Meet the Press NOW — July 31

If it's Monday, the window is officially open for another potential indictment of former President Trump in Georgia as he awaits more charges in Washington. And a third defendant in the classified documents case faces a judge in Miami. Plus, the DeSantis campaign reboot hits New Hampshire as he unveils an economic agenda, doubles down on culture war issues and falls further behind in the polls. And Russia accuses Ukraine of using drones to attack Moscow as Ukraine's counter offensive makes some gains.

And the top Putin ally again warns of a possible nuclear response. Welcome to Meet the Press. Now I'm Chris Welper in Washington. As a Republican front runner for President, Donald Trump faces an increasingly tangled web of developments tied to multiple criminal investigations.

The former president posted on social media today that he expects an indictment any day now in special counsel Jack Smith's investigation into interference in the 2020 election. The federal grand jury in that case is expected to meet as early as tomorrow. He's also awaiting potential indictment in Fulton County, Georgia, where the district attorney investigating his alleged interference in the state's 2020 election said she expects to announce charging decisions soon. Why will I make a commitment to the American people, but most importantly the citizens of Fulton county, that we will be making some big decisions regarding election investigation, and I would do that before September 1, 2023, and I'm gonna hold true that commitment.

The work is accomplished for two and a half years. We're ready to go. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump's Mar a Lago property manager, Carlos Delevera, made his initial court appearance in Miami today following last week's superseding indictment that charged him and the former president with obstruction of justice in the case tied to classified documents.

Joe Oliveira's arraignment had to be delayed to next month because he's been unable to find local counsel. As Mr. Trump's legal issues grow, so does his lead in the Republican primary. He's now opened a massive 37 point gap over Florida government.

Ron DeSantis, according to New York Times, Sienna College will release today. With a commanding position inside his party, former president this weekend demanded elected Republicans use their powers to defend him. The radical lunatic Democrats, they impeach me, they indict me, they rig our elections. And the Republicans just don't fight the way they're good people, but they don't fight the way they're supposed to fight.

The others are dirty, sick players. And the Republicans are very high class. They've got to be a little bit lower class. I suspect any Republican that doesn't act on Democrat fraud should be immediately primaried and get out out.

To get us started, I'm joined by Garrett Hake, who's been covering the Trump campaign. Also with me is NBC News justice and intelligence correspondent Candelani at the Justice Department and NBC News correspondent Lane Alexander in Atlanta. NBC News legal analyst Jack Rosenberg, a former U.S. attorney and former senior FBI official, will be joined by Garrett Haig in just a moment.

But Ken, let me start with you. Explain exactly what happened in court today there in South Florida. Trump's Mar a Lago property manager Carlos de Oliveira now faces an Aug. 10 deadline to get a lawyer.

Yeah, that's right, Kristen. Like a lot of people of limited means, he wasn't able to immediately find a white collar defense attorney to respond to these obstruction justice charges. Now, very often a judge will allow a public defender to stand in for an arraignment, which is a simple plea and reading the charges. But that didn't happen today.

So he had his first appearance in court. He was released $100,000 surety bond and he's coming back. What was interesting is the magistrate judge said that the judge, Aileen Cannon, wanted to make sure that he got arraigned before the next scheduled hearing to debate the procedures on classified information. So that suggests to me that she is still interested in trying to move this case along and make that May trial deadline.

All right. Well, stand by for me, Ken Garrett, let me turn to you now. What has the reaction been from within the Trump campaign? We got this new poll today, 37 point lead over Ron DeSantis, his closest rival.

And of course, it comes with all of these legal challenges moving large over him. Well, Donald Trump has surprisingly only reposted that poll once so far. I would expect to see more. But broadly speaking, their answer has been we told you so.

I mean, they feel like he has been the runaway favorite in this race, really since the New York indictment. They've argued for a long time that these indictments don't hurt him at all, that they feel like they've pretty effectively weaponized them not just against Joe Biden, but against the rest of the field where they've forced everyone to basically pick a side. You're with, you know, the liberal DOJ or you're with Donald Trump. And what they're seeing from voters is that they are with Donald Trump.

So they feel very secure in this position. I think it's more fuel for their idea that further indictments won't hurt him. Now, obviously, that's an experiment we haven't run yet. The potential Charges or the potential cases we're talking about here with the 2020 election are much more serious and more readily accessible in the minds of most voters.

But, you know, this is something where they're saying, look, this is our field and if you're still firing at Trump, you're shooting the wrong direction. Yeah, I mean, it is extraordinary because there's a big question mark over how the indictments piling up would impact him. It seems like he's increasingly emboldened, and yet things change once he gets to the heart of the campaign season, once he's actually in the thick of it and voters are going to the polls and he's potentially dealing with court appearances, how much concern is there? Is there any concern inside Trump world about the optics has had, about what impact that could have?

