Meet the Press NOW — July 29

If it's Tuesday, a key group of experts on food security warns that the, quote, worst-case scenario of famine is threatening Gaza, as Israel faces mounting pressure from President Trump, U.S. allies, and some of Israel's own human rights organizations to do more to address the spiraling humanitarian crisis. Plus, President Trump weighs an extended trade war truce with China as his top economic officials huddle with their Chinese counterparts ahead of the White House's August 1st hair of deadline, and officials say the gunman who killed four people in an in-town Manhattan, including an off-duty police officer, left a suicide note that mentioned the NFL, which had offices in the building. He targeted.

Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Gabe Gutierrez in Washington, where we begin with the increasingly urgent warnings from all sides, the United Nations, human rights groups, and U.S. policymakers about the dire crisis in the Gaza Strip, as international pressure ramps up on Israel to do more. Today, the UN-backed IPC, a panel of experts that monitors hunger around the world, warn the, quote, worst-case scenario of famine is unfolding in the Gaza Strip.

Those concerns echoed by two prominent Israeli human rights groups that, said for the first time that their country is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, Israel's government responding, calling the accusations obscene, saying Israel only targets Hamas and not civilians. Earlier this week, Prime Minister Netanyahu denied there was anyone starving in Gaza. Meanwhile, senior White House official telling NBC News that President Trump was disturbed and troubled by the pictures of children starving in Gaza. Speaking to reporters on Air Force One on his way back to Washington, the president reiterated the horrific nature of the images coming out of Gaza and provided some more details about the U.S.

food centers that he announced yesterday. A lot of money's been said by other countries, but nothing compared to us, but a lot of things have been stolen. They said money. They said food and Hamas still said.

It's a tricky little game, but we're going to make sure we have some very good people. They're going to be watching it. Who is going to be running those streets that are for you and what kind of oversight we have? Well, we'd be dealing with Israel and we'd think they could do a good job of it.

There's nothing you can say other than it's terrible when you see the kids. And those are kids, you know, whether they talk starvation or not, those are kids that are starving. Here in Washington, pressure is also ramping up on the Trump administration to step up its role in addressing the crisis in Gaza. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Trump ally, became the first Republican to call the situation in Gaza at genocide.

And today, a group of 44 Senate Democrats signed a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Wickoff urging an expansion of humanitarian assistance and renewed efforts to reach a ceasefire agreement. During her briefing today, the State Department spokesperson called on the broader international community and humanitarian foundations to do more when it comes to surging aid into Gaza. As we discussed, there has to be more. There's always had to be more.

The calls from the president, from the secretary and even GHF has been, have more join us adding to the aid and to the mechanisms that are there is what we've all called for. It is not an indication that there should be only one. It should be everyone should be contributing to helping to make a difference here. And the sign of the immense political pressure many governments are now facing to take a tougher stance towards Israel.

Today, UK Prime Minister Starmer announced his country will follow in the steps of France and move towards recognizing a Palestinian state, unless Israel takes substantive steps to end the war in Gaza. And this new international correspondent, Matt Bradley, is in Tel Aviv with the latest. Well, it's been three days since the Israeli started allowing other countries to air drop aid into the Gaza Strip and allow shipments of aid by ground through trucks into the Gaza Strip, kind of opening very slightly the spigot of aid that had been allowed in Gaza after so many people there had been enduring months of an almost complete blockade of any aid going in. And now just today, we've heard two very symbolic but very grim milestones for this conflict.

Just today, earlier this morning, Palestinian Health Authority said that 60,000 people have been killed so far in this conflict ever since the October 7th, 2023 Hamas terror attacks set this off. We also heard from one of the main expert bodies on famine and food security in the world, designating that there is a major humanitarian crisis and a famine-like conditions in the Gaza Strip. They did not designate the Gaza Strip as suffering from famine as such, which is something they rarely do. But they did say that this was a worst-case scenario for famine and they said that there are areas within Gaza where we're seeing famine conditions.

Now, famine is a designation that for the most part is something that's going to have to be taken up by the United Nations or by individual countries, but this is something that all of those countries and United Nations are certainly going to be considering, there was another very grim milestone yesterday, two Israeli human rights organizations became the first groups of their kind to determine or to designate that Israel's fight in the Gaza Strip was tantamount to genocide. Now, they joined other international organizations who have said the same. This just goes to show that we're seeing a paradigm shift both in what's going on in the Gaza Strip and in perception worldwide and here in Israel about how the Israeli government is conducting that war. Matt Bradley and Tel Aviv.

Matt, thank you. And join me now is NBC News White House correspondent Monica Alba. And Monica, what else did we hear from President Trump about the situation in Gaza today? Yeah, well, and this comes of course, Gabe, after those comments yesterday that were quite striking where he did break with Prime Minister Netanyahu saying specifically that he didn't accept his assessment that people weren't starving in Gaza.

