Meet the Press NOW — May 5

Foreign. Welcome to a special edition of MEET THE press. Now. I'm Kristen Welker in Washington, fresh off my exclusive and extensive sit down interview with President Trump from his home in Mar?

A Lago. No topic was off limits, especially his handling of the economy and our democracy. The president rejecting indicators of an economic anxiety and uncertainty from his terror strategy. In fact, after our interview, he floated new tariffs.

The president also wavered on whether he has to adhere to every part of the Constitution as it relates to undocumented immigrants. We will get to those comments in just a moment, including new reaction from a top House Republican joining me right here in studio. We begin, though, with the economy in that extended interview that aired Sunday on the Press, President Trump downplaying concerns of a downturn, telling me the US Would be okay in the long run even if it slipped into a recession in the near term. The defiance from the president extended beyond our interview, with new tariffs on auto parts going into effect and plans for new tariffs on movies filmed outside the United States.

In more from our interview, the president also signaling a clear willingness to intervene with US Companies if he disagrees with their business decisions. Take a listen to this exchange I had with him about playing hardball with CEOs. Let me ask you about this call to Amazon founder Jeff Bezos this week in response to a report that Amazon was going to display tariff costs next to product prices. Are you going to punish CEOs who increase their prices because of tariffs?

I think what, I think what is a great misnomer is the word tariff. In many cases it's not to me. I don't view it as a text. I view it as an incentive for people to come into the United States and build plants, factories, offices, a lot of things.

I think it's an incentive. But the thing that's not known is if you look back and see oftentimes like China or Vietnam or other countries, not just China, because China is an abuser, but there are other abusers. Many of them are friends of the so called. I say friend and foe and friend is oftentimes worse than foe.

But what people don't understand is and this is a lot, the country eats the tariff, the company eats the tariff and it's not passed along at all. Some CEOs are saying they're going to have to pass along. So how do you deal with those CEO, the company China is eating the tariffs. Right.

What do you say to those CEOs who are saying we might have to pass this on to the. Well, they say that because maybe it's to their advantage. Managed to say it, maybe punish them? No, because you know what?

I want them to build plants in the United States. That way they don't have any tariffs. See, tariffs will. And not only wills.

Look at what's happened in two months. We're close to $9 trillion of investment. We've never been anywhere near that. What did you say to Jeff Bezos?

He's just a very nice guy. We have a relationship. I asked him about it. He said, well, I don't want to do that and shut it off immediately.

So he changed course. And will you take that same tactic with other CEOs, people who might disagree with them? If I think that somebody says something that's incorrect, wrong or maybe hurtful to the country, I'll call. Absolutely.

Wouldn't you want me to call Biden wouldn't call because he didn't know what was happening. But I do. Joining now at the White House is NBC's Michelle, and also with us is NBC News business and data correspondent Brian Chun. Thanks to both of you for starting us off.

Yamiche, you heard what the president told me on tariffs and the economy defiant his tariff policy will pay off in the long run. Take me inside your conversations at the White House. Is there a sense you should the president has a clear plan or is he adjusting as events warrant? Well, first, coming off that incredibly newsy interview that you did with President Trump, there's a lot to talk about with White House officials and they are essentially doubling down the idea that President Trump believes that he is doing what's best for the economy long term, as he said to you, he's maybe a little something, maybe a recession could happen, but in the long term that Americans will be more prosperous, the country will benefit from his strategy.

I think there is this sense in talking to the sources that I'm talking to, but the president is willing to adjust as things happen. That's why you've seen tariffs go on, off, they pause. They're making deals. They're trying to make deals, different countries.

Nothing has been writing as of yet. But what I'm hearing from White House officials this week is that they do feel like the president has a pulse for the American people and understands what the American people want to see, which that he believes these tariffs put in place and yet is continuing the sort of narrative which is that America, he believes, was being taken advantage of and that the country needs to wrestle back some of that power. The big question is going to be whether or not the president adjusts Again, if Americans are feeling too much of this, he's been saying short term, paying transaction costs. I think there's a lot of, I would say, concern, at least in the White House, that long term, while this might pay off on the short term, is a stock market going to flush way too much, People going to say, well, actually I do want to have $35.

I do want to be able to buy as many things as I want to. That's, I think, a big question. How long are Trump supporters, the American people, going to wait for President Trump's policies and strategy to pay off? Kirsten, I think you're right.

That timeline question is so key. And Brian, I pressed the president, what is the timeline for that transition cost? He wouldn't give me an answer to the timeline. But again, as Anisha said, he doubles down on this idea that ultimately his tariff policy is going to pay off.

How are businesses likely to react to that? And also that exchange that I had with the I have a problem with what a CEO is doing. I'm gonna pick up the phone and call. Yeah, well, look, I mean that obviously referring to the Amazon interaction that we saw where Jeff Bezos had received a phone call from the President personally to basically turn around on the reported policy of a part of Amazon's site listing certain surcharges and added cost as a tariff related factor.

