Meet the Press NOW – March 27

If it's Thursday, automakers race for impact after the president announces a new 25% tariff on all imported vehicles and parts, further escalating a trade war with America's top economic partners and clouding the country's economic outlook. Plus, a key Republican senator joins Democrats in calling for an independent investigation into the administration's use of signal to discuss sensitive military plans. As allegations that the president's top advisors broke the law now head to court. And President Trump pulls his pick for United Nations ambassador, announcing Congresswoman And Elise Stefanik will stay in Congress as House Republicans cling to a razor-thit majority and face new political uncertainty.

Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Chris DeWelker in Washington, where the White House is trying to turn the page amid new fallout over its use of a commercial messaging app to discuss highly sensitive military information. The president looking to shift the narrative back to the economy after announcing sweeping new tariffs on auto companies. A 25 percent tariff on all imported vehicles and foreign-made auto parts effective one week from today.

Here he is making that announcement last night. So we'll effectively be charging a 25 percent tariff. But if you build your car in the United States, there is no tariff. And what that means is a lot of foreign car companies, a lot of companies are going to be in great shape because they've already built their plant.

But their plants are underutilized, so they'll be able to expand them inexpensively and quickly. But others will come into our country and build and they're already looking for sites. White House officials are conceding they do not know precisely how these new tariffs will be implemented because domestic automakers source their parts from all around the world. And on top of the auto tariffs, a separate batch of potentially sweeping reciprocal tariffs on U.S.

imports will be taking effect next week as well. The president's repeated escalation of tariffs and tariff threats are creating economic uncertainty and prompting concerns of worsening inflation. But despite that, the president's supporters are largely signaling a willingness to let his policies play out. In the latest installment of our Deciders Focus Group, we heard from African-American men who live in swing states and voted for Donald Trump in 2024.

The group was a mix of independents, Democrats and Republicans, and nearly all of them remained staunchly with the president, despite mixed views of his economic agenda. I really believe in my heart that Trump being a businessman, he's going to get these prices in the economy where it needs to be. He has a point to prove, and he loves to do that. And I believe he's going to get it to where it needs to be.

I think he needs to pace himself. He's going too fast, and he's doing too much at a fast pace and not allowing the economy to catch up. And I think it's just the first time I've seen a president go so drastic so quickly. You know, so I think in the grand scheme of things, it could turn out wonderful, but it also could not.

These tariff wars. One day he's going to do tariffs. One day he takes it back and gives him another date. It causes the stock market to go down a lot in a recent week or so Sure I mean sure he a businessman but keep in mind he also had several failed businesses So maybe there some sun on the horizon on the other end But right now it painful because the tariffs eventually the tariffs do go into effect They will be eventually passed on to the consumer to pay more So we see He has his hands in so many different things.

I can wait till he gets to the six month point. Then I'll start worrying. It's only been two months. So it's a lot of things on the table.

It's a lot of mess to clean up. It's a lot of stuff that needs to be done in order for that to happen. As far as the inflation and the prices going up with the tariffs, I believe it. I believe the plan may be for it to balance itself out with those jobs being available here.

Maybe not immediately, but, you know, as time goes on, I believe that will be the end goal. Always so fascinating to hear from the voters. NBC News Senior White House Correspondent Kelly O'Donnell joins me now. Also with me is NBC News Business and Data Correspondent Brian Chung.

Kelly, let me start with you. The president pressing forward with reciprocal tariffs next week. He's calling this Liberation Day. What can you tell us about the timing of yesterday's announcement and what we're anticipating next week?

Well, it seemed that the announcement yesterday was added to the schedule. And you might infer from that that the president was eager to get on to one of his favorite subjects and away from a lot of the public discussion about the signal chat and the Houthis attack that has dominated a lot of coverage. So by doing that, the president, who has a sense about how to capture the moment, how to dominate headlines, talked about his tariffs and then is doing more of a lead up until April 2nd. Part of what he also talked about is trying to sort of prime the public for what to expect in certain ways.

And at the same time, talking about how this could change in the long term, especially for the automobile industry. He made reference to the fact that there are some factories that are in the United States that are underperforming their available capacity or could be plussed up to do more. But absent that, you can't build a new factory overnight. And there have been many years of trade policy that have allowed for the automobile industry to source its goods that go into assembly in multiple countries.

And so it really is putting a lot of pressure on the automobile industry. It will also probably change the used car market as another option for people and also looking at car manufacturers that already have inventory in terms of the consumer and the buyer. For the president, tariffs are one of his key objectives. He has talked about flexibility in wanting to implement them in different ways.

These would be sector tariffs. And then, of course, he's talked about reciprocal tariffs to be any country that imposes tariffs. The U.S. would match that sector tariffs, looking at things like the auto industry and other areas where he will, as he chooses, try to impose those to bring more money in through these import taxes into the federal treasury.

