch off the most aerial attack, the biggest aerial attack in the entire war that's existed there for over three years now. Ukraine is desperate for these sorts of things, but the United States is also looking at their stockpile. But the reality is, it's not just the defensive. This also includes things like air-to-air aim missiles, AIM missiles.

It also includes things like 155 rounds per gimler. Those are multiple launch rocket systems. So the U.S. at this point is pausing all of these while they look to see if there's any chance that U.S.

stockpiles simply get too low while they're trying to send more things to Ukraine. When we say pause, do we have a sense? Is that weeks? Is it months?

Any way to estimate? So we don't know at this point other than officials continuing to say temporary and pause. The reality, though, Kelly, their officials are also telling us that some of these systems, namely things like the 155 rounds, those could get released to Ukraine faster than some of the other ones, like the Patriot Interceptors, that are a little bit more in higher demand right now. And frankly, the stockpiles just are a little bit more in jeopardy.

And the U.S. also provides munitions to other countries, too, and I imagine that could be part of the calculation. Yeah, the big question, though, is are we talking about what the U.S. sells to other countries?

So the U.S. we'll frequently hear about things like foreign military sales, selling weapons, systems, equipment to other countries. Or we're just talking about aid. Really, the U.S.

only provides aid like this to Ukraine and to Taiwan. And we'll button it up right there. Courtney, thank you so much for your expertise. And we will certainly be back tomorrow.

But now, the news continues with Hallie Jackson. Hey, it's Kate Snow, NBC News anchor and host of The Drink. This month, Demi Lovato is my guest. The global superstar tells me that she is the happiest she's ever been right now.

But getting there, it wasn't simple. Demi opens up about starting in Hollywood Young, and why she now thinks she may have started too soon. She talks about recovery, her new marriage, and the deeply personal reason behind her new cookbook. The drink is always about the journey to the top, and this was an honest conversation about what that takes.

Hope you'll listen and follow The Drink wherever you get your podcasts.