Meet the Press NOW – June 16

Did you know that everyday activities like ASMR can actually be healthy for you? Right now you're improving your heart health, boosting your brain activity and lowering your stress. Manulife wants you to see healthy living differently so you can live a longer, healthier life. Visit Manulife CA Health to learn more ways Manulife can help.

Drive off in a new Hyundai Launcher today with $0 down during the Hyundai Advantage Sales event. Take advantage of the $1,000 Spring Drive bonus and lease the 2026 Ella Essential for just $73 weekly at 4.99% for 60 months. And you're covered by Elantra's Best in Class five year new car Warranty. Now that's the Hyundai Advantage.

Conditions apply. Offer includes 1% loyalty rate reduction for qualifying customers. Visit hyundaicanda.com or your local deal for details. If it is Friday, catch me if you can.

The Republican primary field grapples with how to handle it. Twice indicted threat runners as the Republican National Committee pushes for every candidate to pledge to support the party's eventual nominee, even if it's a convicted felon. Plus, the Justice Department's multi year probe of the Minneapolis Police Department in the aftermath of George Floyd's death finds a pattern of unlawful abuse, racial discrimination and systemic misconduct, all detailed in a scathing new report. And communities across the south dealing with deadly and destructive tornadoes that killed four, injured dozens more with more severe weather in the forecast.

Welcome to Beat the PRESS Now. I'm Peter Alexander and today for Chuck Todd. It has now been eight years to the day since Donald Trump first announced his int to seek the Republican presidential nomination. Remember that escalator Right now, like much of the last eight years, Trump is dominating the political conversation, leaving leaders in both parties hammering about what to do.

Let's start at the White House where my embassy colleagues are told the President Biden has delivered the message to A's and to his broad re election team that they should say nothing about Mr. Trump's legal troubles to avoid any impression of tainting his upcoming trial and the ongoing work of the Justice Department. But Democrats, they want to seize this moment in part to prevent Mr. Trump from using his megaphone to sort of shape the narrative around a criminal case that could decide the 2024 election.

One Democratic Aiden, calling this malpractice for the party to stay silent. Dan Pfeiffer recognized that name. He's one of former President Obama's top advisors. He said that, quote, silence could end up being a mistake.

Democrats, he added, need to go on offense to push back on Trump's messaging before he discredits the investigations and distracts the as Democrats try to navigate our new post indictment politics, the field of Republican presidential rivals at Bruta 12 this week is also searching for a strategy. The former president's closest competitor, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, has decided not to call out the former president's legal issues. Instead, he's trying to out Trump Trump on key conservative issues. Take a listen to what DeSantis said on 700 Club about Mr.

Trump's abortion stance. He said it was, quote, harsh to protect an unborn child when there's a detectable heartbeat. I think that's humane to do. Do you feel the former president's going soft then on abortion a little bit, especially in this area that you mentioned?

I think so. I mean, I was really surprised that he's a Florida resident and I thought he would, he would compliment the fact, you know, that we were able to do the heartbeat bill which pro lifers have won for a long time. Meanwhile, Republican Ace Hutchinson, who is calling for Mr. Trump to step aside because of his legal issues, is facing the possibility of being barred from the Republican primary debates after the RNC today reaffirmed its position that candidates must pledge to support the party's eventual nominee if they want a spot on that stage.

That comes as the former Arkansas governor asked the RNC to amend its loyalty pledge following Hutchinson's comments that he cannot support a convicted felon. I'm not going to vote for somebody who's convicted of a serious felony or espionage. I'm not going to support someone as a nominee if that is the circumstances. Looks more and more possible that that could be the circumstances.

We're going to talk to Ace and hot Asa Hutchinson in just a moment. But first, let's get to our reporters. NBC Henry Gomez is governing the ins and outs of the Republican primary. NBC's Mike Memley is our point person on the Biden political operation.

Mike will get to you in a moment. Henry, do you first is a few days removed now from that indictment. Have Trump's fellow candidates settled on what their new normal, what their str is going to be at this point? Well, it's a bit of a mixed bag at the moment, Peter.

You've got two extremes on one side. You've got a candidate like Vivek Ramaswamy, who's a political unknown who has basically made a central piece of his campaign to pledge to pardon Donald Trump if he somehow becomes president. And on the other end, you've Got these anti Trump scolds like Chris Christie and Asa Hutchinson who you just mentioned, who have been openly critical of Trump to begin with and are using this latest indictment as another opportunity to hit him for all of his perceived flaws. Now in the middle, sort of mushy middle, you have a bunch of other candidates like former Vice President Pence, like MP Haley, who are sort of trying a two fisted attack here where on one hand they'll question the Department of Justice investigation as being politically motivated, on other they'll acknowledge that there are some concerns about how former President Trump behave and handle documents.

And you've got, as you mentioned, Governor Ron Santis who is kind of ignoring it altogether, just saying that this is problematic as investigation. I think what this shows you is that they haven't latched on to a coherent strategy to take this fight to Trump. No one's really sure what the right mix or balance is because to win a Republican nomination, you have to win over voters who supported Donald Trump. And so if you're going to make the issue of his indictment a central issue in the campaign, you have to do so in a way that doesn't alienate the support.