The optics less than the logistics. Right. It's difficult to run a structured campaign when you might have to show for an arraignment or court appearance. You know, it's hard to schedule where you can be if you don't know any other shoes can drop and somebody else just as part of this case is pulling the strings.

But in terms of the optics, again, they feel like this is something they can lean into. And if they're still beating their closest Republican challenger by 30 some odd points, they can make that argument that this is all about going after Joe Biden and see, look how Joe Biden's going after us. So I think they feel like they can work within that space if it comes to that. It's the logistics that are as much a problem as anything else.

But again, with a lead that big, you don't have to do a lot events to hold your position. Now, you're absolutely right about then that, Chuck. Help us to sort of orient ourselves from a legal perspective. We are obviously in this extraordinary moment where, as the former president himself has said, there could be another indictment day.

Now, in the January 6th case, a possible indictment coming Fulton County, Georgia, where Blaine is of all of these cases you're tracking, where do you see the biggest legal jeopardy for the president? Well, there's always jeopardy, Kristen, if you're a defendant in a criminal case. One way of sort of examining your good question is which case is the most compelling? Another way of examining it would be, you know, which case might lead to the most jail time if Mr.

Trump is convicted. Let me take the first one. The most compelling case, in my view, would be the one for which he received a target letter just two weeks ago. The events related, I should say the activities related to January 6th and trying to overturn a fair and free election.

To me, that presents an enormous threat to our democracy and will be the most compelling criminal case. By the way, the fact that he received a target letter says to me strongly suggests that he's soon to be indicted on that basis. So I think that's the most compelling case. It's certainly the most dangerous case.

And a convicted of those charges, it would be literally unprecedented. We use that word a lot, unprecedented. But the notion that a president of the United States would try to thwart the peaceful transition of power is extraordinary. That is the most compelling case to me, Kristen and Chuck you, I've been watching your analysis for a number of days now.

You've been very clear that a target letter is a pretty significant sign that we can have confidence that an indictment is coming. Talk a little bit about why. And also you've expressed some questions about Smith's strategy of lumping all of these defendants in together. Talk about the potential challenges around that as well, if you.

Sure. So first question first, Kristen, the last thing you want to do today is go home, open your mouth and find a target letter. It means that the Department of Justice has decided that you are a putative defendant, someone who is likely to be charged with a crime and has told you so in writing. When I was a federal prosecutor, I occasionally sent out target letters, never as a bluff, never as a feint.

It was never a game, it was deadly serious. Meaning we are going to charge you. We're going to ask the grand jury to return a true bill, an indictment. And so because he received the target letter, we ought to expect that he will be charged with federal crimes.

And soon to your second question. I think it's a difficult call for prosecutors when they decide to put a number of defendants at the table sitting next to Mr. Trump. There's a great disparity, of course, between the former President and relatively low level workers at Mar a Lago.

Moreover, it may take the jury's focus off of Mr. Trump and it may also complicate the government's case in the fall. With three defence, you have three defence teams. With three defence teams, you have three defence opening statements, you have three defence closing arguments, and each and every government witness is cross examined three times.

So I don't mean to suggest that they got it wrong. All I'm saying, Kristen, is that it can be a difficult strategic decision. Obviously, the Smith team had good reasons for doing it. My preference might have been in a perfect world in which we do not live to have the president sitting alone at a defense table.

But that's not what we're going to get unless, of course, Mr. Nada and Mr. De Olivera decide to plead guilty and cooperate against him. But right now, three defense teams representing three defendants.

Well, fascinating and a lot to watch as we wait for the next potential court case. And with that, can let me go back to you and ask you about the fact, of course, as we've been saying, that de la Vera wasn't able to find a counsel and so his trial has been delayed. Do you have a sense of how long and how that could impact the overall proceedings here? Well, his trial date would be the same.

It's the May date that Judge Alain Cannon has set for this proceeding. What's the latest? His arraignment, which is simply the reading of the charges. And he would enter a plea.

And so he had his first appearance today. He'll eventually be arraigned. He's got a lawyer now. Just his lawyer is not he's not admitted to practice in the Southern District of Florida.

But because he has a lawyer, that lawyer can begin getting ready to answer these charges. So it really is an excuse. The addition of a third defendant and a new obstruction of justice conspiracy arguably could be a reason to delay this trial a little bit. But there are many experts that we've been talking to who do think that they can, if they put their mind to it, they can get this tried by May of next year.

If Judge Aylin Cannon really wants that to happen, of course there are going to be there's going to be litigation about many issues and maybe appeals. And that could really a ranch into things in the lay things. Let me turn to you now in Georgia, where today a judge rejected the former president's attempts to basically quash the grand jury report that could potentially lead to an indictment there, of course, the grand jury investigating efforts to overturn the 2020 election. What can you tell us about this and about potential indictment based on what we're hearing from D.A.

finally, Willis? Well, Chris really has had the latest blow to the former president and his legal team in their efforts to try and preemptively fight any potential charges that may come here in Fulton County. So the former residents legal team has made three different attempts through a number of different filings to essentially get this whole thing to go away. They're asking that DA Funny will be disqualified from investigating the former president.

