Meet the Press NOW — September 16

Amazon presents Jamal versus the Shih Tzu. Descending from the gray wolf, Shih Tzu's live by their own untamed primal code of not giving a single Shih Tzu. But Jamal shopped on Amazon and bought dog treats, chew toys, and 32 ounces of carpet cleaner. Hey Jamal, you've been promoted to pack leader.

Save the everyday with Amazon. Fun, I'm Dylan Dryer, co-host of the third hour of today, and Mom to three wild boys. I've learned a lot my years as a parent, mostly that I don't have it all figured out yet. And I'm not the only one.

This is my new podcast, The Parent Chat. Each week I sit down with someone new for honest conversation and real world advice about parenting. I am over here just like winging it. Hey, I'm just trying not to screw my own kids up.

I'm not giving you advice on how much screw yourself. Search The Parent Chat on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Kelly O'Donnell and we begin with breaking news, dramatic new details from prosecutors in Utah as Charlie Kirk's alleged assassin is now facing the death penalty.

Utah authorities formally charging the 22-year-old suspect Tyler Robinson with aggravated murder. As President Trump and his team are vowing action, signaling a major crackdown on left-wing organizations that they claim are encouraging political violence. Robinson is due to make a court appearance for the first time in less than an hour from now. After prosecutors this afternoon released a trove of evidence tied to his alleged murder plot and his potential motives, including a detailed conversation with his roommate that contained an apparent confession.

Robinson is charged with seven total counts, including aggravated murder, as well as felony discharge of a firearm and obstruction of justice among others. Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray, whose office is handling this case, read from the charging documents detailing new information about Robinson's potential motivations. Robinson's mother explained that over the last year or so, Robinson had become more political and had started to lean more to the left, becoming more pro-gay and trans rights oriented. She stated that Robinson began to date his roommate, a biological male who was transitioning genders.

This resulted in several discussions with family members, but especially between Robinson and his father, who have very different political views. In one conversation before the shooting, Robinson mentioned that Charlie Kirk would be holding an event at UVU, which Robinson said was a stupid venue for the event. Robinson accused Kirk of spreading hate. As mentioned, prosecutors also detailed text messages between Robinson and his roommate that were sent in the hours immediately following the shooting.

Roommate, you weren't the one who did it, right? Robinson, I am, I am, I'm sorry, roommate, why? Robinson, why did I do it? Roommate, yeah.

Robinson, I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can't be negotiated out. How long have you been planning this? Robinson, a bit over a week, I believe.

Just a remarkable accounting and joining me now is NBC News, National Law Enforcement and Intelligence Correspondent Tom Winter, and Misty Maris, a defense attorney and NBC News legal analyst. So glad you are both here. Tom, you and I have been working closely together covering this story for days now. And I'm curious, what are your big takeaways from what we learned in the case and how authorities are trying to put together a motive?

Yeah, I think, Kelly, the information here, and of course, there are just allegations in that Tyler Robinson of his course is presumed innocent until he has his day in court. I think if you look at this and if half of the information that was laid out today is true, it presents a very damning case. One of the things that stuck out to me is that it's not just so much based on one or two individuals providing statements to law enforcement, not that there's anything wrong with that, but you have text messages real time as he's on the run and he's describing the types of things according to prosecutors that he apparently did. He's describing the reason you just laid out there and played from the sound there, from the press conference of exactly what the state attorney said.

And so, or the county attorney said, excuse me, so it's that type of information. Why did you do this? What was your thought process? How long had you been planning it?

All of that sticks out is incredibly serious evidence here that's in this case. On top of that, we now start to develop a little bit of information about what is in the mindset of somebody like this, the fact that they got to a point where they thought the only thing they could do to challenge the beliefs of Charlie Kirk is not to stand in front of a podium and engage with him, not to question him, not to protest if that's what he was interested in, but in fact to shoot and kill him. And that is a trend that you and I have been talking about that law enforcement is talking about is something that they're very concerned about and how quickly this all came together. You remember we reported over the weekend, Kelly, that the roommate here said it was, they were totally unaware of the fact that this plot or plan was being put together.

And now you've just seen it in text messages that this thing came together in about a week. That makes it very difficult, not only for authorities to know about one of these plots being put together, but also for family members and for friends to be able to step forward and either contact law enforcement or try to intervene. It's all very difficult stuff to see, Kelly. And it was so gripping to hear sort of the accounts of family and roommate and so forth, recognizing what they saw in the pictures and then the sort of peeling back of layers of their awareness as it was happening.

And also according to what the prosecutors laid out, sort of the feelings, the planning, the discussion of the weapon that Robinson apparently engaged in in these conversations. So when he comes to make this virtual court appearance in the next hour, what are you expecting and will there be any discussion of death penalty as a potential way that this case will be directed going forward? So the county attorney, Jeff Gray, did say that after that press conference, he would be filing information with the court, notifying the court that they intend to seek the death penalty on the first count there, the aggravated murder count. So that is something that we anticipate as far as this hearing.

It should be something that takes 10, 15 minutes on a normal day. It's a virtual appearance. This isn't something where Robinson is brought into court to face charges or to face the reading out of these charges. They'll address the issue of his representation of counsel or a court ordered counsel if he doesn't have the funds to pay for one himself.