The President saying that he definitely saw those images on the news, and I'm told by senior White House official that he was quite disturbed and troubled by those images, and he said that you can't fake something like that. So this is a moment where he is trying to talk about now a new U.S. aid plan, potentially some more food centers he's saying, but we don't have any details about what that's going to look like and how that's going to work. So we've been pressing the White House for that, but it is a clear shift in his tone and in his language and saying that the humanitarian aid just needs to be a priority, even though there are just very many questions still about how this conflict ends and what role the U.S.

would play in that game. You know, Monica, do you get the sense that there is growing pressure on the administration to convince Prime Minister Netanyahu to change course? And where does that relationship between Trump and Netanyahu even stand? I mean, it was a really clear challenge for the last administration, for former President Joe Biden, and it continues to be one for current President Trump.

When it comes to the relationship with Prime Minister Netanyahu, the U.S. can make its position clear, can pressure him, can say what they want to say, and there are just so many examples of Prime Minister Netanyahu not listening to that, not being subject to that kind of pressure, and not really caring. So is there anything that would suddenly change that dynamic? That is the real question.

But I think you are seeing President Trump a little bit more public about how he feels about that. And he said that he spoke to Prime Minister Netanyahu just a couple of days ago, and that he would be speaking to him again soon. And the real question is now that the President has also kind of amped his rhetoric up on Hamas. He has talked about them being hunted down and needing to kind of come up with the next phase of what happens to some of those top key remaining Hamas figures.

And that's the other issue here, Gabe, that we just don't know what else could be done besides the U.S. calling on Israel to do more to end this suffering for the population of Gaza and Palestinians. You know, Monica, earlier this year, the President talked about making Gaza the Riviera of the Middle East. He even suggested that the U.S.

might take over Gaza in some way. Has the President's posture changed since then? He's backed off of those comments, Gabe. He is now talking about this idea of could the U.S.

play a role in helping to relocate some Palestinians who would want to choose to leave Gaza. He was asked specifically about that today, and he said, look, we need to figure out a lot of other things before we can get to that. And he said that there would be people who would want to leave the territory and the besieged enclave on their own. But that is something that a few months ago, of course, raised a lot of eyebrows.

He hasn't really been repeating those comments as much. Instead, he has been a bit more focused, again, on the humanitarian crisis and on those hostages that are still there, those 20 or so who are believed to be alive, that he has met with many of the U.S. American dual Israeli hostages that have been freed from there. And that's something that he's continuing to try to push for, and we know that the special envoy Steve Whitcoff had to pull the U.S.

out of those latest talks for a potential ceasefire last week, but that it's something he has detailed Steve Whitcoff to continue to work on to try to get those remaining hostages out. Okay. Monica Alba, live for us outside the White House. Monica, thank you.

And during the news, Chief Foreign Affairs correspondent, and Chief Washington correspondent, Andrea Mitchell. Andrea, I want to play some of what the State Department spokesperson said today during the briefing. No one has denied. We've not denied it in this room.

That the humanitarian assistance to this point has not been enough. My argument is that it would never be enough in that obscene unnatural environment. And so we're proceeding in that regard. And of course, with President Trump's leadership, as he noted yesterday, to do even more to assist when it comes to food and other aid.

As you know, well, before today, the State Department had been touting the effort so that the U.S. and Israeli-backed aid group, how significant of a shift in rhetoric is it? 180 degrees by the president, and of course by the State Department's spokeswoman, because they were saying that the Gaza humanitarian foundation was doing enough. But the basic facts that were visible on video, what the president was seeing, was just so compelling.

He said, you can't fake that. That is starvation. What the prime minister was saying was that there was no starvation. You know, what do you believe, me, or your lying eyes?

And once the president said that, that changed everything. So this week is a dramatic turn. And now the State Department is saying, well, we're doing everything, you know, we can. We have to do more adjusting the message, if you will.

But the bottom line was that the foundation that was a joint Israeli-American venture was only distributing food in four locations in the South, well-guarded by the IDF, which is a violation of international law, because the military is not supposed to be guarding food distribution. That is, in contrast, to 400 sites. All over Gaza, not just in the South, where Israel apparently wants people to move to, and the suspicion is that they will reoccupate the North and militarize it and create a zone of people in the South, that they would follow the food, of course, they're desperate for food. So in the World Food Program, the UN had 400 sites all over Gaza.

This was four sites. It was never going to be enough. And they were very defensive about it. Well, Andrew, the UK prime minister, Q Sharma, he joined President Macron announcing the UK will recognize a Palestinian state.

So do you see this gaining momentum? What would this mean in practice? Well, in practice, it's really not going to happen. For one thing, the Palestinian Authority has not reformed itself.

Mahmoud Abbas is not popular with his own people. He is an elderly leader who has resisted bringing in new people. There are so many Palestinians, economists, and others who are experts, and who could come in and really change the Palestinian Authority, the leadership in Gaza to replace Hamas. And then that would enable and basically give a green light to the very wealthy Gulf states, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and others, who said that they will come in and both secure it and try to help rebuild it because it is a devastated zone.

But none of that is going to happen unless there is some viable leadership other than Hamas. So that has been the hold up. And of course, there's no ceasefire. And right now, Hamas really has no leadership.

