If it's Tuesday, President Biden issues an urgent call to defend democracy at home and abroad as he pushes world leaders to stand up to Putin and seems to retool his reelection pitch. Plus, a House divided talks to avert a government shutdown, hit a new roadblock as House Speaker McCarthy is forced to call off a key vote amid quarreling in his conference and with his speakership on the line. And politics and picket lines, thousands more auto workers could soon go on strike as White House officials stay on the sidelines and former President Trump plans an address to union workers in Detroit instead of attending the next Republican presidential debate. Welcome to Meet the Press Now.
I'm Garrett Haake reporting in Washington as President Biden tries to frame his presidency and his reelection campaign around the battle for democracy at home and abroad. With the war in Ukraine now in its second year, President Biden addressed world leaders at the United Nations General Assembly in New York, trying to rally UN members to stand up to what he called Russia's naked aggression in Ukraine as he urged nations to meet the moment and defend democracy in what he called an inflection point in world history. We will defend democracy, our best tool to meet the challenges we face around the world. And we're working to show how democracy can deliver in ways that matter to people's lives.
Russia's price for peace is Ukraine's capitulation, Ukraine's territory and Ukraine's children. Russia believed that the world will grow weary and allow it to brutalize Ukraine without consequence. But I ask you this, if we abandon the core principles of the United States to appease an aggressor, can any member state in this body feel confident that they are protected? If we allow Ukraine to be carved up, is the independence of any nation secure?
I respectfully suggest the answer is no. President Zelensky also addressed the United Nations this year delivering his remarks in person. Weaponization must be restraint. War crimes must be punished.
Deported people must come back home and the occupier must return to their own land. We must be united to make it and we'll do it. Glory to Ukraine. Zelensky will bring that impassioned plea for assistance to Washington later this week when he heads to the Capitol, the White House and the Pentagon.
It comes as public support for additional aid to Ukraine is fading, particularly among Republicans. While Biden tries to make his pitch for democracy around the world, his democracy here at home faces serious challenges of its own, including a government shutdown in 11 days and an impeachment hearing getting underway right before that. But according to the president, the biggest threat to U.S. democracy is his likely 2024 campaign rival, Donald Trump.
Here's what Biden told donors yesterday ahead of today's remarks. Quote, In 2024, democracy is on the ballot once again. And let there be no question, Donald Trump and his MAGA Republicans are determined to destroy American democracy. And I will always defend, protect and fight for our democracy.
That's why I'm running. That message from the president is a return to the messaging from his 2020 presidential campaign and a sharp turn away from his Bidenomics pitch to voters that's dominated his messaging over the past few months, but has also largely failed to boost the president's flagging approval rating and poll numbers. Joining me now is Mike Memoli outside the United Nations and Richard Engel is with us from Ukraine. And Mike, I'll start with you.
As the president makes this pitch for democracy, how is his message received in the room? What were world leaders doing? How were they reacting? Well, yeah, there was parts of this long speech from the president today that were very micro intended literally for the people in the room.
We're talking about career diplomats, things like reforming the UN charter, expanding the security council, new financing for the World Bank. That was an audience that the president was targeting with some of those very specific proposals. There was the broader audience, of course, as we've been covering this president over the last two and a half years, his foreign policy outlook that this is a battle between democracies like the U.S. and autocracies like China and Russia.
This year in particular, we've seen that battle. It's sort of for the global South developing countries like in Africa and Southeast Asia. The president beginning his speech by talking about Vietnam. That was very conspicuous.
The only applause line, though, in the heart of really the president's message, of course, was about Ukraine. And that really is something that the president is hoping he can sustain. It was not as big a part of his speech this year compared to what we saw last year. He acknowledged in his remarks today that Russia is counting on the world growing weary of this struggle.
But the president nonetheless ending with that refrain talking about the need to continue to support Ukraine, because if not, then where is it going to move on to next? And that was a point that President Zelensky, who the White House acknowledges is himself the most, more than the president, effective messenger for this cause, made himself. He said, Russia has expanded its horizons every decade. Look at Georgia.
