Meet the Press NOW — May 6

You have a reason to care. You know someone you've lost someone, you've lived it. The darkest times are no match for what we can do together. Join us for the CAMH sunrise challenge from May 25th to 29th.

Canadians are waking up with the sun to raise funds for a future where everyone can access the mental health care they need, the moment they need it. Get up with the sun, show up for camh, and rise up for mental health. Register today at sunrisechallenge Ca. That's sunrisechallenge ca.

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

President Trump meets with Canada's new prime minister for the first time at the White House, doubling down on his push to decouple the U.S. economy from its largest trading partner. But also conceding that annex in Canada is highly unlikely. Plus, new US Intelligence now appears to undercut a key argument at the center of the Trump administration's sweeping deportation plans.

As the president moves forward in his efforts to test the limits of his executive authority and Democrats take on the Trump administration's unprecedented and unpredictable tariff policies, we are going to speak to one of the top House Democrats who's been leading the charge against the president's agenda as her party struggles to rebrand and amount a political comeback. Welcome to the press. Now, I'm Peter Alexander here in Washington, where President Trump appears to be de escalating some tensions with Canada while reigniting others. During an Oval Office meeting with newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, the president notably revisited his rhetoric about annexing Canada's territory and making it the 51st American state.

A reporter in the Oval asked him what concessions he wanted from today's meeting, and his reply was that he didn't want any. Just in his words, friendship. The president saying his position has not changed on making Canada the 51st state, but also making it clear that really had no intention of pressing the issue with the Canadian prime minister, who made it quite clear where his country stands. Well, I still believe that, but.

But, you know, takes two to tango, right? I do feel it's much better for Canada, but we're not going to be discussing that unless somebody wants to discuss it. Well, if I may, as you know from real estate, there are Some places that are never for sale, that's true. We're sitting in one right now, Buckingham palace, if you visit it as well, having met with the owners of Canada over the course of the campaign last several months.

It's not for sale, won't be for sale ever. But the opportunity is in the partnership and what we can build together we have done in the past. The president following up by saying never say never. Despite the softer language from President Trump on annexation, he did double down on tariffs against Canada, saying that there was nothing it could do.

Immediately lift those penalties. The president and the Canadian prime minister also sparked publicly about the US's reliance on Canadian markets. We want to make our own cars. We don't really want cars from Canada and we put tariffs on cars from Canada and at a certain point it won't make economic sense for Canada to build those cars.

And we don't want steel from Canada because we're making our own steel. We're having massive steel plants being built right now as we speak. We really don't want Canadian steel and we don't want Canadian aluminum and various other things because we want to be able to do it ourselves. In other words, they have a surplus with us and there's no reason for us to be subsidizing Canada.

Canada's a place that will have to be able to take care of itself economically. We are the largest line of the United States in the totality of all the goods. We are the largest line of the United States. We have a tremendous auto sector between the two of us.

And the changes that made have been helpful. You know, 50% of a car that comes from Canada is American. That's not like anywhere else in the world. Today's White House beating came hours after the federal government reported that the U.S.

trade deficit widened to a record $140.5 billion in March as companies raised to import goods before the tariffs went into effect. Also today, the CEO of American toymaker Mattel, which makes among other dolls, Barbie, told CNBC he toy manufacturing shifting to the US as a result of these tariffs, but does see American consumers paying more. NBC News senior White House corporate Kelly Donald joins me now alongside our friend NBC News business and dad correspondent Brian Chunky. Eyes on all these things, Kelly, let's walk through this for a second if we can.

This is sort of a delicate dance that we watch in the course of the half an hour plus between Marc Carney, the Canadian prime minister, and President Trump, where you can see Carney time sort of waving. I got something to say here you only had a chance to speak up a few times. The president sort of wanted to demonstrate that he was dominating this conversation. What were they hoping to accomplish here?

Well, certainly a reset would be welcomed by the Canadian prime minister, who has in many ways benefited from the bombast and the broad pronouncements of President Trump, at least in terms of how he weathered the election, going from an expected Conservative win to his Liberal Party winning with ease. And so now that he's in a position and is the prime minister, he sort of definitely used the real estate language that President Trump had invoked to talk about not for sale. And so a chance to reset, a chance to change the dynamic, a chance to certainly Canadians were watching closely to get a measure of how he would be toe to toe with President Trump. And so he asserted himself where he could.

And some of the Canadian niceness, that reputation for being polite, was certainly at play as well. But President Trump, while talking about wanting friendship, also repeatedly pummeled Canada in terms of downgrading its value as a trading partner and insisting it would still be better off if it were the 51st state. We'll see where that goes over time. But the president also said he wants to resolve the trading issues.

And clearly it is an important partnership. And we saw at least an attempt at rebuilding today, but not all the way there. Yeah, the trade deficit, we should know. The president again today saying it's $200 billion with Canada.

The actual number is closer to 35 billion DOL. Nonetheless, on this topic of trade, Kelly, we heard from the treasury secretary, Scott Bassett, today. You and I know as we've been watching this in front row, that he's been touting progress on these trade deals with key partners. In fact, there's one right around the corner.

We're about to make an announcement, but the president today, I think, really sort of backed away from that sense of progress here. What struck you? Well, the impression was clearly left from the point when these tariffs in their sort of incremental stages. The president always talked about being the dealmaker.