And they were assassinated by Israel. And now they are resisting all, obviously, the work of negotiations. But the starvation is a separate issue. It really has to be dealt with.

And what the world as community is saying is that there should not be a blockade. There should be truckloads of UN and other trucks, other agencies delivering food and fuel and water. And what they need is baby formula. But now the infants are so malnourished that they can't even absorb the formula, so they need all kinds of special.

So if they don't have enough IV fluids, they don't have saline, they don't have enough anesthesia for operations. I interviewed a nurse today for NBC News Podcast and it is really appalling, an American nurse. Andrew Mitchell, our Chief Foreign Affairs correspondent, Andrew, as always we thank you for your time. And we're also following major developments in the Trump Administration's ongoing trade war with China.

After two days of talks in Stockholm, China announcing today that it wants the ongoing tariff truce between the two countries to continue. The US Trade Representative, James and Greer, called the talks constructive, and said President Trump, as the final said. We're going to head back to Washington, DC. We're going to talk to the President about whether that's something that he wants to do.

It's certainly something that's been under discussion. President Trump, meanwhile, weighed in on those trade talks on Board Air Force One after speaking with his Treasury Secretary. I just had a phone call from Scott, and had a very good meeting with China, and seems to be a good meeting. They're going to bring me tomorrow.

We'll either approve it or not. But he felt very good about the meeting. It's better than he felt yesterday. CNBC Senior Washington correspondent, Ayman Jayvers, joins me now from Stockholm, and just wrapped up an exclusive interview with Treasury Secretary Scott Besson, and thank you so much for joining us.

I'm just understanding where we stand with his tariff truce between the US and China, and what needs to happen before it can be implemented. Yeah, Gabe, the key thing that needs to happen is the sign-off from President Trump, and as you saw in that clip there, he seems ready to give it. All the body language here in Stockholm was positive, but the Treasury Secretary, when I sat down with him just a couple of minutes after he got off the phone with President Trump, was not willing to say that they're going to extend that August 12th deadline for another 90 days. I've been a lot of speculation that the purpose of this meeting in Stockholm was simply to kick the can down the road another 90 days and avoid a huge, high-income global terrorist.

They're not ready to say that they're going to do that just yet. Listen to what the Treasury Secretary told me just a short time ago. I'm going to see him with Ambassador Greer tomorrow, and he'll have the final decision. I think our Chinese counterparts have jumped the gun a little, and said that we do have an extension.

I would say that the meetings were very far-reaching robust and highly satisfactory. So, Gabe, you see the Treasury Secretary there saying that the Chinese side jumped the gun a little. That, you know, if you read between the lines to me, it feels like we're going to get a Trump approval tomorrow with this deadline extension for another 90 days, and we'll see another sit-down between the two sides, somewhere else on planet Earth won't be here in Stockholm in 90 days' time, but we have to wait for the President to give the official green lights tomorrow. The President did seem a little bit more positive about it on Air Force One today, as we mentioned.

So, if the President does approve it, how long would this new truce last? Well, what they're talking about is another 90-day period, and then they have to have another face-to-face sit-down at that point, and you're looking at the Treasury Secretary talking to him off-camera. He said, you know, maybe we'll do it in Portugal, maybe somewhere else, they're actively shopping for cities around the world that will host these talks. And so, this becomes sort of an endless series of meetings where they continually kick this hand down the road, keep this truce in place as it is right now.

You know, I think companies, consumers, you know, people who buy stuff in the United States, all want this truce to stay in place because it doesn't raise prices. If the truce goes away, prices are going to go much higher for American consumers. And so, I think a lot of people watching these talks want them to continue to extend this deadline and prefer maybe a permanent solution, but that doesn't seem to be anywhere in the offing right now. And, I mean, there has been some concern that the U.S.

is trading with the EU, could be on the rocks. Is that Trump administration concerned about that at all? Yeah, I asked the Treasury Secretary about that. There's one of the pieces of this deal that they announced on Sunday was that the Europeans said they would buy an additional $600 billion worth of products from the United States.

But then after that, deal was announced, the Europeans came out and said, well, those purchases are going to come from private companies, and we as the European government can't force private companies to make those purchases. So, we don't really know if that will happen. I asked the Treasury Secretary best, and if he thought that that's a real commitment or not, and he said, you know, we're going to monitor that and we'll watch for it. And, you know, if they're upset that those purchases are not coming, they might take action.

But he said he's confident, at least for now, that those purchases will be coming for American companies. Hey, I'm in Dapper's with CMDC. I mean, we thank you for bringing us that exclusive interview with Treasury Secretary Scott Best. Thanks.

And as we speak about the war in Gaza, just a note, which many of you watching or listening may have noticed, there is a protest going on outside of our DC studios here. Coming up. New details on yesterday's deadly midtown Manhattan shooting, including the suicide note found at the scene. We'll have the latest on the investigation in the hunt or mode.

