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 laundry 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.
Conditions of buy offer includes 1% loyalty rate reduction for qualifying customers. Visit HyundaiCanda.com or your local deal for details. If it's Tuesday, Beware of foreign entanglements. President Trump tightens ties between the US And Saudi Arabia, but faces growing concerns about his family's lucrative business dealings in the region and his plan to accept a $400 million luxury jet from Qatar as a temporary Air Force One.
Plus, House lawmakers hold make or break meetings on Capitol Hill as Republicans clash over key tax and Medicaid provisions at the center of President Trump's sweeping legisl the U.S. court of International Trade. Here's arguments in a case that could decide the fate of President Trump's tariffs as the administration's trade war faces its first major legal test. Hi there.
Welcome to Meet the Press now on Ryan Nobles in Washington as President Trump kicks off his first major international trip of his second term as he looks at ink new deals and investments in the US While also facing scrutiny over potential personal business conflicts. The president's Middle east itinerary notably includes three countries where the Trump Organization has planned real estate projects and other business ties, starting in Saudi Arabia, where he was greeted in Rihan by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salam as part of a lavish welcome ceremony. The two leaders then participated in a signing ceremony for a strategic economic partnership between the US And Saudi Arabia on issues related to energy, defense and health. The White House says that Saudi Arabia has also committed to invest $600 billion in the U.S.
though the specific details remain a bit unclear. Speaking at an investment forum hosted by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, President Trump praised a new generation of leaders transforming the Middle east before our eyes. A new generation of leaders is transcending the ancient conflicts of tired divisions of the past and forging a future where the Middle east is defined by commerce, not chaos, where it exports technology, not terrorism, and where people of different nations, religions and creeds are building cities together, not bombing each other out of existence. The president also has strong words for Iran, threatening, quote, maximum pressure if the ongoing nuclear talks fail.
The president also seemed to open the door to diplomacy with Syria, but the president's Trip has reignited concerns about conflicts of interest due to the Trump family's extensive and growing business ties to the region, which now include multiple Trump Organization real estate projects, the UAE's $2 billion investment in the president's crypto venture, Jared Kushner's investment firm that received at least $2 billion from a fund tied to the Saudi government and the president's longstanding relationship with the Saudi backed Live golf organization. Meanwhile, back here at home, the administration is facing pushback over its decision to accept a $400 million luxury jet from Qatar to be used as Air Force One. Some of those critics are members of his own party who are raising serious security concerns. I think it's not gonna pass the Snell test.
I wouldn't do it. Cutter has a lot of. Are you gonna call on the president to change his mind? Well, sure.
I just said it right now. I don't think. I don't think it's a good idea for him to do it. Were you?
If the president's flying a claim that the guitar gunman provide, may he consider the appropriateness of that? Yes, he seems to intend to use it for Air Force One. You have security. Well, they better sweep that plane from front to back.
Well, more that concern is insane to the president. I mean, Cutters are not, in my opinion, a great ally. Support from office. And so what I'm worried about is the safety of the President of the United States.
Join me now, NBC. Garrett Hay, he's traveling with the president in r Saudi Arabia. NBC, Julie Circuit on Capitol Hill. And NBC's intelligence reporter darts me on set A G start with you a thousands of miles away.
President Trump, of course, a lifelong businessman. How is that shaping this trip? And what more do we know about the agreements and investments that we're announcing around today? Yeah, probably speaking.
Ryan, this trip is more about deals than it is about traditional diplomacy. Although looking over the limited information that the White House has put out about the deals struck today or announced today by the President and the crown prince, it's not clear at all how to get to that $600 billion figure the president was touting. The single biggest investment seems to be this $142 billion arms deal between the US and Saudi Arabia. Other than that, it's a mix of smaller projects of Saudi data centers coming to the United States or U.S.
goods or services being sold to Saudi Arabia. Some of these projects appear to be in different stages of development than others, but it is always the goal of this president to kind of pump up these Investments. Remember, he did a similar thing during his first trip again to Saudi Arabia in his first term, where it was a baseline of $400 billion of investments that he said was the reason he came to Saudi Arabia first. Then.
Today it's 600 billion. At least that's the number they're talking about. And do you get a sense that the White House is concerned at all about the optics of all these agreements, considering all the family business ties that the president has to that region? Not at all.
I think that's a big difference between the first term and the second. Remember that in the first term, the president said with great fanfare that he wasn't going to conduct any foreign business dealings while he was in office. The Trump Organization, he said, would hold off from doing so. Now there is no such prohibition.
His two sons, who run the Trump Organization across in the globe, inking these deals with multiple development projects here in Saudi Arabia, a big golf course development in Qatar, several developments in Abu Dhabi and other parts of the United Arab Emirates. The overall response from the White House seems to be that they say, and viewers and voters can look at this however they like, that these are separate entities between the Trump White House and the Trump Organization, and they're all doing this out of the open. And essentially, you can't be corrupt if you're making your business deals out in the open. I think there's a wide variety of responses to that general line from the White House, but that's how they view it.
They're making no efforts to hide it, and they don't seem at all concerned with, you know, the perception of conflict of interest on these business deals or on the acceptance of that plane from Qatar. And you mentioned the emphasis on deal making as opposed to diplomacy. But in his remarks to the investment form, the president also addressed some of these diplomatic issues, like what's happening with Iran and Syria. What stood out to you?
