Meet the Press – August 10, 2025
NBC News3 days ago
KRISTEN WELKER:
This Sunday: Texas hold 'em. With control of Congress on the line, lawmakers clash over Republicans' plans to redraw the maps.
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
We are entitled to five more seats.
KRISTEN WELKER:
As Democrats flee the state.
GOV. GREG ABBOTT:
We are in the process, as we speak right now, of searching for to arrest Democrats.
KRISTEN WELKER:
And threaten to retaliate by drawing their own lines.
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
So, they have decided the only way to save themselves is to cheat.
KRISTEN WELKER:
I'll talk exclusively to Democratic Governor JB Pritzker of Illinois. Plus, Russian reset. As his Ukraine ceasefire deadline passes, President Trump tries to reboot Russian relations with an in person high stakes meeting that could see shifting borders.
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
We're going to get some back. We're going to get some, some switched. There'll be some swapping of territories. To the betterment of both.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But will he punish Russia for refusing to end the war? I'll talk to Republican Senator Lindsey Graham. And: political payback? The Justice Department targets top Democrats, including former Obama administration officials. I'll talk to former Attorney General Eric Holder. Joining me for insight and analysis are: NBC News Washington managing editor Carol Lee; Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress; Lanhee Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution; and Tony Plohetski, investigative reporter for the Austin American-Statesman. Welcome to Sunday, it's Meet the Press.
ANNOUNCER:
From NBC News in Washington, the longest-running show in television history, this is Meet the Press with Kristen Welker.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Good Sunday morning. President Trump's foreign policy is facing its biggest test yet. He campaigned on the promise that he could end the war between Russia and Ukraine in his first 24 hours in office. More than 200 days later, he will attempt to follow through on that pledge by hosting an in-person summit this week with Russian president Vladimir Putin in Alaska. The president telling reporters on Friday that land swaps between the two countries would be part of a proposed deal.
[BEGIN TAPE]
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
It's actually nothing easy. It's very complicated. But we're going to get some back. We're going to get some, some switched. There'll be some swapping of territories to the betterment of both.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has adamantly opposed any proposal that requires Ukraine to give up territory to Russia. NBC News has learned the White House is considering inviting Zelenskyy to the Alaska summit, but right now, he is not scheduled to attend. Meanwhile, at home, the battle over redrawing congressional maps ramps up with Texas Republicans attempting to pass a new map through the legislature, which would all but guarantee five additional safe seats in Congress for Republicans, a move Mr. Trump says he deserves.
[BEGIN TAPE]
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
We should have many more seats in Congress, and we have an opportunity in Texas to pick up five seats. We have a really good governor, and we have good people in Texas. And I won Texas. I got the highest vote in the history of Texas, as you probably know, and we are entitled to five more seats.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
More than 50 Texas Democrats fled the state to deny Republicans a quorum to vote on the proposed changes, with the support of Democratic governors across the country who vowed to fight back, including California Governor Gavin Newsom, who says California will put new congressional maps up for a vote this November to counter what Texas is doing.
[BEGIN TAPE]
GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM:
We are talking about emergency measures to respond to what's happening in Texas, and we will nullify what happens in Texas. We will pick up five seats with the consent of the people, and that's the difference between the approach we're taking and the approach they're taking.
GOV. KATHY HOCHUL:
If Republicans are willing to rewrite these rules to give themselves an advantage, then they're leaving us no choice. We must do the same.
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Texas House Democrats are putting their lives on hold and their livelihoods at risk because they don't want to live in a country where the president rigs elections for his side. That's not democracy. That's not America.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Back in Texas, Governor Greg Abbott and state Republicans aren't backing down.
[BEGIN TAPE]
GOV. ABBOTT:
Democrats act like they're not going to come back as long as this is an issue. I mean, it's not going to come back until like 2027 or 2028 because I'm going to call special session after special session after special session with the same agenda items on there.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
On Saturday, I spoke with Democratic Governor JB Pritzker of Illinois, who is hosting many of those Texas Democrats in his state. Joining me now is the Democratic Governor of Illinois, JB Pritzker. Governor Pritzker, welcome back to Meet the Press.
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Great to see you, Kristen.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, it is great to have you here after a very big week. Your state is housing some of the Democrats who fled Texas to block redistricting there. Senator John Cornyn says the FBI granted his request to help track them down, and Texas Governor Greg Abbott says they are preparing to arrest those Democrats. What would you do if law enforcement officials tried to arrest Texas lawmakers in your state, Governor?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Well, first of all, Texas law does not apply in the state of Illinois, and there's no federal law that would allow the FBI to arrest anybody that's here visiting our state. So, it's a lot of grandstanding. That's what this is all about, and so, John Cornyn, who's trying to run for reelection, apparently losing to an even more extreme MAGA Republican, Ken Paxton, trying to get some headlines for himself. And Greg Abbott, of course, has been a disaster for the country, as he sent people across the country on his quest to change the immigration discussion. And, of course, we had 50,000 migrants that were sent to the state of Illinois because of him. So, what I can tell you is that the Texas Democrats that are here are welcome. We're providing them a safe haven, a place for them to visit and stay, breaking quorum, because they're heroes that are standing up not just for their own constituents and for the people of Texas and their rights but also for the rights of people all across the country. Because what Greg Abbott is doing and what Donald Trump is attempting to do is to cheat mid-decade here. This is — they're attempting to change the map. They know that they're going to lose in 2026 the Congress, and so they're trying to steal seats. And so that is what these Texas Democrats are trying to stand up against —
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well —
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
And then, don't forget, the map that they put together is, it violates the Voting Rights Act, and it violates the Constitution. And so, thank God for these Texas House Democrats.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, let's talk about the issue at hand here. Texas Republicans being urged by President Trump, as you just said, are pushing this mid-decade redistricting plan. Their goal is to add as many as five GOP seats. In response, Democrats like yourself are thinking of drawing your own map to boost seats in blue states. Take a listen to what Texas Governor Greg Abbott told my colleague, Ryan Chandler, about that. Take a look.
[BEGIN TAPE]
RYAN CHANDLER:
What's your message to governors like Newsom, Hochul, Pritzker, who have said they will retaliate if Texas does this?
GOV. GREG ABBOTT:
They have no capability. They've already gerrymandered their states in ways in which they don't have hardly any Republican members of Congress. Look at the map of Illinois. It's drawn in such way they can't even squeeze out another Republican. It's a joke.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
What's your response to Governor Abbott?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Well, Governor Abbott is the joke. He's the one who is attempting mid-decade here, at a time when frankly all of us are concerned about the future of democracy, he's literally helping whittle it away and licking the boots of his leader, Donald Trump. Here in Illinois, we followed the law. We provided a map and passed a map that follows the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution and the laws of the state of Illinois. He's attempting to thwart federal law and take away five seats that are in the hands of Black, Brown, minority Congress people and the people that they represent. He's taking those votes away. He's violating the Constitution. And all of us need to stand up and speak out and make sure that it's understood across the country that what they're trying to do in Texas is illegal.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, Governor, it might be illegal. It's not unprecedented though, or it might be rare, I should say. But Texas actually tried to redraw districts mid-decade before in 2003, and the U.S. Supreme Court actually upheld the map in that case, with the exception of one district. So the argument that Abbott is making is it's not illegal, though they are doing it certainly in an off-year. But I do want to look at the map of Illinois. Let's take a look at this. Despite President Trump winning 44% of the statewide vote in 2024, Republicans hold only three of Illinois' 17 districts. These districts seem to be designed to maximize Democratic advantage. What do you say to those who argue that it's hypocritical for you to criticize Texas for partisanship, when your state also drew maps to boost your party's standing?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Well, remember that what Texas is trying to do is, again, violate the Voting Rights Act. We didn't. We held public hearings, legislative hearings. People attended them. They spoke out. There was a map that was put out. There were actually changes made to the map. And a map was passed, and it was done at the end of the census, the decennial census. So that's how it's done in this country. You talked about how rare it is to do what he's doing. Yes, it is. What's even rarer is to do it at the behest of the president of the United States, who's clearly attempting to and says that he deserves to have five more seats. He's wrong, and he's attempting to change the game because, again, he passed this big ugly bill that's hyper-unpopular in Texas, among people in Texas and across the country. And he knows he's going to lose the Congress in 2026. That's why he's going to his allies and hoping that they can save him. And we've all got to stand up against this. This is — it's cheating. Donald Trump is a cheater. He cheats on his wives. He cheats at golf. And now he's trying to cheat the American people out of their votes.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, look. Sticking on your state's map, every major group that grades the fairness of congressional maps gives your state an 'F.' Common Cause, a nonpartisan government watchdog, even says your map, and I'm going to quote, "represents a nearly perfect model for everything that can go wrong with redistricting." And I guess the question is, you talk about preserving democracy. How do you preserve democracy if you're using the same tactics that you've criticized Texas Republicans for?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
But as I say, what they're talking about is a distraction. The reality is that the violation of people's voting rights is what Texas is attempting to do. That's what's wrong with their efforts right now. And the fact that the president of the United States knows it and nevertheless, is asking them to do it. That is what's wrong with what we're seeing right now. Democracy is at stake, and these Texas Democrats are standing up to what the GOP is attempting to do, which is to steal seats because they know what they've done is wrong. They know that they've made an enormous mistake.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Let's turn now to foreign policy, Governor, and the crisis in Gaza. As you know, Prime Minister Netanyahu says he's now planning a ground invasion into Gaza City. Illinois has one of the largest populations of Palestinian-Americans in the U.S. More than half of the Democratic Senators last week, a record number, actually voted to block sales of some weapons to Israel. Do you think the U.S. should stop sending weapons to Israel, Governor?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Look, I think that the resolution that was put up in the United States Senate was an effort to send a message. And it's the right kind of a message, which is that Israel needs to make sure that the food assistance that ought to go to innocent Palestinians should arrive there. And they should do everything in their power to prevent the starvation that I think we've all seen. So that's the message that's attempting to be sent by the United States Senate. I believe it's very important for us not only to protect those who are innocent – on both sides of that border, making sure that Israelis and Palestinians are protected – but also to make sure that we're seeing the return of the hostages, that Israel is allowed to stand up to terrorists like Hamas but not allowed to target or have ill effect as best they can on the innocent people of Gaza. So that I think is what's going on right now. We've all got to stand up and make sure that the innocent are protected.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Well, I want to talk about the future now of your party. You're one of the leaders of the Democratic Party, you are also a billionaire. Some in your party are openly questioning whether billionaires such as yourself should exist at all, Governor. Just listen to what Zohran Mamdani, New York City's Democratic nominee for mayor told me recently. Take a look.