So the company designed the backtrack on that thing. We're not gonna do that anymore. Spokes to the president about that. Does kind of underscore this concern that in CCU offices across this country that they don't want to publicly go against the president when it comes to the tariff policies.

Now, this isn't to say that all CEOs are not speaking out about this, but it does underscore something that I've been hearing within context I've been talking to over the past few months, which is that they have been through lobbying efforts and through direct conversations with the Oval Office, maybe at lower levels, trying to pressure White House into not doing these terror policies or offering some sort of temporary stay on these types of tariff policies, but not wanting to publicly say anything out of the fear that it could be sort PR disaster like Amazon essentially went through with the pricing beginning. It's the companies that have the decision and the power to figure out how they price their goods. And that pressure is indeed coming from the White House. That is fascinating perspective.

Another chunk from my interview with President Trump, this is him trying to explain comments last week about rising prices. Take a listen. We'll do some analysis on the other side. So let's talk about the tariffs.

I want to ask you about something you said this week, got a lot of attention. You were at your Cabinet meeting. You said, quote and I quote, we said maybe the children will have two dolls instead of $30, and maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally. Are you saying that your tariffs will cause some prices to go up?

No, I think the tariffs are going to be great for us because it's going to make us rich. You said some dollars are going to cost more. Isn't that acknowledging that some prices will go up? I don't think a beautiful baby girl needs, that's 11 years old, needs to have $30.

I think they can have three dolls or four dolls because what we were doing with China was just unbelievable. We had a trade deficit of hundreds of billions of dollars with China. When you say they could have three dolls instead of $30, are you saying Americans could see empty store shelves? No, no, I'm not saying that.

I'm just saying they don't need to have $30. They can have three. They don't need to have 250 pencils. They can have five.

But you're basically saying there could be some supply chain waste money on a trade deficit with China for things we don't need, for junk that we don't need. Well, prices are already going up on some popular items. Pliers, strollers. This is such a dishonest interview.

Already. Prices are down on groceries. Prices are down for oil. Prices are down for oil.

Energy prices are down at tremendous numbers for gasoline. And let me tell you, when you have the big thing, what he did, he spent, which he was. But he spent like a very stupid person. And that was bad for inflation.

But what really killed us with inflation was the price of energy. It went up to $3.90, even $4. And in California, five and six dollars. Right.

Okay. I have it down to $1.98 in many states right now. When you go that much lower on energy, which is ahead of my prediction, because I really thought I could get it down into the 250s, we have it down at $1.98 in numerous places. But when you say costs are going up, even mortgage rates are going down.

Let me give you some examples. These are. I mean, these are actual examples. So you're saying the prices are going down, Some prices are going up.

Tires, strollers, some closing in the wake of your tariffs. That's peanuts compared to energy. Energy is 60% of the cost you campaign.com to bring prices down on day one. I don't know what you say strollers are going.

I'm saying that gasoline is going down. Gasoline is thousands of times more important than a stroll or something. What do you say to Americans who say they voted for you because they want and they need relief right now? They're getting it right now.

What about mortgage rates? Mortgage rates are going down despite the fact that we have a stubborn Fed. But you said dolls, even dolls could cost a couple bucks more. Maybe they might.

But you don't need to have, as I said, $35. You can have 2, 3, 4 and save a lot of money. We don't need to feed the beast. Yamiche, what's the reaction inside the White House?

You do have some Republican strategists saying this is not the strongest position for the president to be making. It's really fascinating talking to White House officials about this portion of the interview because they are again, of course, backing the president in some ways echoing the fact that Americans maybe don't need to waste money on it on different items and that maybe they'll be able to be a little bit more judicious when it comes to their purchases. But I did sense a, well, let's just see how this lands this week. So I think it's gonna be interesting to continue to watch how White House officials message on this because there was this position where this idea that President Trump is somebody telling Americans, well, maybe you just won't have as many options.

And that's something that I think is hard as well for a lot of Americans, including Trump's supporters, who believe in capitalism, who want a country where if you want to buy $30, you can give it afford $30. I also found it interesting the president saying that gasoline is more important than strollers. I mean, we know this is the president who talked about making IBF free, who's talked about the people around him, JD Vance, Elon Musk talking about America wanting to have more children. So the idea that he's sort of placing something that is so directly involved with children, strollers and dolls sort of into this idea of something that worries some people.

But overall, the White House says what the president, they believe has a political instinct like no other. And they think that he really believes that he's struggling a quarter with the American people in reasoning with them in some ways as he gets his long term economic strategy across the finish line of their minds. And of course, that 198 figure the price of gas. Brian, the president also disputed that small businesses would need extra help with these tariffs.

I pressed him on this. He said he doesn't think that that's going to be necessary. What do you anticipate the reaction will be inside the small business community? Yeah.

And real quickly, just before the small business, his point about gas prices being below $2 in some states, I want to point out that Triple A, which measures, measures gas prices across this country, doesn't have any single state in the union that is registering an average gas price that is below $2. So it's a bit unclear where that claim is coming from when he cited that statistic in a right ranging interview. But when it comes to the small business, that is also an interesting rhetorical choice that the president chose to make by basically telling you that it's the big business that we should be paying attention to. And certainly, yes, it is big business in many cases, the Amazons, the apples of the world that are making those major pricing decisions for how much we pay for their goods.

