This Sunday, presidential plans we will move forward. Vice President Kamala Harris begins to outline and clarify her positions on key issues ahead of the two month sprint to Election Day. My values have not changed. Are there enough details in the Harris agenda to win over undecided voters?
I'll talk to Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna of California. Plus, Trump's promises. Donald Trump appears to try and moderate his position on women's health as the election years, promising the government will pay for fertility treatments. The government is going to pay for it, but we're going to get or mandate your insurance company to pay for it.
I'll talk to Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas. And devastating discovery, the bodies of six hostages, including Israeli American Hirsch Goldberg, Poland are recovering Gaza just days after his parents addressed the Democratic Convention. Hirsch, if you can hear, hear us. We love you.
Stay strong, survive. How will this impact negotiations for a ceasefire? Joining me for insight and analysis are David Rhode, NBC's senior executive editor for national security, the Wall Street Journal, senior political correspondent Molly Ball, Lonnie Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution, and Maria Theresa Kumar, president of Voto Latino. Welcome to Sunday.
It's Meet the Press from NBC News in Washington, the longest running show in television history. This is Meet the PRESS with Kristen Welker. Good Sunday morning. Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris will face off in their first debate next week as new polling shows just how competitive the race is with just over two months until Election Day.
Nationally, Harris is leading Trump 48 to 47% in the wall Street Journal poll of registered voters. A Quinnipiac poll shows Harris up two points in unlikely voters, 49 to 47% in the battleground states, according to a set of Bloomberg winning console polls. Harris and Trump are tied in Arizona and North Carolina. Harris is narrowly ahead in Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Pennsylvania.
And Harris is ahead outside the margin of error in Wisconsin. This week, the vice president sat down for her first interview since becoming the nominee and was pressed on why she shifted positions on some issues from fracking to Medicare for all to immigration since she first ran for president back in 2019. I think the most important and most significant aspect of my policy perspective and decisions is my values have not changed. And this morning, there are new signs.
The issue of abortion is front and center in this race as a growing share of voters, and particularly women, rank abortion second after the economy and give Harris an edge on the issue. For former President Trump, it's yet again posing political landmines. On Thursday, he was pressed by my colleague Dasha Burns about whether he would support an amendment that would overturn his home state of Florida's six week abortion ban. There's an abortion related amendment on the ballot to overturn the six week ban in Florida.
How are you going to vote on that? Well, I think the six week is too short. It has to be more time. And so that's, and I feel them that I want more weeks.
So you vote in favor of the amendment? I'm voting that. I'm going to be voting that we need more than six weeks. But the very next day, after a backlash from anti abortion advocates, Mr.
Trump said he couldn't back the amendment. Are you going yes or no on amendment floor in Florida? So I think six weeks, you need more time than six weeks. I've disagreed with that.
Right from the early primaries when I heard about it, I disagreed with it. At the same time, the Democrats are radical because the nine months is just a ridiculous situation where you can do an abortion in the ninth month. And you know, some of the states like Minnesota and other states have it where you can actually execute the baby after birth and all of that stuff is unacceptable. So I'll be voting no for that reason.
Now, less than 1% of abortions happen at 21 weeks or later and usually because of catastrophic health risks or lethal fetal abnormalities. And of course, infanticide is illegal in all 50 states. We'll have more on all of that in a moment. But first, a devastating turn in the Israel Gaza war.
Israeli forces have recovered the bodies of six hostages in Gaza, including Israeli American Hirsch Goldberg Poland, whose parents met with world leaders pressing for his release. Even speaking at the Democratic National Convention last month. Anyone who is a parent or has had a parent can try to imagine the anguish and misery that John and I and all the hostage families are enduring. Bring them home.
The Israeli Defense Forces said that the bodies were recovered on Saturday from an underground tunnel in the southern Gaza city of Rafah in an operation by the IDF saying all six had been killed shortly before they were to be rescued by Israeli forces. In a statement, Vice President Kamala Harris said Hamas is an evil terrorist organization. With these murders, Hamas has even more American blood on its hands. President Biden spoke on Saturday night.
It's time to spore ending. We should end this war. I think we're on the verge of an agreement. It's just time to end it.
And joining me now is Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas. Senator Cotton, welcome back to Meet the Press. Thank you. Chris Brady, thank you so much for being here.
Let's start with this devastating news, the discovery of six bodies, hostages including Israeli American Hirsch Goldberg, Poland. Everyone I think feels heartbroken this morning. The entire nation in Franklin World mourning these deaths. What is your reaction Senator, and what do you think this will mean for hostage negotiations?
Well, it's terribly sad news that Hamas murdered, executed these six hostages and cold blood apparently shot in the head shortly before they had been rescued by Israeli Defense Forces. My heart goes out to all the families, especially Hershelber Poland's family or fellow American. There are other fellow Americans still be accounted for. But I think we should know that these hostages were discovered in the tunnels under Rafah.