And, Cal, you just heard those voters say, look, I'm going to give the president a little bit more time before I start to get too worried about the economy. But inside the administration, is there any concern about the fact that prices aren't coming down, that we're seeing all of this volatility on Wall Street? Well, they are one of the things that was surprising about how the president addresses this is he often would tout the strength of the stock market and how Wall Street is judging his performance. And now he kind of moved into the markets go up and they go down He has talked about lowering prices in the area of energy and that eggs have come down Eggs are a complicated situation because of the bird flu and supply and that kind of thing They are focused on wanting to reduce costs for the American people They bristle and really push back whenever, as reporters, we raise the issue of tariffs being an additional cost on those bringing goods into the country and how likely that is to be passed on to the consumer.

He says little disturbance, short-term disturbance. We'll see how voters take that as that's really felt in real terms. We will. And, of course, it is the top issue for voters.

Brian, let me turn to you. Of course, the big headline yesterday was that this will have an impact on the car industry. What are you watching for in terms of how these tariffs might impact the industry writ large, auto workers, as well as Americans shopping for a new car? Yeah, well, look, when it comes to Americans that are shopping for a new car, it could be just straight up thousands of dollars more in cost.

And that's because of this 25 percent tariff that would be slapped on any car that's coming in from another country, including from our neighbors to the north and south. There's some interesting language within the executive action that says even for vehicles that would be compliant with the USMCA, which is that trade deal that the Trump administration negotiated in the first term, that the percentage of parts that don't come from the United States would be tariff at a 25 percent rate, which means that, let's say, for example, you bring in one of the Chevy Silverados that is made in Canada. Yes, it's an American car with an American brand on it. But if 60 percent of the parts of it inside of it are coming from Canada, well, then 60 percent of a 25 percent tariff would be applied.

So Goldman Sachs has estimated as a result of all these tariffs that it could add, get this, between 15 or 5,000 to 15,000 dollars in terms of the cost of a foreign car imported into the United States. But even for a domestic car, it could be three to eight thousand dollars more. So from a consumer standpoint, very much real. And then when it comes to the workforce side of things, you have somebody, UAW, that workers union saying that they're optimistic this could lead to reshoring of American jobs.

But, Kristen, folks that we've spoken to have said it is just not possible to reshoring American factories in the course of months. It might not even happen in the course of a presidential administration, even if they wanted to. Well, just really great reporting, guys. Thank you so much, Kelly and Brian.

Appreciate you're both starting us off today. I want to turn down to more from the latest installment of our Deciders Focus Group series. As we mentioned, we are hearing from black men in swing states who voted for President Trump in 2024. One of the biggest takeaways from this key focus group was despite some disagreements with the president about his tactics, they are standing by their vote.

take a listen to a little bit more of what they have to say. I'd like to know whether on balance you approve or disapprove of what the new administration has done since it took over. So by a show of fingers, who approves what the new administration has done since it took over? Marlon, why do you approve?

I approve because he's weeding out a lot of things that the other, I would say Biden and Kamala Harris disrupted in this United States. There's a lot of things. It's going to be a tough job for him in the Trump administration as a whole. But I'm just willing to wait and see what goes forth from now.

I believe that he getting rid of the clutter and things that have been there for a long period of time And he just cleaning house But there a way to do it And so I don 100 agree totally how he cleaning house But there are some areas that need to be improved within the government. Billia? Billia? Billia?

I'd say he said he's going to do some things. He did a lot of things. Whether it actually happens, is that how he wanted it to happen or not, at least he tried and actually did something. So that's more than I can say about the Democrats probably ever.

Billia? Jeffrey, tell me why you disapprove. I disapprove the way he's handled the The firings of government employees, firing public sector versus the private sector are two different animals. In my opinion, he should have gone in with a scaffold instead of a blowtorch.

I think the economy right now is in a position where they're hurting and they need help. That focus group was produced in collaboration with Syracuse University, Engacious and Sago. And joining me now is director of Syracuse University's Democracy, Journalism and Citizenship Institute, Margaret Taleb. Margaret, thank you so much for being here.

It's so fascinating to hear their perspective now, just over two months into the second Trump administration. What were your biggest takeaways? Because it sounds like, by and large, they are sticking with President Trump. They're saying, look, we want to give him a little bit more time before we make judgments about one of our biggest issues, which is the economy.

That's right. And I think it's important to underscore that this is a very niche group of voters. This doesn't necessarily represent the overwhelming majority of black men in America or African-American voters in America. But it represents an important segment because this is a segment that President Trump and his team have targeted and said, the Democratic establishment has taken these voters for granted for too long.