It's such a delicate dance. These guys are trying to walk. These men and women are trying to walk. At this point, I want to talk about the RNC pledge.

This of course was a flashpoint. You remember in 2016 when it was meant to keep Donald Trump from running as a third party candidate. It's a flashpoint now. So Republicans are wavering on whether they would support him.

What is the situation on that at this moment? Well, there's two antitrust schools that I just mentioned, Christopher Seniors Atchison. You know, just listen to how they're talking. If Donald Trump is not mean, they're not going to support him, they're not going to vote for him, at least based on what they've been saying on the campaign trail already.

And if you're saying this now, but also aiming to be on the debate stage, which both of these candidates are, it comes down to whether this is some sort of wing or not. Now remember, Donald Trump also disavowed this pledge back in 2016. He initially signed the pledge, but then back, I think it was in March of 2016. It was down to him, Ted Cruz and John Piece.

He walked away from it saying he wasn't necessarily going to honor that pledge anymore. So these debates are treating it as a non pay dating document, which essentially it is. What's going to happen if Donald Trump's a nominee and they're on the debate stage. They're not gonna nobody's not really gonna pay attention to go back on their words at that point.

But an RMC official told our colleague benoist story today that if the candidates are questioning and complaining debate pledge now, they should probably reconsider their stance. And let me ask you about what they think on the den side here. The White House obviously mum about the indictment. President Biden hasn't said anything since we got our look at it.

Some Democrats are itching to get the party to go on offense though. What can you tell us about this tension here, the fear that President Trump, former President Trump could sort of discredit all of this just by being the one who is the one talking right now. Yeah, Peter, not for you. And the question you railed asked the president last week, we wouldn't have heard anything from the president on this situation really in the last few weeks.

And listen Democrats, these Biden allies are saying we understand why President Biden, ever the institutionalist, someone who has run on and tried to stick with this norms and traditions argument that he must respect the independence of the Justice Department. They're understanding his point of view here, but they're saying this is boring on malpractice at a certain point to let President, former President Trump and other Republicans continue to make this argument about unfounded that the president is weaponizing the Justice Department against his enemies go unanswered. They think he needs to be more fulsome, not necessarily in speaking about Trump's situation legally here, but to simply defend the institutions themselves. Now it is interesting one of the suggestions that they made, which is to say look, former Vice President Pence was investigated and clear.

So this is not about weaponization. This is about simply following the facts where they lead them. Now the White House is not unusual, not accustomed to this kind of internal friendly advice from fellow Democrats. In fact, I think Dan Pfeiffer was one of those who coined the term bedwetting in 2012 when Mitt Romney was closing in on President Obama in the polls in that year.

But they really speak to what they think is the political reality they're facing, which is that it's the swing voters who are less engaged in this story who really don't want to hear anybody talking about these legal issues. And the president doesn't want to get stuck and have his messaging defined by this. It's also really interesting Peter, to look at the other ways in which Democrats are running different strategies at this point. You look at the DCCC which is trying to reelect bring back a Democratic majority in the House and to do so by winning these battleground districts that were won by President Biden but are now seated by Republican incumbents in those seats.

They're running aggressively on tying these Republican lawmakers to President Trump because that's the way they see flipping the House. But the dsc, which wants to maintain the Senate majority, has a bunch of races in deeply red states like Montana, like West Virginia. They're laying off the situation completely. So it really does speak to the way you don't want to antagonize a base here against you politically.

And that's what the president's doing. That's what these other campaigns are trying to do. All of it is President Baptist pairs to rejoice with union endorsements tomorrow, I see, begins sort of the political campaigning a bit tomorrow in, of course, the great state of Pennsylvania. My family with the very latest man, thank you very much.

And we thank you as well. Joining me now is one of those candidates we were just talking about the four markets of governor, current Republican presidential candidate, Asa Hutchinson. Governor Hutchinson, thank you for making time to be with us. You told my colleague Von Hilliard that you would do what you need to do to get on the debate stage.

You know, the RNC is effectively saying that you have to pledge to support the nominee even if that person was convicted of a crime. So what are you gonna do? Well, as I said, it's important to be on the debate stage. Whenever you look at Republican voters in Iowa and Hampshire, they want to see the candidates there.

It's really the first time that they give an exchange back and forth. They're tested. And so it's important for our candidates to be there. And I believe that it ought to be inclusive.

We should not be exclusive in the first couple of debates, particularly. So they set a criteria. I intend to be on that debate. People are telling me it's important.

They want to hear my message. And I think it's going to be a great contrast. Now, I disagree with the strategy as to how you're going to disqualify some for being on that debate stage. I've been a Republican all my life in Arkansas.

We've built a Republican Party. And part of it was opposing the Democrats that had a party loyalty oath. I didn't like it 30 years ago, and I don't like party loyalty oaths. The American people are more independent.