But on the other hand, small businesses are a major foundation for this economy. When you consider that statistics from the government itself say that small businesses account for about 55% of all job gains that were made between 2013 and 2023. It's really kind of those businesses, those small mom and pop shops, those gift stores down the block, those little coffee chains are really the major driver of job creation, which at the end of the day, I imagine we have priority of the president as well. The focus on small businesses is going to be important than context of terrorist laws.

All right, Yamiche and Brian, thank you both so much. Really appreciate it. Would you have more? Now for my exclusive interview with President Trump, I asked the president if he would abide by the Supreme Court order directing his administration to facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

That's the undocumented immigrant father who was mistakenly deported. That's according to the administration, to a super prison in El Salvador. The administration alleges he's a gang member. That's something his attorney and wife deny.

But our conversation evolved into exchange over the role of the courts, presidential authority and President Trump's views on upholding the Constitution. Take a listen. In a 9 to 0 decision, the Supreme Court directed your administration to facilitate the return. You've talked about this in the past.

Of Kilmar Rue Garcia from a prison in El Salvador whose deportation your administration called an administrative error. You said in a recent interview you could bring him back, but you won't. Are you defying the Supreme Court? No, I'm relying on the Attorney General of the United States.

Pam Bonnie is very capable of doing a great job because I'm not involved in the legality or the illegality. I have lawyers to do that. And that's why I have a great doj. We have a great one.

We had a very corrupt one before. Now we have a great one. And they're not viewing the decision the way you said it. They don't view it that way at all.

They think it's a totally different decision. Well, you say you have the power to bring back, though. Your Attorney General says, quote, that's up to El Salvador. Just to put a fine point on this.

Do you have the power to bring Abrego Garcia back as the Supreme Court? Well, I have the power to ask for him come back if I'm instructed by the Attorney General that it's legal to do so. But the decision as to whether or not he should come back will be. The head of El Salvador is a very capable man.

Well, you know, your Attorney General has said the issues that. That were facilitate. Will you seek clarification from the Supreme Court? You need to go back to the Supreme Court.

We may do that. I was asking about that. We may do that. There are some people that say bring them back.

Put him in trial and get them out right away. Because you take. You see what happened just this morning, Tapes came out, horrible tapes from his wife. You don't get much worse than that.

You don't get. I mean, he seems certainly like a very dangerous, very bad person. But even the wife who was so afraid, she was afraid to talk. And all of a sudden, tapes got released this morning that were devastating to him.

And this is the point, sir, about due process. Constitution says every person, citizens and non citizens, deserve due process. Why not push to have him come back, present all of that evidence in court, Let a judge. Well, I'll leave that to the lawyers and I'll leave that to the Attorney General of the United States.

Because you have to understand, I'm dealing with Russia and Ukraine. I'm dealing with. I'm dealing with Iran. I'm dealing with Rwanda and the Congo.

We're fighting and we're trying to get that one straight out. And I think we have done that, did a great job. Nobody talks about it, but I think we're close to doing that. They're looking like they're gonna maybe make a peace deal, which would be good.

But I'm dealing with a lot of different things. I don't know much about this gentleman other than I hear he's an absolute not good person. And I have very capable legal people. John Sauer, as you know, all top people.

And I have to rely on that to interpret whatever said by the Supreme Court. Now, with that being said, I have tremendous respect for the Supreme Court. Look, three of the people are people I appointed and I have great respect for the Supreme Court and I would expect that the Attorney General will be doing the right thing. Your Secretary of State says everyone who's here, citizens and non citizens, deserve due process.

Do you agree, Mr. President? I don't know. I'm not, I'm not a lawyer.

I don't know. Well, the Fifth Amendment says no, no, it seems, it seems, it might say that. But if you're talking about that, then we'd have to have a million or 2 million or 3 million trials. We have thousands of people that are some murderers and some drug dealers and some of the worst people on earth, some of the worst, most dangerous people on earth.

And I was elected to get them the hell out of here. And the courts are holding me from doing it. But even given those numbers that you're talking about, don't you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States? I don't know.

I have to respond by saying, again, I have brilliant lawyers that work for me and they are going to obviously follow what the Supreme Court said. What you said is what I heard the Supreme Court said. They have a different interpretation. And joining me now is Congressman Byron Donalds, Republican from Florida.

We should also note that he is running for Governor in the great state of Florida, the Sunshine State. Congressman, thank you so much for being here. It's good to be back with you. It's good to have you back.

I know it's a busy time for you, so we really appreciate it. We're going to talk about the President's comments there as well as the economy. But let's talk about that moment when he said, I don't know, when I asked him if he has to uphold the Constitution of the President of the United States. What was your reaction to hearing that?