And there are a lot of men in this country who think that the Democratic Party got too woke or is focusing on the wrong issues or isn't decisive enough. And this survey tells us he is right about a slice of that electorate. More than overwhelming support for Trump, what I heard that was so interesting was just the total disillusionment with these voters, with the Democratic Party. I mean, they were asked at one point, what would your advice be to the Democratic Party about how to reconstitute?

And like one said, quit. And everyone else on the panel started laughing. So they're really for many of these voters. What the elements that were drawing them towards Trump or helping them to have more patience with Trump were cultural, much more than they were substantive.

They they liked the idea of his brand of masculinity or decisiveness, the way he packages that kind of messaging. It resonated with them. And they just don't trust Democrats because they say, well, my pocketbook really hasn't gotten better. Democrats have had a long time to do it.

I want it to that point. I think we have more sound on what they have to say about the Democratic Party. Exactly what Margaret is talking about. Let's listen.

Get more of your reaction on the other side. What are the key characteristics or traits that best describe today's Democratic Party? Elliot, why don't you go first? I would say liars, a lot of people doing insider trading.

A lot of people are working for lobbyists and not for the people. I would say they pretty much failed at everything. I think lost, lost. I'd add to that with, you know, with the lion, just a bunch of false promises.

I would say attack on our children with these push agendas. Just not really relatable. Just trying to sell a dream. That's not the reality.

I would say manipulation. You know, to me, it feels like they more want to scare you into following them than to go on with what your heart really thinks should be done. So I would say manipulation. Learn to be honest.

Be honest. Do something. because they always say they can't do something. Do something.

Don't show us something in this head and you're hiding a thousand other things that you're going to do behind our back over here. That part, just be upfront, be real with us. That's what they need to do. Margaret, it's just so revealing to hear those answers.

And the subtext to a lot of what they're saying is don't take our votes for granted. That's right. And if you were a Democratic strategist watching this, you'd be banging your head against the wall saying, but what about this? But what about this?

But what about them? But what's important to remember, some of their criticism is coming from their personal experience, the way they have perceived the political system, right? And part of it is coming from the way they consume media. And many of the men on these panels get a lot of their news or information from social media and the depth of knowledge on the substance of some of these issues.

What is Doge doing? Do you know what's what do you know? What's Elon Musk doing? Do you know what Trump is doing on X, Y, Z?

The knowledge is not deep and specific. It's a lot of buzzwords, memes, things they've heard. And so some of this is if your news intake is an algorithm that reinforces certain messages and leaves other messages out, that will be the way you understand an issue. But some of this is not that some of this is their lived experience and their frustration with what is default assumed to be the party that should have been representing them all along.

And that's a very real thing. And I think worth listening to Margaret Tollivan is always so informative and fascinating to have these discussions with you and to hear from these focus groups. Thank you for being here in person, my friend. Great to see you.

Coming up, new calls for an independent investigation into the sensitive military plans discussed by top White House officials on Signal. As a judge begins to hear a case about whether laws may have been broken, we're live at the Pentagon with the latest fallout. Plus, President Trump's surprise move pulling the nomination of his pick for ambassador to the U.N. Congresswoman Elise Stefanik out of concern that Republicans could lose a seat in the House that they won by more than 20 points.

Stay with us. We'll delve into all of it. You're watching The Press Now. Welcome back.

As Speaker, Mike Johnson tries to navigate a razor thin majority in the House. Today, President Trump making a surprise announcement that he's pulling Congresswoman Elise Stefanik's nomination to be his ambassador to the United Nations. In a post on Truth Social, President Trump defended his decision to pull the nomination, writing, quote, with a very tight majority. I don't want to take a chance on anyone else running for Elise's seat.

He went on to say, therefore, Elise will stay in Congress, rejoin the House leadership team, and continue to fight for our amazing American people. Joining me now is Mel Zanon on Capitol Hill Mel thanks so much for bringing this breaking news to us This is just extraordinary Speaker Johnson already trying to navigate his incredibly slim majority in the House as they navigate having to deal with the debt ceiling and the rest of the Trump agenda right Right. There have been a lot of dynamics at play here. The concerns about the razor thin majority in the House has been something that's been an ongoing concern, both for the White House and for Speaker Mike Johnson.

That's the reason why it took so long in the first place to get her delayed. Her nomination has just been sitting on ice despite being overwhelmingly approved through the committee process. But the thinking had always been that once they get these two Republican seats back next week through a special election, that they would be OK. They would be able to forward to lose Elise Stefanik.

But that thinking has really changed in the last few days. And there's a few reasons for that. Number one, there's been concerns about at least one of those special election seats in Florida, the sixth district. The candidate there, Randy Fine, has been massively outraised by the Democratic opponents.

Some polling has showed a tighter than expected race, even though Trump won that district by 30 points. And so Trump and other GAP leadership have really had to intervene. And that's been really frustrating and kind of spooked them a little bit, even though they do think ultimately that Republican candidate will win. It has made them realize that this prospect of future special elections, including for Elise Stefanik's seat, could be a problem for them.