[BEGIN TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Do you think that billionaires have a right to exist?
ZOHRAN MAMDANI:
I don't think that we should have billionaires, because frankly, it is so much money in a moment of such inequality.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Governor, is that the kind of message that Democrats should be embracing?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Look – how much money you have doesn't determine what your values are. And I'm a Democrat because I believe that everyone deserves healthcare. I'm a Democrat because I believe we've got to fund education and have a free public education available to every kid in this country. I'm a Democrat because I believe that we've got to stand up for our democracy and against the MAGA Republicans who are literally trying to take away people's rights all across this country. So it does not matter what your income level is. What matters is what your values are, and that's what makes me a Democrat.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, there is a big debate right now inside the Democratic Party about how exactly to counter Trump and counter Republicans. Here's what you said at a fundraiser in New Hampshire a little bit earlier on this year. Take a listen.
[BEGIN TAPE]
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
These Republicans cannot know a moment of peace. They have to understand that we will fight their cruelty with every megaphone and microphone that we have. We must castigate them on the soapbox and then punish them at the ballot box.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Now, you're running for a third term as governor in your state. How can you guarantee voters that you will govern everyone and not just Democrats?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Because I've demonstrated that during my time in office already. You know, people forgot in years past – Republicans – we had more Republicans holding the governor's office over the last 40 years than we had Democrats. And they forgot about southern Illinois and central Illinois and about areas of the state where there are more Republicans than Democrats. I did not. I have made sure that we've invested in education and infrastructure, that we've created jobs in those areas of the state. We need more people that are willing to reach across the aisle and do the right thing when they're in office. Look, we have tough elections, Democrats and Republicans fighting one another. But after the election is over, when you're actually governing, you've got to govern for all the people of your state. And that's what I've done for the last six-and-a-half years and look forward to doing for another four.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right, Governor, very quickly before I let you go. Do you rule out a run for president in 2028?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
I'm focused on running for reelection as Governor of the State of Illinois, and everything that I do really is focused on lifting up the people of my state.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But you don't rule it out, Governor? Yes or no?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
I can't rule anything out, but what I can rule in is that no matter what decisions I make, and I mean in particular about what I do here in the State of Illinois is about the people of Illinois. Indeed, any future decisions of mine will always be guided by that.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Governor JB Pritzker, thank you so much. We really appreciate it. Coming up next, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina joins me next.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Welcome back. Joining me now is Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Senator Graham, welcome back to Meet the Press.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
Thank you.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, thank you so much for being here. Let's start by talking about this meeting this upcoming Friday between President Trump and President Putin. President Putin saying he is demanding that he gets to keep some of that territory that he has illegally claimed without making any concessions. Senator Graham, is it a mistake to reward President Putin with a presidential-level meeting without Moscow making any concrete or public concessions?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
No, I'm very okay with President Trump meeting with President Putin in Alaska. So I was on the phone this morning, Kristen, with our European allies, with the Ukrainians. I talked to Yermak this morning. The vice president was on the ground in Europe yesterday listening to Ukraine and our European allies about what a good deal would look like. And the reviews about J.D. Vance are very, very positive all across the board. Everybody said that J.D. listened well, he understood sort of the red lines. And I think everybody knows that how this war ends can be a good thing or a bad thing. If it ends in a way that looks like that Putin's overly rewarded, there goes Taiwan. You can't end a war without talking. I do hope that Zelenskyy can be part of the process. I'll leave that up to the White House. But I have every confidence in the world that the president is going to go to meet Putin from a position of strength, that he's going to look out for Europe and Ukrainian needs to end this war honorably. And it's time to end this war honorably. But how we do it will be historical. And I'm confident President Trump will get a good deal for all.
KRISTEN WELKER:
So Senator Graham, you take me to my next question. Let's talk about the red lines and what a good deal would look like. Let's look at the map right now, Senator, there. This is a map of Ukraine. You can see the areas in red currently under Russian control. Now, President Trump this week didn't rule out Ukraine having to give up some of its territory, something the Ukrainians have rejected. Do you believe that Ukraine should sign a deal that includes giving up any part of their territory, Senator?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
Well, think about East Berlin and West Berlin as the way a conflict can be settled, at least for a period of time. North Korea and South Korea is in a state of truce. There's never been a final settlement. But I come on your show a good bit, I want to be honest with you. Ukraine's not going to evict every Russian, and Russia's not going to keep. So there will be some land swaps at the end. But what would a good deal look like? Make sure that 2022 doesn't happen again. On Biden's watch and Obama's watch, Russia invades. The goal for me, and I think President Trump, is to end it forever. Now, what would that look like? You'll have some land swaps, but only after you have security guarantees to Ukraine to prevent Russia from doing this again. You need to tell Putin what happens if he does it a third time. Pre-invasion sanctions that would crush his economy if he ever did this again. In 2022 we didn't help Ukraine at all, Biden didn't. Militarily, we need to keep Ukraine strong, keep flowing them strong and modern weapons, and security guarantees with European forces on the ground as trip wires to prevent a third invasion. We want to end this with a sovereign, independent, self-governing Ukraine, and a situation where Putin cannot do this the third time without being crushed. This is really a dress rehearsal for Taiwan. And as to China, we had a good talk. I played golf with the president yesterday. Saturday was the ten-day deadline. China is very much on his mind. He can tell you the top five oil purchasers of Ukrainian oil. He knows who they are. And if this doesn't end well with Putin, everybody buying Russian oil and keeping his war machine going in Russia, you're going to pay a heavy price like India.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right, well, and I hear you saying what's happened under Biden's watch. But the attacks have only ramped up by Russia against Ukraine in recent weeks, on President Trump's watch.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
That's true.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But Senator, let me just read you something--
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
That's true.
KRISTEN WELKER:
--that you said back in 2023, as we talk about these potential land swaps that you're discussing. This was during your visit to Ukraine. You said, quote, "You don't end wars by giving territory to the aggressor. If Putin is not stopped here, he will keep going…and that increases the chances that there will be a war between Russia and NATO." Senator, if Russia is allowed to annex some of those regions, won't that effectively be a green light for Russia to go into and invade other countries?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
What will stop a third war is to do things differently than we did in 2022. Is to keep arming Ukraine so that Russia will be deterred by the most lethal army on the continent of Europe right now, which is Ukraine. Security guarantees that if you come into Ukraine again, you'll be fighting more than just Ukraine. Having some European forces on the ground as trip wires, building up economic integration. The one thing that changed everything, in my view, is the minerals deal between us and Ukraine changed the relationship between the United States and Ukraine. And President Trump will defend those interests. East Berlin and West Berlin existed divided for a very long time. It wound up not being the case. So there's de facto recognition and de jure recognition. I'm not trying to tell you or anybody else that I think Ukraine can evict every Russian soldier. I am here to tell you that President Trump will end this war in a way to prevent a third invasion and not to entice China to take Taiwan. We're not out to humiliate Putin, we're out to get a deal to make sure there's no third invasion.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Senator, I have to ask you about this sanctions bill that has the backing of, frankly, more than 80 other senators.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
Eighty-five.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Okay, there you go. You've been putting off bringing it to the floor for more than four months now. If this summit does not produce a ceasefire agreement, will you commit to bringing that bill to the floor?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
I talked to the president about the bill. I think it will help him in court. His tariff policy is being challenged in court. If Congress creates a tariff regime giving the president authority to set tariffs to go after people who buy Putin's oil, I think he's got a stronger hand legally. But he's doing everything the bill does. He put a 50% tariff on India for their buying Russian oil. He talked to me a lot about China. He talked to me about two other countries that buy Russian oil. So he's doing it through executive action, and I'm okay with that. But I stand ready to help the president. And when we get back in September, let's have this conversation.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Senator, I need to get to Gaza. But why punish India more than Russia?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
More than Russia?
KRISTEN WELKER:
Shouldn't he be sanctioning Russia?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
Well, the one thing I can tell you, Putin could give a damn about sanctions. He evades them. He could give a damn about how many Russians die. The one thing that he can't tolerate and live with, if we go after his customers. The whole goal is to crush his customers, India, and China, and Brazil. That if you keep buying Putin's oil and prop up his war machine, you will be denied access to our economy. This is a new strategy. Trump is all in in terms of going after Putin's customers if we can't end this well. Without oil and gas revenue, Russia collapses.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Senator, I have to ask you about another issue that you're very focused on, the war in Gaza. We have one minute left. Israel announcing its plan this week to take over Gaza City. World leaders have called the move a 'dangerous escalation', Senator. How long do you see Gaza being occupied, and quite frankly, who should control it after?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
This is Israel's World War II. I can't believe we're having a discussion about how to fight a war against people who want to destroy you as a people, the Israeli people. So they will take Gaza militarily unless the hostages are released. Eventually, the Arabs will take over. The future of Palestine runs through Riyadh. The future of the Mideast runs through Riyadh. I envision after they defeat Hamas that normalization will be back on the table between Saudi Arabia and Israel, and the Palestinians will benefit from that discussion as well as the Israelis. Enough already. Destroy Hamas. Do to Hamas what we did to the Germans and the Japanese during World War II. Annihilate them and rebuild the Palestinian society, like we did with Germany and Japan. I think we can do that.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, I know everyone is calling for those hostages to be released. We'll watch it closely in the coming days. Senator Lindsey Graham, thank you so much for joining us. We really appreciate it. And when we come back, former Attorney General Eric Holder joins me next.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Welcome back. Joining me now is former U.S. attorney general under President Obama, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder, welcome back to Meet the Press.
ERIC HOLDER:
Good to see you.