They're asking that the special grand jury's report itself be quashed and just not even allowed to be considered. Well, the first attempt before a Georgia Supreme Court struck down several days ago unanimously. The second was struck down today by a judge here at Fulton County Super Superior Court. And in a footnote, the judge who wrote that word, Judge Robert McBurney, indicated that his decision today could possibly nullify that third report that's still hanging out there.

So really, if that is the case, what that would do is that would clear the way for any potential charges to actually sit if they were to come in this case. Now that comes with the course for your second question, which is timing. And we have to say we do fully expect to see a Fulton county district attorney, Connie Willis, announced her charging decisions within the next three weeks. This is kind of the time frame that she set for which she's very clear that she wants to do it before September 1st.

She put out that letter that we all remember to local law enforcement saying, hey, between July 31 and August 18, I'm having most of my staff work from home. Please don't schedule any sort of in person trials here at the courthouse. We really want to shore up security around the courthouse. That's certainly the strongest indication that she is preparing to present a possible indictments against high level figures in her investigation.

The other thing, Kristen, that we know is that there are two grand juries that are currently seated grand jury A, grand jury B. We know that one of those grand juries is who she's going to be presenting her case to. And Lisa Heston, let me follow up with you quickly. You talked about security.

What type of preparation specifically are you starting to see there? How robust is the security presence? Well, you can see someone behind me right now. We're talking about a few orange barricades that have lined at the front of this courthouse.

It's not something that we typically see here. Those started going up over the weekend. The other thing is we expect it to kind of ramp up over the next few days. And that's because security is something that has long been on the DA's mind.

You know, she has talked about it with reporters over the past year, including me, saying that she's up to her own security. She's received a number of personal threats. She wanted the FBI to come in and make sure the security was up to stuff here at the courthouse. And it's something that she addressed over the weekend.

Take at a look. Obviously, I sent a letter to the sheriff that leaked immediately almost into the other county officials saying that I thought that some people may not be happy with the decisions that I'M making. And sometimes when people are unhappy, they act in a way that could create harm. I'm not willing to put my employees in harm's way.

I'm not willing to put any of the employees or the constituents that come to court out in harm's way. So you heard it right there. She doesn't want to put anybody in harm's way again. That's why she kind of blocked off this three week time period.

Again, the strongest indication that we could see charging decisions very soon. Okay, well, I know it's busy time for you blink. Let me turn back to you. Obviously, the Chunk team watching all of these cases very carefully, but you say they really have their site strength on Georgia.

Yeah. My sources of Trump have always indicated that Georgia, the one they're worried the most about for a variety of reasons. The first is that the evidence is the easiest for people to understand. This is one with the famous phone call asking for votes.

This played out in front of people in a way that January 6th did as well. But the case here is just very straightforward and easy to understand. Also, their attorneys here are a different set from everywhere else where they're working. And it's a case, it's outside the federal system.

So it's one where even if Mr. Trump lost it, one White House who wouldn't be in position to pardon himself. Everything about Georgia, I forgot one other the jury pool in Atlanta would be much, presumably much more favorable, much more anti Trump. So everything about that particular case is kind of one that the Trump people have circled.

Undertakers. It's right. Reporting from inside Trump world, Garrett. Chuck, let me just ask you finally, according to the Washington Post, there has been super PAC has basically spent more than $40 million on legal costs this year alone.

And there's reporting also that Smith is interested in how lawyers for witnesses are being paid. Talk about the significance of all of this. What types of red flags does this potentially ra. Yeah, a couple of red flags.

So, I mean, first impression, of course, Kristen, is that Mr. Trump generates a lot of work for white collar criminal defense lawyers. But hypothetically, imagine there was an investigation at NBC and you, Kristen, were being questioned as just as a witness. Somebody might have pertinent information.

It would be perfectly okay, perfectly okay for NBC to pay for your lawyer. She must have your confidence. She owes to you a duty of loyalty and confidentiality. If she was working on your behalf, she would have to help you make decisions in your best interest.

The problem arises, of course, the red flag arises when that lawyer being paid for by NBC is actually working on behalf of NBC, Kristen, and not on behalf of you. So one thing all these witnesses in these cases and now several other defendants have to ensure is that the lawyer, even if they're being paid for by a third party, are acting in their own best interest interests. That's a red flag. Another red flag, of course, would be if a lawyer is representing multiple witnesses or multiple defendants and conflicts arise among those clients.

