Meet the Press NOW — May 30

If it's Tuesday, deal or no deal, President Biden and Speaker McCarthy's agreement to avoid it a fall faces its first big test amid growing tensions on the Hill and new efforts to kill the deal. Plus, Ron DeSantis kicks off his presidential campaign in Iowa as he looks to recover from last week's rocky rollout and gain ground on the Republican frontrunner Donald Trump. And the war in Ukraine comes home to Russia. Everything we know and don't know about the rare strike on Moscow that is being criticized by the White House and has Keith racing for potential fallout.

Welcome to MEET THE press. Now. I'm Kristen Welker in Washington where the debt ceiling deal reached between President Biden and House Speaker McCarthy is facing its first major test right now on Capitol Hill with less than a week to go until the government defaults. As we speak, the House Rules Committee is considering whether or not to send the deal to the floor for a vote, which House leadership wants to happen tomorrow without delay.

But some Republicans on the committee have other ideas, including Ralph Norman, who called the deal insanity, and Chip Roy, who referred to it in far less glamorous terms. Both lawmakers are part of a group of ultra conservatives called the Freedom Caucus, which held a press conference earlier today urging their House colleagues to break with Speaker McCarthy and kill the deal. Take a listen. I want to be very clear.

Not one Republican should vote for this deal. Not one. If you're out there watching this, every one of my colleagues be very clear. Not one Republican should vote for this deal.

It is a bad deal. This bill is un American. It defies conservatism. No Republican in good conscience should support this and go back to the drawing table.

So how far these members want to go is a question that could put McCarthy's leadership on the line. NBC News was first to report that some far right members were unhappy with the debt deal, are floating the move to force a vote to try to oust McCarthy as Speaker unless changes are made. Sources tell NBC News Republican Congressman Ken Buck, who will join me later this hour, floated the idea in a call with members last night. And earlier today, a second Republican Congressman Dan Bishop, told reporters he was considering a long shot maneuver as well.

Whether they actually go through with it remains to be seen. MECC senior congressional correspondent Garrett Hick joins me now from Capitol Hill and congressional reporter for the Dispatch, Audrey Faulberg is with me on set here. I want to start with you. Who knew a Rules Committee meeting could be so exciting and draw so much attention?

Right. We know that the meeting is Underway, we know this is a potential big hurdle. What are we expecting? What are you watching for?

Well, the testimony has gotten away mostly from Republican members who are in favor of this bill, kind of touting it as a compromise that does what Republicans set out to do, which was bend the spending curve in Washington. What I'm watching for and what would relieve some of the drama around this hearing is the opinion of Thomas Massie, the Republican member from Kentucky, who's one of those far right, the House Ream Caucus members, but who's bit of a contrarian really in everything he does and hasn't yet said what he thinks about this bill, at least not definitively. He told me earlier he'd be tweeting his thoughts about it at some point after he talked with his wife about it. If Massey decides he's gonna vote in favor of this bill, that means it would pass with a majority of just Republicans, even if all four Democrats on the committee decided to sit on their hands and oppose it.

I don't even think that's gonna happen to King, Je told reporters a little while ago if he doesn't see this bill having a problem in rules, which I think is Jeffrey's code for Democrats will vote for it if we have to. This is the first of what is ultimately going to be several kind of suspenseful votes for the, for the future of this bill as it makes its way through both chambers. And this could perhaps not be solved until much later tonight if the past Rules Committee meetings of this Congress are an example. Yeah, I think suspense is the word of the day.

Garrett, you've characterized that so well. We're watching Congressman Nagus offer his opening remarks as you talk there. Garrett, before I go to Audrey, give us a sense, take us inside the Democratic Caucus because we know we've played some of the Republican pushback from the Freedom Caucus. We know that some Democrats have expressed concerns about this bill as well.

What are you hearing from them, Garrett? And we know that the goal is for a vote on Wednesday, but could that timeline be held up if there's a real stumbling blocks here today? Look, Democrats are frustrated by this bill. It doesn't have any of their priorities in it.

They were shout out of negotiating process. They didn't have any hand in crafting it. But some of them at least are going to have to vote for it to prevent default. And that seems to be the recognition among Democrats.

Jeffries talked about this as well, making the argument that President Biden was able to negotiate down some of the Republicans worst demands in the view of Democrats for what would be in this bill to lift the debt ceiling. You know, I think what you're going to see is perhaps as few as 70 or perhaps many more Democrats deciding that it's important to kind of hold their nose and vote for this bill because it is so important to get the debt ceiling suspended just for the country to move on. But they're not happy about it. And you're likely losing significant chunk of progressive members, perhaps even some from the more center left, who just feel like there's nothing in this bill to support.

It's only like the least bad option available to them. Now, the timeline could slip, but every time an element of this timeline slips, we get in a much more dangerous territory closer to that deadline, which itself could of course slip again. But with the Senate up next and all of their procedural morass that a bill can get stuck in, House members don't want to screw around with this. They want to get this hot potato out of their hands and over the other chamber as quickly as they reasonably can.