Look at Belarus. As he said, that is now being swallowed up. He says you have to continue to support Ukraine now because of what could come next. And that's the message that these two men are hoping will continue to resonate, even as support, as you rightly noted, is starting to really start to wane.
And Mike, on the domestic front, the president seems to be shifting a little bit away from his Bidenomics message. He's changing things up, sort of leaning back into the defense of democracy message that we saw in 2020 and the midterms. Talk me through the White House strategy on this and how they view that change. Well, Garrett, there are, as I often invoke the number, 413 days until election day.
And I promise you, we haven't heard the last of Bidenomics. It will come back. This is obviously a foreign policy heavy part of the calendar. The G20 just last week, the trip to Vietnam and, of course, the U.N.
this week. But it is really notable, Garrett. This is probably the first time in two decades that we are seeing at least one of the campaigns put foreign policy to the front of the political discussion in the way the Biden campaign is now, as George W. Bush did 20 years ago.
Look at the campaign ad that the president launched last week talking about his trip to Ukraine. Look at the president's blunt remarks that you quoted from last night. Look ahead to what he's going to be doing in a battleground state next week in Arizona, giving us a speech about democracy. The president does think that this is an important message that will resonate, but you're also going to continue to see him toggle it with that domestic economic message in October.
We will see the president, even potentially during a government shutdown, getting back out to key swing states and talk about that split screen, as the White House is calling it right now, between the president's priorities and what we see among the Republicans in Congress, who you spend a lot of time around, Garrett. That's right. Mike Memoli outside the United Nations for us. Mike, thank you.
I want to turn to Richard now in Ukraine. And Richard, as Mike points out, President Zelensky is such an effective messenger for his cause. What was the goal of the speech today, the specific message that he's hoping to convey in this speech and on this trip? Don't give up on Ukraine.
And I think he wanted to convey a sense of urgency. When you're here in Ukraine, people forget about the war outside the country. You can't forget about the war here in Ukraine. There were just air raid sirens in Kharkiv, where I'm standing right now, a few minutes ago.
And then they were ringing a few hours before that. And we heard them last night as well. All throughout the east of this country and really half of this country, you're living in a constant threat. You're living in a constant war zone where power is scarce.
The winter is coming here. It's heavily militarized. We were in a frontline town yesterday. It was largely destroyed.
There were only 900 people left. They were completely dependent on the mayor every day. The mayor has to bring in hand carry-in supplies on one road in or out. And they're very worried about this nuclear power plant.
President Zelensky was talking about it today, how Russia is weaponizing nuclear power. It's because Russia is occupying a nuclear power plant in this country, and there's fighting around it. And not just Ukrainian officials, but many international experts worry that it's a ticking time bomb, that one day this nuclear facility could blow up and contaminate large parts of this country and potentially spread around the world. So there is a serious degree of urgency that I think he's trying to deliver, that frontline communities are getting devastated.
Ukraine is sending its troops into battle. It is having to improvise on the battlefield, converting drones and using them to offset where it doesn't have enough artillery. So I think he really wanted to say, this is serious. We're living this every day.
Don't give up on us because we haven't given up on ourselves. Well, and to me, it seems like not so much even a question of giving up, but I hear it all the time on Capitol Hill, especially from Republicans, almost this idea of Ukraine war fatigue. What's your sense of how widespread that is globally among Ukraine's other allies and how much of an uphill climb do you think he then faces, not just in Washington, but with all the countries that have been aiding Ukraine in this war? It's the numbers.
Like I said, here in Ukraine, they're not tired. They're tired physically, but they're not anywhere near giving up. But when you go across Europe and what you're hearing in the United States, it's inflation. People are concerned about the rising costs.