Right. And so this is something the government has to watch very carefully. And if it is a concern, bring to the attention of a judge, perhaps seek to have one of the lawyers recused to get other counsel for a witness or defendant if they don't think they're being appropriately represented. It's a sticky matter because courts don't really want to interpose themselves between a lawyer and a client.

So lots of possible red flags, lots of things to watch carefully for. But the mere fact that a third party is paying for a lawyer in and of itself, that's okay. Can you always make, I mean, Chuck, I should say always make very complicated things a lot easier to understand. We appreciate that, Ken.

One final question to you. Will Jack Smith's decision in any way be impacted by what happens down in Georgia? I don't think so, Kristen, is the answer. We can't know for sure.

We can't know whether these two groups, prosecutors, are consulting with one another. But Jack Smith is a pretty independent guy. Whenever I ask whether any other factors are influencing his decisions, whether politics, whether logistics, whether media, when I ask people in this building where I am, they say absolutely not. He's got one goal here and that is to pursue justice in these two investigations.

All right. Well, everyone is watching and waiting. Fantastic conversation. And starting us off today, Chuck Lane, Ken and Garrett, I thank you all.

Coming up next on a very Busy Monday, Ron DeSantis hits the trail as he falls further behind in the polls of the new attacks from the field. The panel's next plus one on one with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, how Israel's embattled prime minister is defending his judicial overhaul in the face of a national outcry. You're watching THE PRESS now. Welcome back.

Ron DeSantis is facing more backlash from within his own party over Florida's new teaching standards, which claim enslaved people benefited from skills learned in slavery. That includes criticism from his 2024 rivals. Anybody that is implying that there was an upside slide to slavery is insane. This is one more part of a back pattern of, of Ron DeSantis being mean and hateful.

Slavery was really about separating families, humans, and even breaking the wives. It's just devastating. So I would hope that every person in our country, and certainly Mike President, would appreciate that. Now DeSantis has fired back, a move that has at times elevated the backlash.

But in an interview with NBC, Gutierrez, DeSantis defended his actions. Do you really want to pick a fight with several black Republicans standing up for the truth? If somebody is siding with Kamala Harris to launder a lie about work that these black history scholars did in Florida for our state Department of Education just to try to score political points against me, that's not standing for the truth. The inviting comes as the Florida governor trails front runner Donald Trump in the polls and as his struggling campaign operation tries to hit the reset button.

Joining now is our panel, Benji Sarland, Washington bureau chief at Semaphore Amisha Cross, Democratic strategist and serious EXAM political analyst, and Stephen Hayes, editor and CEO of the Dispatch and an NBC News political analyst. Thanks to all of you for being here. I thought, Benji, the exchange with Gabe was so interesting because here you have given him kind of an opening, an opportunity to clarify where he stands on this incredibly controversial curriculum in Florida, and yet he did not take that opportunity to kind of double down. Yeah.

What strikes me about this whole exchange is that it's so easy to move past the situation if you want, without conceding anything, without having to send you back down. All you have to do is say basically what Byron Donald said to the standards that set off a lot of this, which is, I actually agree with these standards. And I don't think they ever intended to say slavery was good. They should just tweet this one sentence to make it absolutely clear.

And instead, you saw he went nuclear, compared his staff compared to Kamala Harris. Now he's doing the same thing. All he had to do is say basically the same thing. It would have been fine.

They chose a fight. I mean, what's your take on what you just witnessed in this controversy writ large where you do have black lawmakers, black leaders coming forward and saying, this cannot stand. I'm proud of the black leaders who come forward, particularly I think those who are also in the Republican party, because before 24 hours ago, those black leaders were stated by themselves. They think that as somebody who is an American descendant of slaves, it hurt to see that this is something that was a part of the curry.

I don't think that anyone who understands history can argue that there is a functional good to be had for African Americans in this country who had Some of the most emotions, difficult times, not only during slavery, but also during Reconstruction, also during the civil civil rights movement. And this sound of a snowball effect. But it's not surprising because Ronan Santos led the anti search movement. He led the book bans.

This is a guy who has absolutely no problem trying to rewrite history, to religate history and to basically tell young people that if it makes you feel bad as a young white kid, it just didn't happen. That's frustrating. Stephen, let me ask you to respond, and within this context that everything we're discussing is coming against the backdrop of DeSantis basically trying to reboot his campaign. One of his supporters, Ed Rollins, maybe former supporters, said, I don't think it's the campaign's fault at all.

I think it's his. I think he's been a very flawed candidate. I know some of the people around him, some of them are good, talented people, but every time he opens his mouth, he has a tendency to, shall we say, think out loud. And he clearly doesn't understand the game.

What do you make of that? Yeah, I mean, I think there's certainly some truth to what Ed Rollins is saying. When you go to Bendy's point, I think there's a reason to a certain extent that you're not seeing to see this pushback. And that's because they think when Kamala Harris came down and made this a bigger issue, they think that would ounce their benefit to a certain extent in a Republican primary.