And so it'll just be the very basics that we get here. I really doubt that we'll get any new information. I did want to point out of thinking about this today, if you're at home, you're wondering how do they get all this information? How can they talk about all this information beyond the investigative process?

How come this is coming out in the courts? Well, Utah doesn't have a grand jury system and it's not like a federal court or a state court. In some states, we get very little information when charges are filed. In Utah, you have to state kind of bullet point by bullet point what the specific charges are.

And then under that, there's a preliminary information, Kelly, and that is where prosecutors can spell out the information that law enforcement has gathered that believes that the reason why they can bring these charges in the first place. The support for that definitely laid out in the narrative and it was really riveting to watch today. There was discussion of both mother and father of Tyler Robinson having some recognition, discussion of how he would surrender. What were your takeaways there?

Yeah, confirming the thrust of our reporting late last week that it was a family member. We had said the father had come forward and confronted his son. Now we've got some more information on that. And apparently it was the mom that initially saw the photos, mentioned it to her husband, Robinson's father, according to the charging documents here.

And he confronted his son and effectively, did you do this? Where's the gun? There's the photo of the gun that's out there, obviously they would be familiar with it. And that's where this case starts to make a turn.

Now, at some point, Robinson allegedly makes an allusion to or some sort of a suggestion of his own suicide. There's a discussion that takes place to reach out to a family friend who we've previously identified as a local minister. And then they arrange for him to go to the local sheriff's office to surrender, be taken into custody. And that's where we are here today, Kelly.

So just a little bit of extra details, ultimately was a family member that turned him in. We should be clear that the roommate who apparently Robinson is in a relationship with has been cooperating. We've heard that from the FBI, from the FBI's director, and we've heard it from law enforcement here again today. So there is cooperation certainly from those around this individual, and that's something that'll be a part of this case undoubtedly as well, Kelly.

Let me bring Misty into our conversation. And from your perspective as someone on the defense side of the table, let me read a bit from what's been described by prosecutors as the text exchange. This deals with handling of the weapon, according to this evidence that was presented Robinson. If I am able to grab my rifle on scene, I will have left no evidence going to attempt to retrieve it again.

Hopefully they have moved on. I haven't seen anything about them finding it. What does this say to you? He talks about the fact this was a family weapon that was important to him.

He had left it behind, and then there were police in the area, and he did not feel safe to go and retrieve it. If you were putting together his defense, how much is this a key part of what you have to deal with? It's absolutely a key part and it's twofold. Not only does it speak to the cover up, right?

You have the planning commission and the cover up of the crime. This talks about the weapon going back to find it, getting away from the scene, really relates to some of these obstruction charges and witness tampering charges. But in addition to that, it speaks to a guilty mind. So it's really going to be a hurdle for defense attorneys to handle this text message exchange just generally.

We know the roommate is going to be a key witness in this case, not just the text exchange, but also finding the note under the keyboard and all the evidence that's laid out in this document. That being said, from a defense perspective, you are in the information gathering stage right now. You're getting discovery and information and putting together how you're going to approach this case. There's some open questions about, will there be a mental competency exam?

What will that reveal? There's so many unanswered questions that at this stage, it's really the defense attorney working to gather everything that's out there to make those strategic decisions about how to approach the case. Outside of this process, we've been hearing so much about ideology, political motivations in the broad conversation and then focused on Robinson. This notion is described by family that he moved to the political left over time.

Is that something that in terms of the case and how his defense would be prepared? Is that a factor? Motive is not a required element, so is it a factor? Correct.

Motive is not a required element, so prosecutors do not need to prove it, but interestingly enough, in these particular criminal charges, there's what's called a victim targeting enhancement. This is something unique in the Utah law, although other states have similar statutes. It says that Robinson intentionally selected Charlie Kirk because of his belief or perception of Kirk's political expression. That's important because that means there is an intent element with respect to at least that part of the charge.

How does that fit into everything altogether? Well that could be an aggravating factor. Remember, in order to seek capital punishment, which is what prosecutors are seeking here, it's not just a premeditated murder, there has to be more. So this is one of the elements that if proved to a jury could be an aggravating factor.

So the charges here with this particular enhancement do actually require a showing of motive at least on that front. So it's going to be relevant to the case with respect to that, as well as something the jury would like to hear when the prosecutors present their case. It can answer some questions in the minds of the jury. Let me say thank you to Tom Winter, we will, and you and I will be talking on the phone later today, I'm sure.

And Misty, I'd like you to stay with us. We have some more information. The charges and additional information about Kirk's alleged assassin come as the president and his team are vowing action against what they are calling, quote, the radical left and vowing to go after hateful ideologies. Now Attorney General Pam Bondi is going so far as to say that the Justice Department would go after anyone who engages in what she deemed hate speech.

Do you see more law enforcement going after these groups who are using hate speech and putting cuffs on people? So we show them that some action is better than no action. We will absolutely target you, go after you if you are targeting anyone with hate speech, anything. And that's across the aisle.

The Attorney General later clarifying on social media that hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is not protected by the First Amendment and that she describes as a crime. And Trump today was pressed by reporters about some of those comments as he answered questions before departing the White House for his trip to the United Kingdom. We probably go after people like you because you treat me so unfairly and say, you have a lot of hate in your heart. Look, we want everything to be fair.