I thought suspense was the word of the day, but maybe it's hot potato. Garrett, that was. That was a good one, too. Audrey, let me turn to you on that point, because obviously you heard the fireworks there at the top from the House Freedom Caucus essentially saying, we are not going to back this bill.

But even Dan Bishop seemed to acknowledge that they didn't have enough votes to actually hold this up in the end. What is your sense? What are you hearing when you talk to your sources? I think that's exactly right.

You know, even though there is this opposition from a lot of members of the House Freedom Caucus support a member that, you know, a lot of them just weren't going to get on board with this in the first place. So I think it's really important to look back to where this conversation began several months ago, shortly after McCarthy clinched that sneakers gave me clear he wanted to negotiate with President Biden. Biden said he wouldn't come to the table. Why did that clean Definitely increase.

Look where we are now. It's nearly doom. Of course, the default deadline is coming up, but McCarthy can say, you know, look, we're calling back to that pandemic relief funding. We're freezing spending for the next two years and imposing stricter work requirements for food aid programs.

So I think from that perspective, McCarthy's really touting this is a win for Republicans. Yeah, I mean, you're absolutely right to highlight that point because as you say, Audrey, in the beginning of this, President Biden Said he's not going to negotiate over the debt limit. He's still saying, look, I never negotiated over the debt limit. This was over the budget.

But bottom line, these negotiations were taking, were taking place at a parallel moment and in a parallel way. What is your sense that these Freedom Caucus members really want to extract in this moment? How seriously should we be taking this discussion about a potential motion to vacate? Do you think that's real or is that number of members of Congress really playing to their base?

I think that it's probably the latter. Remember, they're working on these incentives that they have to get reelected. Right. And I think that you're hearing something bravado from a couple of members.

Dan Bishop, as you mentioned, Chipboy kind of floated that idea as well. But you know, they have to get other members. Of course, one member can bring that motion to the floor, but you have to get a simple majority of people actually proving that measure. So I think that's probably more bravado at this point.

But I think, look, you know, McCarthy knows he doesn't need every single Republican to get this across the finish line. I mean, that's some Democrats are going to vote for as well. So I think from that perspective, he knew, you know, we tried our best and we really did bring, from their perspective, Biden to the negotiations. I mean, he got this deal.

We're going to see what happens in the Rules Committee right now. But he got this deal at this, at this point without a Republican Senate with a very, very narrow House Republican majority. So I think he's touting this is a victory at this point. That's a really good point here.

Let me go back to you and get you to weigh in here because McCarthy has signaled he's not concerned about all this talk about a potential motion to vacate. Look, this is going to hang over his entire speakership. What are you hearing from your sources on the Hill about this? And is McCarthy, is this deal basically in the clear if this passes the Rules Committee today?

I think the deal is in the clear if it gets to the Rules Committee in terms of getting through the full House, I don't think the numbers are there to stop this deal. As for McCarthy, I mean, look, we'll see. There are some conservatives who are really, really frustrated by this turn of events, not the least of whom is Chip Roy, who I been kind of impressed by the way McCarthy almost co opted him as somebody who had been a critic who had become an ally in recent weeks. And it seemed to be really on board if conservatives truly feel like this is a betrayal, we could see the knives come out from McCarthy.

But the same problem will exist in that scenario as existed through all 15 rounds of the speakership vote the first time. If not Kevin McCarthy, who? And the idea that House conservatives would take him down without some other agreed upon replacement in the wings I think just throws the caucus into further chaos. And that's not something that even McCarthy skeptics in the party want to say.

Yeah, I think you're absolutely right about that. All right. Well, it is a busy and big day on Capitol Hill. Garrett Haig, Audrey Faulber, thank you both so much for joining me.

And joining me now is Michigan Democrat Congressman Debbie Diggle. Congressman Diggle, thank you so much for joining me on the very bus. It's nice to be with you and I love me the press. Oh, thank you.

It is so nice to have you. We appreciate that very much. I want to take your temperature on where you stand right now as it relates to this deal. You have said just yesterday you felt like you were being held hostage over this deal.

It includes provisions you would never support if the debt ceiling weren't at stake here. Let me ask you, big picture, have you decided yet, Congressman, are you a yes or no? I'm still undecided. And those words are exactly how I still feel.

We are being held hostage. We have been told that we could default on art on the debt ceiling by this weekend. We can't let that happen. The people that would be impacted by that, by seniors, by veterans, by our children, people who need our help is real.

And the recession that could come, the depression that could come, that's real. And I know, I feel that responsibility, but I'm very angry that this is. We should not be playing politics with this. I hope you after this we get a process so we're never here again.

And there are real things in these bills that aren't part of even budget negotiations, but things like permitting reform, which quite frankly for me, the more I read it, everybody focuses on transmission not being in there and center of an entrance project. I'm concerned language in there could gut the very heart of nepa. I know it needs to be modernized. My husband wrote it 50 years ago and it's the Magna Carta of environmental law and it is seriously impacted.

So I, I hear your chief concerns with this. Let me ask you, though, because if you are a no vote, if there are enough no votes, the country potentially risks default. Would you be willing? I know you're not decided yet, but Would you be willing to vote no if ultimately you cannot get together, even if it needs to fall?