His top administration voices did so as well. And deals suggest there's actual negotiations and perhaps a signed agreement to come at some point. Then they talked about the rushing in of many nations wanting to be a part of that. And now they're describing something very different.

There was at 1.90 deals in 90 days. That's not what they're saying now. The president is now playing the need for formalized deals. The treasury secretary, who was addressing Congress, which does require being truthful and he has been very consistent in being clear about things like the US And China are not engaged in negotiations, whereas the President has often suggested that those talks were happening.

But certainly there was a sense of it doesn't have to be a written form. You've heard what the President said. It sort of recalibrated his approach to this. We also have a situation.

When are you gonna sign this? We don't have to sign deals. We can sign 25 deals right now, Howard, if we wanted. We don't have to sign deal.

They have to sign deals with us. They want a piece of our market, we want a piece of their market. We don't care about their market. They want a piece of our market.

You keep writing about deals, deals. When are we gonna sign one? It's very simple. Well, they say, in some cases we want you to open up your country.

In some cases we want you to drop your tariffs. So I wish they'd keep, you know, stopping asking, how many deals are you signing this week? Because one day we'll come and we'll give you 100 deals and they don't have to sign again. The premise was the President had suggested there would be deals.

So, of course, we followed up with questions and others did as well to try to get a sense of where he's at. A little bristly today. Also a bit more of that real estate analogy. Kind of like the person who doesn't want to show much interest in the deal in order to be able to have some leverage.

Yeah, Kelly, I think those are all points. Brian, I want to follow up with you on this. The president sort of suggested this idea of separating the US Economy from the Canadian economy right now. As Carney himself said, The U.S.

is Canada's biggest plan. We buy more from them than from anywhere else. How feasible is what President. President Trump is proposing?

Yeah, I mean, the president did list a number of industry goods, like, for example, lumber and oil. Yes, in the United States, we do domestically produce a lot of that. In fact, on the oil front, we are a much bigger producer now than before, let's say 10 years ago. But there are a lot of nuances to our trading relationship with.

It's not really fungible. It's not a thing. We could just say we just go alone and make it here in the United States. And one example is potash.

It's a form of fertilizer that a lot of American farmers will use. We don't make that here in the United States. Almost all the potash that we have here in the United States does come from Canada. That is being tariffs right now at 10%.

That has been a big thorn in the negotiations between the United States and also with Canada. But the big example here is really with the auto industry. We talk about how a lot of American automakers have assembly plants in Canada. They also have auto parts, you know, suppliers that come across from Canada.

I recently went on a reporting trip and actually followed an auto part. It goes across the border four times, in fact. I mean, I even went on a jog in Detroit and I almost say a wrong turn up in Canada. They are so close to each other.

I think that that type of integration, which has been around for decades, underscores that it's not a thing that you can decouple very easily here. I'm impressed by the jog you were paying attention to. Short. I was there and didn't even do better than that over the course of the reporting.

Let me ask you about Mattel if I can, because I think this is where the rubber meets the road for a lot of American consumers. The CEO of Mattel said that he does not expect manufacturing to move to the US but does expect that consumers here will pay more. Can you walk us through that? I mean, that's what we're hearing broadly from companies right now, whether it's in private or publicly making those sort of assessments.

Well, the analogy is relevant because we just heard from the President a few days ago describe the situation for Americans as one where you might be able to buy $30 for your daughter. You only be able to buy two, and maybe those two will cost a few more dollars. And essentially what Mattel is saying is exactly what's going to happen here. Because they said that they might have to take pricing.

That's the kind of corporate speaker you will for having to raise the price tags at the store for not just Barbies, but also things like Hot Wheels that Mattel produces as well. What's also interesting, though, about the politics of all this is that as the president is trying to use these tariffs to essentially whack the American companies with incentives to produce here domestically, you have companies that are saying, yes early, we're trying to move things around so we don't have to pay 145% tariff on things coming out of China, but instead of moving into the US we're just gonna move it to other places in the world. That's what it said in the earnings call. They're gonna try diversify away from China.

But they didn't say we'll come to the us, they're just gonna move to other countries. Kind of similar story with Apple and other companies that have very much been in the spotlight here with regards to whether or not they're producing here in the us. They're saying, yeah, we're just gonna have to hit China. We'll just move it to another country.

Brian, thank you. Kelly. About my friend, I appreciate you as well. Join me now is Doug Ford, the Premier of Ontario.

Premier Ford, I appreciate you making time to speak to us. As you know as well as anybody with intentions at one point between Canada and the US were extremely high. You even threatened to cut off power to the US before both sides back down. What is your current assessment of the U.S.

canada relationship? Well, right now, it was great to see Prime Minister Carney and then President Trump sit down today. And I think that it's a new start, a new opportunity to rebuild the relationship. And it sounded like it went fairly well.

And I hope it really does go well moving forward because we need each other. We need to build that fortress I've been talking about for a number of months now. So it's good to see that they're getting along. He's getting along a lot better than our former prime minister.

Well, I was going to say that was particularly notable here. We know the way that Donald Trump spoke about the former prime minister, referring to him as a governor repeatedly here. So I want to get your take because I know for the Canadian audience this was, this was must see TV to see the way that Carney would conduct himself in front of President Trump. How would you assess how Prime Minister Carney handled this meeting with the President?

