If it's Friday, it's a presidential game of telephone, as President elect Trump says Mexican President Claudia Scheinbaum told him she'd effectively close the Mexican border. Scheinbaum says she made no such promise. Plus, a world first. Australia imposes a ban on social media sites for children under the age of 16, reigniting debate here in the US and around the world by the impact of excessive social media use on children's mental and physical health.
And Lebanese civilians begin the slow process of rebuilding as the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah appears to hold for now, despite allegations of violations from both sides. By the way, welcome to be the press now. I'm Ryan Nobles in Washington, where Thanksgiving week football doesn't have a monopoly on calls being under review. President elect Donald Trump and Mexican President Talia Sh Bomb spoke Wednesday following Mr.
Trump's threat to impose a 25 tariff on everything imported from Mexico unless it ends the flow of migrants and fentanyl in the United States. In a social media post after the call, the president elected the shine bomb, quote, agreed to stop migration through Mexico and into the United States, effectively closing our southern border. In a subsequent post, Mr. Trump said that Mexico will stop people from going to our southern border, effective immediately.
Trump's incoming deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, praised the call. Is Trump already delivering on his campaign promises? Is the president already making progress? Making more than progress?
He's already delivering historic change, the change that he campaigned on months before he even returns to the Oval Office. Donald Trump is reestablishing the principle, the doctrine of America first, of our national sovereignty, our national security, and he's rebuilding a cooperative, collaboration relationship with Mexico. However, President Chanbau didn't see their conversation the same way. In a statement of her own, she said, in our conversation with President Trump, I explained to him the comprehensive strategy that Mexico has followed to address the migration phenomenon, respecting human rights.
We reiterate that Mexico's position is not to close borders, but instead build bridges between government and people. Nothing in there about closing the border. Of course, we won't know what happens with Trump's threat to impose sweeping tariffs on Mexico until he takes office. But some folks are skeptical of those threats.
They include President Biden, who spoke to reporters yesterday in Nantucket urging the president elect to reconsider. I hope he rethinks it. I think it's a counterproductive thing to do. Surrounded by the Pacific Ocean, the magic ocean, and two allies, Mexico and Canada, the last thing we need to do is begin a school of close relationships.
I think we got them a good place. Joining me now for the soon to be winter White House in South Florida is NBC News senior White House correspondent Kelly o'. Donnell. Kelly, hi.
I mean, what do we know about what was said on this call that led Trump and the Mexican president to have pretty different accounts? Well, one of the things that will certainly be noteworthy here is that unlike the typical process, and we do this a lot when we compare Donald Trump to a typical process and we see the daylight between them, it would normally have a call of this nature where head of state in the new president of Mexico, an incoming head of state with Donald Trump, there would be others on the call who would be doing note taking, who would be memorializing the conversation so that if there were disputes, that could be cleared up. And also just for a sense of the relationship over time and for the use of the United States government to have a good record of what was said. It's our understanding that those kinds of checks are not being done in the way conducting calls now.
We'll see if he does so when he's back in office. But he also uses his social media as a way to negotiate, to push his preferred account of it. He's clearly trying to have a friendly tone toward President Xinboung. But she is also trying to keep it pleasant.
And she took real pains in both press conferences and in her social media posts to talk about the call in productive, pleasant ways. She used those sort of descriptors. But she was also unafraid to politely distinguish some of the points. And part of that is she saying it's not the policy of Mexico to close the border.
She did say that she discussed with the president elect the fact that Mexico was trying to stem the flow of caravans of migrants coming through her country toward the southern border. He interpreted that perhaps as closing the border. She sees it differently. So perhaps the good news at the moment is that the tone is largely favorable among these two.
So this isn't some kind of battle between them. But they view the facts differently. And it certainly sets up what will be a very consequential relationship, as it always is, with the United States and our neighbors to the south with Mexico and to the north with Canada. Right.
It also tells us a little bit about how Donald Trump intends to use this threat of tariffs once he takes office. The fact that he's already ready to claim victory on that threat, probably an indication that he believes that this is an effective tool. How is this being received by key folks in Washington? Do they see this as a sign that Trump wants to use these terrorists as a threat but not necessarily follow through.
There's certainly an expectation that he uses them as a negotiating tool to try to extract something from the other party. And sometimes it is the purchase of goods, a policy change. Sometimes he does in fact put tariffs in place. And then after a period of time, other countries respond as a consequence of that and want to do things differently.
So it's an active tool that he uses not only in the run up, in the execution of it, but in the follow through. We saw that in the first term, where sometimes it would be a bank shot. He's talking with one country, but another country responds differently. So he likes the volatility of that one, which surmise based on his making him such a central part of his economic plan.
What he does not do is get bogged down in the details of what specific tariff, how would it be enacted, at what price, at what cost and for what duration. That stuff does happen, but it's not what he focuses on at this point. He is trying to set the terms of what the second Trump presidency will be like with friendly nations and more adversarial ones. President Biden also said he was concerned about China.