It hasn't been fair. And the radical left is that tremendous damage to the country, but we're fixing it. Now this all comes as emotions were running hot on Capitol Hill. Some senators lashed out with FBI Director Cash Patel testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Political violence is always wrong, period, full stop, it doesn't matter which side in the name of any ideology or cause it's wrong. But in America today, political violence is not a problem that falls equally upon both sides. We have to be honest about this. The vast majority of Americans are against political violence, but there is a vocal, active minority that encourages and celebrates it.

And that minority is overwhelmingly on the left. There can be no unity between good and evil. Somebody has to win this thing. And as a country, we have to absolutely reject it.

And don't tell me it's both sides. I believe you have made our country weaker and less safe. I believe that we are more vulnerable to a major event and I pray to God it doesn't happen. In the words of an ex FBI official, you are overseeing and I quote generational destruction of the nation's premier law enforcement agency.

Mr. Patel, in just eight months, you have assaulted the institutional integrity of the FBI. I believe you're failing as a leader and that your failure does have serious implications for the safety and security of Americans and our families. We're more vulnerable to domestic and foreign attack because of your failures of leadership.

Joining me now, we're NBC News White House correspondent, Vaughn Hilliard, NBC News Chief Capitol Hill correspondent Ryan Nobles. And back with us is our legal analyst, Misty Maris. Thanks for staying around. So Ryan, let me start with you.

You've been there all day. You witnessed the fireworks during Cash Patel's appearance. And what is your sense of the big takeaways in terms of points that may have been made or any new understanding? Well, certainly there's a disconnect between Democrats and Republicans about Cash Patel's stewardship of the FBI, Republicans largely praised the actions that he's taken.

They've defended the statistics that demonstrate what has happened in terms of crime under Cash Patel's leadership, where Democrats view Patel as turning the FBI into a very political organization. He accused him of pushing people out of jobs because of a perceived political bias, and it's something that Patel very flatly rejected. There was also quite a bit of new information related to the Epstein investigation. Patel said very plainly that he just did not think that there was that much new information that could be revealed based on the confines of what the DOJ collected and what he described as a very limited investigation in the late 90s and early 2000s.

The other thing that we saw was a very combative Cash Patel. During his confirmation hearings, he was very much less willing to engage in a back and forth between Democrats on the panel. It was a much different Cash Patel today. Here's one example.

Yes, sir. That rant of false information does not bring this country together. If you want to work on bringing this country, it's my time, not yours. My God.

My God. I'm going to talk about fighting this country. It is my time. I follow you on your social media posts that tear my time to address you.

You know what? Oh, you want to try all you want in this country to not say it is my time for one more time. Sir, you're the time of this committee. Sir, you don't tell me my time is over.

And that was just one example. Patel had very similar back and forth with Adam Schiff of California with Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, where he defended his tenure in office. And many times, Kelly, you know this very well, these hearings are designed for an audience of one. Trump cabinet official is there to back up the president and to battle with Democrats.

Those are things that Donald Trump certainly prizes in these roles. And now that Cash Patel doesn't need the vote of these senators anymore, he's already been confirmed. He doesn't need to worry about upsetting them in any way. The only person that he needs to continue to impress is Donald Trump.

And that clearly what he was attempting to do today during this very combative hearing. And we've been reporting over recent days about concerns about Patel. And so trying to shore up his standing with the president, I'm sure was part of his agenda as he faced senators today. Vaughn, let me turn to you.

The Trump administration says it's going after those who engage in hate speech that could encourage violence. But has it provided any more details about which groups or which individuals they would be looking to investigate? Right. Kelly, the attorney general followed up and said that they would be going after individuals who use hate speech to incite violence.

But we should be clear yesterday, inside of the Oval Office, the president of the United States himself used two different examples in which that, those parameters to go and pursue potential charges against somebody, were questioned. He looped in, folks may recall, he went to a restaurant here in Washington, D.C. last week. And there were four individuals inside of that restaurant who, after the fact, identified himself as having been with Code Pink, the anti-war demonstrators who interrupted the dinner and were yelling at him and protesting.

And he suggested that they should also be involved in any reco charges that are brought forward, suggesting that they were agitators. He was also asked about the more than 40-year demonstration outside of the White House by a group of individuals who have set up a blue tent over in Lafayette Park, across from the White House. Two weeks ago, that tent was removed, but when the president was suggested to him that the individuals were still out there and that they still had a first amendment right to free speech, he responded by saying, quote, not so sure. And so there are questions here about exactly what the president wants to crack down on.

But he has indicated something of a potential effort to try to bring unclear what the evidence actually is. There has been non-presented of any vast conspiracy linking the idea that there are any organizations that are funding protests that somehow are at any which way connected to the assassination of Charlie Kurt. As we heard from this press conference, they believe here at this point in time that the alleged assassin acted alone. And so it's not clear what the president is using to justify a broader crackdown against left-wing organizations as he describes them.

And Juan, as you're speaking, we're seeing the president and first lady descend from Air Force One in the United Kingdom, beginning what is a really extraordinary second state visit made possible because in the first term, Queen Elizabeth extended the invitation for a state visit to President Trump. Obviously, he was out of office for four years, and then when he returned Prime Minister Starmer, I brought the message in person that King Charles also wanted to receive the president of First Lady for a state visit, and that had never been done before to state visits. It's the highest diplomatic honor between countries. So the president who's been on Air Force One for many hours now has arrived in the United Kingdom.