Did he strike, in your eyes, the right balance between, I guess, flattery and defiance? He did strike the right balance. Make no mistake about it. Prime Minister Carney is extremely bright individual.

He was the chair of Brookfield, a trillion dollar fund, one of the chairs in Bloomberg. He's an extremely bright individual and he'll get along quite well with President Trump. Who has more leverage in these trade talks right now, the United States or Canada? Well, I don't look at it as leverage.

I feel that we need each other. We're the US's largest customer. The US is our largest customer. I spent 20 years of my life in Chicago, New Jersey.

I love the Americans and all Canadians love Americans. We just have to sit down. We're stronger together. I always say, united we stand, divided we fall.

We are the problem. China's the problem, and we need to stand united. And when President Trump says He doesn't need Canada. I have to laugh every time he says it because you know, the farmers would be in big trouble in the US if they didn't receive Saskatchewan's potash or the uranium or high grade nickel or the $1.2 billion, 1.2 billion barrels of oil that we ship down.

And the list keeps going on and on and on. If you take away the oil, by the way, the US has a $50 billion surplus on. So if he doesn't want the oil, we'll make the pipelines, we'll ship them over to everywhere else in the world if he doesn't want oil. And then they know the $50 billion surplus that he'll be proud of.

I want to ask you if I can obviously there was back and forth and as you heard work on was clearly prepared on this issue of annexation and struggles I'm speaking to right now. We've spoken in the past but not recently. The signage behind your Reese Canada is not for Sale. That's obviously the key headline that a lot of Canadians are going to see on the evening newscast and when they wake up to the newspapers in the morning, is that a new was that newly prepared?

Were you surprised that President Trump appears to back away a bit from his efforts or his claims to Canada as a possible 51st state? Well, I'm not surprised anything the president says any any longer. I just know that Canada is not for sale will never be the 51st state. We love our American neighbors.

We can work collaboratively together against our foes, be it China or other other countries around the world that don't share. We share the same values, Canada and us, unlike any other two countries in the world. We have longest unprotected border in the entire world. We're so much stronger together.

We have more critical minimals in Ontario than anywhere in the world. I just want to ask you very quickly as you've engaged in this so long, the USMCA was set up by former President Trump to get rid of nafta. Now the president effectively wants to get rid of the usmca. What does that say to you?

Well, I was part of the last deal and I remember the president saying this is the greatest deal lover. Well, I guess it's not the greatest deal any longer, but that's fine. If he wants to re look at it and renegotiate it, that's fine. We're up for that because again, I just think we can do so much more together.

We need each other and we're going to be really working with the US Administration to make this happen. Premier Doug Ford of Ontario, we very much appreciate making time to speak to. Thank you so much, sir. Thank you so much.

Coming up, aligning with Biden details on the Trump Justice Department's decision to side with the Biden administration push for a key abortion pill case to be dropped. That story is next. Plus, new US Intelligence appears to contradict a crucial argument underpinning a key part of the Trump administration's mass deportation plan. We have that reporting straight ahead.

You are watching MEET THE PRESS now. Welcome back to surprising move. The Trump administration asked the federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit restricting access to the abortion pill. Myth of Preston Justice Department attorneys did not weigh in on the merits of the case, instead taking up a similar position to that that the Biden administration had taken by saying the three conservative states who filed the lawsuit did not have standing to bring the case.

Throughout this campaign, throughout the campaign, President Trump tried to navigate the political intricacies of the abortion access debate, saying he would not ban access to M. Bristow nationwide, while also taking credit for appointing Supreme Court justices who helped overturn Roe v. Wade. Join me now.

NBC News justice and intelligence correspondent, of course, is Ken Delaney. And, Ken, what does this tell us, if anything, about where the administration's position is on access to the abortion pill? And where do we watch this case go from here? It's hard to know, Peter, because as you said, the Trump administration's Justice Department is taking this position on procedural rounds, not on the merits of the case.

Nonetheless, it was striking to see them take the very position that the Biden administration has taken and essentially trying to block this lawsuit, which itself seeks to block the distribution of this abortion judge. And some experts are looking at this as the Trump administration to buy time as they try to figure out what to do with this issue, because that's Also something like 70% of Americans support access to this drug. But there are a lot of MAGA people, a lot of Trump supporters who have trouble with it. And so it's a thorny political issue for the Trump administration.

So let's just go 35,000ft. Just to be very clear, what does this mean for access into the Preston? Does anything change at all based on this? Nothing changes.

The FDA has allowed this drug to be distributed without in person doctor visits and dispense at retail pharmacies and through the mail. And so far, the Trump administration has not changed that. Now, they could, of course, they control the fda, but again, so far they have not. And this lawsuit changes Nothing.

All right, let me pick up another topic. I got a lot of attention in the justice world. This is the President's nomination of a man by the name of Ed Martin. He would serve, if the President gets his way, as the U.S.

attorney for Washington, D.C. senator Tom Tillis of North Carolina today came out in opposition to this nomination. He cited, among other things, his concerns. Really, this was the primary issue about Martin's position on January 6th.

Prosecutions likely blocking his path to confirmation explain why this nomination was so controversial. This is Ed Martin, someone who has been a strong and fierce Defender of those January 6th defendants, some of the riders among them. How much of a blow could this be without Taylor's administration? Yeah.