Very different, complex relationship, very different than Canada and Mexico. But there too, President Biden said he hopes that President Trump will give it carefully, careful thought because in the words of President Biden, he said he believes that President Xi of China doesn't want to mess up that relationship, doesn't want to make a mistake is what he had said. So that's part of what we're seeing here. Is everyone trying to game out.
What does Donald Trump mean and what will he actually do? Right. Kelly o', Donnell, thank you for that. Join me now for some inside his speech, the former White House spokesman under President George W.
Bush and the vice president in both public affairs group and bassist Michael, former secondary director of the New York State Democratic Party and NBC News political analyst. So Pete, President elect Donald Trump and a former leader had a call in which there were two very different statements afterwards. Does it feel like we're back in 2017 yet we're watching the same movie once again? Ryan whether lost in translation or talking past each other, I think they were effectively saying the same thing.
Mexico has been patting itself on the back for months now because of their stops along high and plucking migrants, potential illegal immigrants, into the United States of America off buses and trains. They believe the Mexican government believes that they are doing enough to stem the flow across our southern border. Donald Trump disagrees And the voters who voted for him disagree. And that's why he is making this threat of a tariff.
And it's very similar to one he made in 2018. And the then Mexican president came to the table, negotiated with Donald Trump and increased their security measures. And that's likely what Trump is trying to get out of it this time as well. I guess the biggest difference right between 2017 and now is that when Donald Trump won then it was a surprise.
No one was prepared for him. They didn't know what they were dealing with. Now he's a known quantity. There's a record to look upon.
Does that change how he may interact with some of these world leaders and how they treat him? Well, they also know that he can be a little unpredictable. And you saw Prime Minister Trudeau from Canada and the Mexican president not long after he put this threat out on Truth Social, were on the phone with him having a conversation. So they clearly took it seriously enough to engage in that dialogue with Donald Trump two months before he actually takes office.
So Basil, Democrats are worried that Trump may just hit the ground running, launch these full bore tariffs right away when he takes office in January. Tell me how you view this claim of victory from the call with the Mexican president. Does it tell you that perhaps it's just a bargaining trip and a threat instrument or are you worried that these tariffs could become reality very quickly? Well, both things are true, I guess in my mind.
In my analysis. I think to Kelly's point earlier, she makes a great point that in many ways Donald Trump uses social media to negotiate. It is true. He uses social media to govern in many respects and he uses it to negotiate.
So this is one position I'm actually glad that even use the, you know, talk about fentanyl because that's something that, you know, a lot of folks have been talking about in terms of the, the, the porous border between that and sex trafficking that needed to be curbed through some kind of relationship, strong relationship in Mexico. So I do think that it sort of pulls world leaders, owing to your question before about how leaders respond. It pulls world leaders to him. They've got to respond to him whether they like the way they have to respond or not.
He forces them to respond to him in certain ways. I think he likes that. I think he actually believes that that is the best use of his authority and the bully pulpit from, from the White House. But I also know something that Bill Clinton used to say that the United States Only 4% of world's population, so there's Only so much we can make and sell to each other.
That means that we have to have these strong relationships with, with countries outside of our border because that's 85% of our market. So if the points that he's making and the policy that he's pushing forward causes there to be a rupture in that relationship or to make things much more expensive for Americans, which is what so many economists have said, then it does cause some long term damage that, you know, I'm not so sure that we at this point have the ability to fix in the short term. So again, I look at sort of his voters, those that supported him, and whether or not they're actually going to benefit from this public negotiation. Okay, so let's talk about one of his biggest promises and that is a mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.
But I want to play some sound from Tom Holman whose Trump's incoming borders are. Take a listen. So this operation will be much bigger than anything ever done. But here's what I'm trying to tell people say, well, really a mass operation, is that inhumane, Is that racist?
No. You can't let millions of people into this country across the border, illegal witness of the crime. They demand and they demand the right to do process. They demand the right to make a silent claim.
Okay, you have that right and we're going to give you that opportunity. We'll give you your Dan core. But at the end of that process, when federal judges, you gotta go home, they have to go home because we don't. If we don't send them home, then what the hell are we doing?
That's a very big topic about mass deportations. I mean, what could this effectively look like? Isn't there a real possibility it could get messy? Well, anything the government gets its hands in has the potential to get messy.
But I think what we hear there from Tom Homan is that he is a no nonsense personality. He is someone who is known for getting the job done. In fact, Washington posted a profile on him years ago and they said Tom Homan deports people and he's very good at it. In fact, he was a border patrol agent, worked his way up the ranks to become acting ICE director previously.
And he has received accolades and commendation from both sides of the aisle, Republicans and Democrats. Barack Obama himself gave Tom Homan the nation's the federal government's highest civil service award for his work in deporting illegal immigrants. So if anyone knows what to do and how to do it, Tom Homans the guy. So, Basil, how Do you think Democratic state, local executives, though, are going to play this?