That's where Joe Biden and Kamala Harris put pressure on Israel not to enter for months using arms embargo to try to keep them from entering. Kamala Harris even said that Israel shouldn't enter Rafah because she had studied the maps. What the Biden Harris administration should have done from the beginning is not pressure Israel to restrain its response, but let Israel win. From the very outset, for 11 months, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris have put more pressure on Israel than they put on Hamas and Iran, Iran's other terror proxies.
And Senator, just to be clear, there of course is no arms embargo. It is true that Biden administration did halt one shipment of arms out of concern for weeks. For weeks the Biden Harris administration put an embargo not just on large 2000 pound bombs which of course are needed to penetrate these deep and buried tunnels, but on things like tank rounds and artillery shells and war round. Well, it was just one shipment of arms.
It was the £2,500. But they have now moved forward with that. It's not an arms and bar, just to be very clear. That's very specific.
It was in place for many weeks specifically to try to prevent Israel from entering Rafah where these hostages were discovered. If we had simply backed Israel to the hilt from October 7th, this war would probably be over. We probably would have found many more hostages alive and there would be fewer civilian casualties caused by Hamas infliction of those civilian casualties on its own people. But at every turn, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris have put more pressure on Israel than they have on Iran and Hamas.
And of course they have also argued the US stands firmly behind Israel was one armed shipment. Let's talk about crimes. No, Christian, you can hear fact checking all you want. I'm going to tell you the real facts.
It was a large category of weapons far beyond just 2,000 pound bombs. It wasn't an arms Embargo. That's why it wasn't specifically an arms embargo. Let's just move forward though, in terms of what Prime Minister Netanyahu is facing right now because he's been facing pressure in the wake of this.
He's been resistant to accepting this hostage. Y axiosis bar reports that a senior Israeli official said, quote, we warned Netanyahu and the cabinet ministers about this exact scenario, but they wouldn't listen. Do you believe Prime Minister Netanyahu bears any responsibility for not getting a deal sooner? No, I believe Hamas bears responsibility for not turning these hostages back over to their families and surrendering at every turn.
Benjamin Netanyahu has tried, tried to meet the Biden administration halfway. They continue to move the goalposts. They continue to encourage and embalm Hamas. Consider what happened just a few weeks ago when the Prime Minister was here to speak at the Capitol.
Kamala Harris didn't even sit behind him and joint session from Congress, one of her few duties as vice president. Then she came out after meeting with him and stressed that we need a ceasefire now, which is the day. Back to Hamas position. What did you have two days later?
You had Israeli children being blown up on playgrounds. Because every time Joe Biden and Kamala Harris put more pressure on Israel, it simply emboldens Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran. Just to be very clear, there is pressure on Prime Minister Netanyahu now. You have people protesting in the streets.
He is of course the leader of Israel and that's what I'm asking you about. Do you think and would you urge him in this moment, Senator, to get a deal, given these casualties? I would urge him to finish the job against Hamas, which is exactly what Kamala Harris and Joe Biden should have done from the very beginning. Again, if we had backed Israel to the hilt, if we hadn't continually put pressure on Israel to slow and moderate its response, Hamas would have been broken and we'd forgotten more of these hostages than alive.
The only time Hamas has even come close to releasing hostages is when they are on a ropes. And of course the US has even more aid, both military and monetary, to Israel and any country. But let's be exact idea, we get hundreds of billions of dollars in religion. Some of that money of course is frozen.
But let's, let's move on to some domestic issues, if we could. The issue of abortion. Front and center this week, Donald Trump has gone from calling himself throughout the arc of time very pro choice at one point. He's more recently bragged about overturning Roe v.
Wade. He now says he's going to vote to keep Florida's six week abortion ban in place. A lot he once described as terrible. How can people trust Trump on this issue when he keeps shifting his position?
Well, the President's been very clear. He does not support a nationwide abortion law. In fact, there's only one candidate in this race who supports a nationwide abortion law. It's Kamala Harris.
And we know he does because it's, we voted on it. It is radical and extreme. It would require tax higher funding of abortion up to the moment of birth. That's what she stands for.
She's the only one in this race calling for a nationwide abortion law, something that is wildly unpopular. This is to clear the billiard to requires that there be exceptions for health through the end of pregnancy, not that all abortions be legal. In all cases, a woman's health is at risk when she's been raped for being the victim of incest. Vast majority of Americans support those as well.
But this law is radical. It overturned 50 years of precedent. Require taxpayer funding for abortion even in these cases. Well, taxpayer funding for abortion is currently of course legal under the Hyde Amendment.