They're feeling that they don't have enough money, even though the economic numbers I don't know how many people are dying in suffering places like Syria. It's unfortunate, and I think it takes some leadership, strong leadership. Let's talk a little bit about strong leadership, because you were very critical of the speaker this week. You called him weak during this funding process.
He's just pulled the CR procedural vote for the floor. This defense vote just failed on the floor. What do you want to see from Speaker McCarthy that he's not been doing? Well, listen, you know, we got into this issue.
So we have a serious fiscal catastrophe looming. We didn't get here overnight. We will not get out of here overnight. But if we abandon our duty as Congress and not doing our job and doing politics, and we will never get out until it's going to hurt the American people significantly.
Isn't shutting down the government the peak of abandoning that challenge? Listen, but the challenge is we should have not been in a position now where we couldn't even pass appropriations bills out of the committee. We're increasing the amount of unauthorized spending. We knew, like September 30th didn't change on the calendar.
We knew about it. I talked to him about this issue starting last November. We had this discussion. I said, we need to have a plan.
We need to have to deal with that ceiling increase. We need to have a plan that is meaningful to move the needle. And he failed to do with this issue. Now we get into a position like people try to do things under pressure.
Well, that's not the way to govern, you know, so I think it is a problem, because fiscal issue, which the number one issue that Congress should be dealing with, has been abandoned. So what are we doing here? So what now? I mean, if not Kevin McCarthy, is there someone in your conference who you think would be a better leader for this party right now?
Listen, I think we actually the Speaker of the House doesn't need to be a member of Congress. A lot of people don't realize that. I think a lot of people learn it. I say, Wisconsin with 200 million people, we have choices, right?
But ultimately, I think Kevin is a symptom of the system. And I think we have to stand up as Republicans and put pressure and have this conversation. But ultimately, leaders have to hold accountability, you know, hold themselves accountable, too. And unfortunately, he didn't deliver on a lot of major issues.
Now we're again in a crisis mode. So what do you say to the voters who put Republicans in power? You guys then voted for McCarthy as your speaker. And you're staring down the barrel of this potential shutdown here that you just suggested is because you guys weren't doing your job.
So what do you say to people who look at all that and say, this is not a party that can govern? Well, listen, all the power failed us and we can make a difference and show the American people we can lead or we'll be another failure. And I know the Senate is corrupt and it's not controlled by Republicans, but Republicans and Democrats are not willing to govern this country. And the House has an opportunity to undermine leadership to make a difference.
You know, otherwise, we'll fail. How is the Senate corrupt? Well, because the Senate is so afraid. I'll tell you how corrupt.
Why do we not have any? They don't want to put any serious cuts to fraud, even fraudulent appropriations because the number one interest lobby is Big Pharma, big hospitals and big insurance. It's destroying Medicare. We're talking billions of dollars.
Five items that Obama and Trump agreed on. One point eight trillion. I said that this is going to make a difference by partisan support. You know, it will help us save Medicare for seniors.
Well, but it will have to shake out the status quo here. They're afraid because they put this money in super PACs and they collect enormous amount of money doing nothing in the Senate. What are they moving? How they determine long term policies for this country.
They're supposed to do it. It's much harder for the House. So I told them the House can have to push for them and win this for the people. I can assure you it's harder definitely to pass things in the Senate when you need 60 than a majority in the House.
Usually. But I want to ask you one other question on another topic before I have to let you go, Congresswoman. The other big story in the House right now is impeachment. And back in 2021, when you first started in the House, you said the following of the push to impeach Donald Trump over his actions on the 6th.
You said Congress should stop playing divisive politics and start working on delivering good policies for the American people. You've got an impeachment hearing coming up just a couple of days before the government is supposed to shut down. Do you feel the same way now? I totally agree with that.
But we have to go through serious investigations before we move forward. That's I think majority members on Judiciary Committee actually supporting to have a proper processes, including impeachment inquiry before we decide because to go into proceedings, it's a serious business. So and I think most people underestimate my Republican colleagues on Judiciary Committee. Most of us are constitutionalists.