Do you think it's smart for them to not cooperate if the deportations become too aggressive? How could that stand off, play itself out? You know, it's interesting about the Barack Obama because a lot of immigration activists actually faulted him for what seems to be aggressive deportation under his administration. So I actually think that, you know, the, clearly the advocates, the folks on the ground who are working with immigrant communities who are, you know, provide legal support, there's going to be a lot of concern there.
Where I think the bigger concern is really about the families, for example, like, how are you breaking up families? Are you ripping people apart? How are you pressing local governments, you know, cities for, for example, who said that, you know, who claim to be sanctuary cities, they've been a particular target under the Trump administration. So I think one of the big questions is how are mayors and governors going to respond if they believe that, you know, not acquiescent to what Donald Trump and federal government wants to do?
What's the impact on their funding? What's the impact on resources and programs that are run by the state, but really are funded through the federal government? So I think in some ways there's going to have to be some kind of conversation with mayors and governors, particularly with the advocates, to say, look, you know, there's a lot that we can do to help protect some of these families and some of the, some of the folks that are here, but with the pressure coming from the federal government, we may have to make some very tough choices. That is not going to be, that's going to be very difficult going forward.
Are particularly concerned about it. Okay, we're going to leave the Basil, thank you for being here. We appreciate it. Turning now to the latest step for a series of unsettling developments with more political leaders saying they've been targeted.
Bomb threats. Several members of the Connecticut congressional delegation, all Democrats, said that they were targeted yesterday while preparing to celebrate Thanksgiving at their homes. And now Rhode Island Congressman Seth Magaziner also said that he was the target of a bomb threat. Thankfully, no bombs were found.
It comes after several of President elect Trump's cabinet picks and executive branch appointees were targeted by bomb threats and swatting attacks earlier this week. And moments ago, President Biden was asked for his reaction to the bomb threats, telling reporters that were working the issue hard with the FBI. Miami News colleague Ryan Reilly has more. Lawmakers in Connecticut were threatened on Thanksgiving Day with a number of lawmakers receiving these, these threats against their houses.
There was a mailbox threat. There have been numerous threats against lawmakers. And this sort of fits into this broader notion that we've seen recently with members of the public, or rather members of private members of the public being threatened, including both lawmakers and members of Donald Trump's own cabinet. We saw of those threads threats frequently come in.
The Justice Department in recent years has been taking action and even in recent weeks has been taking action against some of these threats. But they're often difficult to trace because they can come from overseas and sometimes they're just a sort of so chaos, whereas other times you see these threats coming that are targeted at a specific party. And often the FBI has to decipher where these threats are coming from, whether they're domestic, whether they're foreign, whether foreign entities coming and threatening these individuals. But it also just speaks to this broader notion that often public figures now are coming under threat on a pretty regular basis.
Ryan? Okay. Ryan Riley, thank you for that. After the break.
The Australian ban that has tech companies saying oi, oi, oi. But the ban on social media for showing under 16 could mean in Australia and right here in the US at Silicon Black Friday means big shopping deals and big airport lines. We'll let you know what to expect from your holiday weekend. You're watching MEDIA PRESS now.
Welcome back. Amid a raging debate here in the United States about the effects of social media on children, Australia has made history passing a first of its kind ban on social media for everyone under the age of 16. The ban will impact platforms like Facebook, TikTok and Snapchat, and it puts the burden on those platforms to enforce the ban. NBC News correspondent Liz Cruz has more.
Under the new law, tech companies will be required to take reasonable steps to verify a user's age and prohibit those under 16 from creating accounts or else face millions in fines. We have heard the cries of families who are suffering the controversial measure meant to help protect young people from the negative effects of social media. The American Psychological association has warned about the addictive nature of these apps and the negative impact it can have on child's mental health and body image. In Australia, Wayne Holdsworth says his son died by suicide after a sextortion scam.
Anyone that says this is not a good idea has not lived through my my life. But the law is facing fierce opposition, including from the big tech companies. And Elon Musk, who wrote on X seems like a backdoor way to control access to the Internet by all Australians. And others, including some teens, are questioning how a law like this will be enforced.
It will only create a generation of young people who will be more technologically literate in bypassing these walls. And how it will be enforced really is the big question here. There's not a lot of specifics yet in the law. Tech companies be responsible for the enforcement.
They have a year to figure out how to do it before the law takes effect in 2026. Back to you next, Lance. Casey Mock joins me now. He's the chief policy and public affairs officer for the center for Humane Technology.
It's a nonprofit whose work was featured in the Emmy award winning documentary the Social Dilemma. Casey, this is an issue that I care a lot about with four children under the age of 16 who could potentially be impacted by these decisions. I mean, what do you make of Australia's ban? Is this a model policy or could it be misdirected frustration?