Congresswoman, I'm going to say this viewpoint. We cannot default. I have been very clear about that from the beginning, and I know that. But quite frankly, you know, first of all, we shouldn't be talking about this bill, about who wins, Republicans or Democrats.

We're doing this for the American people. Compromise is not a dirty board. But you know, one of my colleagues who's a good friend, Jesse Johnson, said there's nothing in here the Democrats that would like. First of all, that's not how we should be negotiating.

But I also believe that Republicans have got to get a very strong showing on their side before Democrats show their side. I know we can't default. I've been very clear about that for months. And that's a very serious responsibility.

But what's my responsibility about protecting our environment, too? Yeah. Well, and I guess the question there is, what will it take for you to get. Yes, President Biden has said to skeptical Democrats, call me.

Have you been in touch with the president? Have you been in touch with the White House? I have had multiple conversations. I participated in all the briefings yesterday, asked very pointed and direct questions, including how seniors are going to be impacted by the work requirements and caregivers who, you know, the definition of dependent is under 6 or totally incapacitated.

There are a lot of women between 50 and 54 who had to leave the workplace because they can't find anybody to caregiver. Okay, am I going to get this all fixed this week? No. But am I going to give up on fighting for it?

No, because it needs to be addressed. These are real problems every day Americans, working men and women are facing across this country every single day. And Congressman, have you spoken to President Biden about this, about your concerns directly? Have you put these concerns to the president?

What is he said to you? If so, I have talked to very senior people at the White House. They know exactly how I feel. And I was very clear yesterday on the various briefings that we were having.

And by the way, nobody can totally reassure me. I mean, in explaining this bill, it's more about what didn't happen. And look, I get it. I'm a seasoned soul, unfortunately, I've watched this happen a lot.

But I am going to keep asking questions and demand a plan for how we're going to address consequences that could come from this legislation. And I think that's a role that I have to do for the people of my district right now as well, so it sounds like you will get to. Yes. Once you get some type of assurances from the White House, from the president that your concerns will be addressed in some future legislation.

Is that what I'm hearing you say? I'm not going to commit to you one way or the other. I am undecided and I'm going to keep working the issues that matter to the people I represent every single day. Let me ask you, when you talk to your colleagues there on Capitol Hill, there are a number of other Democrats who have some real concerns about this legislation.

You raised the issue with processing, with permitting, I should say, and NEPA obviously raise work requirements as well. Do you get the sense that there are enough Democrats to potentially block this bill? I'm going to say this to you. We are all being very thoughtful.

We are all communicating very directly. And we all know that we shouldn't have played games or been held hostage on this issue. And I think to a colleague, we all know we cannot default. So, yeah.

Do all of us feel like we're being held hostage? Yes. But do we have responsibility to make our voices heard and to fix this process? Yes, we do.

Do you think that President Biden made a strategic miscalculation by saying that he would not negotiate over the debt limit only to start having talks around the budget in these weeks leading up to the potential estate for default? Should he have started talking to McCarthy sooner? I'm going to answer this question differently. Hindsight is foresight.

But if you look, I said I am always the person that says people should be at the table and talking. And I did happen to say that and it got picked up on. But, you know, you don't solve problems by not talking to each other. And I want to make it really clear compromise is not a dirty word.

But people that are, you know, people have to be in the room understand that what is being impacted and we do have to fight for the people that we represent. I know you haven't spoken yet to President Biden directly. I anticipate you will in the coming days. What is your message?

I'm going to be very strong about it. He's not going to be surprised. He knows how strongly I feel about nepa. It is the bedrock of environmental Magna Carta.

People refer to it for environmental law around the world. And I'm not going to let something I hear my husband in my ear saying, deborah, don't let them gut it. And by the way, I do know it needs to be modernized, that everybody knows I'm always going to advocate. I'm one of the strongest advocates in this Congress for caregivers, seniors, long term care issues.

He won't be surprised. And you know, I'll tell him what I care about and what we have to fight for going forward. And I know you have spent a lot of time working on the issue of caregiving. You and I have discussed it many times.

Congressman Dingle, really appreciate your perspective today. Thank you. Thank you. And as I said, Republican Congressman Ken Buck will be here later this hour.

Coming up, DeSantis descends on Iowa as he tries to convince Republican primary voters to pick him over the field's front runner, Donald Trump. Plus, an incredible update from another developing story in Iowa where a woman was pulled from a collapsed building unscathed hours after authorities said there was no one left inside. That's ahead. You're watching the press now.

A vacation rental shouldn't come surprises if not if my teenagers start selling. Leslie, that's a family thing. Lastly, verbal care and 247 life support. If you know giver.

Com details. Welcome back. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is moving his presidential campaign off the Internet and into Iowa today, kicking off his candidacy with a slate of in person stops across the state that will hold the GOP's first 2024 contest. From Iowa, he will also travel to two other early primary states, South Carolina and New Hampshire, making more than 12 different campaign stops.