Listen, I vote some issues. They make some tough votes because I truly believe my oath into constitution. We're actually not a pure democracy. We have the rule of law and we're constitutional republic.
So I'm willing to take tough votes and we have to have proper investigations before we move with anything forward. So I think it's a proper step with Speaker Pelosi, which is plain politics. And we know with the stroke of the pen, this happens impeachment of the Senate president. This is totally ridiculous and irresponsible.
Congresswoman, really quick then, do you believe that there should be a vote right now to authorize this impeachment inquiry? You said you're willing to take a tough vote. Listen, I think we should have a vote. I don't think there should be an objection because inquiry is a proper process.
It's actually a proper procedural step that the House to do. And I think that vote probably should be taken. It should be afraid to take the vote because that is the proper thing to do. I'm glad to get you on the record on that.
Congresswoman Sparks, thank you for spanning the globe with us in this segment. We really appreciate you coming on. Thank you. And coming up more on this Capitol chaos.
We are live on the Hill where tempers are flaring right now after a group of House conservatives just blocked an effort to advance the defense spending bill. This was a procedural vote. Plus, meet the pushback. Former President Trump is facing new criticism from a Republican primary rival after comments he made on the issue of abortion during his exclusive interview with Kristen Welker.
You're watching Meet the Press Now. Welcome back. We're following some developing news right now in the House. It comes after Arkansas Republican Congressman Steve Womack told me yesterday that the situation inside the House Republican conference was, and I quote, an unmitigated disaster.
Well, things appear to have gotten worse today. This morning, Speaker McCarthy was forced to pull a procedural vote on the short-term spending deal backed by leadership as they struggle to sway holdouts inside the conference. After huddling with members this morning, the speaker said discussions were still ongoing. You know what?
Getting there is never easy, but we're willing to listen to all voices. Something much different. We're willing to build up from the bottom up. And the one thing that we found is members got together over the weekend.
They came up with solutions. We aired the solutions right here. I thought we had a very good discussion. We'll continue that discussion today with those that have some more questions.
America's too great to give up just because you have a tough discussion. And while the speaker tries to put on a happy face here, the sniping between warring factions inside his conference is intensifying and the government shutdown is looking all the more likely at month's end. Here's just a bit of that sniping between Florida Congressman Byron Donalds, who helped cut the imperiled deal on spending, and Matt Gaetz, who's one of several members trying to kill it. I'm doing everything I can to assemble a coalition to defeat the Donald CR.
I believe that it is really kind of frivolous in the cuts because they only occur for 30 days. I challenge my colleague from Florida to create a coalition and try to actually get a victory for the American people. If he wants to have a personal thing with me going back and forth, he's entitled to, but I don't care about that foolishness. I want to win.
We can't blame Joe Biden and the Democrats for why the Republican-controlled House of Representatives hasn't passed any subject spending bills. That's our fault. So we have to deal with that. We will likely have to endure some degree of a shutdown.
Adding insult to insult, in the past few minutes, Republicans didn't have the votes to advance what for them is a non-controversial bill to fund the military. That vote was torpedoed by some of the very same holdouts on government funding. Moments ago, some Republicans from more moderate districts voiced their displeasure on the steps of the Capitol. Listen to this.
What we just witnessed was a conservative Republican Party frankly look and behave like the minority instead of the majority. What we just saw were five individuals vote against a rule to bring to the floor for a vote the most conservative DOD bill in modern history. Joining me now with the latest on all this from Capitol Hill is my colleague Ryan Nobles. Ryan, where are we right now in the Republican conference?
Did we move any closer to keeping the lights on today or just take more hops and leaps backwards? Well, I think Congressman Womack's description to you yesterday was pretty apt and continues. It remains an unmitigated disaster, I think by any measure. But I think maybe the difference between what we saw yesterday and what announced this new deadline for negotiations.