And number two, I think perhaps the bigger dynamic at play here is just that the White House and Donald Trump are seeing how difficult governing really is on Capitol Hill as they're trying to push through this massive domestic policy agenda. They really can't afford to have many defections. They can't afford to have any more members leave. And so I think ultimately that is probably what was driving the decision to try to keep Elise Stefanik here in the House.

All right, Mel Zanona, thank you so much for bringing us that update. We'll continue to track all of the twists and turns from Capitol Hill. Appreciate it. And right now, a judge right here in Washington is hearing arguments in a case brought by a government watchdog group accusing President Trump and Trump administration officials of violating federal records laws when they use the messaging app Signal to discuss highly sensitive military plans.

Notably, the judge overseeing the case is Judge Bosberg, who you might remember blocked the administration's efforts to invoke wartime powers to deport alleged gang members. Bosberg's ruling in that case prompted intense backlash from the president and his allies, including calls for Bosberg's impeachment, calls which were rebuked by the chief justice of the Supreme Court. The fallout from that signal group chat national security blunder isn't just playing out in the courts. Today, the top Republican and Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee called for the DOD inspector general to investigate the incident and determine whether the department's classification and declassification policies were adhered to.

Yesterday, while speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, President Trump appeared open to an IG investigation saying, quote, it doesn't bother me. Joining me now is Courtney Kuby at the Pentagon. So, Court, there are growing calls for Secretary Hagseth to potentially step down. President Trump fiercely defending him.

What's been the reaction inside the Pentagon? Yeah, well, Secretary Hagseth himself has been completely defiant about this issue every single time that we've heard from him. He's been on the road all week. He's now in Guam, but we don't expect his message to change.

Now, privately, there are people who are starting to quietly talk about the fact that the information as released by the Atlantic is clearly information about an attack plan. It is detailed times and the types of platforms that were being used, the times that bombs would be dropped. That is the kind of information that would be considered mission planning or attack plans, whatever you want to say. When you put that information together in advance of an operation it would be considered of at least a secret nature according to DOD policy And there are people here who are quietly saying you know if one of us did that we be getting in trouble So I wondering if that going to bubble up But as of now, it's very anecdotal, Kristen.

We do not accept Secretary Hegstead's message to change at all. Now, there is one other piece of this that we keep hearing from the Secretary, and this seems to be a pretty consistent message coming out of this administration. And that is the fact that, look, no matter what happened here, this was a successful operation. Well, keep in mind, the idea of classified information, the disclosure of it, It is not necessary for that information to cause harm in any way for it to still be unlawful or illegal for someone to provide that information in an unclassified setting or to make it public in any way.

That is not one of the standards that the information actually causes harm. So we'll see if they keep making that argument or not. And so far, that is one of the ones that the Secretary of Defense continues to say. Well, I know the scrutiny continues to mount.

And we do have new reporting about DHS staff are facing serious punishment for accidentally adding a reporter to a group email. What can you tell us about that? Yeah, I mean, this reporting just coming out from our colleague Julia Ainsley, I mean, the timing is pretty remarkable here. So this is this is a case of a Department of Homeland Security staffer, longtime employee who admitted to colleagues that she accidentally added a journalist to a some sort of a message chat that included information on an upcoming ice operation, unclassified information about an upcoming ice operation.

She was placed on administrative leave and just notified this week that she would be losing her security clearance. So, I mean, let's put these cases one by another, not classified information on this chat. Somebody it appears that this person, you know, self-identified is having doing doing this. The person was put on administrative leave after this happened and then is losing her security clearance, according to our colleague, Julia Ainsley.

So the juxtaposition, you know, is pretty striking. It is. It is striking indeed. Courtney, thank you for covering all the angles for us.

Really appreciate it. Coming up next, the disturbing moment at Tufts University as a graduate student from Turkey was arrested by mass federal agents caught on tape. We have the details of that case and what it means for the administration's nationwide crackdown on American universities. You're watching the press now.

Welcome back. It's becoming a recurring theme in the first months of the Trump administration sweeping layoffs to government agencies. Today, it's the Department of Health and Human Services announcing that 10,000 more full-time jobs are being eliminated in accordance with the president's executive order to implement doge cuts. When today's layoffs are combined with the other cost-cutting initiatives being implemented, HHS says the agency's headcount will be reduced by 20,000.

These new cuts will come across multiple agencies. 3,500 jobs will be eliminated at the FDA, 2,400 at the CDC, 1,200 at the NIH, and 300 at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. HHS tells NBC News that the jobs eliminated at the CDC include those focused on global health, domestic HIV prevention, and also gun violence. Joining me now on set is NBC News health and medical reporter Berkeley Lovelace to break all of this down.