Even leaving aside generous six, Peter, some of his critics will say Ed Martin was one of the least qualified people ever to be nominated as U.S. attorney. He had no prosecutorial experience, and as acting U.S. attorney, he's done a series of bizarre things, including most recently, sent a letter to medical journals essentially threatening them with a criminal investigation over what he viewed as a bias, political bias on their part when it comes to January 6th.

He was an ardent backer of the Stop the Steel movement. He was outside the Capitol on the day of the riot, and he has launched investigations into how that office prosecuted Generous six cases. He's fired a number of prosecutors behind some Generous six cases and demoted others. And so for Thom Tillis, this was just a bridge too far.

Thom Tillis actually said if it was any other district, he might have supported that, but not here in the district the January 6th attack took place, and that looks like it dooms the nomination because his acting role expires on May 20. Just to put a punctuation mark on this, the guy who would run the office that prosecuted the January 6th defendants would, if this happened, be someone who was fiercely defending those same people that this office had previously prosecuted. And Lane, we appreciate it very much. Thank you.

We want to turn to the president's immigration crackdown now. Today, Homeland Security Secretary Christine Noem testified before the House Appropriations Committee to defend the administration's priorities, while Democrats pushed back on several DHS policies, including the president's deportation agenda. This comes as the Trump administration is intensifying its efforts, including offering money, thousand bucks, to convince migrants to self deport, basically to take themselves out of the country. DHS announced yesterday that migrants who use the CBP home app to voluntarily leave the US Will now receive assistance to facilitate travel to their home country, as well as a 1000 doll.

$1000 paid after their return has been confirmed. But the presidency probation policies may be facing another setback here. A newly declassified memo reveals intelligence agencies rejected claims that Venezuelan President Maduro controls the trend Aragua gang undercutting the president's justification to invoke what he has been using as its argument in support of this effort, the Alien Enemies act to deport migrants without due process. And join me now as NBC News intelligence reporter Daniel Lucian.

Thanks for being here. I want to make this clear. Here's a new reporting about this intelligence memo that runs counter to the administration's justification to support these Venezuelan migrants here. Tell us more about that and why this is significant, the way we're watching this all play out.

So the whole premise really of invoking the 1798 law that allows this kind of expedited deportation of Venezuela as Del Salvador was saying, that this country's under invasion and this gang, Trent from Venezuela is allegedly acting at the direction of the Maduro regime. But now you have an intellig memo saying, actually that's not the case. And this is a consensus across the intelligence community with the exception of the FBI that are partial to send. And they're basically saying, yes, this gang commits crimes, moves narcotics, but it's not really acting on the orders of the Maduro regime.

And that's a problem for the administration, I think. So explain why that's a problem specifically as they try to defend this argument before federal judges. That's right. You already have a federal, more than one federal judge questioning this idea of an invasion.

Now they're gonna have this. The opponents of this are gonna have this intelligence memo. So that's a problem for the administration. And of course it creates a political optics problem because it's contradicting how they've presented this.

So walk me through the sort of political side of all this right now. Right? Like the President. This is sort of like the intersection of a lot of things.

You got the US Intelligence agencies that the president has his own issues with. Now, of course, he runs all of them. You have the Aliens act in his desire to deport at this time. Is there concern with the intelligence community that there could in some form be politicized here?

We've seen it before in Washington, but we have not seen, you know, Wilson Blower come forward. We haven't had somebody resign. But you do have Democratic lawmakers seizing on this. And hold on, what about this discrepancy?

You've presented it one way publicly and your own intelligence community seems to be saying something different. What's up with that? And I think we're gonna hear a lot more of this now. The administration and Republicans who come back and say, listen, this is irrelevant.

You know, this gang is dangerous and they've got to go and they've got to be deported. Yeah, to be clear, they can be dangerous. But the argument had been that they were dangerous in the form of an invasion being supported by Venice, by the President at the same time. I appreciate it.

Thanks for your reporting and sharing all that. Tomorrow, the Papal Conclave begins at the Vatican. As we've been watching closely, cardinals have now entered into seclusion. All staff have taken oath of secrecy.

And while there is no timeline for the voting, we're told it could take days longer than usual. See the white smoke which indicates the election of a new Pope. There's no clear frontrunner still, as cardinals are ideologically divided between conservatives and reformists like Pope Francis. Also, the late pontiff's legacy of geographical diversity among his appointed cardinals presents its own challenges.

Many of these electors really, before they arrived in Rome, didn't even know one another. They don't speak the same language in many cases. In the past, Italian was the unofficial common language. That's actually no longer the case, which is going to influence the politics of this conclave.

You see, there's politics everywhere. Stick with NBC News now for continuing coverage of the papal election. We will be right back. More after short break.

And also with Mexico. I think the relationship is really very good with the president of Mexico, as you know, you probably heard. And we're going to have a very good relationship with regard to FIFA. I have no doubt about it.

Johnny would know better than anybody. But you understand, I mean, I think the relationship is very good. Thank you very much. Question?

Yep. Please be the level of interaction, cooperation with Canada and Mexico as it relates to next year's World Cup. Are you already talking to them? Here we are.

It's total, complete. We talked about it even today at our meeting with, with Canada. And the level is total. It's going to be perfect, going to be beautiful.

They're very excited about it. Yeah. Please. Applications for people around the world want to come to the United States for the World Cup.