I will say I think that the characterization from many in the media of the curriculum overall has been unfair. They're 191 bullet points. They give up detailed, exhaustive accounting of just how horrific slavery was. I think they shouldn't be fighting on this one point, clarify it, move beyond it.

They've chosen not to do that for the most part. But I think they don't think that this is a fight that hurts them. And I understand what you're saying. There are a lot of bullet points.

That one bullet point, though, I think based on what you're saying, which is so offensive to so many people because it seems to try to paper over what happened. Absolutely. And it's in a weird juxtaposition in our nation's history where you also have President Biden, who was honoring a lynching victim and his mother, so you have the Emmett Hill memorials going up, and then you also have this happening. And it comes again on the heels of trying to again relocate the past, trying to turn white supremacy as an economic good, beneficial Good.

Even towards the black people who got absolutely nothing out of it. I think that's where the offense comes from. Even though it is just one sentence, that one sentence for those of us who have parents, grandparents, other people in our family who have lived through. My grandparents were from Mississipp.

I have direct ancestors who were working in some of the hardest places in the state of Mississippi who worked those cotton fields. So to see that, that is really frustrating. And it's hurtful. And it's hurtful because not only Florida, other places will try to clone the heels as well.

And it will be very easy to Ron DeSantis to come out to say what Brian Byron Donald did to ensure that this was kind of, you know, eradicated. But he has no means of doing. He doesn't want to do it because, quite frankly, he doesn't care about black people, the black vote or black history. So you let me let you respond to them and look at him folding.

Yeah, I mean, I think, look, there's language in the AP curriculum that's similar to language that's in this. So the context matters here. But I think your point is well taken. If you look broadly at what DeSantis has done and how he's running his campaign, many people think he's forfeited the benefit of the doubt.

I mean, if you look at the other controversies last week where he had a campaign staffer who created this ad with Nazi iconography in it, and this was a campaign staffer who had previously gotten in trouble for defending the quintessential. And the DeSantis campaign hired him after he had defended Nick Fuentes. You do things like that, you invented a doubt. I want to ask you about some of the polling.

Really fascinating. I know you've been digging into all of the letters, New York Times, CNN, college football. Two to one voters chose Trump over DeSantis on qualities like strong leader, gets things done, able to beat Biden. And then look at this, Benji.

65% say they're more likely to support a candidate who focuses on restoring law and order than defeating Woke. That, to me, really stood out, because if DeSantis is running the war against Woke and former President Trump is focused on kind of his core issues, what they've always been. Is that the area where he's failing to get voters? Well, it's actually one of several items in that poll that also stress that the Woke message, when they tested it seems to either lose out to other issues or even the Republican voters poll seem to actively dislike it.

For example, the Same poll showed that vot prefer you don't go after companies. You know that you say you're woke and you let companies say what they want to not punish them. Now, here's the thing. It's hard to test these issues, right?

Partly because a lot of people don't know what woke means. You know, how you word this can matter, but one way to interpret this is that when you see this as a Republican voter and see woke ideology, you assume it's about Ron DeSantis. And in a poll we're getting absolutely blown out, a lot of those voters might be saying, yeah, I don't care about woke up because I don't like Ron DeSantis. Either way, it's not good.

And he's running against a front runner who is facing all of these legal challenges, as we've been discussing, but who seems to just be made of Teflon. This was Will Hurd was booed in Iowa for criticizing the former president. Chuck asked him about this yesterday. Let's take a look at that.

Donald Trump is not running for president. Make America great again. Donald Trump is not running for president to represent the people that voted for him in 2016 and 2020. Donald Trump is running to stay out of prison.

And if we elect, my goal was not to go in there and talk to the people that, you know, have been frustrated when they're told that the person that they respect has been lying to them. I was there to talk to the people that believe in personal responsibility, that believe character matters, that believe service matters, that believes that the United States has a role in the world that's important to us back here at home. Steven, what does that moment say to you? And his explanation, I mean, will hurt his, you know, unapologetic.

Yeah. I think there's a lot of polling among Republicans to find they now don't have a problem with Donald Trump's done. They don't believe the reporting on it. They don't even think he kept classified.

This is a hard argument for Republicans to make. I find it fascinating that you don't have more Republicans doing what will hurt is doing. Because by going after the Biden administration, going after the DOJ on these prosecutions of Donald Trump, his opponents are making his case for him. You want to know why nobody's close to Donald Trump in the New York Times?

Senpoul. It's in part because they're making his argument on his behalf. He's saying, these people are all coming after me. They're saying they're all going after him.

How do you separate there? No, I think that's totally correct. The issue here is that you also have the herd, somebody who's polling this single digit, who's willing to have this conversation. But the entire caucus is not.