The visit is the first true test of DeSantis candidacy face to face with voters. This kickoff comes after DeSantis botched campaign announcement on Twitter which was mired with technical difficulties. It also comes as former President Trump, who has taken a commanding lead in the primary polls, is scheduled to be in the state later this week. NBC News correspondent Iowa ahead of the Sandus event tonight.

So Gabe, how is the campaign approaching Iowa after last week's botched campaign rollout where there were a bunch of glitches on his Twitter announcement after? The campaign obviously doesn't see it that way. They are still trying to spin it as that this was a campaign rollout that quote, broke the Internet. But here in Iowa, the campaign is trying to court evangelical voters because as they see it, they see this as a key constituency that Governor DeSantis is poised to do very well with.

They have internal polling suggesting that some 67% of GOP primary voters here in Iowa have an unfavorable view, for example, of Disney, of course, person that is an ongoing feud between Governor DeSantis and Disney, a company that the governor and his team see as a woke corporation and those are some of the cultural issues that they really plan to hammer home as he visits Iowa tonight for the first time as an official presidential candidate. Chris and Gabe, he's going to be visiting a megachurch. He's going to be talking to pastors, talk a little bit about why he's following up on the points that you're making, why that constituency he believes is so important. Well, certainly, President, as you know, the evangelical vote here in Iowa is critical.

The Republican primary is really based on that, according to several people that I've talked to just this afternoon. And we spoke with one of the pastors of Governor DeSantis and his wife will be speaking with later tonight at this church in suburban Des Moines. And they plan to speak with those, a group of pastors as well as evangelical voters in this church. Take a listen to part of my conversation with that pastor who'll be speaking with Governor DeSantis and why he thinks it is so important, these cultural issues of so important.

Take a listen. DeSantis is framing the issue for evangelicals the right way. We don't see this as, you know, a battle between DeSantis and Disney. It's a battle for children.

It's a battle for protecting children from an ideology that the majority of parents in the United States do not want to be thrust upon their children, period. That's it. That's why Target is experiencing the backlash that it's experiencing right now. And Chris and this pastor also says that just Target, it's also Bud Light and now Kohl's, these companies that are now seen as, quote, woke corporations.

And he sees, as you just heard, that Governor DeSantis is framing this the right way to appeal to those conservative evangelical voters here in Iowa. First Caucus state just ramping up there. Gabe Gutierrez, thank you. Thank you for bringing us that great interview.

Really appreciate it. We want to turn out another story we've been following out of Iowa. Davenport city officials announced this afternoon five people remain unaccounted for after an apartment building collapsed Sunday evening. Although no deaths have officially been confirmed by local officials, the remains of two of those people are believed to be inside.

The news comes after officials said yesterday they believed the building was empty following a canine unit search. Meanwhile, plans to demolish the building have been put on hold after first responders rescued another resident from the building overnight. The crowd of protesters gathered at the site of the collapse this morning, urging the city to wait. In a press conference this afternoon, local officials called the structure volatile and said they're working with structural engineers to continue searching recovery efforts while also planning a controlled demolition.

Up next, debt DeSantis decision 2024, what the Republican field's newest candidate said about the developing debt deal, plus how a third party vote could shake up the race for the White House. The panel's maximum. You're watching MEET THE Press now. Prior to this deal, Kaylee, our country was careening towards bankruptcy.

And after this deal, our country will still be careening towards bankruptcy. Look, in Florida, we run big budget surpluses. We have a $1.2 trillion economy, but our debt is only 17 billion. Obviously, in Washington, D.C.

they do these cycles to just get them through the next election. And that's ultimately one of the reasons why they continue to fail. Welcome back. That was Florida governor and Republican presidential candidate Ron DeSantis criticizing the debt ceiling agreement while touting his own budget record back at home.

Although we should note Florida law requires the state to balance its budget. It comes after earlier this month, Donald Trump urged Republicans to let the nation default if Democrats did not agree to their demands. Join me now on set as Leanne Caldwell, Washington Post live anchor and co author of the early 202newsletter Savante Myrick, former Democratic mayor of Ithaca, New York, and president of People for the American Way Stephen Hayes, editor and CEO of the Dispatch and an NBC News political analyst. Thanks to all of you for joining me this afternoon.

So, Leah, not a surprise, what we heard from Ron DeSantis that he would be opposed to anything that includes not lowering spending. But what do you make of what he said as it relates to what we're hearing from the Hill? Well, not surprising. As you mentioned, he's a former member of the House Freedom Caucus.

So the members of the far right Freedom Caucus have come out, most of them against this bill. The question I have is will that have any sort of impact on members outside of the Freedom Caucus? Kevin McCarthy is working really hard to keep his members in line. And while we noted that while you noted that Donald Trump said that default is okay a while ago, Donald Trump also has not said anything since there has been an agreement.

We know Kevin McCarthy has been in constant contact with him, I suspect to try to keep him silent on coming out from saying anything. But it does create some sort of little bit of a contrast between DeSantis and Trump. We'll see how it translates on the Hill. Not sure if it's gonna have too much impact.