Well, I wouldn't go so far to call it a model policy, Ryan, but I think I just want to go back to, you know, what you said about your own experience as a parent and really the way in which this policy is a model is that the government was really trying to be responsive to the concerns of Australian parents. I believe a survey conducted by the safety Commissioner showed that 95% of Australian parents think that social media is one of their chief parenting challenges. And another survey said that over 77% of Australians supported the bill. Now I will say that also there's recognition that I don't think the government has done here that there's certainly in addition to the details that have to be added over the next year before the law comes into effect, there's additional measures that the government is considering such as installing a duty of care for the companies to adhere to.
The ban right now applies to teens under the age of 16. Is that appropriate age? I think that's part of the question. Children obviously mature at different paces and patterns and I think that there's wide recognition that the self enforcement of a age gap around 13 is not sufficient here.
But certainly the question of what age is appropriate is going to be an ongoing debate here and around the world going forward. And then of course the biggest question every time we talk about regulating technology of any kind, but even more so social media, is how on earth do you enforce this? Is this an enforceable law or is it really just more of a statement? It's going to be really challenging.
You know, the measure by which companies will be expected to verify users ages is one of these things that's to be determined under the bill. And some Things that have been discussed as uploading some forms of id. Some of the more invasive measures were removed from the bill at a later date. Now, I will say, however, that these companies have a surprising amount of information about their users already, just based on their patterns of usage on the platforms.
And companies like Instagram can already determine with a high degree of accuracy using user data, how old their users are. And we know this from whistleblowers like Frances Haugen and Arturo Behar who have disclosed internal documents showing us. And so it may not necessarily be the case that some sort of, you know, privacy invading measure to require uploads of IDs or verified IDs is required in that case. But again, like many things with this, it all remains to be seen of how the government shakes it out over the next 12 months.
Well, I know from my own experience that the idea of banning all social media or even access to screens seems wonderful. As a father, I would love to be able to do that. But I also understand that we live in this society now where screen culture has become such an important part of our society. Kids are using devices to learn in school, to communicate with their sports teams, to talk to their friends.
Critics are arguing that this ban could lead to more isolation among kids, which could be just as dangerous as what they're being exposed to on social media. Where's the balance there about trying to control or at least regulate their access to this material while at the same time not leaving them out of the kind of global conversation that's happening online? Well, that concern, I think, goes to the heart of what is maybe the most powerful criticism of the bill, is that it actually doesn't do much to improve the quality of the product that kids are still going to inevitably going to be accessing. You know, and the proposal to make that change was actually in an amendment that was introduced by a member of Parliament.
So, Daniel, to install digital duty of care that I mentioned before, that has brought support across Parliament that even the Prime Minister himself a few weeks ago mentioned he intended to introduce as well. And so by having a design centric solution that, you know, treats these online spaces like physical spaces to which things like, you know, in a building, we have a fire escape requirement in the building code or smoke detectors required in the building code. And there's. So I think there's an acknowledgement that taking a design focused approach is the solution to making the product better for everyone rather than leaving some, you know, deep dark corners of the Internet uncovered and unregulated by this technology.
And I'll say this is an approach that we actually know already works. The United Kingdom introduced the age appropriate design code, I believe four years ago. And as a result of that TikTok and Instagram made design changes across their platforms across the world that made it better for everyone. Maryland has also had a resembling this recently going to affect.
And so I think that that's probably the answer to your concern. There is a more design centric approach rather than just trying to wall off certain parts of the Internet for people under a certain age. And for tech literary people, when you say design centric that means these algorithms aren't so super addictive that kids are just constantly scrolling all day long. Would that be an example of a changing the way they're presented?
Exactly right. There's some design features that the companies have put in to maximize the revenue of the products and maximize engagement of products and they aren't necessary features for the products to have the same sort of social utility of connecting people that, you know, make these products, you know, so attractive. So for, you know, example, this is something called a dark pattern, right. A manipulative design that's designed to sort of keep you on the side and keep you using certain features of it.
Another feature of some of these design centric approaches is banning geolocation being on by default for young people's account. Right. There's no reason why a 13 year old should have be pinging her location to Facebook. Right.
Turning messaging off for strangers to contact kids. You know, that's another obvious one. There's no reason why strangers should be able to contact your 13 or 14 year old through these app talk about this all day but unfortunately we have an hour in this program. I've got to get to other people.
But terrific analysis of this. I appreciate being on here. And we're going to now move to talk to Clint Watts about this, who's another expert in the field. He's a leader of Microsoft's Digital Threat Analysis Center.
He's of course NBC News National Security Analysis. Just off the top, your thoughts on Australia's ban and whether or not you think it can be enforced. Yeah, in terms of the enforcement, I don't know. I think this is probably just constructed right now.
No one knows how to enforce it, but they did allow that one year period. I think what's remarkable is I was just looking at some of the polling around the passage of that. The Number I said 77% of Australian parents were in support of this bill. That's a remarkably high number.
And you were just speaking to that. And really comes into the implementation. No one has really tried to implement this. Australia has moved out on laws before.