Well, what stood out to me was how when he did talk about diplomacy, the decisions were much more in line with the Saudi viewpoint than they have been with our more traditional ally in this region, which is Israel. The lifting of sanctions on the new Syrian government was kind of the biggest foreign policy announcement the president made that he said he was asked directly to do that by the crown prince and by the president of Turkey, by the way, to give this new government in Syria a chance. That's a government that's viewed skeptically by Benjamin Netanyahu. He said they would continue to hold out hope for the Abraham Accords and normalization of relationships between Saudi Arabia and Israel.
Something's not going to happen while the war in Gaza continues. And on Iran, where Saudi Arabia has had slightly improved relationships over the years, the president continues to say he wants a deal. He doesn't want to bomb Saudi Arabia, he doesn't want to bomb Iran, he doesn't want to engage them militarily right now if it can be avoided. The very salesman like line basically saying the time is now to strike a deal, don't wait.
But he continues to hold out the hope that there can be some kind of negotiated settlement with Iran. Again, all positions more in line with the Saudi viewpoint than the Israeli one. Okay. Garrett Haik on the first day of the president's trip overseas.
Garrett, we appreciate that. Let's move now to Capitol Hill, which is standing by. So Julie, we mentioned one of the potential conflicts of interest getting a lot of attention on this trip for the President is that luxury jet that the Trump administration is preparing to take as a gift to the Trump administration from the Qatari government. What are Democrats doing right now trying to hold the administration accountable on this?
All right. As you know. Well, Democrats don't control any part of government. So all they can really do is make a lot of noise about this.
And that's exactly what they're doing. There are multiple non binding resolutions floating around. One of them trying to reaffirm congressional approval, the power that Congress has in doing transactions like this. Of course that falls in the monuments clause which prohibits any president from accepting foreign gifts without explicit approval from Congress.
Democrats aren't able to get anywhere on that unless they have support and buy in from the other side of the aisle. You also have Weird Schumer, the Democratic leader in the Senate who said he will issue a hold and he has on political appointees on nominees of the Department of Justice have lower level people, nobody that really cause a lot of concern or a lot of alarm up here. But other than that, there's really not much they can do. The question then becomes what if anything, will Republicans do?
That remains to be seen. Yeah, let's expand on that a little bit because as you point out, the Constitution prohibits government officials from accepting these type of gifts unless they get congressional approval. And you know, I both talked to a lot of Republicans and Democrats over the past couple days who seem to indicate that that would be the case. But is there any movement to actually make that happen?
Could there be a vote and if so, will Republicans approve it? Well, later through the Republican leader in the Senate actually made some pretty interesting comments a Couple of hours ago, Hours ago, Ryan, who's asked about this multiple times, he said that there will be lots, lots, lots of issues around that. His words that I think will attract very serious questions if and when it happens to Republicans. This is still very much a hypothetical.
They've not received that memo from doj, for example, that Campani signed off on, saying that this is all kosher. They don't have any legitimate, legitimate documents, conversations with administration that tells them this is happening. And when the president, if he plans to use this during his term, he said that he would accept it. Will he use it after this term is going to be part of the presidential library.
These are questions they need answers to first because they don't even know if that clause, you point out, the monuments clause and even is applicable here. There's also a set of rules that DoD operates by, confidential rules by which they implement, by which a president, which vehicle he's allowed to use to transport himself on, will this plane that Cutter is gifting Trump be actually equipped and retrofitted to serve as an Air Force One. They just don't know that either. So all these questions lingering, I don't think Republicans are going to put the cart before the horse and stand up to the president here.
But surely, if you're listening to the dude, it sounds like they do have serious concerns about this. Okay, Julie, thank you for that. Let's bring in the conversation now. Again, there's obviously a lot of issues about this in terms of conflict of interest, the potential of the Qatari government maybe not being the most faithful actor when it comes to this.
But there's also just a logistics issue, right, with taking a plane like this and making Air Force One. I want to play something that Senator Cruz told me yesterday about what this would look like. Take a listen. Would we let another country decorate the Oval Office?
Would we let another country build the situation? Would we let another country wire the press office? Oh, wait, Air Force One is all three. Why on earth is it a good idea from a national security perspective to let another country, let alone the emir of another country, give President Trump his next Air Force One?
I feel like even kindergarten understand how many security protocols and specifications are put in Air Force One to allow the president to fly? I mean, what would it take to convert a jet like this? This is a huge undertaking, right? Okay.
So you have to. Because it's from a foreign country, even though it's Boeing made, experts tell us that you would have to actually disassemble the plane to make sure there Are no listening devices, spyware, any kind of vulnerabilities for security purposes, then you've got to reassemble it, and then you've got to upgrade it and turn it into Air Force One. Air Force One is not the joke that we take home for Thanksgiving or Christmas. Right.
This is a very sophisticated, complicated aircraft with communication systems, missile defense systems, backup power. Right. I mean, the list is endless. And it's really elaborate.
No other country has a plane like it, really. And so it costs hundreds of millions of dollars, billions of dollars to do this. And by the way, Boeing already has a contract to take two 747s and turn them into Air Force One aircraft. They've been doing that since 2018.