Do you think he has to uphold every part of the Constitution, including the Fifth Amendment? Well, first of all, let's be clear. I think what the President was talking about is, yes, he's going to uphold the Constitution. He's taking advice from his legal team, led obviously by the White House counsel, the Attorney General of the United States, everybody working at Department of Homeland Security about all the parameters that they are using to deport illegal aliens out of this country, which is the core of President Trump's victory last November.

Let's remember, the American people have been clear that they want criminal illegal aliens, number one, and illegal aliens overall return to their home countries. Donald Trump is fulfilling that promise. Now, to the broader question, this entire situation. Is it okay for the previous administration to abuse the border security laws, abuse asylum, abuse temporary protected status, open up the country to millions of people, and then hide behind due process, where it would take us 15 years to actually process people back out of the United States?

You're talking about the numbers. You're saying there are so many people here that it would just take too long. But let me ask you, I mean, the Constitution says that everyone who's here is entitled to due process. So I understand there are big numbers that you are talking about and the President is dealing with.

But if you're going to follow the Constitution, don't you have to follow what it says by letter and law? Well, I think first, the other thing is, if you look at this, when you come in, let's say, on a silent package that is at the discretion of the administration, the administration is now saying, you know what, we are going to have a legal detainer for you to be deported and you are going to be removed from the United States. That's under, that's under the premise of how you came in. Second thing, every illegal alien that came here, the first thing they did is they broke the law coming into our country.

They brought the law, let's be level, set here. That's what they did. So there is an orderly process that the president has seen is going through. They're not just rounding up people and dropping them out of the country.

That is not true. Everybody that's been deported to this point has had a legal deportation order executed by the president's administration. But in this case, the case of Camaro Grego Garcia, the administration said it was an administrative error. And in 2019, an immigration judge issued an order that's still in effect that he should not be deported back to El Salvador.

And I guess this goes back to the question that I was asking to President Trump. Do you think that everyone, citizens and non citizens, are entitled to do process? First of all, let me be clear with you. When it comes to due process, that is a privilege reserved for American citizens.

When people are in our country illegally, there is a semblance of due process, but not nearly the level of the United States citizen of an American. There are two different standards. You come to America, you are a guest in the United States. That privilege can be revoked.

And a lot of these illegal aliens were not guests. They showed up at the southern border, Joe Biden abused our laws, ignored our laws, and let them in. And yet, what are American people supposed to say about that? Well, the Constitution is the fifth Amendment.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless and a presentment or indictment of a grand jury accepting cases arising in the land or naval forces. And then it goes on to say, nor shall any person be subjected for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life, limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived, deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. So the Constitution says any person, not citizen. And therein lies the debate and the root of my question.

I mean, does any person just apply to citizens in your mind, or does it apply to citizens and non citizens? The Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says it applies to citizens and non citizens. Well, let's be very clear first and foremost on the framework of our Constitution. They never envisioned there would be an executive that would allow millions of people to come to the country illegally.

They never fathom that. Number two, more importantly, you have a situation right now. Is it okay for any administration to not follow the law, abuse border security laws, let millions of people in, and then hide behind the court system to say, well, now they're here. So now we have to go through a lengthy process.

Let's examine this right now. Right now, what we know is when people came to the country, almost 90% of them would not even go to the hearings. So if you, if you're supposed to show for a hearing and you do not go, where are we supposed to go? To the academy?

To your point about the hearings, does Congress need to work harder to get more funding, to get more resources to the courts so that you can better process people who are here who are undocumented? And in the one big beautiful bill, there will be dollars provided to the administration to speed up the deportation efforts. I will add that one of the things we have to be very sober about is that the gravity upon which all these people are brought to our country, it is not physically possible to hire that many judges and process them out of the country. This is why you cannot have open borders to begin with.

Okay, let's move on to the economy. I have to get your reaction to the President effectively saying that kids should have two dolls and not 30 dolls, they should have fewer pencils. Do you think that's the right argument to be making? That is fair policy.

Look, I think the argument the president is making is that overall, if you look at where we are, prices have come down. Even the GDP read that just came out, that showed a contraction. You know why that is? It's because of the federal government contracting.

That's a good thing. Private investment in the economy year over year is up over 20%. Personal consumption in the economy year over year is up over 2%. So individuals are consuming this private divest.

Domestic investment in our economy, the federal government is shrinking when it comes to goods. Prices are coming down. If people make purchasing decisions on what they're going to do with their own resources, those are their personal choices. As I just noted with the president in the interview, of course, some prices are going up.

The economy shrank. As you know, the stock market has been volatile and fears about inflation are increasing. Let me just play something very quickly that Republican strategist Carl Rope had to say. Get your reaction on the other side.

I thought it was really problematic. We said, you know what the kids said? You know those little girls at Christmas, they don't need $30. They can do it, too.

And if they have to pay a couple more bucks for them, you know, okay, well, it sounds like Mr. Scrooge. And the ordinary American is like, wait a minute, I thought you were on my side. Is Carl Rose right?

No, I don't think Carl's right for number reasons. Number one, first of all, it's still within the first hundred days. And just pass it the other day. The president is working on his entire economic agenda.