Steven, what do you make of what we're hearing from DeSantis, what we're not hearing from Trump? And do you think it will have an impact. Look at Ron DeSantis is right. This is not gonna alter the trajectory of our debt.

What he didn't say is that even if you pass the Republican only bill that passed the House of Representatives, it wouldn't alter the trajectory of our debt because they're not dealing with the timing and the timing of the drivers of our debt. So he's right. But there's an asterisk there. It's not hard to understand why he's doing what he's doing.

You make the play in a primary, Republican primary, where the base of the party is going to be sort of supportive of the most right lean position you can have. That's what he's doing here. I don't think it's terrible. Let's talk about what we're actually seeing on Capitol Hill.

I mean, you have a lot of Democrats who feel like President Biden gave away too much in this deal, in part because he initially said he wasn't going to negotiate over raising the debt ceiling. He ultimately wound up negotiating. He says, look, it was over the budget, not the debt ceiling, but bottom line taking place at the same time. Yeah, that's true.

And I think the timing is what President Biden in the White House are putting the hat on. They say, look, this is the deal we would have gotten later this fall anyway. We just got earlier and we a little bit pulled one over on the Republicans, which is typical. President Biden, very low key.

You almost underestimate him. You think that's what he's doing. And it turns out he's a master congressional negotiation. I will just say one thing under this interesting.

It's become very I noticed the date that Desantis picked for when the budget got out of control. It wasn't when Barack Obama took office. It wasn't Joe Biden took office. He made a point of saying March 2020, which President Trump was in office then.

It's pretty clear that he is trying to stake out a position that Donald Trump is a tax and spend liberal. He can't be trusted. It's a bold move. He added $7.8 trillion to the debt in four years.

It's a pretty good argument. But you would expect if he's going to say this is going to be true, his word he should be rolling out his entitlement reform program at some point in the near future. I'm not holding my breath for it. I do want to get to 2024 in just a minute, but stay on the debt ceiling for just a Moment.

Steven, you Basically, to the point that I was making, I mean, Kevin McCarthy got the president to negotiate. Should the Freedom Caucus. I mean, yes, they've been very clear they were never really going to support whatever deal was reached. But should they take the win here to some extent, I mean, are politically speaking, could potentially backfire.

I mean, look, I think a lot of their power derives from their willingness to always say, this isn't good enough. This isn't good enough. And again, in the context of the modern Republican Party, that works for a lot of base Republican voters. It helps them raise money, helps give them power.

I think it helped give them leverage, frankly, in the Speaker's race. So from their perspective, they're saying, no, of course not. They'll be able to pass it. We're not on the hook for this.

It'll work, but we can maintain our position. Leah, based on what you're hearing, do you think this ultimately will pass? I mean, how American, sitting home watching this all unfold, should they be worried? I think it will ultimately pass.

You know, the first test is right now in the Rules Committee. That's happening. If it can get out of that committee. I'm going to get a little wonky here.

But one thing I'm watching is that rule that they pass out of Rules Committee today also has to pass the House floor tomorrow before they do final passage on the bill. And traditionally, Democrats oppose the Republican rules, and so McCarthy is going to have to find the vote to pass that rule, and it's probably not going to come from the members who are going to oppose this legislation. I started asking Freedom Caucus members, are you going to support the rule to get onto the bill, and they're saying no. So McCarthy's gonna have to make another ask of Democrats for Democratic vote.

So yet another hurdle for McCarthy coming up. All right, let's talk about 2024. Steven, what are you expecting from DeSantis? Can he turn around his campaign?

Yeah, he said a very rocky rollout. If you look at the polls, he's really still trailing Trump. Yeah, I'm looking for two things. One, can he write the ship, as it were?

I mean, we saw fundraising numbers even after his botched rollout. The SAN people who are telling you that they don't really care about the botch roll, doesn't really matter. That's not true. There's a reason that they put so much time and effort into a good announcement, and that's not necessarily the opposite of what you want.

But, look, he's had a rough couple months he's had a bad rollout. People are underestimating. I think their view is, yeah, we can overperform now. And even if we do okay, adequate's going to look pretty good.

So I think that's what they're kind of banking on this point. Savante, what's your take? And look, you have Chris Christie circling the wagons. Sununu circling the wagons.

In 2016, candidate Trump won the nomination because there were so many candidates in the race. Yeah, I think there are still really, truly only two candidates in this race. And that's why DeSantis and Donald Trump. And Trump is, as we said, DeSantis.

He's taking a very interesting tactic by going to the right of Trump and hoping that there's space there. But I think already he's giving the game away a little bit by nothing on Twitter. It wasn't the technical difficulties that brought this all a little odd. What Rob, is all strange is why choose to do it in the first place on camera, a rally, something that you know will work.

I think we all know the answer is he's trying to cozy up to Elon Musk, the richest person in the world. Now, if you launch your campaign by trying to cozy up to a billionaire who himself. Musk is trying to cozy up to Donald Trump. What does that leave the 300 million plus Americans who are wondering who's a champion for us?