So Berkeley, what can you tell us about the cuts to HHS? Yeah, so I can say most agencies are gonna be impacted. I previously reported that the HIV prevention division was going to be cut but there gonna be many other programs that are gonna be affected So these are agencies that cover approving drugs providing health insurance fighting infectious diseases as well Many of these agencies are also going to be consolidated as well And so right now the Trump administration is saying that these cuts are going to be fine that this will save the U.S. money and that there won't be any disruption in services.

We also have a clip of Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. where he says we can do more with less. I want to promise you now that we're going to do more with less.

No American is going to be left behind. Our key services delivered through Medicare and Medicaid, the FDA and CDC and other agencies will enter a new era of responsiveness and a new era of effectiveness. These goals will honor the aspirations of the vast majority of existing HHS employees who actually yearn to make America healthy. And so it's important to note that there's already concerns from people within the agency.

I spoke to somebody at the FDA today who said that there is concerns that this will slow drug and device approvals as well. Well, it's one of the agencies that's being slashed that we're watching so closely. And you also have new information about vaccine data being handed over to a researcher who has peddled misinformation before. What can you tell us?

Yes, we have some great reporting from our colleagues. And so this is being reported as a deeply irresponsible decision from HHS, from outside experts. So HHS hired David Geer. He's an anti-vaccine activist to look into potential links between vaccines and autism, which has been thoroughly debunked.

And so David Geer has a history of having studies retracted. He's previously spread misinformation about vaccines. He's also had his medical license retracted as well. And so there's this concern of why I hire this person to look into the study.

What is he hoping to find? And of course, you know, with something like that, that could also spread, you know, more resistance against vaccines for parents, because right now more parents are choosing not to vaccinate their kids. So there's definitely concerns about this as well. Wow.

Okay. Well, I know you'll continue to track all of this very closely. Berkeley Lovelace, thank you so much for being here. Really appreciate it.

It is great to see you. Turning now from HHS to the Department of Homeland Security, where we're following a particularly controversial piece of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown, detaining foreign students who appear to be in the country legally. ICE arrested and detained an Iranian national in a doctoral program for mechanical engineering at the University of Alabama this week. It's not clear why he was detained or what charges he may face.

And at Tufts University in Massachusetts, a Turkish national with a valid student visa was arrested by masked plainclothes officers on a residential Street. The detention was captured on video and it's sparking protests. NBC's Stephanie Goss has that story. Hundreds of angry protesters gathering near Tufts University's campus, calling on the federal government to release doctoral student Ramessa Ozturk.

One for one, visas all free, Ramessa free them all! The demonstration roughly 24 hours after Ozturk's attorney says the Turkish national, with a valid student visa, was detained by federal authorities as she was walking home. Video obtained by NBC News shows a man not wearing a uniform, confronting Ozturk on the sidewalk and apparently grabbing her phone. The 30-year-old clearly alarmed.

He is joined by five other people, all wearing masks, repeatedly telling Ozturk they are law enforcement before cuffing her and taking her away. In a statement, the Department of Homeland Security tells NBC News an investigation found Ozturk engaged. Activities in support of Hamas, a foreign terrorist organization, that are grounds for visa issuance to be terminated. DHS did not specify what Ozturk is accused of doing.

According to her attorney, she was flown to a detention facility in Louisiana early Wednesday morning, despite a judge's order the day before that Ozturk not be taken from Massachusetts without first providing 48 hours of advance notice, while the court decides whether she is being legally detained. Ozturk's friend and a former Muslim chaplain at Tufts called the detainment shocking. I certainly wouldn't be encouraging anyone at this moment to come to the U.S. and expect to feel safe.

A year ago, Oztar co-wrote an opinion article in her school's newspaper that called on the university to acknowledge the Palestinian genocide and divest it from companies tied to Israel, but did not name Hamas. In January, President Trump signed an executive order stating non-citizens of the U.S. can be deported for being involved in pro-Palestinian protests. The DHS called the Tufts arrest, quote, common sense security, while its secretary on a trip highlighting another immigration focus of the president.

Kristi Noem visiting a prison in El Salvador where deported migrants are being held. The secretary posting a video with prisoners in the background. If you come to our country illegally, this is one of the consequences you could face. Joining me now on set with the latest is NBC News senior homeland security correspondent Julia Ainsley.

Julia, thanks so much for being here. A lot of ground to cover. Let's start with the doctoral student at Tufts University. What do you know about that case?

Yeah, well, her lawyer says that she is a Turkish citizen. She's getting her Ph.D. at Tufts. She was on her way to break fast.

And look, so far, the Trump administration has said that they think it's because they revoked her visa because she was pro-Hamas. But the only thing we've been able to see is that article that Stephanie had, this op-ed where they're just calling on the university like so many students did. She was also here on an F-1 visa, Kristen, and that allows people who have those visas the same rights as American citizens. including the freedom of speech.