And just to be clear, abortions later in pregnancy 21 weeks and after are extremely rare. In the case of health emergency, if they're so rare, why won't Kamala Hare say then dying we shouldn't allow them with those exceptions. But if you have those exceptions, if you have those exceptions, it will account for those rare health emergencies. So why don't you say it?
That is what the law says. You're sure allowed to have exceptions if there are health emergencies. Common hair is noted against the Born Alive Victims Protection Act. She did not.
Yes, she did, Senator. I was there. She voted against. I was there.
She voted against it. Kristen, if these cases are so rare, if these cases are so rare in late term pregnancy, then why won't she say, you know what, we should prohibit these with exceptions to the mother's life. Why don't she say that? Because she is a radical on abortion.
Just to be clear, she voted against advancing the bill twice when she was said no, she's called it a true. Let me ask you about something else. I interviewed JD Last week. He told me Donald Trump would veto a federal abortion ban if it came to his desk.
Now Trump is not committing to that. Do you think he would sign that veto if it came to his desk? Well, Chris, I think it's hypothetical. First off, we both know there's not gonna be 60 votes in the Senate anytime soon for either party's preferred or centrist position on abortion, whether it's the radical position that Democrats have or the proact position of Republicans have.
I think it's a hypothetical question, but President Trump has been consistent, is that there's not going to be a nationwide abortion law while he's president. He appointed three justices to reverse Roe v. Wade, which was wrong in the side of Steven. Liberal scholars acknowledged was poorly reasoned and returned this question to where it had rested for 170 years, which is the American people making choices to their elected representatives at their states.
States are going to have different kinds of laws. Donald Trump's acknowledged that. I hear you're saying that former President Trump is inconsistent, but as we showed, he's actually pivoted quite a bit on this issue. But Shady Vance was very clear.
He said that Donald Trump would veto a nationwide ban. And I guess the question is why can't Trump be clear with people about what he stands. Are you clear? I know you're saying it's hypothetical.
He has been clear that there will not be a nationwide abortion law when he's president. He has been critical, perfectly consistent on that. Now, Kamala Harris, to her credit, she's been consistent and not trying to hide a radical position on abortion. It's the only position she hasn't tried to hide over the last six weeks.
Like her position on decriminalizing illegal immigration or banning gas powered cars or banning fracking. Abortion is the one issue on which she hasn't tried to hide her positions for the American people. I'm talking to Congressman Rocon about all of that coming up. But let's stick with Donald Trump.
His big announcement on IVF this week, he said Thursday he wants the government to pay for or force insurance companies to cover ivf. Is that something you would support, Senator? Well, all Republicans to my knowledge, support IVF in Congress and there's no state that prohibits or regulates IVF in a way that makes it inaccessible. It is expensive for many couples.
I understand that. So I'm open to the most Republican. I think we have to evaluate the fiscal impact, whether the taxpayer can afford to pay for this, what impact it would have on premiums. But in principle supporting couples who are trying to use IDF or other fertility treatments.
I don't think his Southern is controversial at all. Well, two months ago you voted against a Senate bill that would have protected and expand IVF access and it would have mandated that some coverage was covered by health insurance plans. If that bill came back to the floor, would you now support it? Is that what you say?
You mean Chuck Schumer's ridiculous messaging bill that requires fertility treatment for men who think they're women? This was slapped together. Chuck Schumer spent all summer long slapping together the ridiculous bills that he thinks are going to help his liberal incumbent senators face off in their real estate. Very quickly, do you know where this money would come from to cover IVF?
Because in 2022, some $8 billion were paid by any specific legislation that we don't have any legislation. So you're still undecided on where you stand on this government funded IVF plan. Plus, I certainly support couples having access to ivf. And it's not even a controversial issue in any of the sites.
All right, let me ask you about another one of the big headlines this week. Donald Trump visited Arlington National Cemetery. You've been talking about this. He attended a replaying ceremony, obviously for the 13 service members who were killed during the US withdrawal from Afghanistan.
He was invited by those family members. Important to say that he also had campaign staffers with him. Photos, videos were posted on a campaign site. Taking campaign photos and videos at grave sites is forbidden under federal law.
You of course served at Arlington Cemetery in the old guard. So I know that this is a sacred place for you. Bottom line though, I guess, Senator, is it ever appropriate to make campaign content at military grave site? I didn't take campaign photos there.
These families, Gull star families whose children died because of Joe Biden, Kamala Harris's incompetence, invited him to the cemetery and they asked him to take those photos because as they told me yesterday when I spoke to Kelly Barnett and Darren Hoover, the parents of Taylor Hoover, who has Arkansas Thom, they don't get to go to the beach on Labor Day. They don't get to have barbecues. This is their one chance to have a memory of their children to commemorate their service and honor their sacrifice. They won President Trump there.