They want to hear voices. And obviously you want it within the framework of the Republican principles in party. But no one should question my Republican credentials as I want to be on that debate stage. So if it's necessary for you to be on the debate stage to say that you would support the nominee, are you open to breaking your word on that promise if necessary, if you ultimately become a nominee?

Now, I'm troubled by that because your word means something to me and I don't lightly sign oaths, and so I want to look at the language that they present. But I want to support the nominee of the party and I intend to because I believe the nominee of the party is either going to be me or somebody that I can support. And I don't believe it's going to be Donald Trump. So if you can't to say that we're going to.

I'm sorry, to replace if you're not comfortable supporting Donald Trump, that trumpet could be a convicted felon. I know you don't support Joe Biden. Who would you support? It.

It's not you? Well, I mean, I'm not going to get into who else might be an acceptable candidate. I like them all, their fellow governors, many of them, I've known them. I think they're great conservatives.

Obviously, I believe I'm a better choice and that's what the debate is about. And so I intend to support the public nominee. I don't believe it'll be Donald Trump. That's why I'm running for president.

And we're going to sort this through over the next month and a half to make sure that we're qualified for it. But let's not be, let's not be restrictive early on. Let's let the debate happen and the American people decide this. These are serious issues that impact not just the Republican Party but our country and everybody that might be on the ballot in 2024.

So let's make sure we have a nominee that can attract independent voters and suburban voters and win in November. And you've got a lot of chaos and uncertainty and criminal indictments and wrong behavior on one side that should cause pause. So just to be clear, the RNC seemingly looks a pretty harsh swipe at you directly to say, but they said candidates who are complaining about this in the press should seriously reconsider their priorities and whether they should even be running. What does it say about a party if the will of its voters is eventually nominated?

Candidate facing serious charges on handling classified documents, could you remain in that party? Well, I think the issue is do you want loyalty to the Republican principles or do you want loyalty to a particular person? It's not a Trump Party, it's a Republican Party. I'm of the, I believe in the party of Ronald Reagan.

And that's what I think is important today. It's not a Trump party, even though he has a lot of support out there. And we want to be able to win those voters into the mainstream principles that I'm advocating that takes the country in the right direction. Vivek Ramaswamy is asking every fellow presidential candidate to commit to pardoning Donald Trump.

Do you think there are folks in this field who really running to be his vice president or to have a spot of power under him? Are you comfortable with that idea? Obviously, you're not comfortable with the idea of pardoning in advance. All the facts have been there.

But what do you make of that campaign pledge that he desires? Well, it seems that he's running with Donald Trump. I'm running against Donald Trump for the presidency of the United States. And I think there's differences there.

And we should not be currying votes or trying to get votes based upon a promise of a pardon. And it's premature, it is wrong to be talking about those kind of pardons during a presidential campaign when their justice system has not even worked yet. Yes. So naturally government followed bees that you can't support a convicted felon if they were the nominee.

But could you support a nominee who pledges to pardon a convicted felon? Well, again, I'm not going to get into that because I want to be able to support the nominee of the party. I'm going to work hard to be that nominee. We're going to have a very competitive race and the voters are going to be on the side exactly who that's going to be.

We've heard this common refrain, Governor, from your fellow candidates this week. It's been that they are against the so called weaponization of the Justice Department. I could play a ton of clips for you right now, but are you concerned that the top voices in your party are undermining the rule of law in this country? You know, we should follow the facts.

And there's been significant facts that's laid out in the criminal grand jury indictment against Donald Trump. Those are facts that are laid out. If someone believes that the Justice Department is acting politically or that somehow there's been pressure applied to distort these facts, let them lay that out. But sure, I disagree with some of the decisions Department of Justice.

But this case stands on its own. And if anybody cares about the secrets of our country and our military, this should cause you pause and let's see how the facts develop during the course of the trial. But I don't buy into the question about the Justice Department falsely making up this case. Yeah, we spent enough time talking about that.

Let me ask you about some policy issues. The Iowa Supreme Court de locked today leave a 20 week abortion ban on the books instead of a six week ban passed in 2018. What law do you think is better for Iowa? The first primary caucus state 20 weeks or six weeks?

Well, Iowa should make this decision through the legislature. How does America have landed on your plate? Well, first of all, America's abortion policy is going to be determined by the states. Right now Arkansas has a very restrictive abortion policy.

Other states do not. Each state is going to determine it through their elected officials and their constitution. If you ask me about the national policy, if we get there and there is a consensus, then I'm going to look at it. And if it has the proper restrictions with reasonable exceptions that are broadly based with the American public, then I would sign that.

But that consensus has not been developed yet. And obviously I'm pro life and so I would advocate for a restricted policy on abortion as long as there are exceptions there that the American public accept and can live with. Whether it's a Pride month. Right now there's a popular movement in the country specifically in conservative circles to support boycotts of companies like Bud Light that partnered with a trans influencer target that sells Pride merchandise.