It's supposed to cost about 3.9 billion. The cost is going up and the delays keep happening. So the question is, how does this make any practical or logistical sense, financial sense, setting aside these questions about corruption and so on? And that's part of Donald Trump's frustration, right, because he thought that he'd have his airplanes to fly on by the time his next administration hadn't come yet.
And he's frustrated by those delays. But if you move this new project in front of the list, couldn't that complicate getting those Air Force ones that have already been in production up and ready to fly? Yes. Right.
So that contract is there. It's a fixed cost contract. So Boeing is eating a lot of those cost overruns. It's not.
They've regretted. They've publicly said that. Right now, Boeing made these 747s. So presumably Boeing, Boeing would probably get the contract to do this.
Okay, so maybe they make up some of the costs they've lost. But, yes, it's not even clear that this Qatari jet would be ready by the end of this term. And then he wants it for his presidential museum, and you've got to disassemble the plane again. So there are so many practical questions.
And then, yes, there's all these intelligent security concerns. Yeah. It seems like this is a long way away from being an actual thing that happens at Daniels. Thank you for bringing it down for us.
We appreciate it. And as you mentioned, one of the potential business entanglements looming over the president's Middle east strip is his growing crypto dealings and the launch of his own meme coin. Just days before his inauguration, my colleague Kristen Welker pressed the President about his crypto business. In her exclusive interview earlier this month, President Trump denied that he's using crypto to profit off the presidency, saying he hasn't even looked at how much his crypto is worth.
NBC's Vaughn Hilliard has more on what we know and more importantly, what we don't know about the President's crypto ventures. Right. Of all of his business ventures, it is the crypto ones that are so secretive. This is effectively dark money that's going straight into his bank account.
He didn't divest from the Trump Organization. And he is openly promoting investment into these Trump crypto coins, the Stable coin, the Trump meme coin, the World of Refinancial, which is a crypto entity that has in total brought in at least $600, we believe, into the accounts of Trump, his family and their co partners. This is a major money making venture and it's all coming from accounts that are secretive. Not only Americans, but also foreign entities and individuals who are able to invest without having to reveal their identities.
And Trump is openly promoting a gala on May 22 at his Trump National Golf Course in Virginia in which the top 220 investors in his Trump meme coin are going to be able to have dinner with him. They announced just this week. Those 220 individuals, again, the public doesn't know the names of them because these are secret identities, but they have requested the identities so that they can bring people to these behind closed doors dinner. The top 25 investors, the top of which has value worth $18 million in these Trump meme coins, are going to have a VIP tour.
This is a serious question mark in terms of conflict of interest and corruption concerns that we had never seen to this extent with any President of the United States previously. And just two weeks ago, as ahead of the President's current Middle east strip, his own son, Eric Trump was on the stage at a major crypto conference in Dubai announcing that the UAE was investing $2 billion worth of Trump stablecoins to close a deal with Binance, a major crypto crypto firm. This is for the Trumps, a major money making effort here and one that Democrats particularly have been very vocal about in their concerns that this is direct money making profit scheme by the President of the United States with a lack of transparency about who is giving money to him and his family through this. Right, okay, thank you, Vaughn.
Let's turn now to the economy, where inflation continues to show signs of cooling as businesses brace for continued tariff uncertainty. Consumer prices rose by 2.3% compared to last year. It is the smallest yearly increase in Fair February of 2021 and prices fell nearly 13 compared to the prior month. Driving down overall grocery prices.
And prices also declined for categories like gasoline, apparel and used cars. Stocks, meanwhile, were mixed on these news as the candices continue to brace for the impact of President Trump's tariff policy and as the Federal Reserve tries to bring inflation down to its 2% target. Coming up, one big beautiful bail in the risk for one big ugly fight inside the Republican Party over what's in and what's out of that sweeping package contain President Trump's top legislative priorities. A Republican at the center of the action joined us next.
Plus, some stunning details from a new book about Biden's final weeks in office that paints a portrait of an enfeebled president protected by too many in his inner circle. You're watching. Need THE PRESS now. Welcome back.
As President Trump embarks on the first major overseas trip of his second administration, his domestic agenda is front and center right now on Capitol Hill. That's where House committees are marking up their reconciliation proposals today as part of the president's so called big beautiful bill. House Republicans unveiled the text of those proposals yesterday, but the conference remains divided over a key tax provision. It's a crucial task for Speaker Mike Johnson, who must appease far right and moderate Republicans without losing his razor thin majority and without angering Senate Republicans who would take up the bill next.
NBC senior national politics reporter, silent, joins me now from Capitol Hill. So, Sahil, if at all, have any of these bills changed or evolved over the last several hours? Yeah, they are facing markups in committee today, Ryan. The three toughest, most thorniest provisions that Republicans are trying to pass through the House are all getting a hearing today in committee, starting with the Medicaid provisions.
They're under review as we speak at the Energy and Commerce Committee. The Medicaid provisions are some of the toppest for Republicans to navigate given the tension between the hardliners and the centrist. The bill includes new work requirements, stricter eligibility checks, citizenship verifications, cuts to states uncovering, you know, we're covering undocumented people. Some citing extra funding for the ACA Medicaid expansion and additional provider screenings.