If I may, just a second question for maybe Mr. Duffy, Secretary Duffy, Is there anything long lasting, transportation wise that Americans can expect from infrastructure being built for the World Cup? So we'll start with Christy in terms of the applications. Absolutely.

This summer by hosting the club championships for processing those travel documents and these applications already and working with Carlos and Johnny and their team to make sure that they're done timely and being proactive of it. And that is obviously going to be a precursor to what we can do for the World cup as well. So it is all being facilitated. We appreciate the partnership that we've got on all this with the State Department as well.

And I know we've got the Attorney General and cash at the FBI too interested in being all hands on deck to make sure this goes smoothly. Thank you, John. Yeah. So basically there'll be short term needs.

So we have to bring in, you know, buses and additional forms of transportation. Most Miami doesn't have the capacity with their transit system to carry all the people who are going to go from hotels and restaurants to stadiums and the fan center. So we're going to manage those assets, bring them in from around the country to move people. But I think we need it there long term.

So again, I don't foresee no long term changes. This is a short term push, folks. Come in to see great soccer matches and then. Okay.

Yeah, please question about your thoughts on Madison Square Garden. The Transportation Department recently took over the purpose of Penn Station and I was wondering if you have an opinion on the proposal to move as this fair Garden to allow for a more classical train station to move it. That was thought of yours. Jim Dolan's going to have something to say about that.

And I've not heard of any recent plans. They tried to do that for years. They've tried to move it. But I think Jim probably likes his location sitting on top of all the trains.

I can't blame him necessarily. There's not too much of a move. They are going to do something with Penn Station. We'll be involved in that.

We'll work with the governor and we'll be involved with that very much. Okay, thank you. Yeah, please go ahead. More than $600 million in federal funding for security.

Do you support that in branch with Secretary Norman? Security? Yeah, yeah, I support. I support really whatever that takes.

And any money that spent will make up many fold in terms of all of the economic development. These events, especially what we're talking FIFA. Then you have the Olympics. And these events properly done make a tremendous amount of money and prestige.

I think it's a great allure and prestige for our country and for the cities where they are. It's going to be amazing. Yeah. But we're going to not.

We won't hold back at all on security, most importantly. Thank you. Yeah, please. First question.

Is there any reason you haven't referred to McCartney as governor as you did Trudeau the second question, you said earlier that you don't have to sign in trade deals. Of course. Is there any country you expect to sign a trade deal with this week has separate. Well, we're looking at a lot of them.

We're talking to a lot of them right now, I think. I don't want to bore people with that, but I give a very long definition this morning in the Oval Office. We have. We're in very, very good shape.

This country's never been in better shape and we're doing great. We were being ripped off by every country in the world virtually, and now we're not being ripped off anymore. It's very simple. Very, very simple.

As far as calling him Governor Carney now, I haven't done that yet, and maybe I won't. I did have a lot of fun with Trudeau, but I think this is a, this is a big step up. It's a good step up for Canada. I watched.

I watched very closely. I thought he did really terrifically in the debates. I like him here. He's a nice man.

Along very well. We had a great meeting today. Really good. I think the relationship's gonna be very strong.

Thank you. Yes. Russia is banned from playing the next World Cup. What's your position on this?

Say it again. Russia has been banned from playing the next World Cup. What's your position? I didn't know that.

Is that right? They are banned for the time being. But we hope that he's the boss. I'm not the boss on that.

We hope that something happens and peace will happen and then we admit it. So that will be possible. That could be a good incentive. Right.

We want to get them to stop. We want them to stop. We want. The 5,000 young people a week are being killed.

It's not even believable. The Russian soldiers and the Ukrainian soldiers mostly. Also people in towns every once, every two weeks. Horrible thing going on over there.

So we're going to get their worst stop. Okay. When you were talking about all the events that will be happening here in the US over the next few years, you mentioned the G7 and you said it used to be called the G8. Yeah.

As the host country, you can actually invite Russia to the G7 plus one. What's your thinking on that right now? Well, Russia used to be a member of what was called then the G8. And I don't think I was really in politics at that point, but I know that President Obama didn't like it and they voted Russia out.

I say if they didn't vote Russia out, which I thought was a very foolish decision, because it's a group of people sitting around the table. I've done it many times with them, and you get to know them. And I say that if it was the G8, if Russia were in it, I think you probably wouldn't have this ridiculous deadly war going on right now. That was a very bad decision.

It was headed by Trudeau, by the way, and Obama. They were the ones that really fought hard to get Russia out. I think if Russia were in, you wouldn't. They threw him out.

And because of that, maybe millions of people are dying. Millions, you know, millions. The numbers are far greater than you think, but millions of people are dying. If he was sitting around the table with other people, seven people hammering him and saying, let's not do this, I think you wouldn't probably have had the.

The problems that you've had to get Russia back into this route. No, I think it's. I think it's not good timing now. Now, right now it's.

We missed that gate, didn't we? Huh? We missed that gate with another great decision by some people that should have been making decisions. Yes, go ahead.

Should people have taken, for example, protested in protests across the world, be concerned about being able to. To join the World cup in Washington, in the U.S. well, I don't know what you mean by that, but people that have taken part in protest, I think people are allowed to protest. You have to do it in a reasonable manner.

Not necessarily friendly, but reasonable. Otherwise, fam will come after you and you're going to have a big problem. You're going to have a big problem. Right, Pam?