When you have someone in a former President Trump who had the highest number of votes any Republican president has ever gotten in this history of Republicanism, you also have a guy who went out, he spread election broad lies. He spread lies about and still does claim that he won the 2020 election. Once you have him say that so many times, it has bled into not only the that stalwarts who are, you know, far right, but also pretty much right wing voters broadly. I think that's the problem that some of these other proposals have.

They don't isolate those voters, but they also don't want to go after the king. Benji, what do you make of this? Because there's a big question. Would these candidates start to pounce?

Would they be speaking from the same chorus book? And that just hasn't happened. And I don't think Anyone expected Ron DeSantis or even Mike Pence to sound like Will Hurd here. I don't think that's what the expectation run out of state, Trump will run for president to stay out of prison.

But what has happened is, as we've said here, they've accepted this basic premise that DOJ is out to get Trump. It's out to get conservatives in general. At the same time, some of them are starting to poke around this idea like Nikki Haley. We have to move past Trump's drama.

And now DeSantis staffers are starting to say things like, well, Trump is spending all his money on legal fees. Okay, but why won't this happen to them? If you are accepting this premise that it's just DOJ to get conservative, what is it about Trump specifically that makes this keep happening? And they all struggle to articulate that.

Well, one question will be will they started sharpening their knives for the first debate, which is just a few weeks away. Fantastic panel. Thank you for getting so I'm very busy. My name is Stephen.

And coming up, the stark warning from Ukraine's president after drone strikes at Moscow and the Russian response. That's next. You're watching the press now. Welcome back.

We turn out to the war in Ukraine, where earlier today two Russian missiles slammed into a presidential residential building, I should say, and an education institute in President Zelensky's hometown. According to local officials, six people, including children, were killed in the attack. 75 others were injured. Today's strike comes as the Kremlin is waning key for yesterday's drone attack in the heart of Moscow.

Ukraine did not take responsibility for that attack. But President Zelensky did issue a warning yesterday that gradually the war is returning to Russian territory. Meanwhile, former Russian President Dietary Medvedev, who has often talked about the use of nuclear weapons, said yesterday that ifra's counter offensive is successful. Moscow would have no other option but to use a nuclear weapon.

Joining me now is NBC News chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel, which really appreciate your joining us on this Monday. So what are people there making of Zelensky's warning about attacks inside Russia? What do you make of it? Well, I think it's pretty clear that Ukrainians are now the Ukrainian government services now have a much more active interest and are trying to carry out more attacks inside Russia.

And this is not entirely new. Even in the early phases of the war, about a year ago, Ukraine was carrying out a limited number of strikes across the border. They were were Russian military facilities that were attacked. There was one cross border incident where a Ukraine helicopter briefly crossed over the border, fired on its targets and returned, much to the embarrassment of Russia at the time.

But Russia has but Ukraine has always denied these attacks. So what we're seeing now is much more frequency. There have been three drone attacks in and around Moscow just in the last week, four in the last month. And they're not just around Moscow.

According to Russian officials, there was a swarm drone attack involving 25 drones against the occupied Crimean Peninsula. And then we have these statements from President Zelensky yesterday saying not only is the war moving to Russia, that it is appropriate and that is justifiable in his estimation that these attacks move more onto Russian territory. So far what we've been seeing with these drone attacks in Moscow, they don't appear to be designed to cause a great deal of damage. These are still very small drones that don't carry much explosive power.

The drone that exploded on Sunday morning blew up in a commercial part of Moscow in the financial district. And the two explosions, according to witnesses, happen around 4 o'clock in the morning when the area would not be very busy with people. And there was only one report of an injury. So they do at this stage seem to be psychological attacks to try and intimidate Russians to weaken Putin's credibility, to make him look weak and to make Moscow look vulnerable.

Doesn't mean that all the attacks against Russian territory will be psychological, but that seems to be the goal of these drone attacks so far. And Richard, how much concern is there about retaliation? Obviously, this comes as Dmitry Medvedev has floated the possibility to put this into context, certainly not the first time he has. But that Russia could potentially resort to using a nuclear weapon.

How much concern is there about that on the ground? I don't want to make the Ukrainians sound callous, but I've spoken with many Ukraine officials and military managers about this directly. And they say Russia is attacking us. Russia is attacking every single day.

Russia occupies still 15 to 20% of the country. Russia attacked an apartment building in Kridy? Ri just several hours ago. And Ukrainians will have told me that, what else can Russia do?

They are already occupying our land. They've already left a trail of mass graves behind. If they want to go down in history as a nation that also unleashed nuclear weapons against a country that had invaded because it was losing a war, then history will judge them. So Ukrainians are recognized, these threats.

They are concerned about them on a ideological level. They're concerned about them on a physical level. But they say what choice do they have? They have to defend their country, have to liberate their territory.