They wanted to take those photos. You know, the families also invited Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, where were they? Joe Biden was sitting at a beach. Kamala Harris was sitting at her mansion in Washington D.C.
she was 4 miles away, 10 minutes. She could have gone to the cemetery and honored the sacrifice of those young men and women, but she hasn't. She never has spoken to them or taken a meeting with them. Her and Joe Biden's incompetence.
Those 13Americans were killed in Afghanistan. Well, not everyone obviously is pleased with this. Again, just the law says memorial services and ceremonies at Army National Military cemeteries will not include partisan political activity. Just like Joe Biden has posted content of himself in the cemetery or at other cemetery transfer.
They're all American citizens. They have a right to go there and honor the sacrifice of those 13Americans who Joe Biden Harris sent to their death. Let me ask you about what we're hearing from another family, the family of Master Sergeant Andrew Marcsano. He was a Green Beret.
His family was concerned that his grave was actually shown in a photo that was posted on social media. A statement from the Marcusano's sister Michelle said, quote, we hope that those visiting the sacred site understand that these were real people who sacrificed our freedom and that they are honored and respected accordingly. Did the Trump campaign fail to honor her wishes? Their wishes?
No, Kristen, they honored the wishes of the 13 families whose children died at Abbey Gate. Those families wanted the photos. They told me yesterday they specifically asked President Trump for the photos. Obviously headstones of Arlington are close to each other.
When you take a photo of your loved one, then other headstones are gonna be present as well, right? I think it's pretty disappointing that New York Times went and found a family whose headstone was featured in that photograph of another girl star family and then went to them to try to embarrass the ghost star families who wanted President Trump. Have you had any conversations before President Trump about joining his administration should he win? All we're talking about is making sure that he does win and that we elect Republican majorities in the Congress so we can begin to reverse some of the damage that Joe Biden fell Harris caused.
All right. Senator Tom Cotton, thank you so much for being here this morning on this Labor Day. Hope you get some time with family. Really appreciate it.
When we come back, is Vice President Harris doing enough to clearly her agenda and how her views have evolved? Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna joins me next. Welcome back. How much will Vice President Harris draw a distinction between President Biden's record and what she will do if elected?
In her first joint interview as a Democratic nominee, Harris defended some of her policy shifts since she ran for the White house back in 2019. Joining me now to discuss all of this is Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna of California. Congressmanna, welcome back to MEET the press. Kristen, thank you for having me on.
Thank you so much for being here. I have to start with this just devastating, tragic news, the revelation that six hostages have been killed by Hamas, including Israeli American Hershel Burke, Poland, what is your reaction and what do you think this will mean for hostage negotiations? Well, my heart Breaks for the family of Hirsch Obert, Poland I met, like many his parents, John and Rachel, he was a Californian. They spoke about his love for life.
He was planning to go to India. He was planning to travel the world. And it's just a devastating loss is murder by Hamas. But what we need now is an end to the war and we need to continue to pressure Hamas to unconditionally release the hostages.
But the hostage families themselves are saying that Netanyahu needs to actually be in the negotiation. Gallant, his own defense minister, has criticized Netanyahu in the Cabinet for saying that the Fidelity Corridor, that Netanyahu is not willing to withdraw troops there as Egypt and the United States want. So I hope there's going to be pressure on Hamas and Netanyahu to end this war with these hostages. Let me ask you big picture about something.
This is according to the Washington Post, which says that Vice President Harris would conduct a full review, if elected, of the US Israel policy and could be open to imposing conditions on some aid to Israel. I know that that's something that you have supported. Have you been pushing her directly to support conditioned aid to Israel? I've been pushing her to support the enforcement of US Law.
That is what the enforcement of the Lehee law and our security laws require, that we don't have unconditional aid. And Chris, this is unprecedented. In 1982, after the Sabra and Chatella massacres in Lebanon, President Reagan called up Menachem Begin in Israel and said, we will not give aid in a way that's going to cause humanitarian crises. So we need to have pressure on both sides and the war.
And I'm glad the vice president's open to a new direction. Has she expressed openness, though, to conditioning aid to you directly in some of your conversations? No, I believe that for the vice president particularly. But what she has her team has expressed open and this is a new direction.
And look, anyone looking at this policy, you have hostages who still aren't released. You have a war that has lasted almost 11 months. You have over 40,000 people in Gaza. We need a new direction of policy to bring the war to an end.
Let me ask you about another foreign policy issue. You just heard Senator Cotton there sharply critical of the Biden administration, President Biden and Vice President Harris for the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan. Vice President Harris has said that she was the last one in the room for that decision about that withdrawal. Do you think she bears some responsibility for the way that that withdrawal was carried out?