You might remember they tried to restrict news and news feeds in different ways inside the country a few years ago. Now they're focused on social media. There's several components of this age. Verification, very difficult to do in a way that also isn't necessarily violated.
Private. You've seen some of these techniques of uploading a driver's license or identification. Those oftentimes can be faked or you can see stolen data and that way that's going to be a tough challenge. I think the other part is which applications would be included, which would some of them.
For example, YouTube has a lot of educational features on there. Many people use it for their television. So where does that line draw between what is considered social media or what kind of activities are considered social media and then how to implement some of these? I think it's going to be quite difficult because not all social media applications are the same.
So putting those standards, I like comment rapport right when I was coming on here about design, you know, principles of design that are consistent across applications is probably the way to go to get to the end state that I think they're looking for in Australia. And I feel like every time we have these conversations it gets back to the responsibility of the social media companies. You know, it's going to be almost impossible to enforce in many ways. But shouldn't there be a degree of responsibility taken on by these massive companies that are making billions of dollars in profits that they understand that the very users that are taking advantage of this platform are being hurt by and that they need to change their ways?
You know, one of the things that I find interesting is the social media platforms or tech companies will apply to whatever laws are passed. And so this has happened, interestingly enough in Australia, where news was removed from different feeds. They implemented that. And I think then there was a cry from people to say, hey, I want some of these features back.
And then they move to a middle ground on this. I think one of the challenges is not all social media applications are the same. They have different features or serve different purposes. Some are microbloggers, some are streaming platforms.
You go to video game platforms, for example, they have a very different model. And so some of those principles that you will see that maybe governments more regulated aren't consistent across all the applications. That's going to be very difficult to do. Snapchat isn't exactly like Facebook, which isn't exactly like it's or Telegram, which isn't even close to what YouTube or TikTok are, which are mostly video platforms.
So when it comes time to administer these controls and regulated, where the breakdown tends to come from is getting the platforms able in a way to have those design principles. In some ways I'm hopeful though, because this sort of a movement puts a line down that says that something needs to happen. And once you have that as a goal, a clear and crystal goal in a specific location, I think you can see a movement towards this. If you look at the tech companies that are adapting to GDPR in Europe, which was related to European regulators, there are principles that have been done before.
It'll be interesting next year to see if there's some sort of alignment between how to actually implement this versus what the intent of the laws are. And we have that much more time. I would have to mean, I would have to imagine that you would think that the United States lawmakers are going to keep a very close eye on how this is implemented in Australia. Australia they will.
But I would say with all the tech companies and you know, having, working at one, having worked with most of them, the biggest challenge is how you implement across the globe in many different regulatory environments. So how you have the same platform or functions in one nation and another and by their laws of the laws of another area like the European Union. So that is going to be one of the most difficult challenges, I think, for the tech companies, how to figure that out. You need to know where people are at and how old they are.
That's two dimensions of privacy that are always very challenging when you're trying to also make sure that people are secure and safe on the Internet. Okay, clickbacks. Thank you so much. We appreciate it.
Coming up next, the biggest shopping day of the year is here, but it means for the nation's largest retailers in the state of the American consumer. That's after the break. You're watching with the press now as the day wraps up. Get the scoop on what's been happening with here's the Scoop, a new podcast for NBC News.
With me, your host gazing the studio. We'll take a deep dive into today's top stories with NBC News's trusted journalist. It's a fresh take that's sharp, thoughtful and informative, bringing closer to headlines and conversations that are shaping our world. From the front page to the zeitgeist, here's the scoop from NBC News.
Listen daily on SiriusXM. Stay informed with the NBC News app. Breaking news just coming in moments ago. Watch, read and listen throughout your day.
And now unlock even more with a subscription. It's the best of NBC News with fewer ad instructions, including ad free articles, podcasts and full NBC News shows, plus deeper access and exclusive content. Let's just take a step back. It's more context and clarity from the reporters you trust.
Download the NBC News app now and subscribe for more. More. Get the best of NBC News with a subscription, fewer ads, deeper access and exclusive content. And now join the Xfinity Member Celebration.
Members can get an exclusive 50% off an annual subscription. Head to xfinity.com membership to learn more. Xfinity Imagine that subscription automatically reviews each year at 65.99 plus taxes and fees until canceled. Ends May 20, 2026.
Price is subject to change. Visit NBC news.com xin for full offer terms and details. Welcome back. It's not an official holiday, but today is one of the most highly anticipated days of the year for bargain hunters as millions of American shopping stores and online for Black Friday deals.
More than 130 million people plan to shop today, according to the National Retail Federation. And busy stores today will make for way more crowded airports and roadways tomorrow and Sunday for what's traditionally the busiest travel weekend of the year. We'll check the travel situation in just a moment, but let's start by going to NBC News business and dad correspondent Brian Chung. He's at the Garden State Plaza Mall in Paramus, New Jersey.
Brian, what are the crowds like here today and how Black Friday, how does it Black Friday compared to recent Black Fridays in terms of the total amount of business done? Yeah. Happy Black Friday to you. Right.