And if Russia decides to cross this horrible Rubicon, then that is a Russian decision. And many Ukrainians don't believe that Russia would do it, that China would try and restrain Russia or limit their ability to do it, and that Putin, who's already something of a pariah around the world, would become outcast. Richard Engle, we always appreciate your perspective and your reporting. Thank you so much for joining us.

I really appreciate it. Up next, Netanyahu meets the press. NBC sits down one on one with Israel's prime minister as he pushes ahead with judicial reforms that have sparked nationwide protests and backed backlash U.S. officials.

Stay with us. You're watching THE PRESS now. Welcome back. Israel is in the midst of a constitutional crisis.

One week after parliament passed the first part of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's controversial judicial overhaul plan. Earlier today, the country's supreme court announced all 15 judges will hear oral arguments against the reforms, marking the first time the country's history that the extended bench would preside over a hearing. Me Send Correspondent Raf Sanchez sat down with Prime Minister Netanyahu today and asked him about his controversial judicial reforms. Prime Minister, you successfully passed the first part of your legislation, but only after six months of mass protests that have left this country so divided.

Israel's president has actually warned of the danger of civil war. Was it worth it? There won't be civil war I go into, but I think that correcting the imbalance in Israel's democracy, where the judiciary has basically arrogated to itself nearly all the powers of the executive branch and the legislature. I think, yes, it is important to do it.

I think when it does settles people see that Israel's democracy has been strengthened and not weakened. And I think people's fears that have been stoked and wept up, I think they'll subside and they'll see that Israel is just as democratic as it was before and even more democratic. If the Israeli Supreme Court strikes down your legislation, will you abide by that ruling? I think we have to follow two rules.

One is Israeli governments abide by the decisions of the Supreme Court. And at the same time, the Supreme Court respects the basic laws, which are the closest thing we have to constitution. I think we should have, we should keep both principles and I, and I hope we do so you are committing if the Supreme Court strikes down this legislation, you will abide by that rule. Remember what I said.

I hope that they don't strike down because I think we should abide by both rules. R.A. sanchez joins me now. Rough.

What an extraordinary interview. Congratulations on getting that, on asking some really tough questions and following up. That was just great. Let me ask you, the judicial reforms obviously are not only constitutional crisis in Israel, but there are also a lot of national security concerns.

What did Netanyahu tell you about that? And the concern that military reservists might not show up for duty. This is a really pressing issue here in Israel. The prime minister tried to put a brave face on it.

He said the 10,000 or so reservists who say that they will not show up in protest, protested this new legislation are a relatively small portion of the overall pool of more than 100,000 reservists. But I spoke to the Israeli military this week and they said if this situation continues over the long term, it will impact Israel's military readiness. And that is especially true in the Israeli Air Force, where in some squadrons half of the pilots can be reservists as opposed to active duty. In terms of the politics of this, Netanyahu said it is just unacceptable in any democracy for the military, be it reservists or be it active duty troops, to be putting pressure on elected politicians.

And he says that this argument from the reservists, if anything, made him and his party more determined to pass this legislation. And Ralph, obviously you've been reporting on, we've been reporting on here in Washington, the tensions between the Biden administration and, and Netanyahu's administration over these judicial reforms. The President calling Netanyahu's government the most extreme he has ever seen. What did the Prime Minister have to say about that?

In any potential meeting with President Biden, which so far is not on the books, as far as you know. Yeah. So just starting with the meeting, the President of the United States and Prime Minister of Israel do not seem able to get on the same page about meeting, which is something that is normally routine between the two leaders of two allied nations. Prime Minister Netanyahu says he has an invitation from President Biden to sit down in the Oval Office later this year.

We've asked the White House repeatedly over the last couple of days. They are refusing to confirm that. They say there will be a meeting, but that the location is still to be determined. It's possible it could happen on the sidelines of the United nations in September.

And I asked the Prime Minister about that discrepancy. Take a listen. Well, I'm not going to get into the discussion that I had with President Biden, but I can tell you that I said about what I said. But I think, look, I think our relationship has its ups and downs.

It has its differences, but basically it has its ups. And the best addition to that fact is what the administration itself says. It says that our relations, the alliance, has never been stronger. Our military and intelligence cooperation has never been stronger.

It's true. And we can have our differences. The President thought that we should have tried to achieve these reforms by consensus. I have to agree with him.

I tried, and I'm still trying to. Right. But I think ultimately it's a decision that is made, as in any sovereign democracy, by the. By the elected officials of.

Of Israel. And that's what we're doing now. The president has also been critical Netanyahu, for including members of the far right in his Cabinet. Netanyahu told me whoever is in his Cabinet, he's in charge.

He's setting the policy, and he considers that policy to be sensible and to be moderate and. Great interview. Thank you so much for bringing it to us. We appreciate it.