Well, first of all, it was Donald Trump, who wanted us to get out of Afghanistan, was never able to do it. I get President Biden and Vice President Harris for finally ending a war for 20 after 20 years. And my heart goes out to the Gold Star families of the 13 Marines we lost. I have tremendous admiration for the service of those who were lost.
But I think the war had to end. There needs to be a review of why those victims were there are Marines and of course the administration needs to explain that. But the big issue here was that President Biden ended a war that Donald Trump said he wanted to end. There were some recommendations that troops should still be stationed there.
Do you believe she bears some of the responsibility for some of those key decisions that were made that did lead to that withdrawal which we all witnessed, which by all accounts including Biden administration acknowledging was botched? I think she is proud of the Biden Harris record. She deserves credit for running the war. And to the extent that there were mistakes made, of course she is part of that administration.
But you know the difference, Kristen, is when no one is perfect in government. And President Biden's team himself has acknowledged certain mistakes. But leaders take responsibility and they're open and they're honest. And yes, there were certain mistakes made, but the war was ended.
And that is the big decision that she deserves and President Biden deserves credit for. Let's talk about the interview that Vice President Harris had this week. She talked about some of those policy reversals that have now been in the spotlight. She previously supported Medicare for all.
She now doesn't. She favored a ban on fracking. She now doesn't. She once argued against criminalizing illegal border crossing.
She now says, quote, there should have to be consequences. She said when she defended these policy positions that her values have not changed even though her policies have. Why should people believe what she says now? Well, first of all, I think she came off with confidence, calmness and non defensiveness.
And I hope she'll do more of these interviews. Actually agree with your predecessor, Chuck Todd, that she should go on this weekly show. She's very competent and as running for president have her views out there and take the hard questions. But let's go issue by issue on fracking.
President Biden ran in 2020 on a position saying that there were going to be no new fracking leases on federal land. Our federal land is sacred and that we were going to protect that. He did not say that we were not we were going to ban fracking in private lands. In states like Pennsylvania, most of the fracking is on private lands.
And Vice President Harris ran on that position in the vice presidential deb that Joe Biden and her were not going to end fracking on private land. So my assumption is this is the same position. She's not going to have new leases on federal land, but she's going to be fine with fracking as a transition on private land. That was what they ran on in 2020.
Well, let's delve into one of the policy positions, another one more specifically, her initial support and opposition to a single payer health care system. You support that? Let's play something that Senator Bernie Sanders told Politico just last month. We need Medicare for All.
It's not our view, nor is it President Biden's point of view. And you know what? I think I'm right and they're wrong. Are you disappointed that Vice President Harris is not running on an agenda that includes Medicare for All?
I strongly support Medicare for All. I support getting people on Medicare, dental, vision, hearing. That's our basics. And I believe that people should not have to be go bankrupt because of medical debt.
And I hope that we can get the Medicare for All. But if Vice President Harris is going to take incremental approaches to improve healthcare, for, for families, to expand Medicaid, to expand the Affordable Care act, that's better than going backwards and having Donald Trump once repeal the Affordable Care Act. Zooming out, what do you say to progressives who feel abandoned by Vice President Harris on some of these key issues? I said look at the progress we have made.
You have Bernie Sanders having a progressive agenda that influenced President Biden, that led to the American rescue plan, that had the child care tax credit, that had massive investments in manufacturing, in schools. And Vice President Harris has taken some bold progressive positions. She's calling for building more housing. She's calling for expanding the child tax credit.
She's calling for capping rents that are outrageous. So progress isn't made in one fell swoop, but we're moving in the right direction. Do you think she would consider herself to be a proud progressive? How would she label her herself?
Well, I let her do that, but I think of her as a progressive who's pragmatic to meet the needs. But this idea that she hasn't been consistent, I mean, what about Donald Trump's flip flops? What about his flip flops on a board? And so I think the vice president is consistent on the position on fracking.
It's exactly how Joe Biden ran, I think, on Medicare for All. You know, I ran against her as a culture Bernie Sanders campaign. She wasn't for Medicare for all in the 2020 primary week. That was part of the difference.
So is she as progressive as me or Bernie Sanders or others? No. But she is moving in a progressive direction for the party in focus on working in middle class Americans. Congressman o', Connor, thank you so much for being here on this holiday weekend.
We really appreciate your time. And when we come back, the fight over abortion rights was back in the spotlight this week. Our panel is next. Stay informed with the NBC News app Breaking news just coming in moments ago.
Watch, read and listen throughout your day and now unlock even more with a subscription. It's the best of NBC News with fewer ad instructions, including ad free articles, podcasts and full NBC News shows. Plus deeper access and exclusive content. Let's just take a step back.