Lower tax prices, lower taxes are going to take care of that across the street. More business investment is already happening right now. You have to let the president work through the trade policy. Now you're talking about the words he used around dolls or strollers.

Tell every parent out there that's driving their kid back and forth to summer camp starting in a month or so, back and forth to practices like my wife does with my son. Gas prices are down across the United States. States that is a boon to the American consumer, a boon to families. It will help parents afford the necessities and desires of their kids.

How long do you think Americans are going to give this president? He's talking about transition period. How long are they going to be patient? We've been talking to supporters who say they do want to leave right now.

Hope the American people are with President Trump. He want to mandate for a reason. We're going to get all this stuff done over the next several months and we'll kick it into this economy by the time we hit Thanksgiving. We'll be rocking.

Rolling. All right. Congressman Byron Donalds gave me a timeline. I'm going to hold you to it and we'll have you back.

Thank you so much. Really appreciate you being here. We have much more news and analysis for my exclusive interview with President Trump straight ahead, including the response from the Democratic side of the aisle of President Trump's comments on the rule of law, do process the economy and more. A top House Democrat joins me next.

Plus third Term talk. President Trump makes his most decisive comments yet on being a two term president and weighs in on his potential successor. Stay with us. You're watching a very special edition of MEET THE PRESS Now.

Welcome back. As President Trump, taxes accomplishments in his first 100 days, Democrats are pushing back on his tariff agenda, deportation policies and his threats to the system of checks and balances. Joining me now is Democratic Congresswoman from Michigan, Debbie Dingle. Congressman Dingle, thank you so much for being here.

Really appreciate it. It's great to be with you. I want to start with you where I ended with Congressman Donalds. You heard the president.

In defending his hair policy, the president said that kids do not need to have as many dolls and as many pencils. $2 will do. You don't need to made 30. Do you agree with any part of that argument, Congresswoman?

So first of all, I'm going to take a little step back and take a little bigger picture. I am somebody who believes tariffs are tool in the toolbox and appropriate when you are competing with China, which the Chinese government subsidizes manufacturing, manipulates its currency and pays slave labor. But the way that the president has done tariffs has created absolute chaos. It's made enemies out of our allies.

My industry does not want I'm a car girl, you know that from Michigan, doesn't want to be a ping pong ball. They still can't understand what he's done. And it is creating chaos. And that is not good.

And you know what? The average American family doesn't get 30 or $20 on Christmas Eve. One or two dollars is something that most families are very, very excited about. So it shows how out of touch with the economy he isn't just making that statement.

Let me ask you about something else. The president downplayed concerns about the possibility of a recession, saying that ultimately the US Will be okay in the long term even if it dips into a short term recession. What do you make of that argument? Well, first off, I don't, I don't like hoping for a recession.

I don't like talking about a recession because I think consumer confidence matters. I do think consumers are worried right now. The president made a lot of promises on the economy, and I heard my colleague previously, but he should go to the grocery store with me on Sunday mornings and see everybody knows I'm going to be there. And they're talking about how grocery prices haven't gone down and they're also talking about how a lot of programs that they depend upon are at risk.

So I don't think any of us wants to see a recession, but I'd love to see the economy get stronger. I don't want to see consumer prices go up. He campaigned that he would lower consumer prices. That hasn't happened.

How concerned are you? And they don't want to talk about a recession. But just give me the reality check, Congresswoman, how concerned are you? We saw the economy shrink in the first quarter that there could ultimately be a recession.

So I am worried. But I'm also going to tell you that I think the president does not hope, does not want to see this country's economy suffer. I don't think he wants to see businesses or manufacturers suffer. So, you know, we frequently don't know what the tariff policy is from day to day, by the way, that uncertainty, you know what every business needs larger, small certainty.

And the biggest thing they don't have is certainty. I think we need to be working together to keep that recession from happening, building up consumer confidence, which he hasn't been doing. So I want to figure out a way to do that because I don't think it's good for this country to have a recession. Congressman, let me ask you about another part of my conversation with President Trump.

We discussed the debate, debate surrounding Kilmar Garcia, of course, who was in this country undocumented. He was sent to El Salvador. The administration said it was an administrative error. Of course, there's been a lot of debate and discussion swirling around this.

As you know, though, the president's poll numbers on this issue, the broader issue of the border, is pretty steady. Do you think this is an issue, politically speaking, that Democrats should be focused on right now? Look, I think that Democrats are focused on lowering the cost of economic goods, but we're also worried about, you know, I sort of divide my life into two sides. Many people are worried about protecting the Constitution and what's happening to freedom of speech, freedom of the press, due process, Due process matters.

And I thought I've done many town halls, you know that they're as loud and contentious and as crowded as the Republicans are. And the first thing people ask me about is what do you do when a president ignores the courts? How do you ensure that people have due process? So I, I think that all of us want care about our national security.

We want to keep our border safe, but you also have to recognize and give every person due process. I don't think anybody, there are a lot of messaging bills out there. I don't know a Democrat that wants to see any violent person in this country or someone who attacks somebody in law enforcement. We need to have a process by which we are able to deport those that have done violent crimes.