Plus, President Trump's new comments and reporters on how Jeffrey Epstein, quote, stole female spy employees from his company. He says they'd like to have a permanent rift in their relationship. They're watching the press now. Stay with us.

Now, we'll go back. We're getting new details today about yesterday's mass shooting in the midtown Manhattan that killed four people, including an NYPD officer. Police say the gunman captured in this photo armed with an AR-style rifle entered a high-rise office building on Park Avenue and opened fire in the lobby killing an off-duty police officer who was working a security job. They say he then took an elevator to the 33rd floor where he opened fire again before taking his own life.

Police have identified the gunman as 27-year-old Shane Tamora, a former high school football player in Las Vegas resident who officials say has a documented mental health history. New York City Mayor Eric Adams says investigators are determining if he was targeting the NFL's offices, which are located in that building. He talked about CTE. He was not an NFL player.

We have reason to believe that he was focused on the NFL agency that was located in the building. Deerell Islam, the NYPD officer who was killed in the shooting, was a 36-year-old father of two. His wife was pregnant with their third shot. He was honored with a dignified transfer from the hospital to the medical examiner's office early this morning.

He put himself in harm's way. He made the ultimate sacrifice, shot in cold blood, wearing a uniform that stood for the promise that he made to the city. He died as he lived, a hero. And joining me now is Emerson who's law enforcement and intelligence correspondent Tom Winsor.

Tom thanks for joining us. Look, investigators say the gunman did leave behind a suicide note. What did that note tell detectives and at this early stage of the investigation, do they have a potential motive here? Yeah, Gabe.

I think it's going a long way to exactly that point, which is the motive here. According to a number of law enforcement officials who have talked to us about this letter and a copy of it that we've reviewed here at NBC News, it's written on three pages. It's handwritten. It includes a password for his computer.

And one of the things that he's hoping they do is look inside of it to look at what he says is some information about CTE, which is obviously an often talked about brain injury in a diagnosis of a brain injury as a result of playing contact. Sports certainly football, of course, is one of the primary sports where that disease has been discovered in former players. And so he wants him to look at that. He has a documented history of mental health, perhaps a pretty significant one over the course of the last several years.

And he says that that might be tied to CTE as somebody who once played high school football, then he references the NFL and he references the strength of the NFL and CTE. So all that put together and the fact that where the shooting occurred was that the NFL's headquarters here in New York on 345 Park Avenue, it's certainly pointing to detectives to at least at this age of the investigation, I think that this was the motivation behind this mass shooting attack. And so that's what they've keyed in on so far. Obviously, the investigation continues.

There's several avenues. They're still going to look into it. Speaking of the other avenues, what are investigators saying about the weapon that he used in the shooting? Yeah.

That stands for Armilite Assault Rifle Style Rifle, I should say. And one of the things that the mayor just said was apparently that the lower or the receiver of this, kind of the bedrock of the gun, if you're going to start to assemble an assault rifle type weapon that the receiver of that was purchased by another individual, a friend of his. No reason at this point to suggest that the individual who purchased that was somehow assisting or aiding in this incident, this mass shooting. That's something that we're still trying to get some details on.

And it's possible that that purchase was completely legal and that the two of them were putting together a gun so that they could use it for lawful purposes, obviously, for the reason it was used last night was anything. But so that is something that they're looking into. And that's something that we typically see at this stage of the investigation. Where were the guns purchased?

Were they legally purchased? Who purchased them? It's all part of the natural course of these types of investigations. And Tom, we did hear from President Trump this afternoon on Air Force One.

He says that he has spoken to New York City Mayor Eric Adams about the shooting. The president also spoke to reporters this afternoon, making a hard term here. He was asked about a number of topics, including his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and what caused their friendship to essentially have a falling out. Let's listen.

We took people that worked for me and I told them don't do it anymore and he did it. I say, stay the hell out of here. Epstein has a certain reputation, obviously. Just curious.

Were some of the workers that were taken from you or some of them young women? Some of them. Or some of them young women? Well, I don't want to say, but everyone knows the people that were taken.

And it was the concept of taking people that worked for me has been. But that story has been pretty well out there. And the answer is yes. It worked.

It worked. In the spot. The president. I think you worked in the spot.

I think so. I think that was one of the people. He stole her. And by the way, she had no complaints about us as you know, none whatsoever.

It's a Tom. That was a bit surprising to hear the president say that yesterday he had talked about how Jeffrey Epstein had stolen some workers, but didn't detail what they were. This is the first time we're hearing that they were actually young women who worked at the Mar-a-Lago spot. How significant is that?

Yeah, Gabe. And so everybody in the audience understands it's certainly the audience that regularly watches this program. Over the last week and a half, we've been talking extensively about Jeffrey Epstein and Elaine Maxwell, the president of the United States, Donald Trump, and even former president, Bill Clinton. So we've been discussing this issue in terms of who knew what and when.