KRISTEN WELKER:
It's great to see you. Thank you so much for being here. I want to start off by asking you this morning, the homepage of the group you lead, the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, says quote, "There is no 'offseason' in redistricting. Gerrymandering poses a critical threat to our democracy." But now you're arguing that Democrats are going to have to use gerrymandering, quote, "In order to save our democracy." So let me ask you, how can gerrymandering both be a threat to democracy and also the way to save it?
ERIC HOLDER:
Well, there's no question that gerrymandering is a threat to our democracy. It allows politicians to pick their voters as opposed to citizens choosing their representatives. But we are now in a situation where we find ourselves where authoritarian moves are being made by the White House through various states, Texas most prominent among them, and there has to be a response to that. What I've said is that we have to protect our democracy now if we ultimately want to be able to – to save it. And so taking the reasonable steps that have been proposed in – in California, I think it makes a great deal of sense in this moment. A temporary way in which to respond to that which is happening in Texas with the thought that after this crisis has passed, we get back to the fight against gerrymandering by anybody.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, as you know, some of your Democratic colleagues are expressing concerns about that, including Senator Richard Blumenthal. Let me tell you what he told the Associated Press. He said, quote, "We shouldn't stoop to their tactics. It's an ideal that we have accurate and fair representation. We can't abandon it just because Republicans try to manipulate and distort it." Do Democrats run the risk of undermining the public's trust in our electoral systems by using the same tactics that you're criticizing Republicans for using?
ERIC HOLDER:
Well, yeah, I wouldn't say that we're using the same tactics. I mean, you know, in – when Barack Obama was president, when Joe Biden was president, did either of those presidents call a governor of a state or a state legislature and tell them to – to gerrymander to find five seats for them? No. So we're doing something now that is responsive to what is going on with this White House. You know, what – that call to Texas is kind of reminiscent of the call that President Trump made to the secretary of state in Georgia. He said, "Find me 11,780 votes." He calls Texas now and says, "Well, find me five seats so that we can save the House in 2026 in spite of the fact that my poll ratings are down, in spite of the fact that this big, beautiful budget bill is wildly unpopular, in spite of the fact that we've taken health care away from people, given tax breaks to billionaires." So I think we're talking about two fundamentally different things. If Texas had not moved in the way that they appear to be doing, California would not be doing what they're doing. What Democrats are doing is – is responsive, and it's temporary.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, as you know, Texas lawmakers are digging in. You heard Governor Abbott there talking about the FBI, Senator Cornyn calling the FBI to help locate those Democratic lawmakers who fled the state. I wonder, do you think that the FBI has jurisdiction to intervene here and try to bring back those Democrats who are in other states?
ERIC HOLDER:
Short answer: No. I mean, you're asking the FBI to get involved, to find these legislators who are in the process of trying to defend democracy in Texas. And the question – they're not hard to find, but the question after that is, "Well, what's the federal jurisdiction? What federal statute has potentially been – been violated? What's the basis for any federal government interaction?" And I would say that there is none.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Well, I do want to shift now to another topic. This week the House Oversight Committee issued subpoenas for you and other former officials for testimony related to the Jeffrey Epstein matter. Your deposition is actually scheduled for September 30th. I have to ask you, are you planning to comply with the subpoena?
ERIC HOLDER:
Well, we're in the process of talking to the committee now, finding out exactly what it is that they want. Those conversations are ongoing, and we'll see how that – we'll see how that works out.
KRISTEN WELKER:
So no definitive answer yet. In 2012, worth noting you did actually defy a congressional subpoena. You were attorney general at the time. You became the first attorney general in history to be held in contempt of Congress. Do you have any regrets about that now? Is that informing your decision right now?
ERIC HOLDER:
Well, I mean, if you look at the 2012 contempt what I said was that we were protecting confidential information that was passed between the executive branch from the Justice Department and the – the White House, and we held on to those documents. My successor, Jeff Sessions, put all those documents into the public sphere, and guess what? It showed that what I was trying to protect was in fact reflected in those documents, which was executive branch, executive branch communications. So, yeah, that informs me that if there's a principle, you stand up for that principle. And if there is an – an inappropriate congressional action, well, you know, they do what they have to do. But as I said, we're in the process of trying to talk to them to determine what if anything I can help them with concerning the subject matter of the subpoena.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Let me ask you now more broadly about the FBI and DOJ. President Trump has launched investigations into many of his perceived political foes, including former President Barack Obama, New York Attorney General Letitia James, Democratic Senator Adam Schiff. I'm naming just a few of the people. You have described this as the, quote, "weaponization of the Justice Department," which is, by the way, the same criticism President Trump has made about the DOJ under former President Biden. So let me ask you about that. How do you respond to the argument by President Trump that the Biden Justice Department started this?
ERIC HOLDER:
Well, I – I think that's just totally inconsistent with the facts. There was a predicate for all of the things, a basis for the investigations, the moves that the Justice Department did. I would ask, you know, those who are in the Justice Department now, those who are in the White House now, because they are – they are married. They're joined at the hip in ways that we've not seen before, where the White House is essentially telling the Justice Department what to do with regard to its investigatory power. What in fact is the predicate that you are looking at? What's the basis for the investigation when you're talking about Senator Schiff, Attorney General James? Certainly it's absurd, this notion of looking at President Obama with regard to the actions that he supposedly took. There's simply no factual basis to these –to these investigations.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Mr. Attorney General, one minute left. You have said this moment is a constitutional crisis. If you believe that, do you believe there's a way forward and a way out of this moment?
ERIC HOLDER:
Yeah, I think the way forward is through the American people. There are no saviors. The cavalry is not coming. This is up to the American people to participate in the process, obviously through the ballot box, through making their opinions known, by not supporting candidates who will stand for the kinds of things that we're seeing in Texas right now, where they're trying to cheat people of their – their constitutional rights, their most valuable asset, which is their right – right to vote. And then once this period ends, I think we have to not only rebuild but actually reimagine the executive branch and government such that we don't have to go through this kind of period again. Maybe we have to codify norms that in the past we thought people would simply – would simply follow. So, yeah, we're in a crisis right now. But there is still, I think, a basis for future hope.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right, Mr. Holder. We covered a lot of ground. Thank you so much for joining us this morning. We really appreciate it.
ERIC HOLDER:
Thanks for having me.
KRISTEN WELKER:
When we come back, the Voting Rights Act turned 60 this week as new threats emerge for voter protections. Our Meet the Press Minute is next.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Welcome back. Sixty years ago this week, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, a landmark law that helped end the Jim Crow era and opened the ballot box to millions of Black Americans. Over the past decade, the law has been stripped of many of its protections. Now,l a Supreme Court case over Louisiana's congressional maps could test just how much of that safeguard still stands. Days after his march from Selma to Montgomery, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. joined Meet the Press to speak about the urgency of expanding the right to vote.
LAWRENCE SPIVAK:
Dr. King, I think the demonstration was largely to get your voting rights bill through. Was it necessary for that purpose? Aren't you going to get that bill, and wouldn't you have gotten it whether or not you marched?
DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.:
Well, the demonstration was certainly for the voting rights bill. However, we must recognize there are other, very tragic, conditions existing in the state of Alabama which are as humiliating, as degrading, and as unjust as the denial of the right to vote, namely police brutality. We were marching there to protest these brutalities, these murders and all of the things that go along with them as much as to gain the right to vote.
KRISTEN WELKER:
When we come back, President Trump says he's entitled to five more Republican seats in Congress. Will Republicans succeed in getting them? The panel is next.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Welcome back. Sixty years ago this week, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, a landmark law that helped end the Jim Crow era and opened the ballot box to millions of Black Americans. Over the past decade, the law has been stripped of many of its protections. Now a Supreme Court case over Louisiana's congressional maps could test just how much of that safeguard still stands. Days after his march from Selma to Montgomery, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. joined Meet the Press to speak about the urgency of expanding the right to vote.
LAWRENCE SPIVAK:
Dr. King, I think the demonstration was largely to get your voting rights bill through. Was it necessary for that purpose? Aren't you going to get that bill, and what do you have gotten it whether or not you marched?
DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.:
Well, the demonstration was certainly for the voting rights bill. However, we must recognize there are other, very tragic, conditions existing in the state of Alabama which are as humiliating, as degrading, and as unjust as the denial of the right to vote, namely police brutality. We were marching there to protest these brutalities, these murders and all of the things that go along with them as much as to gain the right to vote.
KRISTEN WELKER:
When we come back, President Trump says he's entitled to five more Republican seats in Congress. Will Republicans succeed in getting them? The panel is next.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Welcome back. The panel is here: NBC News Washington managing editor Carol Lee; Tony Plohetski, investigative reporter for the Austin American-Statesman; CEO and president of the Center for American Progress Neera Tanden; and Lanhee Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution. Thanks to all of you for being here. Carol Lee, let me start with you. The flash-point right now in the midterms is this big battle over redistricting in Texas. What are you hearing? Where is this going to go?
CAROL LEE:
Look, I think the thing to focus on is how much this is spreading across the country and the long-term implications for that. So you have Democrats who are trying to overcome hurdles that they put in place to try to get more seats in Democratic states. You have the White House looking at states beyond Texas that are Republican to get additional seats. And President Trump's just getting warmed up. He's only going to intensify his focus on the midterms, on trying to keep Democrats from taking control of the House and dominating the rest of his term with investigations. And so the question is, you know, in terms of implications for elections beyond 2026 is: Does this work for the party that's most successful at this? Or is there a price to pay from voters who might look at this and say, "You know what? Like, that is just power grabbing. And I don't like it."
KRISTEN WELKER:
Yes. I think it's great way to frame it. Tony, first of all, thank you for coming in from Austin.
TONY PLOHETSKI:
Thank you.
KRISTEN WELKER:
How is this playing out on the ground? You're on the front lines of this.
TONY PLOHETSKI:
Texas Democrats have been resolute from day one – they left one week ago today and headed to suburban Chicago – that they are staying out of state until at least August 19th. That is a significant date because it is the last day of the special session that was called by Governor Greg Abbott with this priority. But at the same time, we are also seeing what those Democrats describe as increasingly heavy-handed efforts by Republicans to try to get them back to the state including lawsuits filed by the governor, by the attorney general, with the state supreme court to try to get them back. And we've even seen other punitive measures including, for example, a reduction of their budget by 30%, which may have an inability for them to, for example, pay their staffers.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Hard-ball tactics, Neera. And the question looming over all of this for Democrats, talked about it with both guests today, Governor Pritzker as well as former Attorney General Eric Holder. Could this in some way backfire on Democrats or erode the public's trust overall? How do you see it? And what are people saying inside Democratic circles?