What's the union's threatening here in terms of this sort of staggered strike if these companies don't meet the deadline? Well, Garrett, you can see an expanded strike. Right now, you have about 13,000 union workers on strike of a 140,000 union membership. So about three plants of well over 20.
So they're saying that they could target additional plants in the coming days, you know, or Friday at noon, if they don't see progress. What that progress looks like or how much progress that could be. That remains to be seen. But the union membership and union leadership is being very clear that this strike could expand very quickly if they're not seeing enough progress, Garrett.
What's your sense of the Trump part of this with him going to Detroit? Obviously, you're in Ohio. But what do we expect from that visit? And how do you think it'll play with union members and union leadership with him injecting himself into their negotiations in this way?
Yeah, Garrett, you know, it's a very interesting dynamic because both with dealing with the Biden administration and former President Trump, you've heard the union leadership kind of say, thank you, but we got it. We can handle our own negotiations. We're the one at the table. You even saw this statement from Sean Fain.
We'll put it up, pushing back against the existence of Donald Trump, at least in Detroit, talking to union workers. You see him saying that every fiber in the union being is poured into fighting the billionaire class and an economy that enriches people like Donald Trump. Again, Sean Fain and UAW saying that they haven't gotten any comment from or that President Trump, former President Trump hasn't reached out to the UAW at all. But Garrett, I want to play a piece of sound, a piece of a conversation I had with a union member when I asked her about this potential visit from former President Trump.
Listen to what she said, not just about Trump, but also about President Biden. Yeah, Garrett, you know, it's a very interesting dynamic because both with dealing with the Biden administration and former President Trump, you've heard the union leadership kind of say, thank you, but we got it. We can handle our own negotiations. We're the one at the table.
You even saw this statement from Sean Fain. We'll put it up, pushing back against the existence of Donald Trump, at least in Detroit, talking to union workers. You see him saying that every fiber in the union being is poured into fighting the billionaire class and an economy that enriches people like Donald Trump. Again, Sean Fain and UAW saying that they haven't gotten any comment from or that President Trump, former President Trump hasn't reached out to the UAW at all.
But Garrett, I want to play a piece of sound, a piece of a conversation I had with a union member when I asked her about this potential visit from former President Trump. Listen to what she said, not just about Trump, but also about President Biden. It would be nice if they were actually out here doing it for real instead of just for votes. Who are you thinking about when you say that?
Trump. You think he's just doing this as a sort of campaign? He didn't support us before back when he was president. Anything to Biden.
Biden's the one with electrification and force basically forcing the big three to go electrified. So I think it's just for votes. The push for electric vehicles. That makes it critical of the president.
Yes, it does. That gives you a sense of why Donald Trump feels that there is an opening. There is concern, legitimate concern among union membership that the transition to electric vehicles could mean fewer jobs or at least less job security for them, Garrett. Yeah, look, that's certainly the space that Donald Trump is trying to exploit here.
Shekhar, appreciate you reporting out there. And I'm joined now in the studio by today's panel. Peter Baker, chief White House correspondent for The New York Times. He's also an NBC News political analyst and the co-author of The Divider, which is out in paperback today.
I got the hardback copy on my nightstand. Also with me is Democratic strategist Amisha Cross and Republican strategist Brad Todd. So, Peter, I'll start with you. I mean, what do you make of this counterprogramming strategy from Donald Trump?
To me, it seems less about the primary debate and more about the general election, the way he is trying to go about this next week. He doesn't need to be in a primary debate. He's winning or his view almost already won. In effect, Republican nomination.
Why bother to get down on the stage with these guys who have no chance in his view of winning? That's the image he wants to present, at least. And appealing to the union workers, if not the union leadership. He's trying to peel off people, of course, who will be otherwise more sympathetic to President Biden.
So you're right. The general election strategy in a primary election night. But how central is that strategy if he wants to crack the blue wall again to peel off these union members and say, these folks don't represent you. I do.