And one of the mysteries that has come up over the years is why Jeffrey Epstein, one-time member of Mar-a-Lago, why he was kicked out of Mar-a-Lago when then businessman and not yet presidential candidate Donald Trump was operating the club. And obviously he's still there and has his residence there today when he's not at the White House. So we have heard this story, just cracking open the reporter's notebook here. We have heard this story told very similarly from a number of individuals surrounding this incident, particularly as it pertains to Virginia Jeff Ray.

And some of this has been elicited in testimony that has come out in court proceedings, both civil criminal. And so this is not particularly a surprising story. The president is elaborating on it more than we have ever heard him elaborate it on it in the past. And so it's really the first time he's spoken on the record about this incident, but it is consistent with some of the things that we've heard in the past in terms of his relationship with Epstein and the incidents involving the now deceased of Virginia Jeff Ray.

Tom Winter, thank you for that report. And up next, big bills, bigger battles. Democrats and Republicans are ramping up their messaging battle over President Trump's domestic agenda and the economy in the run up to 2026. I'll talk to a key house Democrat from one of the most important battleground states of them all.

You're watching me depressed now. Welcome back. Right now, house lawmakers are at home in their districts as members on both sides of the aisle and look to pitch their constituents on the impacts of the president's sweeping agenda law ahead of next year's midterm elections. That all comes as Vice President JD Vance was in Ohio yesterday, taking direct aim at Democratic Congresswoman Amelia Sykes, who's running in one of the top house battleground districts for opposing the package.

Amelia Sykes is not here today. And you know why she's not here today because she's not celebrating no taxes on tips. She's not celebrating no taxes on overtime. She's not celebrating the highest rising take home pay in 60 years because she's fought us every step of the way on the big, beautiful bill.

And joining me now is Pennsylvania Democratic Congressman Krista Luzio. Congressman, thank you so much for joining us here on Meet the Press Now. Hey, thanks for coming on. Oh, Congressman, you've just heard Vice President Vance there.

He's out there selling the spill as tax cuts for working families. How are Democrats like you planning on combating that message? Let's look around. Let's just be clear about it.

That bill is a fiscally reckless grip that's saddling all of us with trillions of debt to take away health care from people, to help pay for tax cuts for the richest, most powerful people in corporations in the history of the planet. That's what that bill is. And by the way, the little bit that they did in that bill to take away tax on tips as an expiration date in the limit, you know, it doesn't have an expiration date, tax cuts for a billion years that they gave that we're all going to be paying for and my kids and grandkids will be paying for it. So we'll take any lecture on fiscal responsibility from these guys.

I take a point. But without congressional action, taxes were said to go up on everyone. So what was the Democratic alternative to this bill? The tax cut for working-class middle-class people who need tax relief and someone who makes a billion dollars a year, but you know what, they can pay a little more in taxes.

We would take aggressive action to bring down the debt with Republicans just did with full control in Washington. Pretty simple. Again, they're taking away health care, food assistance, all to pay for these tax cuts and saddling us with debt in the process. And speaking about health care, Congressman, yesterday, the vice president also said that the Medicaid changes in the bill were about preserving the program for those who really need it.

What's your response to that? Yeah. You should go talk to the folks at a senior center. I was here visiting my district at Western Pennsylvania today who are already planning for what it will mean to see what these Medicaid cuts affect their ability to deliver care, how the SNAP cuts will affect not just the folks who they care for, but the workers in this industry, which is tough.

They're planning. And I've heard from nursing home operators. They're from hospital operators. They're planning for dark days ahead because of these cuts.

Congressman, another big story that's been out there this month and we talked about earlier in the program. It's the saga surrounding government files on Jeffrey Epstein. Some of your colleagues, I say it's not worth bringing up at all. Your state senior senator, John Federman, just told NBC News that clearly it is a distraction.

I'm much more concerned about more substantial things like cuts in Medicaid and now coming up in September, now not shutting the government down. I mean, there's so much more, I think, so much more impactful at this point for me. What's your take on that? Do you agree with Senator Federman?

I care about those things. I believe I'm saying a lot of time protecting my constituents' health care, dealing with spending bills. And I think it's important to American people to know that Donald Trump betrayed them. He's clearly afraid of what's in these Epstein files.

He has lied to not just his voters, but the American people. And I saw the clip on the program a few minutes ago. He's talking about how he knew that Jeffrey Epstein was stealing people from his club and Mar-a-Lago, young women. And he did well about it.

Nothing. That's weak. It's dangerous. And it's pretty scary to say this guy knew what Epstein was doing and told no one about it.

So you do want to release the files? At least the files. Let's see what's in there. I'm not just protecting any creditors.

Anyone was abusing children. Democrat or Republican. I do not care. Congressman, you did tell Time Magazine earlier this year that you've got to be principally seen and spend your time worrying about jobs.

People's paying health care, which you've been talking about here, as well as economic issues. I think folks see too many Democrats not caring principally about the economy you've told Time Magazine. If you want Democrats to focus on the economy, how does that include Jeffrey Epstein? Because the corruption of Washington is exactly why powerful corporations and others have screwed over working people.

And the corruption I see is about congressional stock training. It's about Donald Trump and his family abusing office. It's about hiding and protecting the powerful as Donald Trump and his congressional allies are trying to do to hide these Epstein files. When you take that corruption fight head on, we take the economic fight head on.