NEERA TANDEN:
Well, I think really the vast majority of Democrats recognize the simple fact which is as the generic ballot goes to Democrats – plus 5% in one poll last week – as you're seeing actually more people identify with the Democratic party, a sharp turn from last year, and as you see in these special elections where Democrats are averaging over performance of 15 points, the White House has decided to go get five seats for Donald Trump. And fundamentally I think almost every Democrat I talk to believes that what Trump is really trying to do is to alter the votes, rig the game so that he's not accountable to the public. And that's what democracy is about, elections in which people are accountable. And so I think every Democrat I talk to is really focused on how to ensure that this doesn't happen. You know, I mean, Governor Newsom is saying, "I will only redistrict if Texas redistricts." And that's what we want, a system where essentially Democrats are responding. But if Texas stands down, other states stand down too.
KRISTEN WELKER:
What about that argument, Lanhee, and the argument we heard from Governor Pritzker that this is all because Republicans feel vulnerable running on the Trump agenda in the midterms?
LANHEE CHEN:
First of all, I think the concept of mid-cycle redistricting is a problem. And what probably needs to happen is Congress needs to address this by saying, "You can't do mid-cycle redistricting." There's actually a Republican-sponsored bill that would do that. I think that's the first answer. But beyond that, there is a critical difference between what's happening in Texas and what Governor Newsom's proposing in California, what some other states are looking at, which is that in California to redistrict you actually have to override two citizen-passed initiatives that are constitutional amendments to the California constitution to engage in this sort of partisan redistricting mid-cycle. So it's very different to look at the Texas situation and draw an analogy to California. It's just fundamentally different. So you'd have to override the will over the voters as twice expressed in the California constitution to do it.
NEERA TANDEN:
But that's why Governor Newsom is asking for a ballot proposition. I mean, he's asking --
LANHEE CHEN:
Not to override the process to say, "By the way can we just do a one-time thing where we ignore the California constitution?"
NEERA TANDEN:
But it's through a ballot --
LANHEE CHEN:
And make this happen.
NEERA TANDEN:
It will be the will of the voters either way. That's the big difference with Texas, right? California, Governor Newsom is doing a ballot proposition, leaving it up to the voters whether there's a redistrict. Governor Abbott is basically at Trump's direction doing it all through himself. I think California is way more democratic than Texas.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right, Tony, button this up for us. How does this end, do you think?
TONY PLOHETSKI:
The Democrats who left the state have known from day one that they can't stay away from their homes, their lives, their families, their businesses forever. Ultimately they are resigned to the fact that they will have to go back. We know that the governor has said he is going to continue to call these special sessions. But a win for them in their minds has been the ability to put a national spotlight on this issue. A bright, red spotlight that they say has now opened this conversation nationally. And so for them, they consider that a success.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Well, we continue to track all of that and the foreign policy front. Carol Lee, you have some new reporting in terms of what the White House is thinking potentially open to inviting President Zelenskyy to that summit next Friday.
CAROL LEE:
That's right. They're considering inviting President Zelenskyy. Nothing has been decided, you know. But it is a recognition by some administration officials that in order for – a Putin-Trump summit is just not enough to show really meaningful progress in getting toward an end to the war. And so having Zelenskyy there, even if it's just a Trump meeting afterwards, would in their view lend some legitimacy to a process that has Europeans concerned, Ukrainians concerned, some U.S. officials concerned. We're told that there's a counter-proposal from the Europeans that is going to President Trump. You heard Senator Graham tell you that, you know, this could end in a good way or a bad way. He encouraged the White House to include President Zelenskyy in this process. And hanging over all of this is just how serious Vladimir Putin is. This summit itself, him meeting with the president in the United States is a win for him. He hasn't been in the United States since 2015. The risk for President Trump is he does this, and he gets nothing out of it.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Lanhee, what about that? What about the risk for President Trump in giving Putin this reward on the front end?
LANHEE CHEN:
Well, yes, I think the challenge here is obviously that you have -- President Trump's already said he wants to bring an end to this crisis. The challenge is that it is going to be very difficult to get there without there being some significant set of concessions. And, you know, the challenge I think ultimately will be: Can the president continue to maintain his position without coming down harder on President Putin? Can he do it in a way that basically says, "Look, we want to broker peace." Well, Zelenskyy's got to be at the table to make that happen. So is Zelenskyy at the table, is he going to be able to it? There's a lot of different equities the president's going to have to bring together to make this work well. I think it's going to be a massive challenge, probably the biggest foreign policy challenge this president's faced.
Neera, we are hearing skepticism from European allies of the United States, certainly skepticism from the Ukrainians and then skepticism from Democrats as well about the fact that Putin's coming into this saying, "I want to be able to keep the land I've illegally taken."
NEERA TANDEN:
Well, let's just recognize that this is coming after months and months of Donald Trump drawing a line, asking for a cease fire, pushing a cease fire that's ignored by Putin. He asked for negotiations. They are completely ignored. I mean, there's several red lines that have been crossed with no consequence. And what's actually the consequence is he's getting a summit. So, I mean, I think when we step back here, we have to recognize that the big difference between the president and the Europeans and Zelenskyy is that essentially the Europeans and Zelenskyy do not want to lose the war. And it does seem that Donald Trump is managing a loss. And I think that is a deep concern. Obviously we need to have a peace deal. But the whole idea that we're already talking about land swaps seems to me a terrible way to negotiate a deal.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Well, we continue to watch it very closely. Thank you all for being here for a great conversation. That is all for today. Thank you for watching. We'll be back next week. Because if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press.
This Sunday: Texas hold 'em. With control of Congress on the line, lawmakers clash over Republicans' plans to redraw the maps.
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
We are entitled to five more seats.
KRISTEN WELKER:
As Democrats flee the state.
GOV. GREG ABBOTT:
We are in the process, as we speak right now, of searching for to arrest Democrats.
KRISTEN WELKER:
And threaten to retaliate by drawing their own lines.
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
So, they have decided the only way to save themselves is to cheat.
KRISTEN WELKER:
I'll talk exclusively to Democratic Governor JB Pritzker of Illinois. Plus, Russian reset. As his Ukraine ceasefire deadline passes, President Trump tries to reboot Russian relations with an in person high stakes meeting that could see shifting borders.
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
We're going to get some back. We're going to get some, some switched. There'll be some swapping of territories. To the betterment of both.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But will he punish Russia for refusing to end the war? I'll talk to Republican Senator Lindsey Graham. And: political payback? The Justice Department targets top Democrats, including former Obama administration officials. I'll talk to former Attorney General Eric Holder. Joining me for insight and analysis are: NBC News Washington managing editor Carol Lee; Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress; Lanhee Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution; and Tony Plohetski, investigative reporter for the Austin American-Statesman. Welcome to Sunday, it's Meet the Press.
ANNOUNCER:
From NBC News in Washington, the longest-running show in television history, this is Meet the Press with Kristen Welker.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Good Sunday morning. President Trump's foreign policy is facing its biggest test yet. He campaigned on the promise that he could end the war between Russia and Ukraine in his first 24 hours in office. More than 200 days later, he will attempt to follow through on that pledge by hosting an in-person summit this week with Russian president Vladimir Putin in Alaska. The president telling reporters on Friday that land swaps between the two countries would be part of a proposed deal.
[BEGIN TAPE]
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
It's actually nothing easy. It's very complicated. But we're going to get some back. We're going to get some, some switched. There'll be some swapping of territories to the betterment of both.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has adamantly opposed any proposal that requires Ukraine to give up territory to Russia. NBC News has learned the White House is considering inviting Zelenskyy to the Alaska summit, but right now, he is not scheduled to attend. Meanwhile, at home, the battle over redrawing congressional maps ramps up with Texas Republicans attempting to pass a new map through the legislature, which would all but guarantee five additional safe seats in Congress for Republicans, a move Mr. Trump says he deserves.
[BEGIN TAPE]
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
We should have many more seats in Congress, and we have an opportunity in Texas to pick up five seats. We have a really good governor, and we have good people in Texas. And I won Texas. I got the highest vote in the history of Texas, as you probably know, and we are entitled to five more seats.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
More than 50 Texas Democrats fled the state to deny Republicans a quorum to vote on the proposed changes, with the support of Democratic governors across the country who vowed to fight back, including California Governor Gavin Newsom, who says California will put new congressional maps up for a vote this November to counter what Texas is doing.
[BEGIN TAPE]
GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM:
We are talking about emergency measures to respond to what's happening in Texas, and we will nullify what happens in Texas. We will pick up five seats with the consent of the people, and that's the difference between the approach we're taking and the approach they're taking.
GOV. KATHY HOCHUL:
If Republicans are willing to rewrite these rules to give themselves an advantage, then they're leaving us no choice. We must do the same.
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Texas House Democrats are putting their lives on hold and their livelihoods at risk because they don't want to live in a country where the president rigs elections for his side. That's not democracy. That's not America.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Back in Texas, Governor Greg Abbott and state Republicans aren't backing down.
[BEGIN TAPE]
GOV. ABBOTT:
Democrats act like they're not going to come back as long as this is an issue. I mean, it's not going to come back until like 2027 or 2028 because I'm going to call special session after special session after special session with the same agenda items on there.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
On Saturday, I spoke with Democratic Governor JB Pritzker of Illinois, who is hosting many of those Texas Democrats in his state. Joining me now is the Democratic Governor of Illinois, JB Pritzker. Governor Pritzker, welcome back to Meet the Press.