Well, the Republican Party has undergone a realignment in the last 10 years. Donald Trump's a part of it, but he certainly didn't cause it. And that realignment is a working class party of work realignment. That's the thing Republicans have in common.
So you're going to consistently see Republicans move toward trade unions. And that doesn't include government unions. If you work in air conditioning instead of the desk and you're in a union, that's not the Republican constituency there. But if you're someone who works in a factory, works with your hands.
You saw this on the Keystone pipeline. And I think this is a repeat on a bigger scale. Should the White House be worried about this, the possibility that the former president can peel off support from voters who feel like that woman who Shaq talked to, that Biden administration has gone too far on electrification or what have you. And then Trump might appeal to some of these folks.
Absolutely. Historically, Trump and the Republican Party have not been friendly toward unions, whether it's teacher unions, auto unions, you name it. They are not union strong in any way. But I do think there's something to be said about the change in tempo.
Part of it is because, you know, the roads of the election, those are the Midwest. The Midwest is union centric. So I do think that this is a president or former president who understands that. And he's also trying to at least become a little bit more to the center, but making fun of something that, quite frankly, a lot of people are afraid of.
Changes in innovation. When we talk about electric vehicles the same way we talk about AI, there are a lot of people who are afraid that they're going to lose their jobs. And I think that there may be a certain quakes there. Even if it is a stunt to have Trump go, I think about when he went to East Palestine and then try to make that same argument that, you know, President Biden is being present for Ukraine and I'm being present for Ohio.
Does the White House, should they be participating in some of these stunts on their own, perhaps to try to counteract this? Or are they taking the high road? Is that the right way to play it? They're taking the high road, but I would argue they also need to get in the fight because President Biden has been a union person for a very long time throughout the entirety of everything.
But also before that, he has been one of the forebearers when it comes to being vocal about unions over time. And I think that this is a time where he needs to be full frontal as well. Do not mistake that historical understanding that all of us around this table have for your average American voter. He needs to be out there.
But Joe Biden's never been willing to pick trade union members over the environmental lobby. He doesn't do that. And so that's why you see him backing off right now. I think what you saw in the interview with the Shack interview, that's what the union members are going to want to see.
Is Joe Biden willing to back off his EV commitment for workers? Or is he going to pick environmental liberals? Well, Brett, what did you make of the Tim Scott bite we played there, too? Because I think that's the much more traditional Republican play on this.
It's like, screw these guys. You know, we're going to have a hard line on it. That'll play at the Reagan Library. Is that a misreading of where the electorate is now?
I think it is even of the capitalist side of the Republican Party. Because if you think of who are the most strongly skeptical of unions in the Republican Party, they're people who own medium sized businesses and small businesses. And they're on the same side as the UAW worker is when it comes to electric vehicles. And Peter, what do you think?
What do you make of this? If you've got Trump's rivals basically talking to a 1980s version, perhaps of what they think the base wants to hear on one side and Trump talking to a different side. Is that a space the White House can exploit? Does it mean something in the Republican primary that these two are on?
Trump was over here and everybody else is on the other side. Trump has successfully redrawn the map. You're right. And start with Trump, obviously.
But he had appeal to working class Democrats in a way that previous Republican candidates really didn't. And the question for Biden is how can he get back into that? He's tried. He's gone to Scranton and Pennsylvania a number of times.
He does position himself as union Joe. The EV thing is a challenge for that. How do you balance that? And if he manages to find a way to settle this strike soon, it probably doesn't have that much of an impact.
If it drags on for a while, it both er The U.S. and Iran, but there doesn't appear to be any direct engagement with the Americans and Iran. And just yesterday, the U.S. announced new sanctions against the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad because the U.S.
is still asking for information regarding the presumed death of a former FBI agent, Bob Levinson, who disappeared in 2007 on an island off the coast of Iran. The U.S. still has not accounted for how he died. Iran still has not even acknowledged that arrest.