So far, Ron DeSantis has not made the case to people outside of his bubble that he cares about them. There's no doubt it is a risky strategy. Let's see if he has time to turn around. I want to talk to you guys about a potential third party candidate.

Mark Murray did this wonderful analysis. He crunched the numbers from 2016 to 2020. When Trump won in 2016, you had a high number of votes for third party candidates. In 2020, the tally was much lower.

You see it there, 6% versus 2%. Leigh Ann, how concerned do you think Democrats are? I'm going to put this reality. So right now as no labels.

A potential third party seems to be signaling they're very serious about putting a candidate for. I love Mark Murray's numbers because it actually goes against what conventional wisdom has been. It had been Democrats who had been concerned about a third party candidate. And so perhaps a third party candidate will actually help Joe Biden.

But, you know, I know Nobles has been working on this for quite some time, but there doesn't really seem yet to be a serious candidate and a serious contender who's going to step in of course, maybe Joe Manchin is a possibility, but they have a lot of steps to go before there's someone who can perhaps make a real difference in this race. Sonny, how do you see if I see a potential third party? Well, I hope you can show me where Mark Myers desk is because he ruined my coffee this morning. It's a great report, but had me stressed out because he's like, look, because Joe Sign was in the race in 2016, Donald Trump won.

The numbers just show that out because it wasn't a serious third party candidate. In 2020, Joe Biden won. If there is no labels to run somebody they will be helping. They won't be starting a third party in this country.

They will be helping Donald Trump win, period. So local labels has to get really serious with themselves and ask is that the point of that organization or not? I would support, I think we would be better off if we had multiple parties in this country. But the way to do that is to build a party from the ground up to start a couple months before presidential election.

It becomes a spoiler is. Well, it ruined my copy this morning. Stephen, I'll give you the final word. How do you see the potential?

If we learn anything over the past eight years, it's be cautious and humble, making straight line projections about what we think we know based on what we've seen. If you look at the NBC poll from the end of April, 95% of Americans said that they were not enthusiastic about Jo Biden versus Donald Trump race. This is sort of speaking to them. There are also about access questions, fundraising questions, a lot of questions before this could become reality.

But I wouldn't be surprised if it's a reality that's much closer to something like a Ross Perot bid where people have just had it. What's going on in Washington? All right. We'll have to see some.

T will introduce you to Mark right after the show. Thank you all for being here. Great conversation. Leanne, Samantha and Steven.

And after the break, attack on the capitals. Russia says Ukrainian forces are behind a rare strike on a residential area of Moscow as Kiev suffers another night of air strikes. One of the very latest developments and what they mean for the war. You're WATCHING THE PRESS now.

Stay with us. Welcome back. For the first time since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine, residential areas in Moscow were targeted by a drone attack. This video appears to show a drone flying over western Moscow.

According to Russia's Defense Ministry, eight drones were used in the attack, all of which they say were downed while there was some damage to residential buildings. The Kremlin spokesperson says no one was injured. Ukraine, meanwhile, has denied any involvement with the attack, but an advisor to President Zelensky said he was pleased to see the drone attack. The White House says it is still gathering information about exactly what happened, while noting that the US does not support attacks inside Russia.

The attack on Moscow comes as Kyiv continues to be pummeled by Russian bombardments with even more today, the third attack in just 24 hours. Ukrainian officials say they successfully destroyed more than 20 drones launched by Russia overnight. NBC News correspondent Molly Hunter filed this report from Keith. Yeah, Kristen.

And part of what you officials say in addition to they are still gathering information and gathering evidence is part of that safety from an SEC statement also says we have been focused on providing Ukraine with the equipment and training they need to retake their sovereign territory, territory. And that's exactly what we've done. And that really squares me. Talk to Ukraine officials about their goals for the counter offensive.

It is not to start any kind of offense, as they say, across the border with Russia into Russia proper. They say it is exclusively focused on retaking their territory that Russia currently occupies. About those drone attacks in Moscow, all of the information that I'm getting here in Kiev, of course is really from official sources. The Kremlin spokesperson said he briefed Putin very early this morning, that Putin was brief.

And there's a statement from President Putin. He says the key regime chose the path of intimidation of Russian citizens and strikes on residential buildings. This of course is a clear sign of terrorist activity, Chris. And I said it is absolutely nothing, of course, compared to what key residents Ukrainian citizens have been dealing with the last four days.

Three major waves of attacks just in the last day or so. At least one person killed, many people injured. And even though the air defenses here in the capital city are working on it for that arsenal includes U.S. patriot air defense missiles, it can still be dangerous.

Not only can be fatal, of course in at least one case in the last day, but what happens in those interceptions, of course is that debris and fragments then fall down. They land on roofs, they land on cars. Of course they land on civilians as well. We visited a multi story apartment building earlier today and it was absolutely wrecked, really dirty.

I haven't seen that had damage outside of buildings that actually been hit by missiles. It was unclear to us and the Ukrainian government officials hadn't told any of the residents whether it sustained a direct hit or whether all of that damage was from a very powerful intersection and the debris hit that building. But we talked to a man who had been in his apartment at the time of the explosion around 3am and he said it was a very powerful pressurized explosion. Really, really terrifying because his wife was already in the shelter.