This one seems to have settled down in terms of where the Energy Commerce Committee wants to be. There's not enough of a rebellion that we're hearing from the moderate who's going to vote it down. But there's still tension because, you know, the hardliners want to go further, be more aggressive about it. And there's a tax provision which is also getting hearing now in the Ways and Means Committee.
The biggest problem there, no, is the state and local deduction Republicans are moving forward by lifting the cap from 10,000 to 30,000, which a key group of Republicans in high tax states say is not nearly enough. So that's going to be Speaker Mike Johnson's problem to resolve. And then later this evening the ad committee said to me it's a mark of their bill which is likely to include major changes to snap, also known as food stamps, which will be contentious. But right now, what would you say is the biggest obstacle that Speaker Johnson has right now?
Is it these far right Republicans like Texas Chip Roy who want to see these cuts go deeper and even further? Or is it a blue state Republican like Mike Lawler that has said if he doesn't get the cell cap he's looking for, he's a no? Yeah. Those two individuals pretty much represent the ideological tent poles that Speaker Johnson Zealand.
At least they're two of the most vocal in their camps. But right now, the historical answer to your question, Brian, would have been the hardliners. They've always been the bigger problem for House of Public Leadership because they've been more willing to tank these bills if they don't get their way. They've been more willing especially to shoot the hostage proverbially, whereas the moderates have historically been known to cave when push comes to shove and, you know, go with the company line.
In this case. That's been changing because over the last few months, the hard liners have also softened. They want to be seen as going against Donald Trump, as blocking his agenda because they represent these darker districts where their primary voters are big supporters of Trump and want to see the representatives advancing his agenda. So at this point, it's a bit of an unknown who's more willing to jump off the cliff, who's more willing to shoot the hostess to regularly.
And obviously the House is still a pretty big obstacle. So we'll have to see how this plays out when it makes its way to Senate South Corps. Thank you so much for joining me. We're talking now with someone who is directly involved in these negotiations and that is the Republican congressman from North Carolina, Greg Murphy.
He of course a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, which is one of the key committees dealing with this one big beautiful bill today during their markup session. Congressman and I should say, Dr. Murphy, it is a pleasure to have you and thank you so much for joining us. Just give me an overall sense.
How do you feel like your markup is going right now in the Ways of Means Committee? Well, we've just Kind of started the what's expected to be probably 20, 24 hour markup folks are getting in their initial arguments. Obviously, Democrats don't like what some portions of the bill, Republicans, some are pushing back. These are just the initial.
It's the initial fray before really the text of the bill really gets given. We dive into it. Rather, I want to put up something that you posted last week where you say, as the House Ways and Means Committee works through the budget reconciliation, I'm committed to fighting for meaningful spending cuts that reduce the growth of our fiscal deficits and ensure that our nation remains financially stable. You know, obviously there are a lot of components to this bill right now as it stands.
Do you feel that the cuts are meaningful enough or do you think that there needs to be more subtracted to make sure that the deficits don't grow? Yeah, I know, Ryan, that's an excellent question. Because when it comes to the bottom line, the most important thing I'm concerned about right now is the growth of our deficit. You know, bond markets across the world are saying, well, gosh, can the United States pay back its loan?
Are they going to default on their debt? And if so, 1929 looks like a spring holiday. We cannot allow that to happen. We also know that if you don't continue the TCGA parts that were started in 2017, Americans face $4.7 trillion tax increase.
It's a huge tax burden upon America. So threading the needle is going to be critical. We want pro growth policies that allow companies to invest and guess what, they employ more people doing meaningful work. But at the same time, we don't want to, you know, grow on our deficit.
I think this is a good bill. Is it a perfect bill? No. But only I would write a perfect bill, as many politicians say.
But I think it's definitely a step in the right direction. So let's talk a little bit about one of the big divides and you talk about the impact of the deficit. Obviously there's a big conversation about the impact that cuts out on deficit, but there's also a revenue component. Right.
And one of the areas that you and your colleagues are having a very strong debate over is the future of the SALT tax cap, which of course is the state and local tax deduction. You're from North Carolina. This isn't thought of as being a high tax, locally tax state, but your colleagues from New York and California respects the majority. Makers for the current House Republican caucus have said that they want that cap to be bigger.
You are a tax writer, sir. Where Is that the needle? Where can you thread that needle to find something that your colleagues will be palpable? Sure.
And that's a, that's a complex issue because we look at states like California, New York, where they tax a living hell out of their citizens. That's why there's such an outgrowth of people from those states come down places like North Carolina. How do you find that dotted line? How do you find that perfect balance?
Some people want no salt whatsoever. I'm not one of those. I think $30,000 was a pretty good step in the right direction. Some people want much, much more, which is just unreasonable.
We have to find a sweet spot because as you pointed out, there are people on the far right in this conference that don't want anything. But we have to be really smart and complex, rather having complex attitudes towards this, be able to find that right spot. That's Speaker Johnson's job. I wouldn't want his job at all in the world trying to bring the two far groups together.
But hopefully he'll be able to chat today. So is 30,000 enough for you? Because, you know, some of your colleagues, Nick Lalotta, for instance, said he's a hell no. At a $30,000 cap, are you willing to go higher?
Well, I think that we have to look and see what he's really offering. Is it $130,000? No, we can't do that. That's a $1 trillion tax on the taxpayers.