Congress won a Wall Street Journal poll out this week, had the Democratic Party with its worst ever standing among registered voters, just one in three had a favorable opinion on the party. How do you explain that? Look, I think what I see in places like Pennsylvania is you've got Democrats like me who can win, who are winning in tough districts. We know how to do it here.

I think you look at the way we've won from Josh Shapiro and me and others like me across the country who are winning in these tough house races. We can do it. We don't do it by shining from a fight, whether that's with Donald Trump or a monopolist or powerful railroad, who by the way were two and a half years from East Palestine to run with no action from Congress. We take on tough fights and we win them.

That's how Democratic, the Democratic Party gets back to winning elections. I'm not a pollster, but since we're talking about the poll, how would you answer that poll question? Do you have a favorable feeling towards the Democratic Party right now? I've got a favorable feeling toward Democratic Party in Pennsylvania that goes right after my governor, Josh Shapiro, who's going to win next year once he gets in.

And look, again, I think we are doing things in Beaver County, alligator County, where I represent, where our local Democratic Party is showing up and fighting the winning elections. We need more of that in Washington across the country. So you have a favorable feeling to the Democratic Party in Pennsylvania, you just said, but not the national party, to be clear. That's all I said.

I'm proud of the party that I'm a member of. And I will tell you that we are going to win the midterms next year and break this whole Republican control in Washington. They have used that control, once again, jack up the debt to make all of us pay for this, these reckless tax giveaways. We need some real constraints on Donald Trump and Washington.

That's the case. We're making American people for the next year and a half. And, Congressman, let me ask you a big picture question here. What legislative and policy priorities do Democrats have if you do take over in 2027?

Do they go beyond restoring the pre-Trump status quo? I understand restoring the status quo. My part of the world is less than Pennsylvania. I look at places all over the country.

People are mad. They feel like life is expensive. And we have to fix that. We have to make a dream.

We've got to make a booming economy that people are actually sharing it. So I'm not looking to go back to how things where we're going to make life better for people. We have to fight corruption wherever we see it. And, again, I'm not interested in protecting anyone who's powerful, using people or ripping us off and killing small businesses I go on and on.

So that's the fighting spirit. I want to see you from Democrats. That's the picture we're going to take in the midterms next year, and Democrats are going to make clear that these rising costs, which I see the polling, I talk to my constituents rising costs are crushing people. Well, guess what?

Donald Trump and Republicans control every level of power and government in Washington. And they've done nothing that's not rising costs. We're going to pound them on it. I'm curious about how you, a little bit more about what you think about messaging, upcoming messaging for the Democratic Party.

I want to put up something your state's governor, Josh Shapiro, said about New York City mayoral candidate Zoron Mundani. He said, you have to speak and act with moral clarity. And when supporters of yours say things that are blatantly anti-Semitic, you can't leave room for that to just to sit there. Mundani also seemed to run a campaign where he left open far too much space for extremists to either use his words or for him to not condemn words of extremists that said some blatantly anti-Semitic things.

Do you agree? Yeah, look. I want you to be saying, horribly anti-Semitic things. And guess what?

I'm from the Western Pennsylvania. I can tell you. I'm worried about the mayoral Democratic primary in New York City. We're worried about Donald Trump and Washington Republicans screwing over working people, jacking up the debt and hurting us.

And I think that is the fight we're going to have next year in the midterms. And we are going to continue. I will be continuing to push my party to be laser focused on fighting this corruption, and fighting that economic fight for people. It's how we win.

So what voters expect us to do in a moment where Donald Trump is failing to do anything to control rising costs. Congressman Delusio Pennsylvania, we thank you so much for your time. Thank you. And we have much more news on politics still ahead.

You're watching me to press now. Stay with us. Now welcome back. Joining now is the panel.

Democratic strategist Joel Payne and Mark Short, former White House director of legislative affairs in the first Trump administration. And he is also, I mean, the press contributor. Thank you all so much for joining me here. And by the way, as we mentioned earlier in the program, we should note for those of yours listening at home, there's a protest going on outside this building building houses 70 outlets as well.

But Molly, I do want to start with you. And I want to start where I started with the Congressman, Vice President Vance. He has been on the road trying to sell the big, beautiful bill in Ohio. Let's take a listen to some more of what he had to say.

If you go to Washington, you make some promises and you keep those promises. That's how you earn people's trust. That's how you earn people's vote. And that's exactly what President Trump has done.

I hope that people were worse for it. No, in many ways, he's not wrong. The Trump administration has made good on many of its promises, but they don't seem to be polling very well. What do you make of that?

And with the administration hitting its goals, what happens for the future if the American people just don't seem to reward them for it, at least so far in polling? I think so far in polling is the key part of that sentence, right? I think the sales job on this bill is just starting because it did just pass. And you now have both parties engaging in this contest to define it.