As we watch that, Misty, let me ask you about this environment that we've been talking about. I was at the White House yesterday, spoke to Attorney General Pam Bondi about how the administration would protect first rights, first amendment rights, where even repugnant speech is protected while exploring these investigations into liberal groups. And here's what she had to say. We will always protect the first amendment, but you cannot, you cannot create violence, and that's what's happening.

When people are working together, you talked about Rico, it's Rico. When people are working in concert to commit crimes, the president was talking about people who are breaking up bricks, throwing into police cars. People who are being paid to docks, police officers, to docks, victims of crimes, that can jeopardize lives. And that's when you cross the line from First Amendment to a crime.

And she's referring to Rico, they're racketeering under the law. And so what exactly constitutes hate speech that is not protected by the First Amendment? We hear about, you can't yell fire in a theater. Help us to understand the distinction she's making.

So obviously the government cannot take action against an individual or an organization for exercising their First Amendment right, that's the cornerstone of the Constitution. It sounds like what she's saying is looking at a Rico type investigation or criminal theory, which would be an agreement, a meeting of the mines, to engage in criminal conduct. And that would go outside of the First Amendment protections as inciting violence. However, what she's talking about is very broad, and I did not hear any specifics about making that distinction between what would be protected, speaking out against the government, speaking out on issues that would be protected versus inciting violence and actually falling under what would be a criminal conspiracy.

So it would be a very fact-intensive analysis with respect to any issue that they're looking into. And it will raise a lot of questions for those who want to protest and don't want to come under scrutiny for where the line may be. Let me turn now to Ryan. And as we talk about another important topic that we have covered many times and that window is coming around again, and that is funding the government.

So House Republicans have put together a text for what's known as a continuing resolution that would buy the government more time to keep operations open through late in November, which sounds to me like those thanksgivings I've spent on the Hill before, when that would come up. What are the standout steps that you see to try to avoid a shutdown at the end of the month, October 1 being the start of the new fiscal year? Well, this is really in the hands of Senate Democrats, Kelly. It's going to come down to whether or not they have the fortitude to fight for certain provisions that they're looking for as part of these negotiations.

House Republicans don't need any Democrats to pass the legislation on the House side. They can do it with a simple majority. There's always the chance that maybe a few wayward Republicans buck this process because they don't like these short-term spending bills. But it seems likely that Speaker Johnson will be able to keep them on board.

So the question now is once the bill gets to the Senate, do Senate Democrats force something along the lines of renewing the expiring credits for the Affordable Care Act or some other health care provision, reinstalling the cuts that were given to Medicaid during the big, beautiful bill? Those are things that Republicans view as a non-starter. They want this to be what they describe as a clean CR, which is basically just a continuation of the existing spending levels with no additions attached to it. A Democrat sees this as an opportunity to at least leverage their position of needing bipartisan support in the Senate to get something along those lines.

Both Leader Jeffries and Leader Schumer have said that they are not willing to support this package as it currently stands that has our shutdown meter heading towards the likely end of the spectrum, Kelly. But we often cry wolf up here on Capitol Hill, so we'll have to see how it all plays out here in the next week or so. We have seen that movie before. Vaughn, Ryan, and Misty, thank you all for your expertise and insights.

And coming up, Divided States of America, a high-profile Democratic governor who was targeted by political violence himself, speaks out as White House officials keep up their fiery rhetoric in the aftermath of Charlie Kirk's killing. Plus, Memphis takes center stage in the Trump administration crackdown on crime atop local official ways in as federal agents prepare to patrol his streets. You're watching Meet the Press Now. Let's kickstart your wellness journey with the Dark Today app.

Workouts, meal plans, it's your fast track to a healthier you. And now, during the XFINITY member celebration, members can get an exclusive 50% off an annual subscription. Head to XFINITY.COM slash membership to learn more. XFINITY, imagine that.

Subscription automatically renews each year at $65.99 plus taxes and fees until canceled. All for ends May 20th, 2026, prices subject to change. Visit today.com slash XFINITY for full offer terms and details. Welcome back and join us again in this conversation as we're talking about the president, the vice president and other members of the administration who are blaming the left for political violence in this country.

Now, speaking to NBC News, Pennsylvania's Democratic governor, Josh Shapiro, who you remember was himself a target of political violence earlier this year, accused the president of using Kirk's assassination to limit speech he doesn't like. It shouldn't be hard to condemn political violence, whether you're a Democrat or Republican. And pointing fingers at one or the other ignores the broader point here is that all leaders have a responsibility to speak and act with moral clarity in order to make our community safer. President needs to unite this country.

He claimed in the wake of the killing of Charlie Kirk that he wanted to heal this nation. You don't heal this nation by attacking your fellow Americans. By calling some of your fellow Americans scum his word choice, not mine. The president attacking his fellow Americans, the president using this as a pretext to go and undermine people's constitutional rights, that is dangerous.

It is wrong and it needs to stop. Governor Shapiro of Pennsylvania, joining me now is our panel, NBC News senior National Political reporter, Sahil Kapoor, Chuck Rocha, host of Substack Show, the Rocha Revolution, and co-host of the Latino Vote Podcast and Republican strategist, Annalise Keller. So Sahil, let me start with you. The governor was at what is- There is politically astute and has the benefit of being factually accurate as well.