Again, it's a warning. A state legislature in New York or California that is absolutely unreasonable with their tax structure. We want to help Americans so they're not overly taxed, but at the same time, we don't want to add further things to our deficit. You can't be hell nose in this thing.
And if you are, it's really not helping the process at all. All it's doing is taking a place in the ground. That really doesn't need to happen. We need to have good, honest discussions where there's given give and take on both sides so that we come to something that's meaningful and something that can work for the American people.
All right, let's talk about the cuts side of this debate now. And I know you're not on energy commerce, but you're somebody who has a unique perspective on this, giving your background as a healthcare provider. And I want to play something for you that Senator Josh Hawley told me today about his concerns around proposed Medicaid cuts. Take a listen.
I've got some concerns. I mean, listen, I think the fact that they're not doing adjustments to the funding formula of the states is good. The fact they're not doing per capita thing anymore, that's good. But they're talking about changes to the provider hospital provider formula that will affect potentially a lot of rural hospitals in my state.
They're talking about additional patients, co pays, burden sharing, cost sharing, whatever. I want to understand how that'll work in my state. Exactly. Is it right to have those concerns, sir?
Especially I mean I know you represent a number of rural hospitals in your district in North Carolina. Do you think these Medicaid cuts could impact those hospitals? Well, Ryan, I have to say I'm almost in some ways more uniquely qualified to deal with this or talk about this than anybody who conference. I still practice.
I've taken care of Medicaid patients for 35 years. I've worked in a hospital that we have a terrible payer mix where 74% of Medicare, Medicaid and no insurance. This is challenging. We look at what's going on with the Medicaid system.
Some of the taxes that estates have really abused in some of this regards to gain money from the system. I look at the fraud, waste and abuse and I see it every time I see patients, people are on Medicaid who honestly shouldn't, they should be working and they should be having health insurance with some of their own, some other companies. There is places that we can pare down this. I think really slowing the growth of Medicaid is going to be critical to this entire endeavor.
I look at the state of North Carolina, Ryan, and this is just a tragic statistic that 52% of the babies that are born in the state are born to mothers on Medicaid. How does that happen? How does that happen? It's tragic.
So we have to get hold of the system. And you know, I think at rural hospitals it's rare that rural hospitals now are not associated with systems. There are some that do that. There are a few that survive and God bless them.
But it's just a real critical thing that we had accountability for once in Washington D.C. we cannot kill this nation with our sovereign debt crisis. If with a sovereign debt crisis, if we don't cut back on some things. I don't think anyone would disagree with you that there are numerous examples of fraud, waste and abuse in the healthcare system.
But I get to find somebody that can identify $800 billion worth of fraud, waste and abuse in the Medicaid. Do you really think you can get to that number just by trying to rein in and reform the process or will it mean that individuals that right now are receiving that care are going to lose it? Well, Ryan, it's not going to be that much. We're talking with Chairman Guthrie the other evening.
It's not going to be nearly that much coming out of Medicaid. There's going to be a lot of savings that are coming from other programs that are in that. So that $880 billion, to my understanding, is not fully coming from Medicaid. You know, this is just, it's the balance that we've had.
We've grown government, we've grown government dependency. We've grown a Medicaid. During the Biden administration, they would not allow states to audit their own Medicaid rules. So at one point we had one in four American Americans on Medicaid.
That's not a, that's not a viable path forward for any type of financially sound system in the country. So we're looking at these things critically. You know, is there pain? Absolutely.
Is the whole tariff issue a critical for our nature's manufacturing future? Absolutely. So we're trying to do things thoughtfully to try to really save the system and get Medicaid dollars to those who truly deserve it, who are truly eligible and get individuals off the system who should not be. That should be working.
Very thoughtful conversation. But before I go, you think you can have it done before Memorial Day? Is it gonna pass the House before Memorial Day? Is that realistic?
Ryan, hope springs eternal. Let's just put it that way. All right, that's good. Very good, Max, Great conversation.
I appreciate you being here. Thanks so much. All right. Have a great day.
All right, up next, could an obscure Manhattan court throw a wrench in President Trump's trade war? What happened today is a three judge panel held a hearing on the legality of the administration's tariffs. You're watching me. Let's kick start your wellness journey with the craft.
Today app workouts, meal plans. It's your fast track to a healthier you. And now during the Xfinity member celebration, members can get an exclusive 50% off an annual subscription. Head to xfinity.com membership to learn more.
Xfinity. Imagine that subscription automatically here at 65.99 plus tax and fees until canceled on the ends May 20, 2026. Price is subject to change. Visit today.comxfinity for full on terms and details.
Stay informed with the NBC News app. Breaking news just coming in moments ago. Watch, read and listen throughout your day. And now unlock even more with a subscription.
It's the best of NBC News with fewer ad instructions, including ad free articles, podcasts and full NBC News shows, plus deeper access and exclusive content. Let's just take a step back. It's more context and clarity from the reporters you trust. Download the NBC News app now and subscribe for more.
As the day wraps up, get the scoop on what's been happening with here's the scoop with a podcast from NBC News with me, your host, Gas in the studio. We'll take a deep dive into the day's top stories with NBC News's trusted journalists. It's a fresh take, a sharp, thoughtful and it's informative, bringing closer to headlines conversations that are shaping our world. The front page to the Zeitgeist.