He's doing a good job, too. Well, my whole team here is doing a fantastic job. We're very proud of him. So, yeah, we have a right to protest.

Yeah. Thank you. Go ahead. Yeah.

Do you support Israel's plan to conquer Gaza if Hamas doesn't agree to a deal during your visit? These are very strange questions. I never like when they read them off a machine. Who's sending that question to you?

And let's not talk about that now. We're talking about the world. Go ahead. What else?

Anything else? I think we're pretty well said. I want to thank everybody and we'll make this tremendously successful. And you can see Johnny's a very enthusiastic man.

He's got great enthusiasm, and that's one of the reasons that you've had such success over the last number of years that you've been there. Amazing. He's like he's like somebody that just woke up on Christmas morning as a young child and saw those stories. You've been watching President Trump there, as you can see, alongside the president of FIFA, head of the US Co hosting the World cup next year here alongside Canada and Mexico.

Notably, before we joined that conversation, the president made the announcement that he would be appointing Andrew Giuliani, who is the son of the president's longtime ally, former personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, as the executive director of the World cup task force. And effect, Giuliani is in charge of an effort that's likely to bring more than 10 million tourists from around the world here to the United States. And we want to get some other headlines for watching, specifically from Capitol Hill, where despite some hanging, some grumblings and plenty of missing details, Speaker Mike Johnson says it is still full speed ahead for Republicans on their goal of passing President Trump's signature tax and spending bill by Memorial Day, just a few weeks away. Take a listen.

This is going to be the most important, most consequential legislation that will ever be involved in our lifetimes and arguably one of the biggest in the history of Congress. And so I think at the end of the day, we'll get that consensus. I'm very confident that we're going to get to that point by the end of this weekend and we'll move this thing forward. Meanwhile, the Democratic leader Jeffries announced plans for legislative maneuver that would take some Republican cooperation to defend Medicaid and food stamp benefits in that Republican budget plan.

Congressional Democrats are steadfast in their opposition to the president's package as the party tries to find its own footing in its the right message strategy six months after its 2020 for defeat. Joining me now on set is Washington Democratic Congresswoman Susan Del Ben. She's the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. That is the group in charge of electing Democrats to the House of Representatives.

Congresswoman, I appreciate your being with us, listening to the president as we were listening for breaking news on a variety of different topics. I want to ask you quickly, you're in charge obviously, of helping get Democrats elected right now. So let's talk big picture. What would you characterize what the Democratic Party stands for right now?

Well, I think we stand for the American people. And a huge issue which we're seeing right now and a part of the debate on the legislation coming up on Capitol Hill is making sure we have an economy that works for the American people, lowering costs. Number one issue. Last election, the president promised to lower costs on Day one, it's a broken promise.

And congressional Republicans have been rubber stamping his policies of race cost of the American people. And now we're looking at devastating cuts that they want to do to Medicaid nutrition programs. Really the effort they've done to disruptions for a lot of families. So let me ask you about this because there has been some debate whether due processes to fight the topic of immigration that Democrats should be fighting if the economy is really should be laser focused.

Obviously there's a lot of issues the actor message on all of them. But it's your view that the economy will be the sole driver for Americans as it comes to the midterms and frankly again four years from now as it comes to the next election. I think it's a top issue for folks if they're struggling to make sure they can have a safe place to live, put food on the table, child care, healthcare, these are critical issues. If folks can't make sure that their family is safe, then nothing else is on their radar.

That's the most important. Let me ask you if I can because the Republican push back on all this, it's Democrats they were in control of the chambers of Congress, are controlled the White House for a long time. The president, you know how he just continues to use his bullying as a battering ran here. Obviously things the trajectory was good for the economy right now the Democratic argument, the argument frankly from law independent economists right now is the tariffs are impacting things right now.

So is there a message that doesn't relate to Donald Trump? Does this need to be messaged through the lens of Donald Trump? Does it have to be independent of Donald Trump for Democrats to find success? Well let's be clear, Donald Trump, the tariffs that we've seen in place and the random tariffs, no plan, that's Donald Trump and it's congressional Republicans because they've done nothing to stand up and make sure that Congress has a voice.

They have rubber stamped the president's agenda and that's what's impacting families. And the reason you're seeing it in polling numbers or if you go to town halls and listen to what people are saying, even in Republicans districts, they are outraged and they're scared about what they see happening. Economy and programs that they've depended on Social Security, Medicaid, there's no plan on the Republican side. It is damaging, it is damaging the economy and it's hurting American families.

I think as I speak to Americans around the country and I was traveling just last week, I had the presence 100 day marker. You talk to some and they may have some issues, including one long time, I should say one first time voter, community college student in particular. That struck me when I spoke to her. She voted for Donald Trump on that idea that he would improve the economy.

She acknowledges it hasn't been what she thought it would be. She has real concerns about it. But also I asked her about Democrats, says I don't really know what Democrats are for right now. Where is the where?

What is missing in terms of Democratic messaging? Who is the message leader? Who is the voice of the Democratic Party right now? How did Democrats make sure that message breaks through in what is a very challenging environment given the presence of megaphone?