And to all who observe. I've been at the Garten State Plaza mall here in Branford, New Jersey, all day, just kind of taking a look at all the shopping activity. And they're playing people walking around, but not everyone's got bags. And that's because they're a little bit choosier this year.
And I've been talking to a lot of people all day who've been saying, yeah, the deals and discounts were okay, 10, 20%. But ultimately they were hoping to get dazzled with deeper discounts that will ultimately get them through the checkout line before it's worth it hasn't changed the expectations on the macro scale because the National Retail Federation forecasting what could be up to $989 billion again with a B, that's almost $1 trillion in sales, sales across this holiday shopping season. And we combine that with separate statistics that we got from Adobe analytics telling us that Thanksgiving sales already just over the course of yesterday were $6.1 billion, which is almost 9% higher than last year. And a record, well, tells you that we might be off to a record breaking, potentially weekend of holiday shopping.
So again, we'll have to see how the numbers come in right now when we don't have Black Friday numbers so far. But it seems like people are out and about shopping in what could be another year of the consumer boosting the economy line. I wonder just how important Black Friday is for retailers overall, especially given the fact that they're offering these special discounts and deals all season long, not just on Black Friday. Does it have the same impact that it's had in past years?
Well, I mean, to your point, there certainly is the calendar creep of Black Friday these days because you got retailers that are offering Black Friday deals as early as November 1st. But look, when you talk to retail experts, retail executives, they'll tell you the same thing, that Black Friday and Cyber Monday weekend does remain the most important shopping weekend of the year because consumers and also retailers expect that to be the highest traffic time, not just online, but also in stores. So it is still a priority. And that's why Adobe analytics also tracks prices, says that you do tend to see the deepest discounts on this weekend as well.
On Black Friday itself, they say TVs tend to be the most deeply discounted. You don't want to wait until Cyber Monday for electronics and also apparel. Logan News you can use for those that are perusing the sales this weekend. Okay.
And to everyone, Brian's family, he's at the mall right now, so now be the time to text him to Christmas because he can head right to the store. Brian, thank you for that. Turning from the mall to the roads now. And that's where Gary groins me on the ground along I95 in Woodbridge, Virginia, just outside Washington, D.C.
so, Gary, when can we expect to see most travelers begin their trip home? Hey there, Ryan. This scenario you're particularly familiar with here in Northern Virginia, folks are already on their way. As you can see.
They've got enough food, they've got enough of their family, and now they're hitting the road back to their homes. And those are in just good spirit. The ones that we've talked to today, they say gas prices are low and they are, in fact, they are 25 cents cheaper than they were last Thanksgiving. Last night we were at 3.25.
Today we were at 3:06 that's good news on the roads. When it comes to the air, it's a little bit of a different story. We're seeing 1800 delays at airports nationwide, particularly up north, where I'm sure today weather report a little bit where it's going to be. Detroit, Buffalo, your Bills game on Sunday might have a little bit of issue getting to and from there for some fans.
So that is significant. That snow that's coming in from the Lake Effect area, that's gonna affect both the roads and of course the flights. 800 delays, only about 34 cancellations. Part of the reason for that is because of the military area off the east coast that the FAA has opened up to commercial traffic during the holiday season.
So good news on the air, good in the air, good news in the roads here as well. Yes. And I will be flying into Buffalo tomorrow night for that game. So wish me, wish me luck with that lack of effects snow.
Good luck. So when district driver should hit the road, is there a good time? So this weekend is when everyone's going to whether or not there's a good time to do it. Mornings are going to be best between 8 and 10am locally, wherever you are is best.
Sunday, it's frankly gonna be a mess. Preliminary everywhere in terms of traffic. So getting out as early as you can is the best idea. Ryan.
Okay. Gary Grumbach, thank you for that, my friend. Coming up, tensions in the Middle east as Israel and Lebanon both accuse each other of violating the terms of their new ceasefire. You're watching me the press now.
Welcome back. It's been just two days since the cease fire deal between Israel and Lebanon went to effect. But yesterday Israel says that it carried out a strikeout, has targets that were breaching the conditions of the agreement, while the Lenin army is accusing Israel repeatedly violating the deal. But despite the exchange of blame, the truce appears to be holding as thousands of displaced civilians continue to move back into southern Lebanon, returning to piles of rubble as they look to rebuild their lives.
Joining me now is Matt Bradley in Beirut. Matt, you're on, you're on the ground in Lebanon right now. What are you seeing there? Yeah, we were just out actually just yesterday in the neighborhood of Dahya, which is right behind me.
This is a Shiite Muslim majority neighborhood, is a Hezbollah stronghold that was absolutely pummeled by the Israelis during their expanded defense against Hezbollah over the past two months. That is where Hassan Nasrallah, the slain head of Hezbollah was basically where he was killed in a huge set of bombardments by the Israelis just about Two months ago now, we were there and we were watching people already streaming back. This was about 24 hours after the ceasefire was announced. These are desperate people who were not able to find relief for homes elsewhere in the country when this enormous, sprawling displacement crisis started, displacing about 1.2 million people, according to the Lebanese government.