Violence and politics is not purely a one-sided ideological problem and there is a real yearning for unity in the wake of the killing of Charlie Kirk on both sides of the aisle. Trump is not stepping into that role. It's simply not who he is. I think it's instinct in these situations is to escalate and to try to kind of fuel the fire by blaming the other side, by advancing some of the fights that he wants to pick.

And so figures like Josh Shapiro, as well as the governor of Utah, Spencer Cox can step into that mold and play the role of unifier. The other important point that I think it's just really important to know that political violence in the U.S. is frequently not categorizable into a simple ideological box, not always left going after the right, right going after the left. The Charlie Kirkiller, Trump's own FBI has not identified a motive yet.

The arsonist who went after Josh Shapiro's house was upset about Gaza. He was not someone from the right going after someone on the left. So that's important to keep in mind as well. Very important caution for all of us to not get too far ahead of the facts.

Chuck, when you look at what Governor Shapiro was saying, mild in his tone and manner, but what he had to say was certainly very pointed. And do you think that is going to try to bring people together? Do you think it is effective in having people look at how the climate is being sort of fanned in some places? I think it is when you combine it with what you see with the Republican governor in Utah.

This is going to surprise people, but I'm not going to say anything ill of him because I'm a Democrat. I think he's been courageous in standing up and speaking to it just like Josh Shapiro. On both sides, folks at times of consternation look to their leaders. Shapiro is going to be lots of crazy people on the left.

Just like there's lots of crazy people around open up your Twitter right now, you can watch both sides fight each other. Do you sense a yearning for? Yes. You look to the leaders.

You look to the folks who are elected. You don't point out the crazy in her party or the crazy in my party to say, see, I told you now we have to fight some more. We look at the 10% of things that drive us apart and people make money off of that in algorithms. We don't look at the things that drive us together and that's where we should be as a nation right now.

There are so many incentive structures that make things more heated and so forth. So, Analise, when you look at how the president and the vice president have been very specific in blaming what they call left extremists and radical left and they're talking about now using the mechanisms of government at the Justice Department, racketeering charges and other kinds of things to go after these groups. Do you think that they need to be able to compartmentalize the fact that Charlie Kirk, for the president, the vice president, the attorney general, and many others is a personal friend who was murdered? You know, obviously they are going through a personal loss.

So certainly they are sort of grappling with that in real time and we're all seeing that. But what I think is important to note is there are some comments specifically from Pam Bondi. I think she's kind of walking them back now to make the distinction between free speech and hate speech versus violence. And I think that is a really important line to draw and I think the administration needs to be really clear because Charlie is someone who would have wanted more speech.

He would have wanted to have these conversations that Chuck's talking about, you know, Chuck and I are in green rooms a lot together and are friendly and, you know, that's how we solve these differences as Americans. It's not through going and saying that if you speak a certain way that you're going to be reprimanded, that's absolutely not what he would want here. And I think the administration needs to make that distinction very clear. And Sahil yesterday we had a political violence expert who said that condemnation of violence to stick Democrats and Republicans.

And it's the kind of thing that when you cover Capitol Hill, you're seeing this, you're in that environment. You're seeing the heated emotions. It is not like after 9-11 where they sang and on the steps of the Capitol to have a real demonstration of unity. What do you think has happened that has changed that?

Well, it's certainly not like 9-11. I think that was an unusual moment of unity for the country. And there are, you know, Democrats, I think, by and large, almost every one of them. And a big chunk of Republicans who do feel that desire for unity.

But I think many other Republicans are taking their cues from President Trump. And he is describing violence as simply an ideological thing, something that there should be vengeance and retaliation for us. So I do think the cues from the White House, which a lot of Republicans are following, is a big part of what's standing in the way. I will say Speaker Mike Johnson, since this happened, has been very nonpartisan in talking about the violence and the need for everyone to tone down the temperature.

He was asked, should President Trump also stop calling his political opponents evil and fascists? And he didn't directly answer. He said Trump has been a victim of a lot of that. I'm glad you brought up the speaker.

We do have some of his comments. Let's play those. The president has been called the most despicable names by people on the left for a long, long time. I don't have to give you the catalog.

It would be this thing. I'd need one of those Hakeem Jeffries notebooks to put up here and go through with you and all that. Look, there's a lot of heated rhetoric all around. What I'm trying to advance here is this idea that we can have vigorous policy debates.

That is the legacy of Charlie Kirk. And do you see it as that? He sort of echoed what you were talking about, that Kirk himself had a desire to have a platform for vigorous debate. Do you think that the speaker can be influential, even when the president is taking a somewhat different approach?

I do. And I think Kyle's right. He has taken this tone. He is a great orator, someone who sort of was thrust into the, into the speaker ship, not really with that background.

But of course he has, has found himself in these leadership shoes to fill. And he has, I think, done a job of bringing people together and taking a different tone. And I certainly hope that to the extent Republicans and Democrats are trying to find a way to reach each other, that they're looking to speaker Johnson as someone who can help. And Chuck, do you think that there are some who are active on the liberal side, who are also looking at how can we approach how we're going to protest, how we're going to do things?

Are they looking at tactical changes if that's needed at all? There's no incentive for a member of Congress to try to reach solution on this for this reason. There's 435 congressional seats, about 400 of them are either safe Republican or safe Democrat. If they start acting like they want to come together, they will get a primary either from their left flank if they're a Democrat or their right flank if they're a Republican saying they're not tough enough to stand up to the other party.