Well, if I speak on behalf of the House and our candidates and our members, the reason we actually gained seats in a couple elections like last cycle is because we had strong candidates who were talking directly to their communities about the issues that matter. When you have folks who are talking about why they want to go to Washington State to make a difference for their communities and are there having direct conversations with people on the ground, it makes a difference. And that's why we have 14 Democrats in the House actually won in districts that Donald Trump won in. It's because they are authentic and independent minded.

That's how we win in those districts. And that's a big reason we'll continue to do that. Make sure we take back the majority in 2026. As you heard, the president downplayed concerns about possible recession in the U.S.

speaking my colleague Kristen Welker saying the U.S. will be okay in the long term. Should lawmakers be fighting harder to take back their tariff authority? Obviously the Senate was unable to pass that right now.

Are you forced to just watch on the sidelines? We absolutely should make sure that Congress has a say. This is Congress's role as Congress's constitutional role. And Republicans seem uninterested in standing up.

We put forward legislation to make sure that Congress has a role to prevent or have a say on tariffs. All the president would have to do is come to Congress and make sure Congress votes and decides. That's what we're asking. Republicans demanded this in many cases when Joe Biden was president and there was a bipartisan effort to make sure we were clear on congressional authority.

But they seem uninterested. Now that Donald Trump is president and we are co equal branch of government, we should have a say. Right now you've got a president making decisions every day that are random, chaotic and they're absolutely hurting our economy as he does. This is our obviously sort of expand his executive.

I want to ask you on the issue of immigration. You focus a lot about the economy here. Obviously immigration for a lot of Americans. The president said he got elected on two things, price of groceries and non legal immigration.

He's clearly succeeded in accomplishing Williams and Democrats privately, yeah, he has done a good job at slowing the pace of undocumented migrants from entering the country. Can Democrats concede that he has succeeded in that effort or where do you push back on that? Because you know that's the point that they're going to push Democrats on. As the campaign season ratchets up, I think people across the country are extremely concerned the lack of due process.

He seems not interested at all in our laws or obeying the courts. So we're going to continue to stand up for due process across the country. This is critically important to people and we need to make sure that the president is following the law. He seems uninterested in that.

Another reason why we need a Congress that's willing to stand up, one of our roles is oversight. There seems no interest from Republicans in standing up and providing oversight over the actions of this president. Before I go on about the topic of impeachment, mostly because we went through that process twice in the first go round with Donald Trump as president. One of your House Democratic colleagues is talking about impeachment after its defeat in the Senate after January 6th.

Is is impeachment something that should be taken off the table should Donald Trump be defeated in your eyes? If the ballot box only is impeachment something the Democrats should again consider? Well, I think actually the number one thing we need to do is take back the majority in the House. If we have a House majority, Speaker Hakeem Jeffries, that is the number one check we can have on this president.

We have a Congress that does its job in oversight. Make sure that we are focused on important legislation that moves our country forward. That's my focus as chair of the dccc. But that's one of the most important things we can do to put a check on this president and make sure that we are not only upholding our laws, but moving our country forward.

Democratic congresswoman from one of the most beautiful parts of Washington state, not far from where I lived for a long time. It's always a pleasure to see. Thanks for being with we got some other news to get to after short break including battleground shakeup in the Georgia Senate race, AOCs political ambitions and the future of both parties. The panel is next.

You're watching me press now. Welcome Back to big news. In a key 2026 Senate battleground race, Georgia Republican Governor Brian Kemp announced just yesterday that he will not be a candidate in the state's marquee Senate race next year. He was a top recruit for Republicans looking at unseat incumbent Democratic Senator John Ossoff there.

With Kemp passing on a Senate bid, it's a wide open Republican field that could lead to a contentious primary. Marjorie Taylor Greene's name already being included as a possible Republican pick there. And join me now in the panel is Margaret, congressional reporter at the Washington Post, Cordell Belcher, Democratic strategist and NDC News political analyst and TW Riggy. Say right for me, Ricky, I was trying to get right.

Strategist and vice president of the Push Digital group, Arianny Starr with governor Kentucky as it relates to him bowing out of the race. What does that mean? This is about as tight of a state as there is in the country right now in terms of set of races. I was down there for so much of the last go through with Ossoff and with Warnock.

What do you make of his dropping out of this race? Oh, it's significant. I mean, I have not heard such a sigh of relief from Democratic strategists. Absolutely.

And the fact that as you mentioned, House Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Greene are being are at least saying, you know, I might seek this office, that's like Democrats dream come true. They would love to see her win a primary because someone like Ossoff could probably quite easily win that state. She is too polarizing is what a lot of Democrats are saying. And we have seen that with a lot of her statements.

So I will say there are a number of House Republicans from Georgia who are also very interested to jump in or kind of weighing whether to go run for governors. Oh, absolutely. I mean, you're starting to really sense it. Even someone like Don Bacon starting to say, I'm actually thinking about not running again.

You know, historically the midterms are pretty bruising for Don Bacon, of course, in Omaha, a very purple, even blue seat, as it were. But obviously he's been able to win with Donald Trump in office. Exactly. And if he decides not to run, someone like Congresswoman Del Bennett who was just here, I mean, she would probably be celebrating because that is a seat that Democrats, Democrats would probably win.

TWA makes this decision by Governor Kemp, obviously he has succeeded where other Republicans have struggled. Right. To just build a huge coalition, Robbie's coalition in that state. There is another Republican Maybe has the same ability to do that right now.