So the U.S. is urging Americans not to travel to Iran, and they are urging answers. They are demanding answers when it comes to the death of that American and any others who have been wrongfully detained, Carrie. All right, Jacob, Jacob Gutiérrez, thank you for that reporting.
And still to come on The Rise Again, the number of illegal migrant crossings at the southern border is going back up, threatening to aggravate an already intense migrant crisis in some of America's largest cities. We have the latest on that story and the fallout next. You're watching Meet the Press Now. Welcome back.
The number of illegal crossings at the southern border are on the rise this month. Two Department of Homeland Security officials tell NBC News that not only have border officers steadily encountered more migrants over the course of September, the agents apprehended more than 7,500 migrants on Sunday alone. That's a drastic increase from the last official border numbers released back in July, where apprehensions averaged around 4,300 a day. The number of encounters dropped off in May after the Biden administration lifted the pandemic-era border policy known as Title 42 and replaced it with new policies aimed at making it harder for migrants to seek asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border and encouraging lawful entry applications filed from migrants' home countries.
The new rise in encounters could overload a system that's already stretched beyond its capacity. And a new legal filing in L.A. revealed that migrant parents and children were temporarily separated in Texas border facilities this summer due to overcrowding. NBC News Homeland Security correspondent Julia Ainsley joins me now with more on her new reporting.
So Julia, what are we learning here about this and why do officials think it's happening now? Well, typically the numbers do go up in the fall. There's really high temperatures that you see in Arizona and Texas start to come down a bit and so you will see an increase. But this increase is a little more drastic than even they had expected.
And another thing that really worries them is the number of children, children coming with their parents and children coming alone. They think this is because of pent-up tension and frustration where people are having a hard time entering legally. They're being told by smugglers, take matters into your own hands, cross the border. And they're even seeing places like in Arizona where migrants have learned or these cartels have learned how to cut holes in border fencing to come through.
Basically, this is a real test of these border policies, whether it be Trump's law or Biden's asylum policies. Will they hold because they've really tried a lot here, but now the system is being tested. There were predictions of doom when Title 42 was removed and these new policies were put in place. They seem to have been very effective for a while.
Did something change about how the policies are being enforced or how they're being understood in the countries these folks are coming from? Like I'm trying to figure out what changed on the policy front here. Well, really, they're able to look at migrants, whether they be relatives or friends or anyone they talk to through word of mouth, who have been able to come in. They're looking at the 60,000 migrants who are in New York City right now with the right to shelter.
They're looking at people who have been success stories. And that often happens after a policy that might seem like it's gonna be 100 percent. No one comes in. These are the rules of zero tolerance.
Instead, they are able to see that some people are able to come in. They get processed. They get released. They get the ability to wait for their court date.
And so other people start thinking, maybe my chances are better than I previously thought. I've only got about 30 seconds left. But tell me about these family separations that you found happening. Yeah, this is from a court monitor who interviewed families in a Donna, Texas detention facility this summer and found that in some cases they were separating children, even as young as eight from their parents.
Now, CBP says they did this because of safety due to overcrowding. They didn't have enough room in those family pods. And it's important to point out, this is not like what the Trump administration did. They were separated for a few days and then brought back together, not like Trump, where they were separated with no way of getting back in touch.
But the court monitor did point out that when they were separated, the mothers and the children had no way to communicate or talk to each other. It's good stuff. Really good reporting here, Julia. Thank you for staying on top of the story for us.
And thank you for being with us this hour. I'm back tomorrow with more Meet the Press Now. NBC News Now coverage continues with Yasmin Vassugian in for Hallie Jackson right now. He was a young Marine.
She didn't care about convention. They made a life together. Then one night, the Marine died. And then the death investigation took a wild, unexpected and utterly bizarre turn.
I'm Josh Mankiewicz, and this is Trace of Suspicion, an all new podcast from Dateline. Listen to all episodes of Trace of Suspicion now, wherever you get your podcasts.