That's the reason we're in that building across the street in the position that we're in. Because back in the day, there were a lot more marginal seats that we could come together and make a deal. Now there's almost none. And with mid-cycle redistricting, we're making it even less.

So there's an incentive for them not to come together. I'd just say it's important to remember that. The one incentive, the one, you know, contrary incentive for them to come together is that they realize they could all be targets of this as well. And that if this escalates, if there is a tip for tat retaliation, then no one is safe.

Anyone in the political arena. The vulnerability has been so widespread. If that is one place where there's unity, they all feel vulnerable. Thank you to our wonderful panel.

I appreciate all your insights in and your perspective. And up next, we are going to look at what's happening in Israel, the long-planned ground offensive in Gaza, the assault on Gaza City. That is underway. We'll have the very latest on the military operation there, the civilian evacuations, and the spiraling humanitarian crisis.

Keep it here. Stay informed with the NBC News app. Breaking news just coming in moments ago. Watch, read, and listen throughout your day.

And now unlock even more with a subscription. It's the best of NBC News with fewer ad interruptions, including ad-free articles, podcasts, and full NBC News shows, plus deeper access and exclusive content. Let's just take a step back. It's more context and clarity from the reporters you trust.

Download the NBC News app now and subscribe for more. As the day wraps up, get the scoop on what's been happening with Here's the Scoop, a new podcast from NBC News with Meet Your Host, Jasmine Vesugian. We'll take a deep dive into the day's top stories with NBC News's trusted journalist. It's a fresh take that's sharp, thoughtful, and informative, bringing you closer to the headlines and conversations that are shaping our world.

On the front page, the Zeitgeist, here's the scoop from NBC News. Get the best of NBC News with a subscription. Fewer ads, deeper access, and exclusive content. And now, during the XFINITY member celebration, members can get an exclusive 50% off an annual subscription.

Head to XFINITY.COM slash membership to learn more. XFINITY. Imagine that. Subscription automatically renews each year at $65.99 plus taxes and fees until cancelled.

October ends May 20th, 2026, prices subject to change, visit NBCNews.com slash XFINITY for full offer terms and details. We're glad you're back with us. Israel is once again escalating its war in Gaza, entering the next phase of a planned assault on Gaza City. That's a ground offensive into what Israel says is Hamas main stronghold.

This morning, President Trump was asked if he supported Israel's military operations. Here's part of what he said. We're going to see what happens because I hear Hamas is trying to use the old human shield deal. And if they do that, they're going to be in big trouble.

They're going to be in big trouble. How about the idea of Israel beginning this ground offensive in Gaza City? Do you support that? Well, I have to see.

I mean, I don't know too much about Israel's expanded military activity is drawing condemnation from several Arab countries in the region with Jordan calling it a clear violation of international law. Egypt calling it a dangerous escalation. NBC News International correspondent Matt Bradley is in Tel Aviv with more. That's right.

Israel's highly controversial, though much anticipated ground incursion into Gaza City began several hours ago before dawn this morning. And that's when we saw the skyline of Gaza City being lit up by Israeli attacks. Now this is something that looks like more of the same, but it isn't really. Gaza City had so far been spared the worst of Israel's attacks.

And that's partly because Israeli officials suspect that the 20 around 20 living hostages are still being held inside Gaza City itself. Now the residents there have been told to move elsewhere and so far about half of them have heated the repeated warnings by the Israelis. The Israeli officials said today military officials that about 350,000 Palestinians are still thought to be remaining inside that Gaza City area. Now this operation is already inspiring criticism from the streets here in Israel, from family members of hostages who are furious that they say this expanded operation will only extend the war and put their loved ones at risk.

Military officials too, behind the scenes have been protesting against this saying that this is going to be too much basically for the army to handle, that the army is already stretched too thin. Thank you to Matt Bradley for that report and we're going to be turning now to another escalating conflict, this one between the US and Venezuela. For the second time this month, the US military carried out a strike on a boat that the administration alleges was smuggling drugs from Venezuela to the US. President Trump shared a video of the strike on social media yesterday showing a small boat suddenly erupting in flames.

The president said three men whom he called narco terrorists were killed in the strike. Yesterday while speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, President Trump was asked if he could provide proof to back up his claim. Well, we have proof, what you have to do is look at the cargo that was like it spattered all over the ocean, big banks of cocaine and fented all over the place, and it was plus we have recorded evidence that they were leaving. And joining me now is Republican Congresswoman from Florida, Maria Salazar.

Thank you for making time to come in and sit with us today. I have been covering the issue with Venezuela and the boat that was struck by US military off the coast. And have you been briefed officially on this yet? What are you learning?

We have not, but in reality, we know that you cannot expect anything good coming from Nicolas Maduro. To put it into context for your audience, Maduro is the head, he's not the legitimate president of Venezuela. Long time later though, well, he lost the elections 80 to 20. I mean, he has to be out, but besides that, that he stole the elections, he has been the head of one of the drug cartels for the last 20 years called the Cartels of Solis.

It's very important for everyone to know that the Venezuelan leadership is in the drug trafficking business. So this is the third boat that I hear that we have struck, and I understand that those who were on the boat were, it was an unfortunate destiny, but Maduro doesn't want anything good for the United States. And the White House does classify his government as a narco-terror cartel. They are.