But due process is very fundamental principle of our Constitution. Let me ask you about what we're seeing on the Democratic side now. Senator Sanders has been drawing huge crowds as you know, going across the country with Congressman Alexandria Casio Cortez on their oligarchy tour warning of an emerging oligarchy in this country. Senator Slotkin, though, is saying that Democrats really need to have a different message, saying they should stop using the term oligarchy, that it doesn't reson.

Where do you fall in this debate? Well, first of all, I'm somebody, you know who I am. I'm the person that's in the union halls that goes to meet with veterans every weekend. I was at five farmer markets on Saturday.

I believe you go and are where the people are. I agree with Senator Saunders that people know what the word oligarchy means. But I think we need to be talking to everybody. I said in 216 we're going to lose because we weren't listening to working men and women.

We need to be listening to young people. We need to be listening to young men who are frustrated and worried about their future. So I'm probably with both of them. And that's not I am somebody who absolutely goes where the people are.

I am a fighter. I have given more speeches at rallies and talked about these issues. But I'm also somebody who worked for dental motors for 30 years. So we got to talk to people.

We got to go where the people are and that's what we got to do. And British owners and AOC are not afraid to go where people are and talk about tough issues either. All right, Congressman Debbie Zingle, we always appreciate your perspective. Thank you so much for joining us.

Thank you. Coming up after the break, the president's nuclear non starter from our interview his all or nothing approach to talk to the run as Israel approves military plans for a major escalation in the war against Hamas. You're watching a very special edition of es. Now let's get started your wellness journey with you.

Workouts, meal plans. It's your fast track to a healthier you. And now, during the Xfinity Member celebration, members need an exclusive 50% off an annual subscription. Head to xin.com membership to learn more.

Xfinity. Imagine that subscription automatically here at 6599 plus tax and fees until cancel on the rants. May 20, 2026. Prices subject to change.

Visit today. Com xfd for longer terms and details. Hey guys, Willie Geist here reminding you to check out the Sunday Sit down podcast. On this week's episode, I sit down with one of the biggest bands in the world, Mumford and Sons, as we get the boys together to talk about their new number one album, Prize Fighter and the evolution of that irresistible foot stomping sound.

You can get our conversation for free wherever you download your podcasts. 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 interruptions, 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. Welcome back.

In a major escalation in the war in the Middle East, Israel's security have unanimously approved a plan to expand its military offensive in Gaza, with the goal seizing the war torn enclave. Israeli officials say the goal is to increase pressure on Hamas to release the remaining hostages in Gaza. But it's not just the threat of Hamas that Israel's grappling with. Iran, backed with the rebels, recently launched a ballistic missile strike near Israel's main international airport in Tel Aviv, which Israel's military failed to intercept.

The threat posed by Iran's proxies to Israel comes as the US Looks to resume nuclear talks with Tehran. Here's what President Trump told me about those discussions. Let me ask you about Iran. Your administration has had conversations with Iran.

Is the goal of these talks limiting Iran's nuclear program or total dismantlement? Total dismantlement. That's all you'll accept? That's all I'd accept.

Now there's a new theory going out there that Iran would be allowed to have civilian meaning to make electricity. And but I say, you know, they have so much oil, what do they need it for? But, you know, I've seen it with other states where they're looking to do something and have a lot of oil. Iran has tremendous energy.

And I put sanctions if, you know that I put pretty strong sanctions on two days ago on the oil. The sad part is that if Biden didn't get involved, if we had a competent president, you would have never had the attack on Israel. October 7th would have never taken place. Hamas would have had no money because Iran was broke.

And now in a period of four years during the Biden administration, they became very rich. They have over $300 billion cash in the bank and they had no money. They were ready to make a deal with me. And it's very sad because of this ringed election.

They didn't do it. Just another thing you can mark down to a better election. It's interesting what you're saying though, because Secretary Rubio has said that he would accept the idea is there is an openness to accepting peaceful civil nuclear program. Well, that's what people.

I didn't say anything contradictory. I'd say that people are talking about that. And this is something that's really pretty new in the dialogue. And I'd have to be, you know, my inclination is to say, what do you need that for?

You have a lot of oil. Do you want total dismantlement? Bottom line? I think that I would be open to hearing it.

You know, civilian energy is called but you know, civilian energy often needs to leads to military wars and we don't want to have them have a nuclear weapon. It's a very simple deal. I want Iran to be really successful, really great, really fantastic. The only thing they can have is a nuclear weapon.

If they want to be successful, that's okay. I want them to be so successful. And you know, the Iranian people are incredible. I just don't want them to have a nuclear weapon because the world will be destroyed.

We will dig deeper into that key part of my exclusive interview with President Trump and one of the very latest developments in the Middle east to next. Stay with us. You're watching the press now. Welcome back.

For more, the talks between the US And Iran. I'm joined now by NBC News chief Washington correspondent and chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrew Mitchell. Andrew, thank you so much for being such a great interview. Thank you.