Now we did hear from Secretary Rubio about this today. Let's take a listen to what he had to say. If you apply for a visa to enter the United States and be a student and you tell us that the reason why you're coming to the United States is not just because you want to write op-eds but because you want to participate in movements that are involved in doing things like vandalizing universities, harassing students, taking over buildings, creating a ruckus, we're not going to give you a visa. If you lie to us and get a visa and then enter the United States and with that visa participate in that sort of activity, we're going to take away your visa.

Now Kristen, all we know publicly is what we were able to see in that op-ed which obviously didn't have a call to violence. If the administration has anything else, we just aren't able to see it and I will say her lawyer says there have been no criminal charges filed against her so far. Wow. And you're tracking cases at some other universities?

That's right. I mean, the major university we've seen so far is at Columbia. Of course, it's all kicked off with the detention of Michael Khalil. There are now others who have been taken to that St.

Louisiana detention center, including the woman at Tufts you just heard about. I also spoke last week with a Colombian student who was a doctoral student as well, six months away from completing a five-year doctorate degree. And she fled to Canada. She says ICE knocked on her door many times.

And she actually called on the university to do more. Universities are in a tough spot here. They're trying to tell students, don't open your door unless there's a warrant. You can appeal to campus police.

But a lot of these students are feeling really afraid. And like we saw in some of the cases they actually fleeing the country Yeah the video is just so remarkable and disturbing as you said We know President Trump in a separate piece of his broader immigration agenda has signed an executive order cutting funding to sanctuary cities What can you tell me about that Yeah, that's right. They're trying to cut funding really to the policing around sanctuary cities. This is something that they said would happen.

They have the ability to do this through DOJ grants. Whether or not they'll go further, it remains to be seen. Some of those places are still vague. But this is something that we saw in the previous Trump administration that they ended up not being able to do.

But these are really key grants that allow these sanctuary cities and really police organizations and law enforcement agencies across the country to be able to do things like have community programs. And you also, you're covering a lot of angles today, are tracking the fact that the administration announced the arrest of someone who is an MS-13 gang. What can you tell us? That's right.

That was right here in Woodbridge, Virginia, this morning. Now, the mother of that suspect told our own affiliate here in D.C. that she does not think that he had ties to MS-13, that maybe he had some interactions with them when he was younger. But we were able to find out from the police documents, from the warrants that our affiliate was able to see, that they were able to confiscate a number of weapons from this apartment.

Now, according to the FBI and, of course, Attorney General Pan Bondi, they did a big press conference on this this morning. They say he was one of the three top leaders in MS-13. But, of course, we'll have to wait and see how exactly he might be charged. But if that Alien Enemies Act that we've talked about gets put back in place, if the courts ever allowed it, this would be one of the first people to be sent to El Salvador without a trial.

Wow. Well, to say that you're covering all of the angles is an understatement today. There's a lot happening. Thank you.

It's great to see you, as always, Julia. Appreciate it. We've got some breaking news now to tell you about. A federal judge has just ordered the administration preserve those signal chat messages that discuss military plans.

It comes as the court hears a case about whether members on the chat, which included the Secretary of Defense, White House National Security Advisor, the CIA Director, the Secretary of State and others violated federal record laws. Judge Boesberg, yes, that's Judge Boesberg, told the government he wants a formal declaration that his order is being followed by Monday. We'll be right back. Welcome back.

Turning now to Elon Musk and his role in a key election that's coming up next week. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO and special government employee is the world's richest man, President Trump's point man on slashing the government, and has cemented himself as a key Republican Party benefactor. His PAC is the top outside spender in Tuesday's Wisconsin judicial election, spending $12 million on the pivotal race that will determine the ideological balance of the state's Supreme Court. And similar to his 2024 effort in Pennsylvania, some of that money has gone to fund a petition against, quote, activist judges that offers signers $100 with a random signer selected to win $1 million, according to Musk.

Joining me now on set is Deepa Shivaram, White House correspondent for NPR. Andrew Bates, former senior deputy White House press secretary in the Biden administration. And Stephen Hayes, editor and CEO of the Dispatch and an NBC News political analyst. Thanks to all of you for being here.

Andrew, welcome. Thank you. Your first time joining the panel. Let me start with you.

I do want to talk about the Wisconsin State Supreme Court race, but first I want to talk about Elise Stefanik, President Trump pulling his nomination for her for UN ambassador and saying she's got to stay in Congress because the majority is just so narrow and his agenda is at stake What do you make of it And you know Stefanik was someone who was expected to clear the hurdles of getting confirmed in the first place which hasn necessarily been the case for all of Trump picks for his cabinet And the fact that she was in that position and he was able to say no it not going to work It just speaks to how razor thin on the line his agenda is and getting it through such a tight Congress. Yeah, there's no doubt about that. I mean, Steve, look, the concerns about these special races in Florida, frankly, Hersey as well. That seems to be the backdrop to all of this.