What is your view of those boycotts? Well, consumers should speak and that's the I'd much rather consumers speak as to products that they support or like and they don't disagree with their policies versus the government coming in and saying we're going to restrict you or punish you because of what you said. And so consumers can speak and that's their freedom and that's the wonderful place about American free enterprise system. Obviously I disagree with some of the statements and agendas that's pushed by some corporations.

But I also don't believe government should come in and punish them. It's the free market and let's let business do their business and make their decisions and if they make a mistake, the consumers will make them pay for it. Former Governor Asa Hutchinson, Republican candidate for president from the state of Arkansas. Mr.

Governor, thank you for making time for us. Just going to have exclusive interview with other Republican 2024 candidate former Vice President Mike Penn State airs this Sunday on Meet the Press. And come up here. Pardons, politics and peril.

How the former presidents Republican primary rivals are navigating his indictment. A new reporting on a growing effort to get a third party candidate on the ballot that has Democrats sounding the alarm. That's next. Watch I meet the president drive off in a new Hyundai Launcher today with $0 down during the Hyundai Advantage sales event.

Take advantage of the $1,000 spring drive bonus and lease the 2026 Elantra Essential for just $73 a weekly at 4.99% for 60 months. And you're covered by Elantra's best in class five year new car warranty. Now that's the Hyundai Advantage condition to buy offer includes 1% loyalty rate reduction for qualifying customers. Visit honeycanda.com or your local dealer.

Details. Welcome back. Today, after officially entering the Republican race for president, Miami Mayor Francis Suarez told my colleague Jose Diaz Bellar that he would consider pardoning the former president if he were convicted in the Mar A Lago classified documents case. Here it is.

If I became president of the United States, I think the pardon power, one of the possible reasons for using the pardon power is to heal the country. So, you know, who knows what will happen. His incidental brutal has not been provoked. But certainly if I became president, one thing I would look at as president is using a pardon power to heal the country.

But as columnist Josh Barrow writes, he says the fact that Mr. Trump remains clear front runner in the race speaks to a bigger issue facing the Republican Party. He writes, quote, when your opponent is so popular the voters don't care if he gets indicted, your problem isn't the indictments, is his popularity. And for more, I'm joined by Jeff Basin, the White House correspondent for Reuters.

Of college class made of mine, believe it or not. Maria sir Teresa Kumar, president and CEO of Voter Latino and NBC News contributor Daniel Pletka, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and also an NBC News contributor. Jeff, since we go further back than with the ladies at this table, you have the first one here. Do you think Francis Suarez's position here on pardons, this is like a new narrative in the 2024 campaign that offering a pardon to Trump could win over some Trump supporters?

Is that the thinking that each of these candidates has to sort of grapple with right now? I think the candidates are trying to find a way to talk about what's going on with Donald Trump and finding a way to do that that will appeal to his voters? And the pardon is something that they can offer. It's something that they can say, this is what I'll do.

Don't vote for that guy because he's been Indicted, but I'll be happy to pardon him if I win the office. So, yeah, I think, I think that's the race that they're engaging in right now, and it's kind of just fascinating to see them do that before this has even seen the light of day in court. We've marinated on the document for less than a week already. That's pardon issues of real issue.

Dan, you write about it in the New York Times. You say, the President Biden should pardon. Don. The President Biden should be the one party, Donald Trump.

Here's what you say. Specifically selected prosecution is now a defense in a court of law. But the court of public opinion is another matter. Millions will see Trump's prosecution as illegitimate and any conviction as unjust.

That will further erode public confidence in our judicial system and the principle of equal justice under law. So wouldn't this undermine, wouldn't this undermine the sort of system of justice, though, if President Biden were to pardon Donald Trump in every sport? Marquise and I make the argument very clearly that the indictment of former President Trump is a very powerful document and a very persuasive document as well. This is less about the question of the classified documents and more about the cycle and the president that it breaks.

We have never indicted a former president. Now, we can say, rightly, no former president, no president has acted the way that Donald Trump has. On the other hand, we can look at other countries, South Korea, they don't have a single president, president who hasn't at some point been in jail. We can be that country.

We can be a country where elect me, I'm going after my predecessor, and then the next guy's going to say, like me, I'm going to go after his family. What does that do to the fabric of our Constitution? What does that do to our society? That's the argument.

So where you draw the line? We could see other federal indictments, including in Georgia right now, the famous phone call there with Brad Raffensperger. We could see an indictment here in Washington, D.C. surrounding what happened on January 6th.

Does the pardon apply to any of those? So I'm not running for president. I was born in Australia, so I can't. So I'm not offering to pardon Donald Trump a priori.

But I do think there's a powerful argument to be made that President Biden could be the person to do this. He is the one who said in his inaugural, which I thought was a wonderful, wonderful speech. He is the one who said, I want to heal the nation, that is not what's happened out of jail free card. I have to say that for the millions of people who've been falsely incarcerated for smaller penalties, this idea that someone who actually has receipts of espionage, of attempted coup, of voter fraud, all of it to not have any penalty is not going to sit well with the majority of Americans.

To be clear, he's not accused of espionage. So I think that one is we have to see the court. We have to allow to do what the subcommittee on the commission on the president on the list, Cheney's committee. Now I lost my turn it off.

