What's next as Trump vents fury at Vladimir Putin: From the Politics Desk
Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail.
In today's edition, Elon Musk and Donald Trump bid farewell from the Oval Office on live TV. Meanwhile, Kristen Welker digs into Trump's latest social media salvos at Vladimir Putin and what they could mean for the Russia-Ukraine war. And senior Supreme Court reporter Lawrence Hurley answers a reader question about a notable provision tucked into the House budget bill that passed recently.
— Scott Bland
Elon Musk's missed opportunity
By Jonathan Allen
Elon Musk stood next to President Donald Trump in the Oval Office on Friday, but the physical proximity belied a growing philosophical divide between two of the world's most powerful men, resulting in the tech mogul's abrupt announcement that he is departing Washington — without having achieved his goal of decimating the federal government.
'He came, he saw, he folded,' Steve Bannon, a senior White House adviser during Trump's first term who is influential with the working-class wing of Trump's MAGA base, said in a text exchange with NBC News.
Musk, who stood with his arms folded across his chest as he and Trump took questions, sported a bruise near his right eye — an unmistakable metaphor for his tumultuous government service — that he said was incurred while playing with his 5-year-old son X.
Trump took a more charitable view of Musk's tenure during a sprawling news conference in which he also declined to rule out pardoning Sean 'Diddy' Combs, who is standing trial on charges of sex trafficking and other alleged crimes; said he dislikes 'the concept' of former first lady Jill Biden being forced to testify before Congress about her husband's mental fitness; and predicted again that Iran is on the cusp of making a deal that would suspend its pursuit of nuclear weapons.
'He had to go through the slings and the arrows, which is a shame because he's an incredible patriot,' Trump said of Musk.
Trump and Musk both contended that DOGE will continue to wring out savings by rooting out waste and fraud without Musk as its face.
'This is not the end of DOGE, but really the beginning,' Musk said, vowing to reach the trillion-dollar mark in cuts by the middle of next year. At the same time he spoke of cutting government spending, Musk lauded Trump's remodeling of the Oval Office.
'I love the gold on the ceiling,' he said.
Musk has argued that inertia throttled his efforts to reduce government spending — a conclusion that raises questions about whether he was naive about the challenge of the mission he undertook.
'The federal bureaucracy situation is much worse than I realized,' he told The Washington Post this week. 'I thought there were problems, but it sure is an uphill battle trying to improve things in D.C., to say the least.'
The next steps as Trump vents fury at Putin
By Kristen Welker
President Donald Trump has ramped up the rhetoric attacking Russian President Vladimir Putin, but so far there's no teeth behind it.
After months of cutting Putin slack on the world stage and clashing with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump has undergone a stark rhetorical shift in recent days.
He's taken to social media to blast Putin for having gone ' absolutely crazy ' and for 'needlessly killing a lot of people' including Ukrainian citizens 'for no reason whatsoever.' He has warned that 'what Vladimir Putin doesn't realize is that if it weren't for me, lots of really bad things would have already happened to Russia, and I mean REALLY BAD. He's playing with fire!'
Trump appears to now be warming to the belief many Western leaders have held for years — that Putin isn't seriously pushing for peace, outside of total Russian victory. In recent weeks, we've seen some of the biggest bombardments of the entire war, including a massive drone attack in Kyiv that came in the shadow of a prisoner exchange between Russia and Ukraine.
None of this means Trump is buddy-buddy with Zelenskyy now, and he criticized the Ukrainian as 'stubborn' during Friday remarks in the Oval Office, even as he underscored his disappointment with Putin.
Meanwhile, the issue of sanctioning Russia and sending aid to Ukraine obviously splits the GOP, and it doesn't necessarily sit well with the 'America First' wing of the GOP that Trump commands. But if Trump wants to act, as former Vice President Mike Pence told me he recommended during our conversation earlier this month, he has arrows in his quiver.
Earlier this week on 'Meet the Press Now,' former U.S. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul told us that the only way to convince Putin to come to the negotiating table is to convince him he can't advance on the battlefield. While one might think the West is tapped out when it comes to sanctions, McFaul said there's a lot more on the table, including seizing more assets or banning Russia's 'shadow fleet' that ships oil from docking at Western ports.
And just a few days ago, Iowa GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley, an elder statesman in the Senate, called on Trump to be as 'decisive' in new sanctions against Russia as he's been in his push against Harvard University.
So if Putin has run out of leash with Trump, then what's the president waiting for?
Join us Sunday when we talk about this and a flurry of other important domestic and international issues with House Speaker Mike Johnson and Georgia Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock.
✉️ Mailbag: Congress and the courts
Thanks to everyone who emailed us! This week's reader question is on an under-the-radar provision in Republicans' 'big, beautiful bill.'
'I heard that the bill contains language that takes away a judge's authority to hold someone in contempt when they don't comply with the court's orders. Is that true? I've seen a lot about the financial implications but nothing on this.'