Yeah, it's definitely a big hit. I think every Republican wanted to see Kemp run just as they wanted to see Chris Nu run in New Hampshire. It's just the nature of. Look, I think there's a lot of talent in Georgia, but we need to find somebody who can win.

The fact they have two Democratic senators. I spent a lot of time down there during the Herschel Walker race in Phil Wealth. We need somebody who can win, somebody who can push. I'm not so certain.

I'm sure she's not being kind. She would not be my first pick. There's a guy there named John King who is the temp appointed insurance commissioner, who's a cop, Afghanistan in Iraq, vet versus Hispanic statewide official. He's getting a ton of chatter in that state.

He is somebody who can win. The primary process will play itself out. But there is talent there that we can win. Look, I agree.

I think whoever comes out, whether the Republican comes out Georgia, the only I push back on is that easily beat margin. I don't think you easily beat a Democrat or Republican in Georgia because it's such a tough it to me right now is the battleground state. I'm sorry, I'm battleground state. But you tell me how Georgia is going to go to.

I'm going tell you what's going to happen nationally. Look, I think, I think also the company there has done a good job of communicating and staying in the community. One of the things you hear from Georgia people all the time is that his services office, little things, all politics, local service offices are doing a really, really good job. I think Democrats did dodge a bullet there because Kep clearly would be a formidable candidate in the general election.

But let's see the primary work its way out. And I think from the primary standpoint it's been helpful when candidates like, I'm sorry candidates like Herschel Walker can make the way out of the primary. It doesn't make it a lot easier for Democrats. Not the thought he once did, but were he too, he'd be saying, hey, it's all about the candidates.

We've been these sort of conversations right as we talk about this. The congresswoman Robin Kelly just launched her campaign today. This is obviously going to be a crowded field as well. You have the state's lieutenant governor there who was already endorsed by the state governor, J.D.

pritzker. Other members of Congress are set to join this race who has leg up right now. You know, I think, I think she actually does at this moment. I know there's a couple endorsements that have been coming for some of the other Democrats.

We're going to House Democrats like you just mentioned, Raja Krishna Murthy, who might jump in. It's, you know, still a little bit early, but it's. I think a lot of Democrats are happy that there are a number of these candidates that are at least trying to come in. And it's the person that we're really seeing a younger face, younger faces coming in.

I think there's a bigger thing to say that after everything the Democrats went through with President Joe Biden, whether he should step by side. There are legitimate conversations of Democrats. Someone else, like Jan Chakowski, for example, just said that she was going to retire and mentioned that she is passing the baton. It's similar to what even Senator Dick Durbin has said.

There is a more recognition among those members that the midterms could be really good for Democrats on Hill, and maybe it is time for new blood, new vision to kind of come in. Corella, that's raking because of the oversight in the aoc. The presumption was as she might try to fight for that seat with Jerry Connolly departing his role there. She said, I'm not going to do it.

I'd like to be another senior person on my party side right now. When you make up this debate within the party about new faces versus old, in terms of what was the most effective Message show in 2020, I don't think it's Alan's debate. I mean, I think what you hear from the voters, especially a lot of voters who've been a part of our core base Democrat, is they want new leadership and new blood. They're very clear on this.

And I think the Illinois Senate seat is a prime example of. You see new face is coming into it at full disclosure, transparency. Lauren Underwood is a client of mine. She's also someone who's thinking about a young, dynamic new leader in the party, who's thinking about it as well.

And early Poland actually shows her lead that in primary. But it's going to be an interesting battle. But from the broader macro standpoint, we are seeing the younger leaders in the party begin to answer the call. I think they're seeing the Illinois and other places as well.

This is the last thought here, but just want to get your takeaway of this 2026 map looks pretty rough for Democrats in a lot of different states right now. But the Democrats do seem to be getting a bit better in terms of their message, where they focus as Susan Delaney said to me, on the issue of the economy specifically, is that going to be the driver of what people are paying for at home at the end of the day? Well, it's always the economy, Stu, but I think that time will tell what that looks like at the end of the summer, especially next year. Look, are you told what you're saying right now about the way the economy's going to terrorists Initially, Republicans massive sweeping change cost political capital.

The president at least getting out in front of getting it done quickly. But I just want to say with a lot of retirements, which I don't blame Democrats for doing, in a favorable cycle, comes opportunities for Republicans to feel good candidates to get Democrats to commit money to races they otherwise wouldn't. Two points across the board. I'll just ask you guys, does it take a very unpopular news that we're not talking about?

I think we should be. Well, this is the week where a lot of House Republicans are actually meeting with the speaker and Republican leadership to really finally narrow down a number of these points of tension, cutting Medicaid. And we're all gonna see what that looks like, other benefits. And I think by the end of this week, the expectation should be that the speaker at some point is just gonna stop negotiating and say, this is what we're moving forward with.

And down. You gotta move the same. Exactly. That's just two weeks away.

So we'll likely see that process soon enough and we'll see where all of Republicans fall because, of course, majority is just so thin, can't lose any votes. Very nice to have you. Nice to see you here, too. Appreciate you very much, Cornell, as always.

Thank you. We'll be back here tomorrow with more Meet the Press. Now the news does continue with Hallie Jackson right 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 and challenges. Their stories are funny. And I can't.

So I hope you're joining each week. Who knows, you might just come away with your own glass Half Full Search Glass Half Full with Craig Melbourne From Today on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.