But basically. So I do think that we have to connect what is happening right now with the Justice Department is what we saw very clearly with the subcommittee on the and I think that in order for us to be able to be fair, let's actually let's listen to the case. Let's listen to clearly to the American people. Let's bring it forward.

But this idea to demand or to request a sitting president to pardon someone who has clearly been held and indicted on certain crimes is not only preemptive, but it actually doesn't do justice to our judicial system and to Americans. Trust in the judicial system, Jenny, is a bigger issue here for Republicans. Trump's legal challenges or Trump's popularity within the party. Well, that's obviously a huge issue.

But I don't think we should forget that all of this is in the context of people's perceptions. Hillary Clinton committed arguably pretty serious violations of the espionage act herself. Again, not espionage. And there was and there was documented, confirmed outside interference in her private homebrew server in her backyard.

She wasn't indicted. And the reason for that and the reason for that at the time the judgment that was made was it would be bad for the election. It would be bad for the country to do that. Now, again, do you think there was an evidence that she seemed to have homeless home reserve.

What I think it's about what they said at the time being the leader of the FBI said no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute her based on the information that we have here because it was entirely glitched. Again, it doesn't matter what I think that is what he said. He did not say this would have an impact on the election. I think the evidence shows it did have an impact on the election.

The reason why you should or shouldn't procure Donald Trump. That's a great question. Let me ask you guys for a moment. I'll get back to this.

We have some new reporting to share. When it comes to the president for race. The political organization no Labels a lot of folks pay close attention to this tells NBC News that it will end its effort to feel a third party candidate if polls show President Biden way ahead of Trump next spring. NBC's on Hillary to help break that story and is joining me now on Rochester Road.

Landon no labels decision. This has caused a lot of concern the potential for third party candidate in a series of different places. One of them calls on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Right.

Peter this is the first time that on the record no Labels is suggesting explicitly that they could end their effort here. They are currently paying for ballot access in states around the country for this would be unity ticket that would include Republican and one Democrat potentially. Joe Manchin who has not not dismissed the idea at this point in time. They are looking forward to having a convention this next April.

And I want to let you hear from Dr. Ben Shavas. He's a longtime civil rights activist. He's also a Democrat and a co chair of no Labels here because they have been receiving quite a bit of scrutiny especially from the left about potentially being a spoiler for Joe Biden next November.

I want you to listen Dr. Shavas going to ask him about the separate staples after Super Tuesday next year before the convention in Dallas and April there will be a decision. And if we find that the polls have changed and Joe Biden's way way out ahead and the person on the who the Republicans may choose and if they pretend to choose Donald Trump even though he's been indicted, then no labels will stand down because we're not interested in being spoiled. The issue that Democrats have talked to even since that interview Dr.

Shavis is the fact that he is not and the labels not suggesting that they would step away. If the poll show that it is a dead heat between Donald Trump and Joe Biden which is a situation in which they say would be that spoiler situation here. I mean just thank you for that reporting. What striking as panel joins us again here.

Right. So if it's way off rather not gonna waste their money on this situation. But if it's close than they're comfortable being. I mean they say they don't want to be a spoiler.

That's when for Democrats perspective they would be a spoiler. How big of a threat is no labels to Joe Biden in 2024. This idea of floating that there could be another potential candidate to unify the country in a moment we recognize that we need a president and vice president as strong as possible is a spoiler. And what The American people, I think realize is that we are living in delicate times where it's no longer about party, but it's about who actually believes in democracy.

And we saw that through the red wave that never happened. We saw independent and moderate Republicans coming to the rescue in the midterm elections because they recognize that the current state of the Republican party is a de facto Trump party and they don't want any of that. So this idea of might be playing with a third party candidate, it's going to upset two, not the Republicans. It'll absolutely upset Democrats.

Jeff, we're saying be together at the White House. You hear private runs among gunna press about the idea that there could be someone else who enters this race and takes some of those independent voters votes away from Joe Biden. And there's a reason that they're concerned about that. Look at how close these last two presidential elections were in certain states.

I mean if you states any points like regions of states. Exactly. I mean if you grab 100 votes here, a thousand votes there, 2,000 votes there, that can make all the difference between a state that could turn the election Danny Free. Was there any time where no labels could potentially draw Republican minded voters away or is this all about impacting Joe Biden?

So two things. Number one, I think this is the first time that no labels actually. So we're getting a lot of chat, a lot of consideration, a lot of attention and they have now single handedly undermined themselves with this because in fact what they are about is the Democrat winning. Well, that just makes them honor the Democratic Party.

Okay, that's part one. What was the cycle? Well, I guess a does that make an honor? Joe Biden's win win.

I guess that makes them an honor. Right. That means they want to win. They're also saying if it's closed that they're really getting which means they can undertake Biden.

That was a completely incoherent but. That was completely incoherent. But ast I remember what your question was, either of you. So could you pack the publican voters and take votes away from them?