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Great to see you, Kristen.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, it is great to have you here after a very big week. Your state is housing some of the Democrats who fled Texas to block redistricting there. Senator John Cornyn says the FBI granted his request to help track them down, and Texas Governor Greg Abbott says they are preparing to arrest those Democrats. What would you do if law enforcement officials tried to arrest Texas lawmakers in your state, Governor?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Well, first of all, Texas law does not apply in the state of Illinois, and there's no federal law that would allow the FBI to arrest anybody that's here visiting our state. So, it's a lot of grandstanding. That's what this is all about, and so, John Cornyn, who's trying to run for reelection, apparently losing to an even more extreme MAGA Republican, Ken Paxton, trying to get some headlines for himself. And Greg Abbott, of course, has been a disaster for the country, as he sent people across the country on his quest to change the immigration discussion. And, of course, we had 50,000 migrants that were sent to the state of Illinois because of him. So, what I can tell you is that the Texas Democrats that are here are welcome. We're providing them a safe haven, a place for them to visit and stay, breaking quorum, because they're heroes that are standing up not just for their own constituents and for the people of Texas and their rights but also for the rights of people all across the country. Because what Greg Abbott is doing and what Donald Trump is attempting to do is to cheat mid-decade here. This is — they're attempting to change the map. They know that they're going to lose in 2026 the Congress, and so they're trying to steal seats. And so that is what these Texas Democrats are trying to stand up against —
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well —
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
And then, don't forget, the map that they put together is, it violates the Voting Rights Act, and it violates the Constitution. And so, thank God for these Texas House Democrats.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, let's talk about the issue at hand here. Texas Republicans being urged by President Trump, as you just said, are pushing this mid-decade redistricting plan. Their goal is to add as many as five GOP seats. In response, Democrats like yourself are thinking of drawing your own map to boost seats in blue states. Take a listen to what Texas Governor Greg Abbott told my colleague, Ryan Chandler, about that. Take a look.
[BEGIN TAPE]
RYAN CHANDLER:
What's your message to governors like Newsom, Hochul, Pritzker, who have said they will retaliate if Texas does this?
GOV. GREG ABBOTT:
They have no capability. They've already gerrymandered their states in ways in which they don't have hardly any Republican members of Congress. Look at the map of Illinois. It's drawn in such way they can't even squeeze out another Republican. It's a joke.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
What's your response to Governor Abbott?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Well, Governor Abbott is the joke. He's the one who is attempting mid-decade here, at a time when frankly all of us are concerned about the future of democracy, he's literally helping whittle it away and licking the boots of his leader, Donald Trump. Here in Illinois, we followed the law. We provided a map and passed a map that follows the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution and the laws of the state of Illinois. He's attempting to thwart federal law and take away five seats that are in the hands of Black, Brown, minority Congress people and the people that they represent. He's taking those votes away. He's violating the Constitution. And all of us need to stand up and speak out and make sure that it's understood across the country that what they're trying to do in Texas is illegal.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, Governor, it might be illegal. It's not unprecedented though, or it might be rare, I should say. But Texas actually tried to redraw districts mid-decade before in 2003, and the U.S. Supreme Court actually upheld the map in that case, with the exception of one district. So the argument that Abbott is making is it's not illegal, though they are doing it certainly in an off-year. But I do want to look at the map of Illinois. Let's take a look at this. Despite President Trump winning 44% of the statewide vote in 2024, Republicans hold only three of Illinois' 17 districts. These districts seem to be designed to maximize Democratic advantage. What do you say to those who argue that it's hypocritical for you to criticize Texas for partisanship, when your state also drew maps to boost your party's standing?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Well, remember that what Texas is trying to do is, again, violate the Voting Rights Act. We didn't. We held public hearings, legislative hearings. People attended them. They spoke out. There was a map that was put out. There were actually changes made to the map. And a map was passed, and it was done at the end of the census, the decennial census. So that's how it's done in this country. You talked about how rare it is to do what he's doing. Yes, it is. What's even rarer is to do it at the behest of the president of the United States, who's clearly attempting to and says that he deserves to have five more seats. He's wrong, and he's attempting to change the game because, again, he passed this big ugly bill that's hyper-unpopular in Texas, among people in Texas and across the country. And he knows he's going to lose the Congress in 2026. That's why he's going to his allies and hoping that they can save him. And we've all got to stand up against this. This is — it's cheating. Donald Trump is a cheater. He cheats on his wives. He cheats at golf. And now he's trying to cheat the American people out of their votes.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, look. Sticking on your state's map, every major group that grades the fairness of congressional maps gives your state an 'F.' Common Cause, a nonpartisan government watchdog, even says your map, and I'm going to quote, "represents a nearly perfect model for everything that can go wrong with redistricting." And I guess the question is, you talk about preserving democracy. How do you preserve democracy if you're using the same tactics that you've criticized Texas Republicans for?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
But as I say, what they're talking about is a distraction. The reality is that the violation of people's voting rights is what Texas is attempting to do. That's what's wrong with their efforts right now. And the fact that the president of the United States knows it and nevertheless, is asking them to do it. That is what's wrong with what we're seeing right now. Democracy is at stake, and these Texas Democrats are standing up to what the GOP is attempting to do, which is to steal seats because they know what they've done is wrong. They know that they've made an enormous mistake.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Let's turn now to foreign policy, Governor, and the crisis in Gaza. As you know, Prime Minister Netanyahu says he's now planning a ground invasion into Gaza City. Illinois has one of the largest populations of Palestinian-Americans in the U.S. More than half of the Democratic Senators last week, a record number, actually voted to block sales of some weapons to Israel. Do you think the U.S. should stop sending weapons to Israel, Governor?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Look, I think that the resolution that was put up in the United States Senate was an effort to send a message. And it's the right kind of a message, which is that Israel needs to make sure that the food assistance that ought to go to innocent Palestinians should arrive there. And they should do everything in their power to prevent the starvation that I think we've all seen. So that's the message that's attempting to be sent by the United States Senate. I believe it's very important for us not only to protect those who are innocent – on both sides of that border, making sure that Israelis and Palestinians are protected – but also to make sure that we're seeing the return of the hostages, that Israel is allowed to stand up to terrorists like Hamas but not allowed to target or have ill effect as best they can on the innocent people of Gaza. So that I think is what's going on right now. We've all got to stand up and make sure that the innocent are protected.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Well, I want to talk about the future now of your party. You're one of the leaders of the Democratic Party, you are also a billionaire. Some in your party are openly questioning whether billionaires such as yourself should exist at all, Governor. Just listen to what Zohran Mamdani, New York City's Democratic nominee for mayor told me recently. Take a look.
[BEGIN TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Do you think that billionaires have a right to exist?
ZOHRAN MAMDANI:
I don't think that we should have billionaires, because frankly, it is so much money in a moment of such inequality.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Governor, is that the kind of message that Democrats should be embracing?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Look – how much money you have doesn't determine what your values are. And I'm a Democrat because I believe that everyone deserves healthcare. I'm a Democrat because I believe we've got to fund education and have a free public education available to every kid in this country. I'm a Democrat because I believe that we've got to stand up for our democracy and against the MAGA Republicans who are literally trying to take away people's rights all across this country. So it does not matter what your income level is. What matters is what your values are, and that's what makes me a Democrat.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, there is a big debate right now inside the Democratic Party about how exactly to counter Trump and counter Republicans. Here's what you said at a fundraiser in New Hampshire a little bit earlier on this year. Take a listen.
[BEGIN TAPE]
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
These Republicans cannot know a moment of peace. They have to understand that we will fight their cruelty with every megaphone and microphone that we have. We must castigate them on the soapbox and then punish them at the ballot box.
[END TAPE]
KRISTEN WELKER:
Now, you're running for a third term as governor in your state. How can you guarantee voters that you will govern everyone and not just Democrats?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
Because I've demonstrated that during my time in office already. You know, people forgot in years past – Republicans – we had more Republicans holding the governor's office over the last 40 years than we had Democrats. And they forgot about southern Illinois and central Illinois and about areas of the state where there are more Republicans than Democrats. I did not. I have made sure that we've invested in education and infrastructure, that we've created jobs in those areas of the state. We need more people that are willing to reach across the aisle and do the right thing when they're in office. Look, we have tough elections, Democrats and Republicans fighting one another. But after the election is over, when you're actually governing, you've got to govern for all the people of your state. And that's what I've done for the last six-and-a-half years and look forward to doing for another four.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right, Governor, very quickly before I let you go. Do you rule out a run for president in 2028?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
I'm focused on running for reelection as Governor of the State of Illinois, and everything that I do really is focused on lifting up the people of my state.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But you don't rule it out, Governor? Yes or no?
GOV. JB PRITZKER:
I can't rule anything out, but what I can rule in is that no matter what decisions I make, and I mean in particular about what I do here in the State of Illinois is about the people of Illinois. Indeed, any future decisions of mine will always be guided by that.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Governor JB Pritzker, thank you so much. We really appreciate it. Coming up next, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina joins me next.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Welcome back. Joining me now is Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Senator Graham, welcome back to Meet the Press.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
Thank you.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, thank you so much for being here. Let's start by talking about this meeting this upcoming Friday between President Trump and President Putin. President Putin saying he is demanding that he gets to keep some of that territory that he has illegally claimed without making any concessions. Senator Graham, is it a mistake to reward President Putin with a presidential-level meeting without Moscow making any concrete or public concessions?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
No, I'm very okay with President Trump meeting with President Putin in Alaska. So I was on the phone this morning, Kristen, with our European allies, with the Ukrainians. I talked to Yermak this morning. The vice president was on the ground in Europe yesterday listening to Ukraine and our European allies about what a good deal would look like. And the reviews about J.D. Vance are very, very positive all across the board. Everybody said that J.D. listened well, he understood sort of the red lines. And I think everybody knows that how this war ends can be a good thing or a bad thing. If it ends in a way that looks like that Putin's overly rewarded, there goes Taiwan. You can't end a war without talking. I do hope that Zelenskyy can be part of the process. I'll leave that up to the White House. But I have every confidence in the world that the president is going to go to meet Putin from a position of strength, that he's going to look out for Europe and Ukrainian needs to end this war honorably. And it's time to end this war honorably. But how we do it will be historical. And I'm confident President Trump will get a good deal for all.