So now we're seeing them all moving back in, trying to restore their homes, putting out the trash. There's no electricity, there's no services, but they still have nowhere else to go. Such as the desperation that has also seen, really hundreds of thousands of people screaming sacrifices to the southern part of the country that was the site of Israel's ground invasion. And the Israelis had said today that they don't want Lebanese people going back to a thin band of land right along Lebanon's border with Israel just north of it.
This is the area that Israel had actually invaded with ground troops. And the Israelis have actually continued to strike against certain targets here in Lebanon. They said they hit what looked like people who were moving back toward a Hezbollah missile silo or missile storage area. And the Lebanese and the Israelis have both complained that the either side of the opposite side has been violating the ceasefire.
But as you just mentioned, we're about a couple of hours away from the 72 hour mark since this ceasefire was first put in place. And despite those violations, despite those complaints, it looks as though this is going to hold. Yeah, maybe talk about that. With your experience covering these type of conflicts, is that pretty typical in the early stages of a ceasefire to see kind of back and forth and accusations of one side or the other not holding up to the terms of the agreement?
Is that pretty typical? Yeah, absolutely. We see it time and time again in various conflicts, especially ones that involve non state actors like Hezbollah and military forces like Hezbollah that were really, really badly damaged by the Israelis. And we're talking about not just the decapitation of their leadership.
I mentioned a moment ago the killing of Hassan Nasrallah just behind me here, but also across the whole leadership board of Hezbollah. We saw them systematically getting picked off by the Israelis over the past two months. And remember how this all started with those pager and walkie talkie attacks that literally cut off the hands of a lot of these Hezbollah fighters. This was already a ragtag group, a very formidable fighting force just a couple of months ago, but kind of badly damaged by the time the Israelis had launched their ground invasion and expanded their offensive against Hezbollah.
So they're not gonna have necessarily the same level of communications internally that they would have before. Remember, of course, the pagers attack. They were scared of their own communication systems because of that. So this is the kind of thing where you're talking about a frayed leadership trying to communicate down the ranks.
There was a ceasefire. How to abide by that ceasefire? And they're also just civilians who are running amok, trying to go home, desperate because, like I said, they were not able to find relief, housing, food elsewhere in Lebanon. And there is no central government that's capable of moving down south and directing people and telling them, don't go here.
So it's free for all. And that is one of the things that's causing the chaos that is leading to a lot of these violations. Okay. Matt Bradley in Lebanon.
Matt, thank you for that report. Let's turn now to Paris, where more after more than five years of rebuilding, the world is getting its first glimpse inside the iconic Notre Dame Cathedral after that devastating 2019. Look at these stunning images with brand new stonework, vaulted ceilings and vibrant stained glass windows that have been carefully restored today. French President Emmanuel Macron took a televised tour of the cathedral before it formally opens to the public next month.
And emotional Macron thanked the carpenters, architects and craftsmen involved in the restoration, telling them that he was, quote, infinitely grateful for their work. NBC News chief international correspondent Pierre Simmons has more from Paris. Hey, Ryan. Well, the scaffolding is still up around Notre Dame behind me there overlooking the River Seine.
But inside, my goodness, it is transformed. A restoration that has taken five years since the inferno that brought down the steeple at the top of the cathedral there. That moment that everybody watched around the world that time, terrible time of destruction now replaced by a reborn cathedral. Inside these beautiful white walls interspersed with color from the glass, the stained glass windows and murals on the walls, really superb.
The gold everywhere. A new altar, a modern altar in this medieval church, a place where the crown of thorns will go again. Gold. And then up in the roof.
And we saw President Macron walk around the cathedral today, including into that roof area, up their new oak beams and a fire system, fire doors and sprinklers. So important because in the end, this restoration is bringing Notre Dame back after hundreds of years of history for more hundreds of years, more centuries. President Macron said he said to the workers here today, you've all had a part of that. Right.
Simmons in Paris, thank you for that. And NBC News will have special coverage on the remarkable reconstruction of Notre dame next Thursday, December 5th at 10:30pm you can tune in right here on NBC News now. Don't miss it. And when we come back, the clock is kicking on this legislative session as countless families affected by natural disasters look to Congress for help.
You're WATCHING me, the press now. When lawmakers return to Washington on Monday, they'll have just a few short weeks left to push through any remaining legislation, starting with critical government funding and a bill before the December 20 shutdown deadline. But another piece of legislation waiting to be passed is the federal disaster tax relief bill, as communities impacted by storms, fires and other disasters continue to pick up the pieces. The bill was passed by the House back in May, but is yet to come up for a vote in the Senate.
Joining me now is Jennifer Gray Thompson, CEO of After the Fire usa, a nonprofit group that's focused on supporting communities affected by wildfires. She's been leading delegations to meet with senators and urge them to pass this critical legislation before the end of Congress. Jennifer, thanks for being here. Just first off, tell us what you've heard from senators.