And there are concerns though about the use of force in this way with the president where we don't really have evidence about the specifics of these incidents. Have you been given any evidence? Have you seen any evidence to be certain that the boat that was taken out in each of these incidents is what they say it. And I understand that that's a concern, but it comes from the Joints Chief of Staff.

And reality is that we're not in the business of striking boats that are carrying, I don't know, salmon. But that's part of the concern, right? Something goes sideways. It comes from Maduro.

If Maduro were to be legitimate, he would have allowed the DAA and the CIA and the FBI and everyone to come in and negotiate and say, okay, let me prove to you that I am not in the drug trafficking business. But he is him and his leadership and the other three henchmen who are around him. Maduro needs to go and I salute the president and I'm not always, I'm not with the president to every single issue, but with this one I am, he's doing very well in taking him out. And you know it's easy.

Maduro could negotiate his way out. Listen, Maduro negotiated with the Biden administration, something called the Barbados court that he promised on writing to Biden that if he lost the election, he was going to leave and he didn't because they are a bunch of thieves. And now there are not only upstealing politically speaking, but economically and in the drug cartel business. So you agree with the premise the White House is carrying out any concerns on the tactics?

No concerns because the problem is that Maduro doesn't, doesn't wish anything good for us. He has been wanting to, he has been wanting to harm us for a long time. But on top of that, he has kidnapped the Venezuelans. We're talking about that a million Venezuelans left.

We're talking about that, that they have the largest reserves of oil in the world. Do you think the US should engage in efforts to bring about regime change? Of course. And I'm sure that this is the beginning of the end because we cannot allow for Maduro to be in the drug trafficking business, harming our children, pushing fentanyl and health.

Secretary of State hasn't gone that far though. Well, I'm sure that he has not, but I'm sure he's thinking it. And he's doing that. That's another official that is doing a fantastic job.

Marco Rubio, who happens to be my constituent. And do you think there is anything that we've seen here in this sort of provocate provocation with Venezuela that could result in boots on the ground? The president said, I'll go after the cartels even on land. Do you envision it going that direction?

This is the cartel, just like the Cina Loa cartel. Not only that, remember that, that Maduro is in the drug trafficking business as we have discussed. But he's also given a platform, Venezuela is a platform for our enemies, we're talking about Russia, Iran. We're talking about Hezbollah, Hamas.

We have a bunch of those thieves and thugs in Venezuela trying to harm the United States, not only through drugs, but infiltrating our country with a silent cell. So Maduro and I assure you, I've been covering this for 25 years, is no good for the Venezuelans or for the Americans. And on top of that, you have the opposition leader in Caracas begging the White House to allow her to be able to bring a free Venezuela again and to have a democracy like it was before 50 years friends with the United States. And they have been friends with us for 50 years, but Maduro and Tavis stole the country 25 years ago.

I know we'll be following this and we will certainly check back with you because you do know the issues. You're passionate about it. But let me turn to another thing that is certainly on your plate with Capitol Hill. And that is, we are approaching October, that's the fiscal year for the federal government.

There is a plan to try to provide funding through most of November. Where are you on what's known as a continuing resolution? I am sure that Mike Johnson, this morning where we're talking about that, we're going to present a continuing resolution until November 20th. That's going to give time for us to do what you call ordinary process, which is doing it the right way, being able to vote on each one of the appropriation packages.

And that's going to happen and the American people will not be concerned of having to have a shutdown. So you're a yes on a C.R. Of course, guys, we want to keep the government open. Understand that.

Understand that. Any concerns about the can being kicked down the road yet again? No, because this time we have out of the 12th legislation, we have been able to pass three. And then we're going to get the cardinals as they call it.

They're continuing to work on each of the bills. And the American people for the first time in 100,000 years is going to be able to have each appropriation bill voted by Congress the right way, the way that it should have been done years ago. Now, one of the concerns is that as this current budget comes to an end, there are subsidies for health care under the Affordable Care Act that would come to an end. Would you support funding to continue those subsidies to make health care affordable?

If you like Obamacare, you keep Obamacare. And if we're helping you because you need it, my district needs that help and I'm more than willing to continue with the subsidies continued. We have to study it. Let's see what we're voting on.

But I do know that I'm not taking health care away from anybody or the affordability for it. Of course. And let's talk a little about the environment we're in. I'm sure you have felt the weight of these events this week.

And all of the pressure that's on members of Congress, I'm sure you've contemplated your own security when you are doing events and engaging with the public. Where do you think we are right now? Is there a moment of unity or is it really been retreating to differing sides in this? Now, it's a moment of unity because we have seen the political violence that we are experiencing, that Dems or Republicans, we don't want that.

That's not the way we do business politically speaking. Now, as you mentioned that in conference today, some members were very concerned because their lives could be in danger. And specifically, this group of legislators and I'm part of them that we are fighting Marxism. I mean, I'm the daughter of political refugees.

My parents are Cuban Americans. Don't we love the system? Don't we hate Marxism and everything that it brings, even though they may promise what everything they want to promise in reality is miserable. And there's this group called the Armed Queers Group that were training radical Marxists to shoot firearms at who?

Us? So we are very concerned because I've always said that Marxism is an nefarious ideology that has penetrated the political scene in this country and we do definitely have to be very concerned. And I'm very concerned with the mayor, the potential new mayor for New York City, Mr. Mondami, who's promising democratic socialism.