What does that say about we're two months into the Trump administration? Are they a little caught off guard, do you think, by the fact that the races in Florida are going to be a little bit more competitive than they were anticipating? Yeah, I mean, I think they have to be. We'll see what the outcomes actually are.

But, I mean, if you look at at least the Phoenix district, she's sort of a seat that she would win, I think, almost in perpetuity. But in an open race, even with a relatively weak Democrat, there was talk of a conservative running as sort of a third-party candidate. There was some unhappiness with the other Republicans who were potentially going to be running. And the delays themselves, I think, created this imperative, both for Speaker Johnson and for President Trump, to say, we've got some stuff we want to pass, and we need to pass it now.

She's here. We better have her. Yeah, and she was a rising star in the Republican Party. Andrew Bates, how are Democrats viewing this?

And is there a concern about making too much of this moment? In other words, feeling a little too emboldened because these races have not yet happened. Something that stands out to me is that in the focus group that you were featuring earlier, three of the 12 men said that they were concerned Trump was not making inflation his top issue. Or rather, only three thought that he was making inflation his top issue.

And his own pollster put out data showing that in competitive districts, a majority of voters are not approving of how he's handling the economy. And there's good reason for that. They're on defense because Trump predicated his campaign on lowering day to day costs. Then he raised them on purpose with tariff taxes that affect the middle class.

So I think that Democrats have a lot to work with because that remains people's top priority. They have seen costs go up since Donald Trump came into office. And the Republicans in Congress are about to spend months debating how much can we cut taxes for billionaires and other wealthy special interests, which exacerbates their problems. Steve, what about that point and what we heard from the focus group?

You did have the concern creeping into these men who voted for President Trump saying, look, the economy is still our top issue. You also heard them say we're going to give him a little bit more time, most of them. But how much time do you think voters are willing to give him? Yeah, I think the clock is ticking.

I think Andrew's right. I mean, look, whether or not, you know, Donald Trump is seen as distracted by some of these other issues pursuing Greenland or other things, he is going to be hurt if prices don't come down, period, full stop. I think the fact that he's making these arguments about tariffs and that the tariffs are doing what they're doing to markets, which affects people's 401k or their 529 college plans, things like that. And then in addition, has these pass through costs that undoubtedly will be going to consumers on cars, on avocados, on other things.

If people are looking at this in two months, in four months and six months and saying, my prices haven't gone down, they've gone up. He's in real trouble. One messaging that I think is very fascinating to watch from this Trump White House is in that focus group, there was at least one voter, I think, who said, you know, he seems like a really busy guy. Maybe he getting to it Like maybe you know we give him some more time And one thing that the Trump White House and Trump himself has been quite good at I say is flooding the zone And he talks about so many issues on any given day on any given week that for a voter it like oh well he the president He's really busy.

He'll probably get to it, which whether or not he does is a different question. But they certainly feel like he's quite busy. It's such a great point, Deepa. It speaks to, Andrew, the power of messaging.

And I was astounded by how down they are on the Democratic Party. As a Democrat, what are some of the conversations about how the messaging needs to change in a way that it better reaches some of these voters that the party lost in 2024? for. Well, I think there's a good segue there because there is danger in him talking about anything but what he defined his campaign about.

I remember in the Republican National Convention speech, he promised us that inflation would end immediately. That's a direct quote. He said, day one, prices will go down. Now he's in a dog catch his car situation where the prices are going up because of him.

And if people see him working on other things that they don't agree should be front of mind, if they see him touring the Kennedy Center or raving about Greenland, or if they see him not aware that four U.S. service members are missing in Lithuania right after his aides put fighter pilots in danger with his signal situation. I think that he looks like he is not following through on what he promised people he would do, and that gives Democrats a big opportunity. I do think it's important for us to go through some soul searching, making sure that we're meeting people where they are, making sure we're listening to people about what their top priorities are.

But their top priority, including the focus group that you showed, is they want costs going down and Trump's making them go up. But those comments, the descriptions that those men gave of Democrats, the adjectives that they used to describe Democrats were devastating, really tough for Democrats. There's a lot to claw from. I do think that, to Deepa's point, President Trump, by showing this energy and doing so much has a pretty significant contrast from his predecessor in a way that I think benefits him, even if he's got to answer all these questions about the policy.

Well, one of the big tests coming up for both parties in Wisconsin, the state Supreme Court race, Deepa, is it overstated to say to some extent this race is a referendum on Elon Musk, who has yet again poured millions of dollars into this race? It is, but I also think it's a referendum on Democrats, too. I think it's a both and because you see polling on NBC has been polling on this. Other outlets have been polling on this that Democrats are extremely unpopular right now.