I really appreciate it. Thank you for being here for analysis of this critical part which is our discussion on foreign policy. And you just heard him there first he leaned into dismantlement, but then seemed to really open the door to, well, maybe they can have some civil nuclear. Absolutely.

And it's not a red line, clearly. And when you said, but Secretary Rubio has said that they could have some enriched uranium for civilian, you know, nuclear power, which would be permitted under the national, the non Proliferation act, he said, well, you know, hadn't considered that. He did not. He was not aware or it was not top of mind for him what Secretary Rubio had said, because a little bit down the weeds in terms of what he would be aware of and he's not ruling it out now.

It's still, there's an open question as to whether this would permit them to be to purchase enriched uranium and still have to dismantle all their centrifuges so that they couldn't break out again. And that's a clear, you know, negotiating point. Iran has not accepted that. But this is the most promising moment for Iran negotiations.

The Biden administration got nowhere. And in this instance, it's in fact, next to China, maybe Donald Trump, who took, you know, the US out of the previous nuclear deal that President Obama's team had negotiated, arguably making the world a lot more dangerous, according to most experts, because once they're out of it, they could break out of it as they have, and they've come this close to being able to have enough enriched uranium to create a nuclear weapon. And Andrew, another topic. Israel's cabinet approved a plan to seize Gaza.

What can you tell us there? Well, that is really startling. Certainly Israel's decision to reoccupy Gaza would make it impossible to have a Palestinian state. State.

Israel's decision would make it impossible to have a Palestinian state. They've already taken two thirds of Gaza. So if they now reoccupied Gaza, which they withdrew from voluntarily in 2005, it would then become impossible to have a Palestinian state. And sorry, having a little bit of a coffee.

We've all gone through that. I know you have. Talking about President Trump heading to the Middle east next week. President Trump's trip to the Middle east actually duplicates.

This would duplicate President Trump's first trip after taking office in 2017. He went to Riyadh, which is so unusual. He's the first person would go to Saudi Arabia before he went to Mexico or Canada. He closed his neighbors.

Clearly this time President Trump is. President Trump is not going to go to Mexico or Canada, his closest neighbors, who he's been attacking on tariffs and a lot of other things. So going to the Middle east and going to Riyadh and Qatar and the uae, three countries that are, you know, key to the Iran negotiations, key to any future with Israel, normalization with Saudi Arabia. It's really pivotal.

And of course, Qatar is the largest US Base over there and the big fight against the Houthis. All right, Andrea, thank you. My cough is hopefully passing. I so appreciate you being here.

Thank you. I'm sorry for that. Thank you for powering. No, we will have much more of the panels next.

And welcome back. Roughly one month ago, President Trump told me he was not joking when he brought up the idea of serving a third term, even though the Constitution program prohibits it. But in my new interview with him, he gave the clearest indication yet that he will leave the White House after finishing his second term, acknowledging he's, quote, not allowed to run again, while adding he's not looking into it and he believes the MAGA movement can survive without him as its leader. Joining now is NBC News chief Capitol Hill correspondent Ryan Nobles, former chief spokesperson for Vice President Kamala Harris and co host of the brand new show the Weeknight on msnbc, Simone Sanders Townsend and former Trump White House communications director Michael Dubke.

Thank you to all of you for being here. Really appreciate it. Ryan, let me start with you. What do you make of the president's Latest statements about 2028?

In my telephone conversation with him several weeks ago, he said he's not joking about this top run for their term, those prohibited by the cons. But then in my sit down interview, he said he's really not focused on that at all. He seems to be all over the math when it comes to this topic. He certainly has the opportunity to completely roll it out, take it off the table, say I'm constitutionally prohibited from seeking a third term, so you don't need to ask me about it anymore.

I'm not interested in it. But for some reason he keeps this ball live. He allows some of his most prominent supporters in the conservative media echo sphere to continue to peddle this idea that there's some sort of opportunity for him to stay in office past 2028. Is it because he doesn't want to be considered a lame duck?

Is it just because he doesn't want to consider a future where he's not the president of the United States? All those are valid questions. But the simple fact of the matter is until he definitively says I'm not interested in being president past 2028, I believe it's a valid question to continue asking him because he alone is the only one who can tell us that this is not going to happen. My Ducky, what do you make of this?

He's just having some fun. Keep hope alive, I guess, for the look, I mean, when he's been asked about this, they were the first time I think he was legitimately just kind of poking around on it. I think he gave you a very honest answer. Experts have looked into this.

He is worried about being a lame duck in the sense that he's got to. And frankly, I'm more worried about what the elections of 2026 are going to portend because he's got just a short period of time, especially if the nation goes in a different direction. 2026 is really the election that the President should care about, not 2028 or beyond. Yeah.

So I agree with you on the 2026 point because. And I don't think though that he or Stephen Miller, all people who work for Donald Trump are just going to allow a little thing like all the sentiment and you know, polls and what people think allow the House to flip their fingers. So you got the voter the voting executive order that he put out. You got the SAVE act, right.