KRISTEN WELKER:
So Senator Graham, you take me to my next question. Let's talk about the red lines and what a good deal would look like. Let's look at the map right now, Senator, there. This is a map of Ukraine. You can see the areas in red currently under Russian control. Now, President Trump this week didn't rule out Ukraine having to give up some of its territory, something the Ukrainians have rejected. Do you believe that Ukraine should sign a deal that includes giving up any part of their territory, Senator?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
Well, think about East Berlin and West Berlin as the way a conflict can be settled, at least for a period of time. North Korea and South Korea is in a state of truce. There's never been a final settlement. But I come on your show a good bit, I want to be honest with you. Ukraine's not going to evict every Russian, and Russia's not going to keep. So there will be some land swaps at the end. But what would a good deal look like? Make sure that 2022 doesn't happen again. On Biden's watch and Obama's watch, Russia invades. The goal for me, and I think President Trump, is to end it forever. Now, what would that look like? You'll have some land swaps, but only after you have security guarantees to Ukraine to prevent Russia from doing this again. You need to tell Putin what happens if he does it a third time. Pre-invasion sanctions that would crush his economy if he ever did this again. In 2022 we didn't help Ukraine at all, Biden didn't. Militarily, we need to keep Ukraine strong, keep flowing them strong and modern weapons, and security guarantees with European forces on the ground as trip wires to prevent a third invasion. We want to end this with a sovereign, independent, self-governing Ukraine, and a situation where Putin cannot do this the third time without being crushed. This is really a dress rehearsal for Taiwan. And as to China, we had a good talk. I played golf with the president yesterday. Saturday was the ten-day deadline. China is very much on his mind. He can tell you the top five oil purchasers of Ukrainian oil. He knows who they are. And if this doesn't end well with Putin, everybody buying Russian oil and keeping his war machine going in Russia, you're going to pay a heavy price like India.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right, well, and I hear you saying what's happened under Biden's watch. But the attacks have only ramped up by Russia against Ukraine in recent weeks, on President Trump's watch.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
That's true.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But Senator, let me just read you something--
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
That's true.
KRISTEN WELKER:
--that you said back in 2023, as we talk about these potential land swaps that you're discussing. This was during your visit to Ukraine. You said, quote, "You don't end wars by giving territory to the aggressor. If Putin is not stopped here, he will keep going…and that increases the chances that there will be a war between Russia and NATO." Senator, if Russia is allowed to annex some of those regions, won't that effectively be a green light for Russia to go into and invade other countries?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
What will stop a third war is to do things differently than we did in 2022. Is to keep arming Ukraine so that Russia will be deterred by the most lethal army on the continent of Europe right now, which is Ukraine. Security guarantees that if you come into Ukraine again, you'll be fighting more than just Ukraine. Having some European forces on the ground as trip wires, building up economic integration. The one thing that changed everything, in my view, is the minerals deal between us and Ukraine changed the relationship between the United States and Ukraine. And President Trump will defend those interests. East Berlin and West Berlin existed divided for a very long time. It wound up not being the case. So there's de facto recognition and de jure recognition. I'm not trying to tell you or anybody else that I think Ukraine can evict every Russian soldier. I am here to tell you that President Trump will end this war in a way to prevent a third invasion and not to entice China to take Taiwan. We're not out to humiliate Putin, we're out to get a deal to make sure there's no third invasion.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Senator, I have to ask you about this sanctions bill that has the backing of, frankly, more than 80 other senators.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
Eighty-five.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Okay, there you go. You've been putting off bringing it to the floor for more than four months now. If this summit does not produce a ceasefire agreement, will you commit to bringing that bill to the floor?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
I talked to the president about the bill. I think it will help him in court. His tariff policy is being challenged in court. If Congress creates a tariff regime giving the president authority to set tariffs to go after people who buy Putin's oil, I think he's got a stronger hand legally. But he's doing everything the bill does. He put a 50% tariff on India for their buying Russian oil. He talked to me a lot about China. He talked to me about two other countries that buy Russian oil. So he's doing it through executive action, and I'm okay with that. But I stand ready to help the president. And when we get back in September, let's have this conversation.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Senator, I need to get to Gaza. But why punish India more than Russia?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
More than Russia?
KRISTEN WELKER:
Shouldn't he be sanctioning Russia?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
Well, the one thing I can tell you, Putin could give a damn about sanctions. He evades them. He could give a damn about how many Russians die. The one thing that he can't tolerate and live with, if we go after his customers. The whole goal is to crush his customers, India, and China, and Brazil. That if you keep buying Putin's oil and prop up his war machine, you will be denied access to our economy. This is a new strategy. Trump is all in in terms of going after Putin's customers if we can't end this well. Without oil and gas revenue, Russia collapses.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Senator, I have to ask you about another issue that you're very focused on, the war in Gaza. We have one minute left. Israel announcing its plan this week to take over Gaza City. World leaders have called the move a 'dangerous escalation', Senator. How long do you see Gaza being occupied, and quite frankly, who should control it after?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
This is Israel's World War II. I can't believe we're having a discussion about how to fight a war against people who want to destroy you as a people, the Israeli people. So they will take Gaza militarily unless the hostages are released. Eventually, the Arabs will take over. The future of Palestine runs through Riyadh. The future of the Mideast runs through Riyadh. I envision after they defeat Hamas that normalization will be back on the table between Saudi Arabia and Israel, and the Palestinians will benefit from that discussion as well as the Israelis. Enough already. Destroy Hamas. Do to Hamas what we did to the Germans and the Japanese during World War II. Annihilate them and rebuild the Palestinian society, like we did with Germany and Japan. I think we can do that.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, I know everyone is calling for those hostages to be released. We'll watch it closely in the coming days. Senator Lindsey Graham, thank you so much for joining us. We really appreciate it. And when we come back, former Attorney General Eric Holder joins me next.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Welcome back. Joining me now is former U.S. attorney general under President Obama, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder, welcome back to Meet the Press.
ERIC HOLDER:
Good to see you.
KRISTEN WELKER:
It's great to see you. Thank you so much for being here. I want to start off by asking you this morning, the homepage of the group you lead, the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, says quote, "There is no 'offseason' in redistricting. Gerrymandering poses a critical threat to our democracy." But now you're arguing that Democrats are going to have to use gerrymandering, quote, "In order to save our democracy." So let me ask you, how can gerrymandering both be a threat to democracy and also the way to save it?
ERIC HOLDER:
Well, there's no question that gerrymandering is a threat to our democracy. It allows politicians to pick their voters as opposed to citizens choosing their representatives. But we are now in a situation where we find ourselves where authoritarian moves are being made by the White House through various states, Texas most prominent among them, and there has to be a response to that. What I've said is that we have to protect our democracy now if we ultimately want to be able to – to save it. And so taking the reasonable steps that have been proposed in – in California, I think it makes a great deal of sense in this moment. A temporary way in which to respond to that which is happening in Texas with the thought that after this crisis has passed, we get back to the fight against gerrymandering by anybody.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, as you know, some of your Democratic colleagues are expressing concerns about that, including Senator Richard Blumenthal. Let me tell you what he told the Associated Press. He said, quote, "We shouldn't stoop to their tactics. It's an ideal that we have accurate and fair representation. We can't abandon it just because Republicans try to manipulate and distort it." Do Democrats run the risk of undermining the public's trust in our electoral systems by using the same tactics that you're criticizing Republicans for using?
ERIC HOLDER:
Well, yeah, I wouldn't say that we're using the same tactics. I mean, you know, in – when Barack Obama was president, when Joe Biden was president, did either of those presidents call a governor of a state or a state legislature and tell them to – to gerrymander to find five seats for them? No. So we're doing something now that is responsive to what is going on with this White House. You know, what – that call to Texas is kind of reminiscent of the call that President Trump made to the secretary of state in Georgia. He said, "Find me 11,780 votes." He calls Texas now and says, "Well, find me five seats so that we can save the House in 2026 in spite of the fact that my poll ratings are down, in spite of the fact that this big, beautiful budget bill is wildly unpopular, in spite of the fact that we've taken health care away from people, given tax breaks to billionaires." So I think we're talking about two fundamentally different things. If Texas had not moved in the way that they appear to be doing, California would not be doing what they're doing. What Democrats are doing is – is responsive, and it's temporary.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, as you know, Texas lawmakers are digging in. You heard Governor Abbott there talking about the FBI, Senator Cornyn calling the FBI to help locate those Democratic lawmakers who fled the state. I wonder, do you think that the FBI has jurisdiction to intervene here and try to bring back those Democrats who are in other states?
ERIC HOLDER:
Short answer: No. I mean, you're asking the FBI to get involved, to find these legislators who are in the process of trying to defend democracy in Texas. And the question – they're not hard to find, but the question after that is, "Well, what's the federal jurisdiction? What federal statute has potentially been – been violated? What's the basis for any federal government interaction?" And I would say that there is none.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Well, I do want to shift now to another topic. This week the House Oversight Committee issued subpoenas for you and other former officials for testimony related to the Jeffrey Epstein matter. Your deposition is actually scheduled for September 30th. I have to ask you, are you planning to comply with the subpoena?
ERIC HOLDER:
Well, we're in the process of talking to the committee now, finding out exactly what it is that they want. Those conversations are ongoing, and we'll see how that – we'll see how that works out.
KRISTEN WELKER:
So no definitive answer yet. In 2012, worth noting you did actually defy a congressional subpoena. You were attorney general at the time. You became the first attorney general in history to be held in contempt of Congress. Do you have any regrets about that now? Is that informing your decision right now?
ERIC HOLDER:
Well, I mean, if you look at the 2012 contempt what I said was that we were protecting confidential information that was passed between the executive branch from the Justice Department and the – the White House, and we held on to those documents. My successor, Jeff Sessions, put all those documents into the public sphere, and guess what? It showed that what I was trying to protect was in fact reflected in those documents, which was executive branch, executive branch communications. So, yeah, that informs me that if there's a principle, you stand up for that principle. And if there is an – an inappropriate congressional action, well, you know, they do what they have to do. But as I said, we're in the process of trying to talk to them to determine what if anything I can help them with concerning the subject matter of the subpoena.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Let me ask you now more broadly about the FBI and DOJ. President Trump has launched investigations into many of his perceived political foes, including former President Barack Obama, New York Attorney General Letitia James, Democratic Senator Adam Schiff. I'm naming just a few of the people. You have described this as the, quote, "weaponization of the Justice Department," which is, by the way, the same criticism President Trump has made about the DOJ under former President Biden. So let me ask you about that. How do you respond to the argument by President Trump that the Biden Justice Department started this?