Still ahead in the hot seat and hoping to make history, we'll speak with Democratic State Senator Sarah McBride as she tries to become the first openly transgender member to serve in the United States Congress. You're watching Meet the Press now. Welcome back. Delaware's soul House seat is up for grabs as its current congresswoman seeks to replace retiree Senator Tom Carver.

Enter Delaware State Senator Sarah McBride, who launched her historic bid for the seat last month. If successful, she'll become the first transgender person elected to Congress. And joining now is Delaware State Senator Sarah McBride. Thank you so much for joining me.

Really appreciate it. State Senator, thanks so much for having me. We do want to get to the historic nature of your candidacy in just a moment. But first I want to talk a little bit of policy with you at the forefront of your campaign, pushing for things like paid family leave, childhood education.

I don't have to tell you, currently have a split Congress. If you were elected and if Democrats were still in the minority, how would you push to get those priorities passed? What would your strategy? Well, the reality is that is that we can never let up in our fight for workers and families, regardless of who controls Congress.

But I believe that in 2024, the Democrats will retain control of Congress. They'll retain control of the US Senate, and Joe Biden will be reelected to the White House. And we will have the power to pass the kinds of policies that unfortunately fell out of what was the build back that Iraq. Policies like paid family medical leave, affordable early childhood education, elder care, and home care policies that I've seen in my own life are urgently needed while I served as the caregiver to my husband during this battle with terminal cancer.

But regardless of how the election turns out, that can't take away our responsibility to fight for the policies that people need. Let me ask you about the election. You are running for Congress in Delaware. Of course.

That's the state that President Biden once represented for many years. Do you think that President Biden is the strongest and best person to represent Democrats in 2024? Absolutely. Joe Biden has been an incredible president, just as he was an incredible vice president.

And before that, senator from Delaware. You know, when Joe Biden set out to run for president and talked about being bold and building bridges all at the same time, a lot of cynical political observers thought that wouldn't be possible. But in his time in office, he's passed the most significant investment in infrastructure since the 1950s. On a bipartisan basis, he passed the most robust gun safety legislation since the 1990s.

On a bipartisan basis, he also passed the most significant investment in combating climate change in America's history. And so Joe Biden has gotten a lot done. But of course there's more to do. And I believe that he is the best person to lead our ticket.

And I look forward to being on that ballot alongside him come 2024. Let me just follow up with you've seen the polls, a significant number of Democrats, members of your own concerns about his ability to serve. What do you say to voters who are concerned about his age and his ability, his agility as well? Well, first off, I think you don't have to look any further than his first term as president where he has gotten things done that many thought were impossible.

He's demonstrated an energy both in himself and in his ideas that are fresh and new and motivating for people. You know, when I travel up and down the state of Delaware, when I talk to voters here, I think what's keeping people up at night here in Delaware is similar to what keeping people up at night across the country. And those issues are the issues that Joe Biden is talking about. And so while the Republican Party is going to run as far to the right as possible, while they continue to focus in on culture war issues that don't speak to the issues that are keeping voters up at night, I believe Joe Biden will continue to present an energetic, optimistic, bold vision for this country that speaks to voters and mobilizes voters come 2024.

Let me with you on that point. You've said, look, you are not running to be a trans member of Congress. You are running at a moment, though, when 17 states this year alone have passed bills directed at gender affirming care for transgender youth. There are an increasing number of restrictions for rights across the country.

What and how do you see your role in this moment? Well, as you mentioned, I'm not running just to be the transgender member of Congress. I'm running to be Delaware's member of Congress, focused on all the issues that matter. But as you point out, this is a critical moment for our country.

We are seeing Republican politicians engage in the same kind of strategy they've engaged in for generations, which is to which is to pick a particular community to try to scapegoat and fear monger around that community in order to distract from the fact that they have absolutely no policy solutions for people across this country. And right now, as they have done with previous communities, they're doing that with the trans community. And I do think that there is needed conversation and education to make sure that voters fully understand the stakes of these issues, the humanity behind these conversations. And I think there's cultural change that can come with an out transgender member of Congress who is thoughtfully and effectively working on all of the issues that matter.

And in seeing that, it'll help to diversify people's understanding of who trans people are, which is our greatest weapon against these attacks. Well, Sarah McBride, I have many more questions for you. Unfortunately, I am out of time, though, and we did cover a lot of ground. Thank you so much for joining me.

Really appreciate it. And thank you for being with us this hour. I will be back tomorrow with more me, the Press Now, NBC News now coverage continues with Hallie Jackson right now. He was a young Marine.

She didn't care about convention. They made a life together. Then one night, the Marine died. And then the death investigation took a wild, unexpected and utterly bizarre turn.

Josh. I'm Josh Mankiewicz and this is Trace of Suspicion, an all new podcast from day one. Listen to all episodes of Trace of Suspicion now, wherever you get your podcasts.