I think absolutely. Look, if you look at, if you say, okay, they're a Republican like me, you're not gonna vote for Donald Trump and you're not gonna vote for Joe Biden and Joe Manchin gets in and he's a very conservative Democrat, he's not gonna win in West Virginia. So you know, if he gets in, I think that would be something that people would actually seriously consider. It's something I would seriously consider really you watch Joe Biden, he's gonna go take accept some union endorsements tomorrow.

We saw him today in Connecticut. Tomorrow's really though his first sort of political events and bayonet official he'd run in 2024. In 2020 the criticism was he was in the bunker in the basement, so to speak. This time around he's pretty happy being kind of off the radar.

Is that enough to energize voters? Many people were concerned about other things we acknowledge about his age and about his sort of vigor to do four more years. So I think that when you take a step back and look group of policies that he's implemented, what we're going to see about the Joe Biden presidency with Kamala Harris is that it has been monumental. And I think what you're going to see is the union stepping up and saying the reason that everybody has more access to broadband, the reason that you have $35 insulin, it is because of the Joe Biden policy that we're about to build.

That's also because of Joe Biden. And so a lot of times people like to go after as age as if it's a deficit. But I can't think of any other political person right now that has the depth of understanding how the workings of Capitol Hill needs to be able to maneuver and the individuals they need in order to win policy. Everybody talks about the incredible job that Barack Obama did with health health track one of his policies.

Whether we're talking about the ira, whether we're talking about the American rescue plan, it basically overshadows Just that, ECF. We have 17 more months to talk about. Teresa, Dan and Jeff, always good to have you with us. And up next right here, the latest on the rescue and recovery efforts.

Perry, Texas, these are the pictures we're on the ground less than 24 hours after an awful tornado tore through the city. Three people killed, dozens wounded, leveled residential and downtown areas. We'll take you there. You're watching MEET THE PRESS now.

Welcome back to MEET THE press. Now Governor Greg Abbott is deploying emergency resources to the Texas panhandle today as that area recovers from a tornado that killed at least three people, among them an 11 year old boy and also injured dozens of others. The tornado touched down last evening in Perry Town. It's a town about 8,500.

It's near the Texas Oklahoma border. And this is the trail of devastation the storm left behind. The town's fire chief says the tornado obliterated the trailer park. It damaged or destroyed as many as 200 homes there.

The county sheriff says a nearby hospital has treated more than 50 patients including some who were in critical condition had be transported to other hospitals. NBC News has obtained this video of the tornado. Look at it as it crossed Highway 83 and Perry Tenant virtually destroyed everything in its path. Joining me now from the sites In Harrington, Texas, NBC's Priscilla Thompson.

Priscilla, it's just so stunning to see the pictures, the scene behind you there. What do we know at this point about the victims and whether rescue teams have had any success finding anybody else at this point? Yeah, it is complete a devastation. Peter and I'll start with the victims because we do now know the names of the three people who died and they include 11 year old Matthew Ramirez who was in his family's trailer home at the time of this tornado.

And also two women in their 60s, Cindy Bransgrove who was at food bank and Becky Randall who was working in her print shop when this happened. And her family describing her as someone with just an amazing laugh who always loved to be there for her family. But we did just get a bit of good news from the sheriff and that is that certain rescue efforts have ended. They have not found any other victims who are deceased and they do not expect that death tolls to rise any further.

We're also getting updated numbers from him about just the, the sort of scope of the devastation. He estimates now there are around 100 homes that have been destroyed and eight to 10 businesses that have been destroyed. And one of the things that is so striking about this is we spoke to one man, Victor Muniz, as he was cleaning up his home and he said that this radio hit so quickly they didn't even have time to get in their basement. I want to play a little bit of what he had to say about that.

Take a listen. It he looks up and says, oh my God, a tornado, like there's no way. I don't believe in until I saw, I looked up, I saw the debris spinning around like a block away and I grabbed him, I took him to the bathroom and I just closed the door, locked it. We got down and I was holding him.

He was crying. And Victor told me that they did not ever hear tornado sirens. This is something I asked the sheriff about and he said that by the time the tornado had hit they had already lost electricity and so they had no way of sounding at those sirens. They have a community shelter here in the basement of the library.

One of those things that is so crucial to saving lives. But no one will be able to get to the shelter because of how quickly this tornado bore down on this community. And what's more, the sheriff doesn't believe the scope of the damage is going to allow for FEMA aid here. And there are many people here, including Victor, who you just heard from, that don't have insurance.

And so they don't really know how they're going to rebuild. But everyone's saying this is a resilient community. They do plan to rebuild. You might hear some of that heavy machinery is the farming community.

So already folks working together to clean up their homes and try to figure out the path forward here. Peter yeah, we send them strength, but it's hard to even imagine the task before them trying to begin from scratch. Priscilla Thompson on the ground in Texas for us. Priscilla, thank you.

We want to take it to Pittsburgh now where a jury found the man who killed 11 worshippers at the Tree Life Synagogue in 2018 guilty on all counts this morning. The attack is considered the deadliest anti Semitic attack in US history. After an emotional three week trial, the jury liberated for only five hours on the 63 federal charges, including counts related to hate crimes and gun crimes. Most notably, Robert Bowers was found guilty on 11 counts of obstructing the exercise of religious beliefs, a capital offense that can be punishable by death.