ERIC HOLDER:
Well, I – I think that's just totally inconsistent with the facts. There was a predicate for all of the things, a basis for the investigations, the moves that the Justice Department did. I would ask, you know, those who are in the Justice Department now, those who are in the White House now, because they are – they are married. They're joined at the hip in ways that we've not seen before, where the White House is essentially telling the Justice Department what to do with regard to its investigatory power. What in fact is the predicate that you are looking at? What's the basis for the investigation when you're talking about Senator Schiff, Attorney General James? Certainly it's absurd, this notion of looking at President Obama with regard to the actions that he supposedly took. There's simply no factual basis to these –to these investigations.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Mr. Attorney General, one minute left. You have said this moment is a constitutional crisis. If you believe that, do you believe there's a way forward and a way out of this moment?
ERIC HOLDER:
Yeah, I think the way forward is through the American people. There are no saviors. The cavalry is not coming. This is up to the American people to participate in the process, obviously through the ballot box, through making their opinions known, by not supporting candidates who will stand for the kinds of things that we're seeing in Texas right now, where they're trying to cheat people of their – their constitutional rights, their most valuable asset, which is their right – right to vote. And then once this period ends, I think we have to not only rebuild but actually reimagine the executive branch and government such that we don't have to go through this kind of period again. Maybe we have to codify norms that in the past we thought people would simply – would simply follow. So, yeah, we're in a crisis right now. But there is still, I think, a basis for future hope.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right, Mr. Holder. We covered a lot of ground. Thank you so much for joining us this morning. We really appreciate it.
ERIC HOLDER:
Thanks for having me.
KRISTEN WELKER:
When we come back, the Voting Rights Act turned 60 this week as new threats emerge for voter protections. Our Meet the Press Minute is next.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Welcome back. Sixty years ago this week, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, a landmark law that helped end the Jim Crow era and opened the ballot box to millions of Black Americans. Over the past decade, the law has been stripped of many of its protections. Now,l a Supreme Court case over Louisiana's congressional maps could test just how much of that safeguard still stands. Days after his march from Selma to Montgomery, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. joined Meet the Press to speak about the urgency of expanding the right to vote.
LAWRENCE SPIVAK:
Dr. King, I think the demonstration was largely to get your voting rights bill through. Was it necessary for that purpose? Aren't you going to get that bill, and wouldn't you have gotten it whether or not you marched?
DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.:
Well, the demonstration was certainly for the voting rights bill. However, we must recognize there are other, very tragic, conditions existing in the state of Alabama which are as humiliating, as degrading, and as unjust as the denial of the right to vote, namely police brutality. We were marching there to protest these brutalities, these murders and all of the things that go along with them as much as to gain the right to vote.
KRISTEN WELKER:
When we come back, President Trump says he's entitled to five more Republican seats in Congress. Will Republicans succeed in getting them? The panel is next.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Welcome back. Sixty years ago this week, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, a landmark law that helped end the Jim Crow era and opened the ballot box to millions of Black Americans. Over the past decade, the law has been stripped of many of its protections. Now a Supreme Court case over Louisiana's congressional maps could test just how much of that safeguard still stands. Days after his march from Selma to Montgomery, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. joined Meet the Press to speak about the urgency of expanding the right to vote.
LAWRENCE SPIVAK:
Dr. King, I think the demonstration was largely to get your voting rights bill through. Was it necessary for that purpose? Aren't you going to get that bill, and what do you have gotten it whether or not you marched?
DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.:
Well, the demonstration was certainly for the voting rights bill. However, we must recognize there are other, very tragic, conditions existing in the state of Alabama which are as humiliating, as degrading, and as unjust as the denial of the right to vote, namely police brutality. We were marching there to protest these brutalities, these murders and all of the things that go along with them as much as to gain the right to vote.
KRISTEN WELKER:
When we come back, President Trump says he's entitled to five more Republican seats in Congress. Will Republicans succeed in getting them? The panel is next.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Welcome back. The panel is here: NBC News Washington managing editor Carol Lee; Tony Plohetski, investigative reporter for the Austin American-Statesman; CEO and president of the Center for American Progress Neera Tanden; and Lanhee Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution. Thanks to all of you for being here. Carol Lee, let me start with you. The flash-point right now in the midterms is this big battle over redistricting in Texas. What are you hearing? Where is this going to go?
CAROL LEE:
Look, I think the thing to focus on is how much this is spreading across the country and the long-term implications for that. So you have Democrats who are trying to overcome hurdles that they put in place to try to get more seats in Democratic states. You have the White House looking at states beyond Texas that are Republican to get additional seats. And President Trump's just getting warmed up. He's only going to intensify his focus on the midterms, on trying to keep Democrats from taking control of the House and dominating the rest of his term with investigations. And so the question is, you know, in terms of implications for elections beyond 2026 is: Does this work for the party that's most successful at this? Or is there a price to pay from voters who might look at this and say, "You know what? Like, that is just power grabbing. And I don't like it."
KRISTEN WELKER:
Yes. I think it's great way to frame it. Tony, first of all, thank you for coming in from Austin.
TONY PLOHETSKI:
Thank you.
KRISTEN WELKER:
How is this playing out on the ground? You're on the front lines of this.
TONY PLOHETSKI:
Texas Democrats have been resolute from day one – they left one week ago today and headed to suburban Chicago – that they are staying out of state until at least August 19th. That is a significant date because it is the last day of the special session that was called by Governor Greg Abbott with this priority. But at the same time, we are also seeing what those Democrats describe as increasingly heavy-handed efforts by Republicans to try to get them back to the state including lawsuits filed by the governor, by the attorney general, with the state supreme court to try to get them back. And we've even seen other punitive measures including, for example, a reduction of their budget by 30%, which may have an inability for them to, for example, pay their staffers.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Hard-ball tactics, Neera. And the question looming over all of this for Democrats, talked about it with both guests today, Governor Pritzker as well as former Attorney General Eric Holder. Could this in some way backfire on Democrats or erode the public's trust overall? How do you see it? And what are people saying inside Democratic circles?
NEERA TANDEN:
Well, I think really the vast majority of Democrats recognize the simple fact which is as the generic ballot goes to Democrats – plus 5% in one poll last week – as you're seeing actually more people identify with the Democratic party, a sharp turn from last year, and as you see in these special elections where Democrats are averaging over performance of 15 points, the White House has decided to go get five seats for Donald Trump. And fundamentally I think almost every Democrat I talk to believes that what Trump is really trying to do is to alter the votes, rig the game so that he's not accountable to the public. And that's what democracy is about, elections in which people are accountable. And so I think every Democrat I talk to is really focused on how to ensure that this doesn't happen. You know, I mean, Governor Newsom is saying, "I will only redistrict if Texas redistricts." And that's what we want, a system where essentially Democrats are responding. But if Texas stands down, other states stand down too.
KRISTEN WELKER:
What about that argument, Lanhee, and the argument we heard from Governor Pritzker that this is all because Republicans feel vulnerable running on the Trump agenda in the midterms?
LANHEE CHEN:
First of all, I think the concept of mid-cycle redistricting is a problem. And what probably needs to happen is Congress needs to address this by saying, "You can't do mid-cycle redistricting." There's actually a Republican-sponsored bill that would do that. I think that's the first answer. But beyond that, there is a critical difference between what's happening in Texas and what Governor Newsom's proposing in California, what some other states are looking at, which is that in California to redistrict you actually have to override two citizen-passed initiatives that are constitutional amendments to the California constitution to engage in this sort of partisan redistricting mid-cycle. So it's very different to look at the Texas situation and draw an analogy to California. It's just fundamentally different. So you'd have to override the will over the voters as twice expressed in the California constitution to do it.
NEERA TANDEN:
But that's why Governor Newsom is asking for a ballot proposition. I mean, he's asking --
LANHEE CHEN:
Not to override the process to say, "By the way can we just do a one-time thing where we ignore the California constitution?"
NEERA TANDEN:
But it's through a ballot --
LANHEE CHEN:
And make this happen.
NEERA TANDEN:
It will be the will of the voters either way. That's the big difference with Texas, right? California, Governor Newsom is doing a ballot proposition, leaving it up to the voters whether there's a redistrict. Governor Abbott is basically at Trump's direction doing it all through himself. I think California is way more democratic than Texas.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right, Tony, button this up for us. How does this end, do you think?
TONY PLOHETSKI:
The Democrats who left the state have known from day one that they can't stay away from their homes, their lives, their families, their businesses forever. Ultimately they are resigned to the fact that they will have to go back. We know that the governor has said he is going to continue to call these special sessions. But a win for them in their minds has been the ability to put a national spotlight on this issue. A bright, red spotlight that they say has now opened this conversation nationally. And so for them, they consider that a success.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Well, we continue to track all of that and the foreign policy front. Carol Lee, you have some new reporting in terms of what the White House is thinking potentially open to inviting President Zelenskyy to that summit next Friday.
CAROL LEE:
That's right. They're considering inviting President Zelenskyy. Nothing has been decided, you know. But it is a recognition by some administration officials that in order for – a Putin-Trump summit is just not enough to show really meaningful progress in getting toward an end to the war. And so having Zelenskyy there, even if it's just a Trump meeting afterwards, would in their view lend some legitimacy to a process that has Europeans concerned, Ukrainians concerned, some U.S. officials concerned. We're told that there's a counter-proposal from the Europeans that is going to President Trump. You heard Senator Graham tell you that, you know, this could end in a good way or a bad way. He encouraged the White House to include President Zelenskyy in this process. And hanging over all of this is just how serious Vladimir Putin is. This summit itself, him meeting with the president in the United States is a win for him. He hasn't been in the United States since 2015. The risk for President Trump is he does this, and he gets nothing out of it.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Lanhee, what about that? What about the risk for President Trump in giving Putin this reward on the front end?
LANHEE CHEN:
Well, yes, I think the challenge here is obviously that you have -- President Trump's already said he wants to bring an end to this crisis. The challenge is that it is going to be very difficult to get there without there being some significant set of concessions. And, you know, the challenge I think ultimately will be: Can the president continue to maintain his position without coming down harder on President Putin? Can he do it in a way that basically says, "Look, we want to broker peace." Well, Zelenskyy's got to be at the table to make that happen. So is Zelenskyy at the table, is he going to be able to it? There's a lot of different equities the president's going to have to bring together to make this work well. I think it's going to be a massive challenge, probably the biggest foreign policy challenge this president's faced.