Here's the scoop from NBC News. Listen daily on SiriusXM. Welcome back. A little known federal court in New York will soon decide if tariffs imposed by President Trump are legal.
A three judge panel on the US Court of International Trade heard arguments today in a case claiming that the president exceeded his authority when he announced tariffs on more than 180 countries last month. The case was brought by five businesses who say they rely on imports not readily available in the US and they argue that Mr. Trump not only lacked the authority to impose the reciprocal tariffs, but that the national emergency was a figment of his own imagination. NBC News legal fairish reporter Gary Grumbach joins me now.
So, Gary, what's the crux of the argument that these tariffs are legal? So there's so much in this administration, there's legal ways to do this, right? There's legal ways to get tariffs across the line here. The plaintiffs in this case are arguing here because it's not illegal enough, because I'm sure you're acutely familiar with here, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
It's a law that gives the president of the authority to impose tariffs during a time of a national emergency. Now, the argument here is what is the national emergency? The government says it's because trade deficit has increased by 40% over the past five years. The small businesses that are bringing this case, a wine and spirits importer and a plastics company from China says it's not at all emergency.
So did we get any indication from this 3D channel way they're leaning on this? So there were two issues here. One is they thought also it seems, that it was not an emergency. And two, where is that line?
There was a joke brought up by one of the judges saying is the lack of peanut butter in this country an emergency? Right. Where is that sort of judge for thinking. And so we'll find an answer to this in written order in the coming weeks.
So coming weeks is when we should see a decision. So I assume that no matter how this panel rules, they'll probably appeal right away. How does that process play itself? So this is sort of a different part of the federal judiciary here.
So this would go right to the Federal Circuit appeals court. So we have D.C. appeals courts and then number of appeals courts and 9th Circuit, the 4th Circuit. This goes right to the Federal Circuit.
So what they do a lot of is sort of some of the patent cases and all these trade cases as well. And so what's the, I mean, I'm sure a lot of reviewers have even heard of the Court of International Trade. What's their primary focus? So this is a nine judge court with lifetime appointments appointed by president.
The case we heard today that was heard today was there was a Reagan appointee, Obama appointee and trouble pointy. And so what their purpose is to deal and adjudicate with all these trade cases. There's a lot of maritime trade cases that happen in terms of where shipments are going to and from. There's also a lot of patent cases that go through the trade where there's two items that perhaps could be really similar to each other.
There's a patent argument as well. So this huge impact that this decision will have will continue. There's more than half a dozen other cases related to tariffs are also in worse. Okay, great.
Going back on top of the force. We appreciate it. After the break, a high profile arrest for Democrats and now presidential endorsement for Republicans. We're taking a deep dive into the turbulent primaries for New Jersey.
Governor Gary cares about that. You're watching the PRESS now. Welcome back. We are less than a month away from primary day and a very closely watched election.
New Jersey is one of two states for the governor's race in 2025. And these popular elections often give us a hint at which way the political winds will be blowing in the midterm. On the Republican side, President Trump waited yesterday, endorsing former Assemblyman Jack Citronelli and likely cementing his standing as a front runner. On the Democratic side, it's a hotly contested and crowded race with six candidates on the ballot, five of whom faced off on the big stage last night, with many of these candidates on the stage treating Congresswoman Mikey Sherrill as a frontrunner, attacking her in their or targeting her, I should say, in their attacks.
But as NBC's bomb reports, North Mayor Ross Baraka's arrest last week during a protest at a federal immigration detention facility could shake up the race as Baraka looks to appeal to progressive Democrat voters to win the crowded primary. But for more on where these primary races stand, let's ran NBC's Steve Kornacki, who joins us now at the big board. Steve, what does it look like there? Yeah, exactly.
Four weeks away and Donald Trump, I think he looms large, really is maybe the big X factor in both of these party primaries. Starting the Republican side here, this is from one of the debates. But let's just set the st for the dynamic. This man, Bill Spadia, is a conservative radio host.
He's had Donald Trump on his show, on his radio program. He's been a staunch Trump supporter. He has been angling hard for the motto vote in this primary. And he's been the main challenger to this man Jack Cinerelli mentioned.
This is the third time Cittarelli has run for governor. He was the Republican nominee in 2021. And in the past, Citterelli has essentially been a never Trump Republican. He's moved Trump's way.
And in this campaign, he has wanted to have that Trump endorsement. Well, as you say, this is what Spadia was banking on. The jumpstart his campaign was to get the Trump endorsement. Instead, Ciarelli gets it.
And so just take a look at what that probably does to the race. This was the most recent poll, one of the few public polls we had before this endorsement. And again, Spadia was counting on this to shake up the race and to try to shake up these numbers. That was going to be his ace.
No, he didn't get it. So you just look at Trump's track record in these primaries. Standing with Republicans really does seem likely to cement this advantage for Cherrilli on Republic Democratic side, it gets interesting. You mentioned Mikey Sherrill being seen as the front runner there in a traditional sense.
She certainly is in New Jersey in that she's lined up the endorsements of almost all of the major county party organizations in New Jersey. The political machines are still strong. Most of them are backing Cheryl. It gets a little technical, though, because what those organizations could do on the actual physical ballot to give their candidates an advantage, they can't do this year.