Republicans are starting out underwater. And the feeling among a lot of Republicans was that they lost ground over the course of the legislative fight because the Democrats were out there doing politics while they were in the room writing the legislation. I think it is still the case, though, that there are individual provisions of the bill that are popular, but most people don't know a lot about the specifics and what they know they don't like. So when you talk about the macro, do people feel like Trump's delivered on his promises?

It obviously depends on the person, but in most polls what we're seeing is they think Trump has done too much. A lot of people feel that when you look at things like the tariffs, when you look at things like the deportation strategy, what you hear from a lot of voters is that they've gone too far. When you look at the doge effort, early in the administration, and the chainsaw wielding, right? There was a feeling of shock and awe.

A lot of voters may like the status quo a little bit more than we think. Who could forget the chainsaw? It feels like a century ago. A lot's happened since then.

Mark, I want to turn you. Do these poll numbers matter in a midterm election where the president will essentially be a lame duck here? Do these poll matters and poll numbers don't matter? I think they matter.

Game. I think the reality is that they should be out. I'm talking about the achievements here. I think the Democrats who opposed this bill basically embraced a $2,000 increase on every working family and opposed funding for our board and our military.

I think those are powerful messages. At the same time, 15 months off, we're used to the Donald Trump change in the news cycle every 24 hours. And so the reality is that if voters are voting on the economy come midterms, it's likely it's got more impact on his trade agenda, frankly, than this big, beautiful bill. And that was going to be my next question.

Will we be talking about this one big, beautiful bill? I think the Democrats will continue to try to make it a big point. But I also think that the president is going to change news cycles so many times between now and next November. It's hard for us to predict right now.

Well, speaking of changing news cycles, the president has had his news cycle overtaken the last couple of days. A couple of weeks with the Jeffrey Epstein, a saga, I just asked the Congressmen, do Democrats plan to make this a winning issue for them? A gacha issue? He said that he wanted to tie it to corruption among Republicans.

But do you think this will be a winning issue for Democrats? Well, I think we know that the American people care about transparency. They care about accountability for the wealthy, for the well-heeled, for the elite, so that Donald Trump and Republicans have used power, right? And that's what he's doing here.

He's using power to protect Gleym Maxwell, he's using power to protect whatever Jeffrey Epstein did. And it seems like he has something to hide. And that's not a really good message for Donald Trump, particularly if you want the imperamitor of being the agent of change. That is about a status quo as you can be.

That's an effective message. The last thing I'll say, Gabe, I often think Democrats think that this is a choice point between oh, there's pocketbook issues and then there's these sublime issues like Epstein or whatever. It's all the same thing because I think it's all related to priorities. What do you focus your energy on?

You have power. It's an opportunity to make change for the American people. And instead, you cover up for the wealthy, you cover up for the wealth connected, you transfer a trillion dollars of wealth from working class to the wealthy. That's not a good record to go back to the American people.

You know, Mark, Congressman Massey told me to press that he thinks that Republicans failing to pass some sort of bill to release the absolute files. We'll end up hurting them in the midterms. What's your take on that? I think they should be releasing the files.

I think they should be transparent. I think at the same time, they're going to always fight the challenge of their certain voters were just Trump voters. And you keep the rest of your party excited and not depressed about wanting to come out. But spare me the transparency of Democrats because after Epstein and Maxwell both convicted Democrats controlled the Department of Justice, the House, and the Senate.

If they were really about transparency, they could have released these documents or they were in control. So those white houses totally mismanaged this, but it's not as if Democrats have actually pursued transparency either. You know, Molly, there does seem to be a drip, drip, drip with the story. Even the president today on Air Force One talked about how, you know, they was the workers and defraption soul from our, like, well, young women, that's something that he hadn't really detailed that before.

Is he providing this by, you know, having this drip, drip of information? Why not just come out with everything at once? Well, that's the big mystery at the center of all this is why not just release the files as everyone else has been saying. And that does enable the story to be kept alive, whether it's by the Democrats or by Trump itself.

I will say, though, what is driving the angst about this isn't really democratic base voters. It's Republicans and it's MAGA voters specifically. And, you know, to Mark's point, those Trump voters have never come out for Republicans' elections when Trump was not on the ballot. And that's why the Republicans lost them in terms of 2018.

And it's why they've lost so many other elections that were not presidential elections. And so anything, and that is who is expressing the most concern. It's MAGA world. It's those base voters who, prior to now, have been unflinchingly loyal to Donald Trump.

I don't think they're going to wake up and become Democrats, but if they are disenchanted with any aspect of the political system, they're probably not coming out in a midterm. You know, Molly, meanwhile, while JD Vance was out selling policy, the president was on his visit to Scotland. He was talking about his golf course out there opening a new one. Let's take a listen to the exchange he had about the idea of mixing his presidency with his personal golf course.

Let's listen. There's some critics who say this was a promotional trip for you and your business. But it promoted you and your business personally. What do you say to that?

I haven't heard that. No. I haven't heard that. Did you get to see my driver in the first hole?

That's right. And pretty high, yeah. Pretty low. Pretty low.