Neera, we are hearing skepticism from European allies of the United States, certainly skepticism from the Ukrainians and then skepticism from Democrats as well about the fact that Putin's coming into this saying, "I want to be able to keep the land I've illegally taken."
NEERA TANDEN:
Well, let's just recognize that this is coming after months and months of Donald Trump drawing a line, asking for a cease fire, pushing a cease fire that's ignored by Putin. He asked for negotiations. They are completely ignored. I mean, there's several red lines that have been crossed with no consequence. And what's actually the consequence is he's getting a summit. So, I mean, I think when we step back here, we have to recognize that the big difference between the president and the Europeans and Zelenskyy is that essentially the Europeans and Zelenskyy do not want to lose the war. And it does seem that Donald Trump is managing a loss. And I think that is a deep concern. Obviously we need to have a peace deal. But the whole idea that we're already talking about land swaps seems to me a terrible way to negotiate a deal.
KRISTEN WELKER:
All right. Well, we continue to watch it very closely. Thank you all for being here for a great conversation. That is all for today. Thank you for watching. We'll be back next week. Because if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DC to wake up to troops deployed along the National Mall
President Donald Trump's plan to address crime in Washington, D.C., calls for deploying federalized National Guard troops along the National Mall overnight Wednesday into Thursday morning, according to a person familiar with the effort. The idea is that residents and tourists would awake to the sight of a significant military presence, the person said. The deployment of troops along a relatively safe and quiet stretch of Washington, D.C. -- known for museums, monuments and hot dog vendors serving tourists -- is extraordinary. MORE: Trump to seek 'long-term' extension of federal control of DC police The law grants a president the power to active the National Guard to protect federal personnel and property, such as in the case of the inauguration or the Jan. 6, 2021, riots. A president also has the power to mobilize troops in times of extraordinary crisis as was done in 1992 during the Los Angeles riots. But it was unclear what Thursday's show of military might on U.S. soil would achieve, other than a spectacle for tourists and school groups on summer vacation. Army officials said their mission was to aid law enforcement with logistics support, transportation and administration duties, as well as being visible around the Mall. "That's part of our assignment -- to go to the national monuments and be present," Col. Dave Butler, an Army spokesperson, told ABC News on Tuesday. A White House official told reporters on Wednesday to expect a "significant" presence on the ground Wednesday night. According to the person familiar with the plan, the presence of Guard troops would begin ramping up overnight and continue until Thursday. MORE: National Guard troops told to maintain presence near National Mall as part of Trump's anti-crime mission Trump announced Monday that he planned to mobilize 800 National Guard troops to address what he considered "out of control" crime in the city, as well as taking over control of the police department. Officials said a joint task force, led by Army Col. Larry Doane, will run the operation. While the task force is expected to include 800 activated National Guard members, D.C. residents won't see that many on the streets. The troops will work in shifts of 100 to 200 troops at a time, and some of them will be assigned to administrative or logistical roles in support of local law enforcement. The task force overseeing the activated Guard troops will operate similarly to how the D.C. Guard has handled inaugurations or responding to crises, as it did during the Jan. 6 riots. The National Park Service will play a considerable role because of its oversight of the National Mall, officials said.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's route to Kennedy Center cleared of homeless camps amid DC crackdown
WASHINGTON ‒ Blocks away from where President Donald Trump announced the latest slate of Kennedy Center honorees, workers began to sweep away homeless encampments along his route to the White House as part of his broader crackdown in the capital city. The Aug. 13 move comes days after Trump seized control of Washington, D.C.'s local law enforcement, deployed National Guard troops, and ordered people living outside to "immediately" move, suggesting, as the president put it, that they be relocated "FAR from the Capital." Amber Harding, executive director of the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless, said officials cleared at least two tents on a patch of green space near the Kennedy Center as Trump spoke at the performing arts center. Members of the city's Department of Human Services pinned notices to at least nine other tents in the area, notifying residents that the camps would be broken down and closed if not removed by the following morning. George Morgan, a lifelong D.C. resident who has lived in the encampment for two months, said he's not sure where he will go. He won't go to a shelter because they wouldn't allow him to bring his American pit bull terrier. "I'm very concerned," said Morgan, a Trump supporter, about the president's takeover of the city's police force and his mobilization of the National Guard. "I try not to take offense." He said while he doesn't know where he will go, he's "hopeful God will make a way." Where are they being taken? Advocates for the city's homeless population say they're still unclear where the Trump administration expects people living outside to move. At an Aug. 12 news conference, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told reporters homeless people would be "given the option to leave their encampment, to be taken to a homeless shelter, to be offered addiction or mental-health services, and if they refuse, they will be susceptible to fines or to jail time." She said U.S. Park Police have removed 70 homeless encampments from federal parks since March and are set to clear the remaining two encampments in the city later this week. Andrew Wassenich, director of policy at Miriam's Kitchen, a local nonprofit that assists the homeless, said Trump's rhetoric and the notices being put on tents appear targeted at scaring homeless people to leave. "The more people who do that on their own, the easier for them," he said. So far, Wassenich said the clearing of encampments mirrors past efforts by city officials to move people away from high-traffic areas of the city. In 2023, officials removed a large site of tents at a park near the White House despite pushback from some local officials and homeless advocacy groups. "They're not solving the homeless problem. It's not going away," Wassenich added. "They're just moving it." 'Minimize the disruption' Over the weekend, the city's human services department added about 70 beds to homeless shelters to make room for an expected influx of residents, said Rachel Pierre, the agency's acting director. She said that the city's shelters were at capacity when the order took effect, but that additional room could be made. Wayne Turnage, the deputy mayor of the DC Department of Health and Human Services, said the number of homeless encampments in the city is way down from their pandemic levels. Turnage said about 100 people are living in encampments today – down from around 300 in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. But advocates said those numbers likely do not include all of the people living outside in D.C. The city counted 900 people living on the streets during a one-night survey in January. When the city conducts a cleanup or shuts down an encampment, they typically provide residents with a week's notice, Turnage said. But with the new federal order in place, they're telling residents that they should pack up now. "Our objective is to see that the encampments are closed in an orderly fashion and to extend homeless services to those who are impacted," Turnage said. 'These people are human beings, they're not chess pieces. Their lives are being disrupted, so we have to make sure that we do as much as we can to minimize the disruption." This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Homeless encampments removed on Trump's Kennedy Center route
New York Post
28 minutes ago
- New York Post
Declassified emails show James Clapper's dismissive response to intel community concerns over Russia election interference report
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper was adamant about 'stickin' to' the narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help President Trump, despite concerns raised by a top intelligence official, top secret emails show. Clapper described the Obama administration's effort to revamp an intelligence community (IC) assessment on 'Russia Election Meddling' as a 'team sport,' and one that may require the IC to 'compromise' its standards, Director of National intelligence Tulsi Gabbard revealed Wednesday. Former National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers warned that his team had concerns about the rush to get the report out and their lack of access to the 'underlying intelligence' being used to produce the 'joint product related to Russian attribution and intent for the DNC/DCCC hacks,' according to a declassified Dec. 22, 2016, email from the intelligence official to Clapper, ex-CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey. 3 Clapper was among several top Obama administration officials tasked by the president in December 2016 to redo a intelligence assessment that initially determined Russia did not hack the 216 presidential election. AP 'I know that this activity is on a fast-track and that folks have been working very hard to put together a product that can be provided to the President,' Rogers wrote in the email. 'However, I wanted to reach out to you directly to let you know of some concerns I have with what I am hearing from my folks.' 'Specifically, I asked my team if they'd had sufficient access to the underlying intelligence and sufficient time to review that intelligence. On both points my team raised concerns,' the former NSA director stated. 'I'm concerned that, given the expedited nature of this activity, my folks aren't fully comfortable saying that they have had enough time to review all of the intelligence to be absolutely confident in their assessments,' Rogers continued, noting that he wasn't expressing a substantive disagreement with the report's conclusion. 'I do want to make sure that, when we are asked in the future whether we can absolutely stand behind the paper, that we don't have any reason to hesitate because of the process,' he added. 'I know that you agree that this is something we need to be 100% comfortable with before we present it to the President – we have one chance to get this right, and it is critical that we do so.' 'I'm concerned we are not there yet.' Rogers said he would 'stand down on these concerns' if the report didn't have to be co-authored by the NSA, but for his agency to sign-off, he would need to see 'even the most sensitive evidence related to the conclusion.' 3 Rogers expressed concern with how quickly the report was being produced and his team's lack of access to the sensitive information it was being based on. AP Clapper urged the NSA to fall in line in his short response to Rogers. 'Understand your concern. It is essential that we (CIA/NSA/FBI/ODNI) be on the same page. and are all supportive of the report — in the highest tradition of 'that's OUR story, and we're stickin' to it,'' Clapper wrote back. The ex-DNI went on to shut down any talk of 'more time' being needed. 'We will facilitate as much mutual transparency as possible as we complete the report … but, more time is not negotiable,' Clapper insisted. 'We may have to compromise on our 'normal' modalities, since we must do this on such a compressed schedule,' he added. 'This is one project that has to be a team sport,' Clapper demanded. 3 Gabbard declassified the top secret emails between Rogers and Clapper on Wednesday. MediaPunch / BACKGRID The exchange came days after a Dec. 9, 2016, meeting between former President Barack Obama, Clapper, Brennan and other top administration officials, during which the president demanded a report detailing the 'tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election.' The previous intelligence community assessment, rejected by Obama, determined that 'Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent US election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure.' The NSA would go on to sign-off of the new report, along with the CIA and FBI. Gabbard, who has been on warpath against the actors behind the Trump-Russia collusion narrative, said Clapper's email 'reinforces what we already exposed.' '[T]he decision to compromise standards and violate protocols in the creation of the 2017 manufactured intelligence assessment was deliberate and came from the very top,' Gabbard said in a statement. 'Clapper's own words confirm that complying with the order to manufacture intelligence was a 'team sport,'' she added.