It's more context and clarity from the reporters you trust. Download the NBC News app now and subscribe for more. Let's kickstart your wellness journey with the dark workouts meal plans. It's your fast track to a healthier you.
And now during the Xfinity Member celebration, members to get an exclusive 50 off an annual subscription. Head to expinity.com membership to learn more. Xfinity Imagine that subscription automatically reviews EGR at 6,599 plus tax and fees until canceled all for ranks May 20, 2026. Prices subject to chain.
Visit today.comxfinity for full on returns and details. Hey guys, Willie Geist here reminding you to check out the Sunday Sit down podcast. On this week's episode, I sit down with one of the biggest bands in the world, Mumford and Sons, as we get the boys together to talk about their new number one album, Prize Fighter and the evolution of that irresistible foot stomping sound. You can get our conversation for free wherever you download your podcasts.
Welcome back to the panel. It's your NBC News national security editor, David Rhode, author of the new book where Tyranny Begins, the Justice Department, the FBI and the War on Democracy Molly Ball, senior political correspondent for the Wall Street Journal Maria Theresa Kumar, president of Voto Latino and Lonnie Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Thanks to all of you for being here on this Labor Day weekend. David, I have to start with you.
This devastating news that we all woke up to, the news of these six hostages killed, you, of course, course, were held by the Taliban in Afghanistan for seven months. I know that you know this family. I know that you are grieving this morning. The implications of this, the implications of this for where things go in Gaza from here.
I met the Ponds in this very studio. You interviewed them. Westerholtz sat down with all the families of the Americans that have been taken hostage. John and Rachel, Hersh's parents are just extraordinary.
And the odd thing, my case has been years ago and Kurt suffered much more, his courage. He had his hand blown off by a grenade and he was still dragged into Gaza. His hand appeared to have been amputated while he was in captivity. That was in a video that was released by Hamas in April.
And his struggle to end this way is just heartbreaking. And John and Rachel are just incredible in many ways. And I'm biased on this. I'm a proud NBC national security other wanting nonpartis.
But hostage taking is very cruel crime. It's particularly cruel and cowardly for the families. I know that. John, Rachel, my own family, that you sit there thinking, how can I say my loved one, can I get President Biden or Prime Minister Netanyahu to do something?
And it's just cruel to the family. So this is just heartbreaking and I'm so sorry for Hersh and his family and for all the hostages. Mary Teresa, we heard from them at the Democratic National Convention when they spoke out and they have been so outspoken. Bring our son home.
They have shared their grief, their horror with the world so bravely. And yet here we are. My heart goes out to their families. I do think that what Kamala Harris has been able to do is leave this idea that you need national security for Israel and protections, while recognizing that there has to be justification and protecting the incident in Gaza.
I do think that moving forward that if this blows up into a regional issue issue, this could be the October surprise. And going into the election, if that is the case, Americans are going to ask who is going to be the commander in chief, who is the one that should be at that table. And I think that is something that we should be watching. But again, the grievance that you express, I guess I cannot imagine.
Lonnie well, it's an awful day, without question. I think the challenge for Harris team is that they're trying to have both ways. And you saw this a little bit in her convention speech. Although on the one hand she wants to stand with Israel, on the other hand she's talking about the need to be respectful or to be understanding of the position of the Palestinians and understanding that this is a Hamas driven activity.
There's a difference there, to be sure. But I think that there's a little bit of confusion here, because this is initiative that divides the Democratic Party states as well. And I think that's what makes the politics a little bit complex here for her because she's got to navigate this in order to keep the support for baby, but also pure, countable slim voters. Yeah, Molly, we started to get at that with Congressman Conan just how complicated the politics of this are.
The fact that you do have a fair number of voters in states like Michigan and states throughout the so called Blue Wall, to name a few, who are deeply driven by this issue. And Coloniers was about this in her CNN interview this week. And she just kept saying, we need a deal, we need a deal. We haven't gotten a deal.
And months have gone by and President Biden has persistently said it's closed, as close to close. But the US can't be the only one who wants a deal here if Israel doesn't want a deal, if Hamas doesn't want to deal. And at various times, both sides have rejected these different arrangements that the US has tried to broker. And I think to Maria Theresa's point, with every passing day, that that deal is not achieved.
It is a reminder not only of the issue of arms to Israel, which Kamala Harris did not really answer in that interview and which does continue to divide the Democratic base. There is a significant portion, as we all saw in Chicago, that is animated issue and does not like her position on it. And it's a reminder that this conflict persists. And for, you know, in a lot of polls, voters do say that they trust Trump more on foreign policy, in part because there are these ongoing conflicts overseas in which the US has interest at stake and remains embroiled and the administration has not, for whatever reason, been able to bring them to a close.