There was a lawsuit. It's changed things a bit. So you look at this, Cheryl has those endorsements. We're not sure what they're worth this time.
And you take a look, she's only at 17%. You've got these five other carriers between 7 and, excuse me, 7 and 12%. And that's where the Trump X factor may come in here. You mentioned that the arrest of Rasbaraka.
He's the Newark mayor. He's running pretty far to the left in this primary. He got arrested in protest at that immigration detention center the other day. He gets to say now first of all, that attracted more media attention than any of these candidates have done during this race.
So from a media exposure standpoint, that took him to a new level. And he gets to say now to Democratic voters who are very anti Trump, you know this, he gets to say that he's being targeted by the Trump administration. That could be a very potent political weapon in a still unsettled primary field. So Raj Baraka, after that arrest, again, there's nothing much public polling, but he could be an interesting wild card.
Now as this shakes out over the next four weeks, regardless of who wins here on the Democratic side and the Republican side for that matter, it doesn't matter the general election of history. One thing to keep in mind, look at all these different colors here. What we're showing you is that New Jersey voters have a tendency in their governor's races to elect a governor from the opposite party of whoever controls the White House. You see like this is when 2009, 2013, Obama's president.
This is when Chris Christie won 2017, Trump comes in. That's when the current governor, Phil Murphy won. Now, Murphy did win when Biden was president four years ago, although it was a very under underwhelming victory. So again with Trump in the White House now, that could be a bit of an advantage for Democrats in November and a bit of a challenge for Republicans just based on this history.
But first things first, the primary four weeks away, something about those off year elections, they have a same trend in Virginia as well, which also has a governor's race. They tend to go opposite of the occupant of the White House. So we'll have this place out. Super cracky.
Thanks so much. Appreciate it. Still to come, Democrats face another round of finger pointing and blame games as a new book looks at President Biden's ill fated bid for reelection. And the DNC takes new steps to potentially oust one of its own.
Our panelists next. You're WATCHING ME the press now. Welcome back. Turning now to some scaling new details on the final days of President Biden's ill fated 2024 campaign, the ripple effects of which are still being acutely felt by the Democratic Party.
In a preview of their new book called Original Sin, journalists Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson write that Harris campaign advis David Plough placed the blame for the loss to Trump squarely on Biden, saying that Biden, quote, totally effed us and called Harris's short race against Trump a quote, effing nightmare. The authors also recount an episode in which President Biden didn't seem to recognize George Clooney during a major fundraising event. Speaking on the View last week, Biden, with a little help from his wife, once again denied any cognitive decline. You're wrong.
There's nothing to sustain that. We went to work and we got it done. And you know, one of the things that, that. Well, you know, one of the things I think is that the people who wrote those books were not in the White House with us and they didn't see how hard Joe worked every single day.
A Biden spokesperson said that they'd not reviewed the new book and pushed back on any suggestion the President wasn't able to do his job, saying, quote, the evidence points to the opposite. He was a very effective president. Joining me now is USA Today White House correspondent Francesca Chambers, former Obama campaign advisor and Democratic strategist, strategist Anisha Cross, and former Trump White House communications director Mike Dunky. Okay, so Francesca, you covered the 2024 election.
You were part of this conversation about Biden's cognitive ability, at least the covering of it. I mean, what are you digesting as the reports from this new book start to leak out? Well, with respect to the final days of the election itself, you know, I was just going back through some of my old reporting from the day right after the election when so many of the, so much of the finger pointing was going on between the Biden and Harris hams and you know, voters really felt at the time like if President Biden had dropped out earlier out of that race, it would have given the vice President more opportun introduction, introduce herself to America. That being said, there were also other party insiders who felt that she had made some missteps herself in that race.
You know, she chose to go after a new coalition of voters. She relied on women really aggressively on anti Trump Republicans instead of the white working class men in many cases that President Biden had relied on and that also contributed. So there were a number of factors there in this re election. Part of the thesis of the book, if you want to describe his original sin, which is this idea that President Biden didn't take enough responsibility in this circumstance, that he should have been more forthcoming about his abilities and those closest to him should have been more forthcoming.
Was that an error by him and those around him in that space? Well, I'll just have to sell books. I think at the end of the day, there are more people talking now than obviously we're going to talk. When he was running or even when Kamala Harris was running for Joe Biden, I think it was a very hard decision.
He made that very clear. It was a very hard decision to step. To step away and with someone who had as many legislative victories as many things to his hat on. We talked about the infrastructure package.
We talk about so many things he was able to get across in a very tough cycle. At the end of the day, it was hard for him to walk away from that. If the argument is that he had cognitive issues, the evidence has to be more than what we see here. And I think that it's frustrating as somebody who's worked on the campaign, worked on Obama's campaign.
No, Joe. Well, to watch it go down in this fashion while we're me, while watching the current president try to turn the White House into not only a dictatorship, but something that kind of looks like a monarchy. It's unfortunately to be having the conversation because I think that it goes against the legacy that is Joe Biden and everything that he tried to do to make America more fundamentally equitable. I take a misha's point that this isn't passed in.
But to a certain extent, isn't our responsibility to alleviate it somewhat? Because there seems to be an apparent lack of trust from voters that was demonstrated in the results of the 2014. Also that it wasn't litigated in real time. I mean, I think that's part of the premise of the book about the original sin, that there was this decline that reporters, the White House staff, whatever, kept under wraps.