He ran down, he escaped. But really this is the kind of thing that this capital city hasn't seen in months. Brief image is that thousands and thousands of people are now going down in the subway system of the city just like they were about six months. And that is also new.

I think people here are really, really nervous and really getting to kind of the psychology of living through this constant of siege person, really devastating images there. Molly Hunter, as always, thank you for your reporting. Please stay safe. We now want to bring in retired lieutenant general secretary, former deputy commander, U.S.

european Command and an NBC News military analyst. Thank you so much for joining me. Really appreciate it. Good to be here, Chris.

So Ukraine has said they have nothing to do with these strikes on Moscow, but I wonder what you make of these strikes. Do you think this could be Ukraine starting its counter offensive? I don't think it's them starting a counter offensive. I think it's them reacting to 17 attacks on their country, particularly to see the government Kiev within the last month.

That is a lot for that city to take and we cannot expect for Ukraine just to sit back and continue to take this. And so I welcome them attacking, although I do not welcome them going after civilian targets. They should be military targets so they cannot step or stoop to the same level as Russia, go after military targets. If you're going to do this.

And just to follow up on that very point, what do you make of how the US has responded so far, specifically saying we do not support attacks inside of Moscow? And what kinds of conversations do you think are happening between the Pentagon, between US Officials in Kyiv? Yeah, I think we gave them weapons with the premise that they would not attack deep inside SA Russia. So I'm sure those conversations are happening between the Pentagon and the military folks in Ukraine as well as over in the White House and with their counterparts.

They're probably not happy with it. One of the reasons, as you know, we want to make sure that this war stay combined within Ukraine and not spill over into NATO or into Russia. Then the war will start to spread. So that's the rationale behind that.

I know you say you don't think these specific attacks inside Moscow are a sign of the counter offensive, but do you get the sense that the counteroffensive has begun and do you have confidence in it, given that the US And Its allies in the region have sent more weaponry, more tanks, more aircraft to Ukraine. Are they ready? I do believe that they're ready. What's been occurring over the last few weeks is what we call setting the conditions.

That means the reconnaissance to find out where the vulnerabilities are in the Russian defenses, ensuring that all the equipment comes in that the west have given the Ukrainian, ensuring that soldiers are trained on that equipment and ensuring that the weather is correct. It's starting to get summer over there now, so I anticipate the offense will start in earnest here within days, maybe a week. There have been some reconnaissance going on. There's, there's been some prepping up some targets.

So you've seen a little bit of it, but not the full scale counter offensive as we would call in the US Military. That's interesting. I want to also get your take on this news that we're getting of this Russia Belarusian deal to transfer tactical nuclear weapons. Do you think this is saber rattling on the part of Moscow or should the US Be really concerned here?

It's more favorable, Alan. We have to understand that Lukashenko, the president of Belarus, he's a puppet of Putin. He is extremely unpopular in Belarus. Many say that he lost the last election.

He probably did. What this really does, it puts tactical nukes on NATO's border now Belarus, Poland, Latvia and Lithuania. So tactical nukes will be pushed up towards that border, which signifies nukes along the border, which we haven't seen in quite some time in that area. Very quickly, how should the U.S.

respond to that? Lt. Gen. Well, I think we have various means of monitoring and that's what we should do, continue to monitor.

And I will tell you, having been the deputy commander of U.S. european Command, they're watching this closely. There's no significant impact in terms of alert posture that needs to be changed, anything like that. We just need to monitor the situation and make sure that our NATO allies fully understand now that things will change now that we have nukes alone.

Network all right. We always appreciate your joining us and learn a lot. Lt. Gen.

Steph, we really appreciate it. Good to see you. Thank you. Chris Silicon My one on one interview with Republican Congressman Ken Buck, the House lawmaker who floated to colleagues in rooms that could potentially oust Speaker McCarthy.

That's right. After a quick break. You're watching the press now. Welcome back.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy is apparently unconcerned that frustrations within his caucus could boil over in a somewhat chaotic scrum in Capital Rotunda. Earlier today, McCarthy was asked about the potential for a vote of no confidence in his leadership after one Republican House member publicly signaled his support for a vote to vacate or oust the Speaker. Take a look. No, that's his choice, he said there.

Jody, now is Colorado Republican Ken Bach, who has said he is a no on the debt limit deal. Congressman, thanks so much for joining me. Really appreciate it. Thank you.

So let me just ask you about our reporting. We have reported that on a House Freedom Caucus call last night, you actually floated the idea of using the motion to vacate, which would basically force a vote to remove the Speaker. Can you tell us what specifically did you say to your colleagues? Are you calling for a motion to vacate?

No, I did not. What I said was that Speaker McCarthy had promised spending limits at the 2022 level. This deal calls for spending limits above the 2022 level. And I was asking my colleagues in House Freedom Caucus whether they were considering a motion to vacate as a result of a broken promise.

Scott Perry, the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, told me it's premature. Let's get through this battle and decide if we want another battle. So just to be very clear, you did raise the question. Is anyone considering a motion to vacate?