Did you get the sense that they share your sense of urgency in getting this legislation passed before the end of the year? You know, we've actually always had a really good reception from all senators on both sides of the aisle. This is a unique bill in that people, everyone supports it actually. It actually, it actually affects like 47 states.
And so there's a huge amount of benefit for people across the board. We hear great things from senators. But also, you know, it's a very convoluted process to walk through politics right now. We've been on this journey for three years, but our bill actually expires at the end of this.
And so we do have a sense of urgency. They tell us they have a sense of urgency, but we really need to see them put that into action. Otherwise, it's just words. Yeah.
And if this does get kicked next year, you mentioned the current piece of legislation. You have expires of the right new legislation. There's also a whole suite of tax bills that could come up for debate, including the extension of the Trump tax cuts. Are you worried that everything could be mixed up with these new priorities, with the new administration if it doesn't get done by the end of the year?
Absolutely. That's a main concern of ours. It's also that our people have been paying taxes already for three years. Not only are they having to claim their settlement as personal income tax every single year, they cannot deduct their attorney's fees, which is a provision of that 2017 Trump tax bill.
So we don't want to get caught in that we feel like we deserve better and we know we've done the work. Fire survivors and disaster survivors around the country have been waiting for years, years or relief from Congress to actually just get back home and rebuild. We also have to rebuild back in a way that's far more resilient. We cannot just continue to rebuild back the way that we burned down or that we were affected by major hurricanes.
We can do better. And after the hurricanes of Helene and Milton, we did see that FEMA was drawn into some of these political fights. Have you seen that impact how much support disaster relief legislation is getting on Capitol Hill? No.
Only on social media do we see this sort of debate. On Capitol Hill, there is a much greater sense of the impact on people's lives because most legislators actually have disaster victims in their homes. They know these people personally. There is an appetite to actually work in a bipartisan fashion.
But when we see them get in front of social media, it completely changes the landscape. And there's really no relationship between what we see in the offices of senators and congressmen and what we see on social media. This isn't all of them, to be clear, but it's an awful lot of them. It's a major concern, also a major frustration.
What happened with Hurricane Helene and Milton, making that political was really unacceptable. In the follow up with the discrimination from the FEMA employee only exacerbated an already terrible issue. The people caught in the middle are those who've just lost absolutely everything. And what they're asking for is that America actually step up and help them get home.
And we can do that. This is the greatest nation on the planet and yet we are sitting around like counting likes on Twitter when people who are really suffering need the help of all Congress people to really do their jobs. We need this so much right now in a bipartisan fashion. Let's get back to work in America.
And last month there was a report that President Trump, President Elect Trump was hesitant to give disaster relief aid to states that he considered politically hostile to him, including initially refusing to approve aid for California after the 2018 qualifiers. Are you worried about that again, is there any way for states or communities to protect themselves against potential retaliation from the White House? You know, I would like to hope for the best. Obviously, you know, I'm a disaster survivor from 2017.
So we were caught right in the middle of that. I've been working in the campfire since it happened. And we did see that. We also saw it happen at the same time with Puerto Rico.
We cannot have politics enter into disaster. And I remember sitting with Kevin McCarthy in 20, maybe 19, and talking to him about our very big concerns about making sure that Californians were treated fairly. We're the fourth largest economy in the world and largest sub economy in the world. When you harm California, you actually harm the entire country because we also feed the entire the entire nation.
And so really, using politics as any kind of weapon in disaster is completely unacceptable, no matter who does it on the ground. If you're a FEMA employee or if you are the president of the United States, it's unexpected, acceptable, and it's inhumane and it's un American. It should never, ever, ever happen again. Well, Jeffrey, it seems as though these monster disasters get so much attention in the immediate aftermath of your example, someone that's still dealing and picking up the pieces, picking the pieces up years later.
And it's important for all Americans to know that that trauma and that experience is still something that you live with every day. So thank you so much for your perspective. We appreciate you being here and good luck as you continue that recovery. Thank you so much for having me.
All right. And that is going to be it for us this hour. But we'll be back Monday with more MEET THE PRESS now. And if it's Sunday, it's MEET THE PRESS on your local NBC station.
My colleague Kristen welcome to be joined by Senators Chris Murphy and Bill Harry and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan. Don't miss it. NBC News now covers continues with Gunny Schwartz right now. Hey, it's Kate Snow, NBC News anchor and host of the Drink.
This month, Jamie Lovato is my guest. The global superstar tells me that she is the happiest she's ever been right now. But getting there, it wasn't simple. Demi opens up about starting in Hollywood young and why she now thinks she may have started too soon.
She talks about recovery, her new marriage and the deeply personal reason behind her new cookbook. The Drink is always about the journey to the top. And this was an honest conversation about what that takes. Hope you listen and follow the drink wherever you get your podcast.