If you're gonna practice the art of denial, I would suggest to the Biden family, stop putting him out there. What happened in June at that first presidential debate was so shocking to the nation that led to Clooney finally finding it brave enough to come out and say that he saw this denial in la. But that also led to Biden stepping aside. That was shocking to the nation because it had been denied for so long.
I think they did a disservice to the Democratic Party and they're gonna. They'll have to continue and live with that for the rest of Biden's legacy. That is the end of his legacy. This also belies that a misunderstanding.
I think that Kamala Harris would have a better shot. Personally, I don't think that's the case. There are a lot of things that played against her racism in America. He also can't deny there were significant misdemeanors on her own campaign, campaign trip, some of which you mentioned earlier.
We talked about the people that she strategically went after, which by and large was the wrong coalition. And the sheer amount of Democrats who stayed home, that was not contributed to Joe Biden a lot that was introduced. What if he had gotten out, say, after the midterms as opposed to 100 days before the election? Wouldn't have given her a better opportunity not to make that case.
I think that that can be correct. However, again, when you are somebody who was running up against very strong headwinds of success, it's extremely difficult to get that person to stand down again. He was shaking off all the boxes of one of the most successful personnel President America has ever seen. And there was a sense, I will say from other party insiders I spoke to at the time that if he had dropped out earlier than there would have been a primary.
And then they could have gotten very. Could have gotten very messy. And so there were some people. Would that have been a bad thing?
I don't know. Why not? I'm not sure that Vice President Harris would have been the nominee. There would have been a primary.
There would have been other people that had put themselves out. And from, you know, again, as a neutral observer of the Democratic Party here, they probably would have had someone else running against Donald Trump in 2020. Again, would that have been a bad thing? I was saying there were some voters who would have wanted to have some, you know, some different options.
They did indeed want her to have dropped out earlier in the race. Voters were saying prior to that debate to me, by the way, that they wanted someone potentially younger, that they were looking ahead to the future, to the potential 2028 presidential candidates already and seeing, you know, testing their feelings about them on the campaign trial. There certainly was a lack of enthusiasm for Joe Biden. The encompassing party post pandemic in every major country across the globe ended up losing.
So I am on the other side of this when it comes to even if there had a big primary that was a regular primary, I don't think the Democrats still stood a very good chance of losing. I don't think they would run against the pandemic if he wins. You know, sequels are never as good as the original movie. And I think that's where voters were when they saw the Biden Trump natural.
They didn't feel Trump, though I know, but they felt that way about the sequel to the movie of the race. Let's talk about where this leads the Democratic Party right now, though, because that's probably the more important conversation. And the DNC right now, Francesca, finds itself in a bit of a crisis. They took steps to invalidate David Hogg's election as vice chair on Monday over claims that it unfairly disadvantaged female candidates in the election.
This of course, happening as Hogg himself is feuding with the National Party, brought together this multi million dollar coalition to run primaries against existing Democrats. Do you think Hong's role, that DNC would be in jeopardy if he wasn't ripping on his own party and encouraging these primary challenges? So I'm told that that certainly did not help the situation. This actually goes back to the complaint.
These are two actually separate complaints with how they're kind of coming into one storyline here. So the credentials committee, what they're assessing is a complaint that was otherwise brought against them about the way election for vice chair took place. That was a complaint, I'm told, that was filed in February before he ever said that he was going to be doing this or his organization was going to be challenging Democratic primary choppers. Okay, this brings us to now where there is a sense of frustration with David Hogg, including among Democrats who tell me that they like him.
They feel like he's doing a disservice to the party right now and putting the attention on the wrong things heading into the midterms. So when the DNC votes on this in August, that's when I'm full of a vote on this. He could face some blowback related to the other thing. I wonder, I mean, is the DNC in this wrong?
I mean, is the energy behind folks like Hogg that are looking for this new generation of leadership, I mean, should they embrace this or is it smart for the DNC to protect their incumbents? The loudest energy behind it. Hogs are ironically from the right. At the end of the day, the DNC was wrong in the outset in not having him sign the place to begin with.
That was a blind spot that they had. With that being said, this is a procedural issue. And even if he hadn't made those comments, they still would have potentially been up for another vote. In this conversation.
We're missing if there's somebody else there, Mel Kenyana, who has said multiple times, hey, I'm over here, but he's there. He's just not somebody who's willing to throw a fireball into the DNC and then act as though, you know, this is to change the party. Because the other end of the day called comments I think are very frustrating as a woman. Is that it is.
Okay, well, the DNC is losing women because men can't get dates. Somebody gets one because they're Republican. It belies a certain level of this, you know, ultra masculine thing that they're trying to portray. But more importantly, the Democratic Party, yes, it has its issues.
However, if the idea is that you need to fight against what is coming in America that doesn't resemble our history, that doesn't take into consideration our Constitution, then we need to be fighting against that, not fighting against each other. All right, we're gonna leave it there. Point conversation, guys. I appreciate it.
Not with the 15 seconds I have left. Francesca, Mike. Thank you all. We're back tomorrow with more Brick Meet the Press now.
But the news continues with Hallie Jackson right now. Have a great day. Wrapping me up. 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 Magewitz, 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,