Is Elon Musk really popular right now? No, absolutely not. But it is, I think, a both and of looking at where the enthusiasm is on both sides. Yeah, it's a great point.

And to that point, Andrew, let's look at this ad taking aim at Elon Musk. Elon Musk is trying to buy this election with ads that lie about Judge Susan Crawford because he knows Fred Schimmel always helps his campaign donors. We don't need Schimmel's corruption on the Supreme Court. We need Judge Susan Crawford.

Andrew, it's a fascinating tactic. I mean, Elon Musk is not president, and yet he's the focus of that ad. Do you think that's smart strategy to make Elon Musk focus? Well, there are a lot of Americans who are wondering if he functionally is the president.

Sometimes I wonder about that myself. But I think it says a lot that voters are speaking out. There are often more anti-Musk protesters at Schimmel's events than there are Schimmel supporters. And people, like I mentioned a moment ago, I seem to listen to folks about their priorities.

One of the most concerning things this administration has done in the eyes of swing voters is they let Musk rampage through people's private social security data. A federal judge told them they had to stop. Then they wanted to remove the judge from office. So I think the amount of power that you see being given to this unelected billionaire by the at least nominal president is something that's going to figure into this.

All right, guys, we are out of time. Thank you so much for being here. Really appreciate it. Deepa, Andrew and Stephen, thank you.

And still to come, seeing Green, Vice President Vance heads to Greenland as President Trump vows to annex it. We're live in Greenland's capital city next. You're watching the Press Now. Stay with us.

Welcome back. Vice President Vance and Second Lady Usha Vance are set to travel to Greenland tomorrow, but their trip will be far different than what was originally planned after officials in Greenland characterized the planned visit as, quote, aggressive, and said the U.S. had not been invited. It, of course, comes as President Trump has repeatedly said the U.S.

needs to acquire Greenland and has not ruled out using military force to get it. NBC News international correspondent Molly Hunter is in Greenland with more. In the capital of Greenland, the Arctic cold shoulder, a new trip at the center of the diplomatic fallout over President Trump's push to take over the territory. When Vice President J.D.

Vance and Second Lady Usha Vance arrive tomorrow with a U.S. delegation, including National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, they will not set foot here in Nuke or any other Greenlandic cities. Instead, flying straight to the remote Northwest to BDF space base to visit with U.S. military personnel.

For the last 75 years, it's been America's Arctic listening post, the first line of defense against Russian or Chinese ballistic missiles. I'm going to visit some of our guardians in the Space Force on the Northwest coast of Greenland and also just check out what's going on with the security there of Greenland. The trip, originally billed as a cultural visit for the Second Lady, hopes that our relationship will only grow stronger in the coming years. But now the historic tour stops have been dropped.

The vice president is joining and the focus is national security. Yesterday, President Trump doubled down. We need Greenland and the world needs us to have Greenland, including Denmark. Denmark has to have us have Greenland.

But the Danish government, which controls the territory, doesn't see it that way. Earlier this week before the itinerary changed the Danish prime minister accused the Trump administration of putting unacceptable pressure on Greenland Greenland is home to an estimated 1 million tons of rare earth elements as well as untapped oil and natural gas reserves And Trump wants access. But the leaders here have been clear. Greenland is not up for grabs and the American delegation is not invited.

And Molly Hunter joins me now from Greenland. Molly, thank you so much for braving the frigid weather for us and this incredible assignment. What type of welcome should the vice president expect from Greenland? A chilly one for everyone here, Kristen, as you can tell.

But he is now not coming to the capital, as we just heard in that package. We are in the capital of Greenland. It's the northernmost capital, 20,000 people here. And all week there has been this kind of rising tension about, is Usha Vance the second lady going to come?

What will she do? What businesses will she kind of be associated with here? And the relief that people tell me they felt when that trip was scaled back, when that trip was made just a national security mission to that northwest space base, was immense. I spoke with an MP today, Kristen, about what kind of business this country, this territory, I should say, would be open to with America.

Take a listen. If you met the Vice President, J.D. Vance, what would you say to him? I would say please do not take us.

We're still interested in figuring out what kind of business we could do together. We are open for negotiations, but it should be on our behalf. We do not want another colonizer just to come here and take us. Let's figure out how to find the best solution together, not just you demanding it.

All right, Molly Hunter, thank you for bringing us that fantastic piece of your interview. We will be looking for more on Nightly News tonight. Thank you, Molly. We are back tomorrow with more Meet the Press Now.

The news continues with Tom Costello in for Hallie Jackson right now. He was a young Marine. She didn't care about convention. They made a life together.

Then one night, the Marine died. And then the death investigation took a wild, unexpected, and utterly bizarre turn. I'm Josh Mankiewicz, and this is Trace of Suspicion, an all-new podcast from Dayline. Listen to all episodes of Trace of Suspicion now, wherever you get your podcasts.