All right. Well, can you imagine saying that about any other president? What would happen if Joe Biden had done the same thing? Well, we saw a version of that when Joe Biden was president, and there were a lot of attacks on the business dealings of him and his family, which were supposedly a massive scandal.

Look, as a political issue, though, most voters already believe that all politicians are corrupt. So while they're bothered by it, they don't make a lot of distinctions. They don't see Democrats as pure on this issue. They don't see anyone really as having a stature to criticize someone like Trump.

And if anything, some voters, I think, find it refreshing that he's so open about it as bizarre as that sounds because he does do it in full view. He promotes the business that he, back in his first term, declined to digest himself up. And that mark, that's a very good point. Yes, he is open about it.

Voters knew what they were getting. But what would the reaction have been if Joe Biden spent part of a foreign trip on a golf course that he owned? Or if he accepted a jet, a gift from the guitar? Yeah.

No, it's a double standard. I think as Molly said, it's maybe not the exact same analogy. But I think you saw the family of 100 Biden benefiting from his relationship with the president, how outraged Republican voters were. And so I think Molly is right that the president does it out in the open in ways that some voters overlook.

But I think it's still just tasteful. I think it's beyond the golf course. It's the mean coin. It's the Middle Eastern investment in the families of businesses.

It's pretty broad. And really quickly, Joe, because we got to go, but Democrats have tried to make this idea stick that the president's profiting off of his presidency that really hasn't been able to stick. Why do you think that is? There is one winner in Donald Trump's presidency.

And it's Donald Trump. It's not the American people. Right. It's not the majority makers.

Donald Trump quadrupled his wealth, probably, has gained in public stature. I think that message is actually going to be very impactful for Democrats as we go down in the next 15 months. We shall see that message hasn't hasn't hit voters just yet or they haven't bought into that to say. But thank you all so much for being here.

Mark, we really appreciate it. And now for the break. Cauley with a chance of weather modification. Inside the Republican-led push to ban the U.S.

government from controlling and modifying the weather. As outlandish conspiracy theories about extreme weather events become more mainstream. We'll watch him meet the press now and see what he's doing. Welcome back.

The claim is outlandish. But the government can control the weather. They can't. But the conspiracy theory appears to have gone mainstream in some conservative districts fueled in part by a very real uptake in extreme weather partly due to the impacts of climate change.

The conspiracy theory has now prompted some local officials and congressional Republicans to push for legislation to ban, quote, weather modification. And NBC News analysis found that GOP lawmakers in nearly 20 state legislatures have proposed such bills. Governors in two states have signed them into law and in Congress a pair of Republican lawmakers recently introduced a bill that punished alleged weather modifiers, citing concerns from the constituents. Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene telling NBC News they're continually upset about it and they're engaged on it.

I want to talk now with our reporters on one of those on that piece, Alan Smith. Alan, this is great reporting. What's this game traction? What exactly is behind these conspiracy theories?

So they're really aimed at cloud seeding, which is the practice of shooting basically silver iodide in the clouds to draw out additional rainfall, but it's only really done on a very small scale. And they're also concerned about really stuff that's more of the theoretical end right now, science experiments, essentially seeing if there's any ways to reduce the impacts of climate change. But they're taking these things that are happening at a very small scale. They're mixing them with things like chemtrails that are not happening.

And what you're getting is this legislation that aims to, you know, ban what has been this conspiracy theory that has gained a lot of traction really over the last year, if you go back to Hurricane Helene, the idea that there was massive flooding that hit this very conservative area far from a coast really was gasoline. And you know, a lot of these bills have been proposed really within the last 18 months. Do lawmakers see any potential danger in actually feeding these kinds of theories? If you suggest natural disasters are the result of weather modification, pass a ban on it, and natural disasters keep happening, are your constituents just want to turn on you?

You know, I don't think lawmakers really see the danger in that, you know, Tim Burchett, who's one of the co-sponsors on the congressional legislation that Marjorie Taylor Greene is leading, he said, essentially, look, if this isn't happening, then people have nothing to worry about. So they see that if these laws pass, right, and they have in a couple of states, Tennessee and Florida, then you're showing constituents that you're actually willing to do something about this concern that they're getting really a lot of calls to their offices about. But again, I mean, this extends beyond just the extreme weather events. People are concerned with the chemtrails conspiracy that people are, you know, spraying these chemicals that are causing adverse health impacts.

So there's a lot of things that the lawmakers can point to and say, see, we're working on this or that. Allen Smith, I'm a C Politics Reporter. Thank you for that reporting. And thank you for watching.

We're back tomorrow with more of the press now, but the news continues with Hallie Jackson right now. As the day wraps up, get the scoop on what's been happening with Here's a Scoop, a new podcast from NBC News with me, your host, Jasmine D'Sougea. We'll take a deep dive into the day's top stories with NBC News' trusted journalist. It's a fresh take that's sharp, thoughtful, and informative bringing you closer to the headlines and conversations that are shaping our world on the front page, the Zeitgeist.

Here's the scoop from NBC News. Listen daily on Amazon Music.