The trial now moves into a second phase, a penalty phase, where the jury will weigh whether they recommend Bowers should receive the death penalty. We want to get to George Solis. He's on the ground in Pittsburgh right now with the very latest on that. George, I was there, I remember just days after that awful tragedy and the community was just sort of stunned by this.

But unfortunately, anti Semitic attacks have been on the rise in Jewish communities in the country who've had to deal with so much hate these days, but nothing like this. Take us through the scene in the courtroom today as the verdict came in. Yeah, as you know, you can imagine, this was very hard for the members of the congregation, all three congregations who lost members during this massacre. Courtroom silent as the verdict was ready to hear a pin drop.

We had the yakushuta, Robert Bower sitting there flipping through documents as each one of these counts was read, all 63 of these charges against him. Jury adjourned. And we now move, as you mentioned, into that sentencing phase of the prosecution laying out their case here at the end, much like they started it, just reminding the jury that Robert Bowers went into the synagogue and he committed these atrocities against the worshippers there, that he only turned himself in not because it was the right thing to do, because he ran ammunition. The prosecutor saying that he turned the synagogue into a hunting ground.

The defense for their part, trying to raise questions about his motivation and intent, saying this was really not an issue about people worshiping, but about his own views about immigration related to the Jewish faith. And so it does appear at one point during the liberation, the Drake did have a question about some of the charges here. But ultimately, as we saw, guilty on all counts across the board. As you mentioned, we now move into that crucial sentencing phase where the death penalty is definitely on the table here.

George, release in Pittsburgh. Penny for today. George, thank you so much for that comment. Right here after the break, A multi year DOJ investigation launched in the wake of George Floyd's murder has concluded that the Minneapolis Police Department has been targeting black residents and repeatedly violating federal law.

Those details and the city's response is next. You're watching THE PRESS now. Welcome back. More than three years after murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer, the Department of Justice today announced that the city of Neapolis and its police department had engaged in a pattern of excessive force and racial discrimination that violated citizens civil rights.

Findings are the results of a multi year investigation into that department's practices. Attorney General Mary Garland spoke on the findings today in Minneapolis. We found that MPD in the city of Minneapolis engages in a pattern or practice of using excessive force unlawfully discriminating against black and Native American people in enforcement activities. The data showed, for example, that MPD stopped black and Native American people nearly six times more often than white people in situations that did not result in arrest or citation given their shares of the population.

We are joined by NBC News correspondent Shaquille Brewster and Ryan Reilly. Ryan, first let's get to some of the DOJ headlines here. We just heard from the attorney general detailing the pattern of discrimination against black and Native American communities there. Let's be clear, it's not unique to that community, but that's where the focus was today.

What were the big takeaways in terms of findings from the doj? You know, sadly, the pattern that we've seen in a lot of these investigations in other cities as well, where, you know, patterns of racial discrimination as well as really deep issues within the systems of holding people accountable, some of those systems just aren't working. And the systems, when people complain, those complaints aren't taken seriously and dismissed. There's a number of interesting anecdotes that were brought out, especially with regards to racism, specific, really troubling incidents that even the mayor and police officials acknowledged.

And more broadly, this is about not individual incidents, but these broader patterns. And something came out of the death of Rodney King when we first started seeing these investigations and when the federal government got this power to investigate more broadly some of these patterns of discrimination. So this is something that we saw in Ferguson, in Baltimore and a number of different cities. And it faded away during the Trump administration.

But now it's really been coming back since Biden took back over when they've taken this investigation seriously once again. Jack, you spent a ton of time in the news community in the wake of George Floyd's death. What does this day mean to that community? It's validation for many people there.

I mean, that's kind of the messaging that you're getting from folks in Minneapolis almost I told you so. This is not surprising to me. You know, covering the Chauvin trial, one thing that we heard even after the verdict was there was a concern that people were going to view that verdict as, look, this is one officer who didn't file a policy who did something wrong. Rather than it's an entire system, it's an entire department that has real problems here.

And this report just adds to what we saw from a two year long state investigation last year that was released that had similar instances that went through 700 hours of body camera video. So it's another sweeping condemnation of the culture of the Minneapolis Police Department and one that you have the mayor, the new police chief, the new city attorney, all saying they're looking at changing and that they find a priority to fixing. So on the topic of change, you hear from the city and the DOJ that they agreed to this. What is it specifically consent decree for police reform.

So what specifically does that look like? That's right. You know, we've seen this in number six before where basically they're trying to cooperate, they're trying to get together on the same page and get these reforms because there's some more complex issues here, especially around morale. That's been a real problem for a lot of police departments as well as this police department individually.

This recruiting officer was on my bike river here today. He even an MPD assault, you know, banner on the back of a bus for a $25,000 bonus for new officers. So a lot of cities are having problems recurring police officers these days. I think that's something that there's really a balance that the Justice Department is trying to strike.