Lana, you know, the race could also turn not just on the issue of foreign policy and everything that's happening in the Middle east right now, but on domestic policy. And obviously abortion is front and center in that we are watching former President Donald Trump wrestle with this in real time. For example, on Thursday he suggested he was going to basically vote against the six week ban. Then by Friday he had shifted gears because he was under so much pressure.
How do you think this will play out given the polling? Well, this is another example of the pressure between swing voters and base voters. And this is in some ways equivalent in terms of how this issue plays out. I think that Republican voters will give Donald Trump a lot grace on this issue.
So I don't tend to believe that there will be a large migration of base voters away from him because his position is no longer tortured on this issue. I do think it's the case, though, that the energy of the Republican base is something that could be affected if this continues to drag out. So that's why it was important for his campaign to do as they did, which is try to clarify this as quickly as possible. Because this is one of those things that if you let it linger, the energy is really the problem.
It's not going to vote for Kamala Harris that they may not be as enthused to vote for Donald Trump. It's so fascinating because Donald Trump is both someone who takes responsibility for over turning Roe v. Wade at the same time the minute was overturned, understood that this would be a political liability for him. And it has been for Republicans.
When he comes out and says, hey, free by IVF for everyone, is that something that makes him Democrats nervous? Maybe we should have proposed that first. No, I think, first of all, I think this is real policy implications where there are women, sadly, that are dying under these bans. And so we have to remember that whatever policy decisions we end up with, but there are actual harm being caused every single day the more they delay addressing this issue.
And I do think that the Democrats realize that he is, he's not growing his face. He needs to grow space. And I actually think that to your point, he's making a lot of evangelicals nervous with his flip flopping. And that is one of the reasons why he recognizes ways I need to pull myself back, because where are my voters coming from?
His strategy to win the election is to make sure that his mad Republicans, evangelicals come out. He's losing independent moderate voters from all the polling that we're seeing. So he has to figure out how you thread the needle while ensuring that the other side does not come out. Molly, how do you see this?
And then the fact that we have new polling that shows that women voters increasingly see this as their top issue tied with or second to the economy. We've never seen that before, quite frankly. Frankly. And this is an issue in which Trump has always been sort of caught and advised.
And you know, his position from the beginning was that he was proud of the decision of returning Roe v. Wade because it returned to the states and the states can do whatever they want. But we see in practice how it's more complicated than that. How, you know, when Arizona tried to dramatically restrict abortion, Trump actually intervened to pressure the legislature to overturn that ban.
In Florida, where it's on the ballot, where he is a voter, he's got to say how he would actually vote on a state's decision. And he, as we talked about, went back and forth because he has to simultaneously reassure his base that he will continue to fight for them, but also speak to swing voters. The other part of his base that he risks with this IVF gambit is fiscal conservatives. You heard Senator Cotton not wanting to commit to what would essentially be an expansion of Obamacare and a massive expense for the federal government if they were to have the government cover ivf.
I don't think we get a lot of Republican senators going along with something like that. And so for not only pro life conservatives, but fiscal conservatives who want limited government, less spending, this is a little bit disturbing to see where Trump is going on these issues. All right, guys, stand by. Pause.
We're going to start the next panel with you. David, stay with us. When we come back, price controls and the high cost of living have been top of mind for American voters for decades. Army the president is next.
This Labor Day weekend. Both campaigns are leaning into the economy. The top issue for voters, Vice President Harris's proposal to ban price gouging in the grocery industry has gotten attention and some criticism with former President Trump saying she has endorsed, quote, Soviet style price gouging and Harris's allies arguing that her plan is instead a targeted expansion of existing state powers. Back in 1951, here's how the president of the United Automobile Workers talked about the debate over price controls here on the press.
We believe that when we fight for effective price control, to really have a law that begins to roll back the cost of living and then control it, we think we're reflecting the desires and the needs of the great majority of American people. We think when we fight for a tax law that begins to place the burden of the cost of defending freedom upon all people based upon their ability to pay. We think we're fighting the battle of the average American. And you think that in a democracy, at a time of war, when some of our sons are in Korea and when you walk out the way you did that you're speaking for the plain people of America whose sons are in Korea, who are being drafted.
What about the GI who loses children back here with the wife? Doesn't price, a skyrocketing prices affect her, as if the lack of rent control affect their, their welfare? So we're fighting for these things because it helps all Americans. A debate then, a debate now.
When we come back. The special counsel revised his indictment against Donald Trump this week after the Supreme Court's immunity decision, what role will Trump's legal battles play ahead of November? More with the panel next. Welcome back.
The panel is still here. And David, I want to start with you and your new book, Where Tyranny Begins. But put it against this backdrop. This week, special counsel Jack Smith filed a new indictment against former President Trump, basically stripping out all the references to official acts in his initial indictment in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling on immunity.