Yes. Okay. Under what circumstances, Congressman, would you take further action? Well, look, I think that this bill is a horrible bill.

We're talking about $4 trillion of additional debt in the next 20 months. That's. That's just unsustainable for this country. Kevin McCarthy has the obligation now to come forward and explain how he's going to do better than this bill, how he is going to improve on the situation.

We have 12 appropriations bills coming up in the next three months. We can get through those appropriations bills and recover some of this money, but he's got to make sure that he does. And I think that the motion of vacation, he may not be concerned about it because he has a plan on how to recover from this horrible negotiation he's had with President Biden. So just to be clear, between now and next week, on June 5, that date that the Treasury Secretary has identified for potential default, would you take any action toward a motion to vacate?

Oh, no, I don't think. I don't think anybody's talking about a motion to vacate before this bill, that the debt ceiling bill has passed. I don't believe that's in the cards. What is your.

I heard what you said there, but Senator McCarthy says he's not worried about it. You seem to be suggesting he should be. What's your message to him. Well, my message is that we have to make sure we get to those 20, 22 spending limits in the appropriations bills and not use the, the debt ceiling negotiation as the baseline.

We can do a lot better than where we are right now. I guess the question is, and we saw this during the votes for the speakership, if not McCarthy, then who? Who would you, if you got to that point of frustration, who would you support instead of speaking McCarthy? Have you thought through that?

Yeah, I have. I think during the speaker vote, no one was stepping forward because they believed Kevin was going to win, number one. And number two, Kevin had earned it because he did a lot of the campaigning to raise the money to get in the majority. And number three, no one wanted to put their head up and get their head chopped off.

I think that dynamic changes drastically if there is another motion to vacate. I'm not saying there will be, but if there is another motion to vacate or there's a motion to vacate, I think that people will be bold and they will make statements about how we need to reduce spending in the federal government. And I think the person that does that is likely going to be the next speaker. Do you have a name in your head?

I have a lot of names in my head. I know you guys. The top name. Who's the top name in your head?

The top name that's not going to do it is Ken Buck. Other than that, I don't know who is going to step forward and do that and just give us a sense of asking about the broader deal. What was the response from your fellow Freedom Caucus members, broadly speaking? Did you get the sense that if these appropriations bills don't go in the direction that you support, that there would be a groundswell of support for a motion to vacate?

I don't have a sense. I just got off a plane, just got into town. So I don't have a sense of what other people are talking about. I can tell you that.

I think from the Freedom Caucus, the vote for the debt ceiling bill will probably be 80 against, 20 in favor, 80%. 20%, 80% opposed to the deal that Kevin McCarthy and Joe Biden cut. So do you think this bill can pass? Oh, I think we'll pass with Democrat votes.

Democrats have 4 trillion reasons to vote for this bill. So you don't think that the nation is going to default? Oh, no, no. And the June 5th date is just a May update anyway.

It is not. The nation will not default. Well, the treasury secretary says it's a very serious date and that there could be an economic disaster if this deal is not reached by June 5th. You reject that analysis by the Treasury Secretary?

The treasury secretary said we wouldn't have inflation that lasted more than a few months. I reject the analysis by the Treasury. Would you be willing to see the country default if to vote no on the seal? No, that's not an option.

I will vote no. This bill will pass and the country will not defend fault. Do you think that. So you do not think you have the numbers to kill the bill?

We do not. Okay. I do not believe that, no. Okay.

I guess big picture here. This is a divided Congress, Congressman. You know that. Is it realistic to think that a bill can pass with only Republican support?

No, I think this bill will pass with bipartisan support. Didn't super compromise here in order to get this done? Sure. But you can't compromise the, the status, the financial state of America.

You can't. We're moving a $35 trillion of debt under this bill. It is a terrible deal. We can't compromise in that way.

Well, but Congress would just go back very quickly. President Biden said he wasn't going to negotiate at all. Speaker McCarthy got him to the negotiating table over the budget. Some people are looking at this and saying why not take the win?

Why add more uncertainty and churn in this moment when the nation's credit rating is at stake? You know, for anybody to suggest that this bill is a win is pure folly. This bill is not a win. The American public understands that $35 trillion of debt is not sustainable.

And so to call this a win because, you know, Republicans got a couple billion here, a couple billion there. It's just nonsense. We can't keep adding a trillion, $2 trillion to our national debt every year without defaulting at a serious default, default we can't come back from. All right.

Congressman Ken Buck, we are out of time, but I really appreciate your joining us this hour. Thank you so much. Thank you. Chuck is back tomorrow with more me, the Press Now.

NBC News now coverage continues with Hallie Jackson right now. Now I'm Craig. Mel. Cheers.

Cheers. Cheers. I've always been a glass half full kind of guy. And now I'm talking to some people who look at the world that way, too.

Some really fascinating folks who share their defining moments, their triumphs, challenges. Their stories are funny. And so I hope you'll join me each week. Who knows, you might just come away with your own class.

Apple with Craig from today on YouTube everywhere, you get a podcast.