Nina Gupta, who's the number three official at the Justice Department, has really been kind of at the center of this and trying to both implement reform, but also, you know, keep up these relationships with law enforcement more broadly to make sure that, you know, the personnel are in place to just staff a lot of these police departments across the country and, you know, deal some of these deeper moral issues and acknowledgment that policing is a tough job. Yeah, it is a tough job. And it's also become a challenge CR some of the major American cities right now is real issue we're hearing about a lot over the course of the next many months leading up to 2024. I want to ask you about some of these reforms.

Have they been successful in the wake of George Floyd anywhere else? Is there a new model that we can sort of look at and say, hey, that's starting to work? It's hard when you look at departments because it's so decentralized so each department can tout the changes that they have been making. We've seen these consent decrees, which are the court enforceable agreements that will likely come about from this investigation.

We've seen them in other cities like Baltimore. We've seen them in Ferguson. So it depends on how it's ultimately implemented. One thing that we saw in this investigation, though, are specific recommendations for the Minneapolis Police Department.

And we know that many of them are already on their way to being implemented, if not fully implemented. You talk about things like a ban on chokeholds and neck restraints. One thing that we saw from this DOJ report is that while there were about 54 instances of those being used as neck restraints being used in 2016, in 2021, that was down to just one. So you're seeing progress in certain areas.

Of course, you have people in the community saying this is progress way too late. This lack of progress in the past resulted in people being injured and people being killed, and that it's coming too late for this to form, even as the White House tries to put more pressure on Congress to do more about George Floyd, justice and Policing Act. Nice to see both of you. Ryan, Shaq, good to have you here in person.

Still a Congress exclusively reporting on what was happening inside the White House in the crucial moments after the US Military shot down that Chinese spy balloon. But first, we do want to know the passing of Daniel Ellsberg. He died at the age of 92. Ellsberg, you'll remember, rocked the nation when, while serving as a US Military analyst, he photocopied thousands of pages of damning and secret government accounts of the Vietnam War.

What became known as the Pentagon Papers that he then leaked to the New York Times exposing government lies about the conflict. Ellsberg appeared on Meet the Press in 1973 defending his decision. Because of our involvement in Vietnam and because of what has happened at Pentagon Papers and the Watergate case, a great many of our youth have lost faith in our institutions. Have you?

You have 30 seconds. I never did. And I'm glad to say right now I've never had more hope, not based on faithful and evidence of what I see these days that our government is functioning. Our government is not the president.

Their government is not the executive branch. Those other branches of government are functioning to protect us from abuses by the executive branch. And they have never functioned better in our history. Welcome back.

As Secretary of State Andy Blinken heads to Beijing this weekend for high stakes diplomatic talks. NBC News has exclusive new reporting that President Biden wanted to speak with China's President Xi after the US Shot down a Chinese surveillance balloon back in February, but was talked out of it by his top national security advisors. Secretary Blinken's upcoming trip had to be rescheduled in the wake of that SCA5 balloon incident. Earlier today, Blinken told reporters that the goal of the trip was to establish sustained regular lines of communications at senior levels of government.

Joined now by NBC News national security reporter Dan Delew. Stand. Good to see the president wanted to talk to President Xi after the US Shutdown that surveillance balloon. So walk us through exactly why this did not go ahead.

That's right, Peter. So right after that sort of dramatic episode with the balloon, the president being a great believer in personal diplomacy. He's always said that he has known the Chinese president for many years. He thought, okay, a conversation might be good to diffuse tensions.

But his advisors talked him out of basically making the argument that this was not the time, that there was a lot of anger in Beijing and a lot of anger in Washington. Better to build up slowly lower down the ladder, lower level officials and then eventually get to a leader to leader conversation, which is striking because right now is one of the White House responses. We've been trying to get this answer for a while. The president told us way back when he says it happens soon.

We're still waiting for any indication. So obviously that leader to leader conversation is still on hold. But Secretary Blinken is scheduled to visit Beijing, as you know, this weekend. What is the atmosphere that he enters there in this relationship between China and the US it's still so strained.

That's right. It's really difficult. No question. Just the fact that the visit is going ahead at all is sort of a minor victory, I think, from the White House's point of view.

They really feel like they just got to have some level of communication and dialogue, some regular dialogue to try to lower the temperature. But you just have two countries that have a fundamental disagreement on just about everything. And of course, from the Chinese point of view, they accused the US of trying to hold it back, trying to prevent its rise as an economic and military power. They say they're encircled in the Pacific.

And of course, we had two near collisions recently in the air and at sea in the western Pacific with a Chinese jet flying unsafely close to US Aircraft. So it is a very fraught hour. Nice to see you. Appreciate you joining us as well this hour.

He was a young Marine. She didn't care about convention. They made a life together. Then one night the Marine died.

And then the death investigation took a wild, unexpected and utterly bizarre turn. I'm Josh Rawas and this is Trace of Suspicion, an all new podcast from Data Lab. Listen to all episodes of Trace of Suspicion now. Wherever you get your podcasts.