And in terms of the tone, do you feel that you are experiencing a cooperative tone? Are you, there was a lot of talk about who's side and who's responsible? Do you feel there's a unifying tone at this moment? Within the GOP varies.

We do now. Doesn't it need to be broader? Of course, of course, I mean, I have not really had the opportunity so recent what happened with Charlie Kirk, but it's, but it's, but we do need to hear from the Dems that we are united when it comes to, you know, political violence. Listen, political violence is in Venezuela and in Cuba and in North Korea and in Iraq and in China and in Russia, but not in the United States.

We are the beacon of hope. We are the ones that we have to set the way of and show civility, political civility to the rest of the world. Aren't we? I mean, I don't know what else is because, you know, I, you know, I was a reporter for many years.

I covered a lot of countries and I'm telling you, we're still the best. There is a round. Appreciate your talking about how this country should not embrace political violence. Thank you for your time today and coming over to see us in person and your insights on these very hot issues in our national dialogue right now.

Always here to serve. Still to come, my one-on-one interview with a top local official as President Trump mobilizes troops to Memphis, Tennessee. You're watching Meet the Press Now. Today at the request of Governor Bill Lee of Tennessee, who's standing with us, as you know, I'm signing a presidential memorandum to establish the Memphis Safe Task Force.

The effort will include the National Guard as well as the FBI, ATF, DEA, ICE, Homeland Security Investigations and the U.S. Marshals. And welcome back. President Trump, yesterday, speaking alongside Tennessee's Governor Bill Lee, a fellow Republican, announcing Memphis will be the next city in the President's crime crackdown.

And joining me now is Shelby County Mayor Lee Harris. So good to have you with us. Thank you so much for making time today. Sure.

Thanks for having me. I wanted to start with your reaction to this announcement. It had been sort of bubbling for a while that Memphis was potentially going to be a target of opportunity for the President to bring his federal resources. He'd been signaling this.

But had you been in communication, had you been notified in advance of this being told to the world? No, so far, this has been relatively chaotic. And this is particularly a bad time because tomorrow, of course, is the 238th anniversary of the Constitution. And so on a week like this, Constitution Week, I think all of us are reminded of the freedoms that we have in this country.

So, you know, sending forces to the state of Tennessee at the request of a federal official is the most un-American, anti-American thing that I can think of. So I think we're all disappointed. We're not getting forewarning. And this appears to be without details.

And right now, I'm pretty chaotic. And so for the White House, of course, having a Republican governor welcome the President gets, sort of gets around the hurdle of resistance that we saw in Illinois. And the governor of your state said in the Oval that he was, and I'm quoting here, tired of crime holding the great city of Memphis back. Do you agree with that characterization of your city?

Well, I think the state of Tennessee is one of the best places around. I think one of the problems we have in West Tennessee right now is the proliferation of guns. And why we have that problem is because we have constitutional carry here or permitless carry. And so that has resulted in many, many guns ending up in many, many places where they are stolen, stolen out of cars and end up in the criminal stream.

And we've seen our crime statistics go up dramatically as a result of those kinds of laws being passed out of Nashville. So we're looking for the governor to engage in a conversation around that. And we're looking right now for the governor to have a press conference to explain the details of what's to happen in Tennessee soon. We know that there was a press conference at the White House, but this is Tennessee.

And Tennessee is need to know what is going to happen. We haven't seen the governor have a press conference, unfortunately, we've seen a lot of talk. We've seen very little details and I think now is the time to be transparent, to tell tennis hands what's coming, what to expect, and why. The president signed a memo authorizing this task force.

When you consider the potential to have federal resources that would be sent to Memphis, do you believe there would be a level of cooperation and it is there some value in having additional resources to bring to bear? Well, we obviously support, celebrate, and welcome federal resources, resources that deal or know how to deal with the civilian population. And so that's ATF, DEA, FBI, and so forth. Well, we don't welcome what we think is anti-American is a military occupation on our streets.

Tennessee is no place to see armored vehicles, individuals with military fatigues, checkpoints, and semi-automatic weapons. That war machine is reserved for our foreign adversaries in cases of insurrection. None of that applies right now and so we won't federal help, but it's got to be the right kind of federal help and we've got to be careful about what we do. We've got to be able to pass this democracy on to the next generation.

In preparing to talk to you, I noted that the Memphis Police Department had announced the city had reached a 25 year low, pulling together some statistics that when it comes to crime, murder is that it's six year low. That is certainly a significant move in the numbers. Is that enough? We could always do more, but what Donald Trump has done is try to create the impression that Tennessee is a hellscape.

He posted on social media just today, a video showing a war zone. That's not the Tennessee I know, and that's not accurate. We're making great strides here. This is one of the best places on Earth.

Thank you. We're so happy to hear from you, Shelby County Mayor Lee Harris. Thank you for your time today. We're back tomorrow with more Meet the Press Now, but there's more news ahead on NBC News Now.

I'm Craig Melvin. Cheers. Cheers. I've always been a glass half full kind of guy.

And now I'm talking to some people who look at the world that way too. Some really fascinating folks who share their defining moments, their triumphs, challenges, their stories are funny and my candid. So I hope you'll join me each week and who knows? You might just come away with your own glass half full.

Search Glass Health Full with Craig Melvin from today on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.