That pass the House could potentially pass the Senate pass House with some Democratic votes too on that. And just look what's happening in North Carolina. Allison Riggs won that state Supreme Court race in November. It is being challenged.

She won by 734 votes. It's been challenged and now some votes have been thrown out and she could potentially lose her Republican counterpart for the counter technicality. So I don't think that it's a football conclusion. But on this, why didn't you say no?

Because you know what they said while he was having fun the last time too, and then people tried to take over the Catholic. I think that's part of the reason that we need to take this so seriously, Mike. And I appreciate the idea. Like, I honestly, I think too much has been made of this whole him being in the Pope costume.

As a Catholic, I can understand why people are offended by it, but I don't think he really wants to be the Pope. And I get that he likes to joke, but when it comes to something like this, he tests the limits of what is acceptable all the time. And so there's no reason to think that this isn't part of that. Yeah.

And the Trump Organization is selling half state Trump 2028. His allies certainly are talking about. I want to play for you guys another piece of the interview where I asked him who he thinks his successor should Be take a look at that. We'll discuss it.

I know that you are only 100 days in, but as we sit here today, who do you see as your successor, Mr. President? Well, it's far too early to say that, but you know, I do have a vice president and typically JD's doing a fantastic job. He would be at the top of the list.

It could very well be. I don't want to get involved in that. I think he's a fantastic, brilliant guy. Marco is great.

There's a lot of them that are great. I also see tremendous unity. But certainly you would say that somebody's the vp. If that person is outstanding, I guess that person would have an advantage.

But I think the other people would all stay in unbelievably high positions. But you know, it could be that he'd be challenged by somebody. We have a lot of good people in this. Funny, Mike, what do you make of that answer?

The fact that yes, he talked about J.D. vance, but boy, he really leaned into Marco Rubio as well and that got a lot of attention. Well, he keeps giving Marco Rubio extra responsibility, so maybe being myer apparent is the next one that he wants to give. All I can think of right now on the Catholic side of this, J.D.

vance is a Catholic and be a much younger pope. So I think maybe the president's taking that direction. Simone, from a political perspective, how do you break down what you heard from President Trump when his likely successorship as someone needs to work for vice president? If when I was working for Vice President Harris and the president at the time gave that kind of answer, we would be like, get on the phone.

Can we clean up these podcasts a little bit? So I don't think that that pretends well for the mayor. I also think that to a certain extent, Donald Trump doesn't want us to think about his republic. He doesn't want to annoy anyone one quite yet because he wants to be the top dog.

And the second he says, I think J.D. vance is going to be my, her parent, my next successor. All of us are just going to be talking about the next mansion for 100 and some days. I did.

I did. And I preface my question that way. I know it's so early. Let me just get everyone's take on the doll quote because it has had so much resonance.

Ryan, what's the reaction been on the Hill? I mean, I think obviously there are members, the Republican members of Congress are probably cringing because they're going to be forced to answer this question now. When they're in these town halls, when they're having town halls, or when they're meeting with their constituents. But I don't think it's so much the fact that he said Instead of having $3, you should only have two.

I think it was really one of the idea that he thinks anyone has $30, that that's the comparison that we're talking to here. It shows a level of disconnection with the average voter about how many of these dolls are actually under criminal Christmas trees in over every holiday season. And this disconnect about what the real impact of the economy might be. So he's saying 30 versus 2.

That's what a billionaire tells you to do. But for a family that's struggling to pay for their bills on a weekly basis, it's the difference between two dolls and maybe no dolls. My other Republican strategist said to me, like, this person cringes when they hear that. Well, on the dolls, maybe.

But he also talked about pencils when he was in your interview with you. I think the point he was trying to make here is. And he used the word junk when talking about some of the goods coming from China. I think the point he was trying to make is that there are a lot of things that we import in this country from China that we don't necessarily mean.

I don't know who's dolls, I don't know who's pencils, where he's going with it. But I think that's the bigger issue here, is what are we bringing into this country that we need at such a low price that American jobs need to be in jeopardy? I will buy that. So if that's what the President is saying, though, that's still a bad message.

I do think that the President has a little bit more real life experience because what coming out of the White House reminds me of what I was in the White House and we talked about transitory inflation. The inflation was not transitory. The groceries were high. But the people directly around the President, folks in the room, when I first heard that, I was like, I'm going to the grocery store.

That is what's happening here. And again, you can do a lot. And Donald Trump has been able to benefit from messaging away a lot of things. You cannot out message people feeling their everyday lives.

So when they go to the shelves and they're no nails, maybe it'll be a little too expensive. Exactly. Guys, thank you so much. Great conversation.

Ryan, Simone and Mike really appreciate it. And Simone, congratulations on launching your new show. We will be cheering you on. Thank you.

The Weeknight, which premieres this week on our sister network, network msnbc. We're back tomorrow with morning the Press, now the news, TV news is Kelly Jackson right now. He was a young Marine. She didn't care about convention.

They made a life together. Then one night, a 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,