And it relates to your new book, particularly where you reflect on former President Trump's impact on the legal system. You write, quote, in four years as president and three years as an ex president, President Trump has successfully used conspiracy theories, co option and threats to bend DOJ and FBI officials to his will. Those who dared to defy him and had their reputations damaged and their careers derailed. That is not the rule of law.
That is not democracy. What else did you find in this book, researching this book, that these tactics worked? I was shocked at how afraid people were to speak to me on the record and, you know, concerned about what happened in Trump administration. And since I finished the book, the Supreme Court came out with a immunity decision which, as you said, makes it legal.
Any official act by president with the attorney general is allowed anything. And that was this is unprecedented in American history. It's never existed before. A concrete example, again, recent events.
On Tuesday, Donald Trump is coming out a new book, a picture book. And in that picture book, he says that if Mark Zuckerberg, the head of Facebook, does anything to interfere in the 2024 election, Zuckerberg will spend the rest of his life in jail. Under this immunity ruling, Trump can call up his attorney general, tell him to prosecute Zuckerberg, and if that attorney general refuses to carry that order out, he can fire him. And again, under the immunity ruling, that is absolute immunity, privileged communication between the president and attorney general.
This did not happen. Richard Nixon had his attorney general look for, you know, prosecutors look on. He looked for leaks against the president. This is a whole new era that we're in now.
Yeah. Lonnie, what is your take both on what David has written in his book in this moment that we are in, in which former President Trump is still facing these indictments, albeit it doesn't seem like they're going to go to trial before Election Day. I mean, I think the political impact of the superseding indictment is minimal unless there's some additional resolution of this case, which people are likely, and people are pretty dug in their points of view. I do think the Supreme Court decision is gonna have a very long tail well beyond a second Trump term, whoever's president next.
I mean, the decision talks about the value of an energetic executive. This decision basically gives the executive two Red Bulls and a coffee. Right? I mean, this is like beyond energetic.
And so the concern one has is in the future, what does this mean for executive power? Before, already we have an executive that's more active now than any point in American recent American history. And it puts a premium on what executives promise in a campaign because they then are much more well positioned to engage in executive action to get things done. That's why it matters what they say on the campaign trial now, because now they actually have the legal backing to do things with it.
All of this is taking place against the back backdrop of we are nine days out from the first debate between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. What are you watching for as we get closer to that all important moment? So I think one of the things that has made Harris really a household name is that she is playing in a completely different sandbox than Donald Trump. She does not engage with him, and she does it with joy and she deflects him.
We saw that in the interview as well. And I think the American people are going to look for is that when she engages him, is it going to be through this lens of, I see who you are, buddy. You are a convicted felon and I'm the prosecutor. And we know that among the American people, they may not like Donald Trump.
What they really don't like is that they keep finding these, you know, egregious breaking of the law, and they are wanting someone to put him in his place. And how is she going to do that? How she going to define it? I think it's going to be really important.
Yeah. I mean, Molly, we have seen her come out very forcefully right from the beginning and really lean into her background as a prosecutor and try to, as Maritaris is saying, make that distinction with former President Trump. What does she need to do in the debate? And obviously they're both preparing in very different ways, these different candidates.
Right. And I think they're both going to seek to put together on the defensive. And that is going to be the crucial thing that I think we're all watching for, is we've seen her be less comfortable when it comes to defending her own positions and explaining her own values, as she puts it. So is she able to keep Trump on the defensive?
Is she able to keep the focus on him and the case that she wants to make against him? And not get bogged down in, you know, explaining where she stands because, you know, I think part of what happened in the June 27 debate, of course, all the focus was on President Biden and his dramatic sort of collapse. But a lot of voters who watched that debate weren't necessarily in love with what Trump was doing either. And so I think the question is, can she continue to do this tightrope walk where she's able to position herself as both, you know, an owner and a defender of the administration that she's a part of, but also a candidate who's seeking to represent change and to turn the page?
That is a tricky balancing act. And I think it's going to be interesting to see whether or not she pulled out. Yeah, you're absolutely right about that. The first debate, proving how significant debates can be.
Great conversations. All of you. Thank you for being here. That is all for today.
Thank you for watching. Have a great Labor Day weekend. We'll be back next week because if it's Sunday, it's in the press. I'm Craig Melt.
Cheers. Cheers. Cheers. I've always been a glass half full kind of guy, and now I'm talking to people who look at the world that way, too.
It's really fascinating. Folks who share their defining moments, their triumphs, challenges, their stories are funny and quite candid. So I hope you'll join me each week. Who knows, you might just come away with your own glass apple.
Search Glass Apple with Craig Melvin From Today on YouTube.