To answer this, we turned to senior Supreme Court reporter Lawrence Hurley. Here's his response:
The House bill does indeed include a provision that would limit the ability of federal judges to hold people in contempt for violating court orders. (Read it here.)
The Republican-backed measure comes amid considerable pushback on the right against a number of judges who have not only blocked Trump administration policies but have also questioned whether the administration is complying with rulings and at least considered contempt proceedings.
The provision in question would seek to limit the ability of judges to pursue contempt findings by withholding federal funds that could be used to enforce such a ruling unless the plaintiff posted a bond when seeking a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction.
But there is no guarantee the Senate will include the language in its version of the bill, in part because it may fall foul of rules intended to ensure budget bill provisions have a direct link to federal revenues.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
13 minutes ago
- Reuters
Ukraine's Zelenskiy says Ukraine will attend Istanbul talks on Monday
KYIV, June 1 (Reuters) - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on Sunday that Ukraine will attend a meeting in Istanbul on Monday proposed by Russia. "I outlined (Ukraine's) positions ahead of the meeting in Istanbul on Monday," Zelenskiy wrote on Telegram after meeting with his officials. He added that the Ukrainian delegation would once again be headed by Defence Minister Rustem Umerov.
NBC News
22 minutes ago
- NBC News
Trump administration continues to target international students. What to know and what could be next.
Lawsuits, next-day countersuits, backtracking and mass confusion. International students find themselves at the center of a dizzying legal landscape as the Trump administration continues to crack down on immigration. Here's what to know as the Trump administration keeps attempting to put up legal barriers to international students' ability to study in the U.S. What's the latest? Just Wednesday, a judge granted Harvard an extension on an injunction that blocked the administration's attempt last week to stop the Ivy League school from enrolling foreign-born students. An estimated 4,700 or more foreign-born students have been impacted since the Trump administration began revoking visas and terminating legal statuses in March. A few have also been detained in high-profile cases. In just the past two weeks, students across the country were granted a nationwide injunction against the administration. Some scholars have been released from Immigration and Customs Enforcement as well. Meanwhile the State Department announced that it is 'aggressively' targeting an additional group of Chinese scholars out of national security concerns. But in spite of its legal losses, the federal government has doubled down on its efforts to target international students. On Tuesday, the Trump administration stopped scheduling new student visa interviews for those looking to study in the U.S., according to an internal cable seen by NBC News. Meanwhile, the State Department is preparing to expand its social media screening of applicants, the cable said. The next day, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the government would be looking to revoke the visas of Chinese students 'with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.' It's still unclear what 'critical fields' the administration will be looking into and what types of connections to the CCP are under scrutiny. The State Department referred NBC News to comments by spokesperson Tammy Bruce during a news briefing Thursday in which Bruce said the department does not discuss the details of its visa process due to privacy concerns. 'We use every tool that we have to vet and to make sure we know who's coming in,' Bruce said. 'In this particular case, the United States is putting America first by beginning to revoke visas of Chinese students as warranted.' How did the Trump administration revoke the visas and statuses of international students? For months, there was mass confusion among schools and international students about the criteria the government used to abruptly terminate visas and statuses, with little to no notice to students. But in late April, the Department of Homeland Security revealed at a hearing that it used the National Crime Information Center, an FBI-run computerized index that includes criminal history information. The agency said fewer than two dozen employees ran the names of 1.3 million foreign-born students through the index, populating 6,400 'hits.' And from there, many students experienced terminations of their records in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), which maintains information about nonimmigrant students and exchange visitors. The method was sharply criticized by legal and policy experts, who pointed out that the database relies on cities, counties, states and other sources to voluntarily report their data. This means that it may not have the final dispositions of cases, potentially leading to errors in identifying students. At another hearing in April, Elizabeth D. Kurlan, an attorney for the Justice Department, said that going forward, Immigration and Customs Enforcement will not be terminating statuses based solely on findings in the crime information center. She also told the court that ICE would be restoring the legal status of international students who had their records terminated until the agency developed a new framework for revocations. Shortly afterward, an internal memo to all Student and Exchange Visitor Program personnel, which is under ICE jurisdiction, showed an expanded list of criteria for the agency to terminate foreign-born students' legal status in the U.S., including a 'U.S. Department of State Visa Revocation (Effective Immediately).' Though students would typically have the right to due process and defend themselves before their status is terminated, visa revocation itself is now grounds for the termination of status, according to the memo. The administration has also taken aim at students who have been active in pro-Palestine protests, including Columbia student Mahmoud Khalil and Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk, who were both detained in March. Öztürk has since been released from ICE custody. 'Every time I find one of these lunatics, I take away their visas,' Rubio said at a news conference in March. Has anyone been successful in challenging the Trump administration? Students across the U.S. from Georgia to South Dakota have been winning their lawsuits against the Trump administration, with judges siding with plaintiffs and allowing them to stay in the U.S. Last week, a judge issued an injunction blocking the Trump administration from terminating the legal statuses of international students at universities across the U.S. It's the first to provide relief to students nationwide. The day after the Trump administration terminated Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification — a move that would force the university's foreign students, roughly a fourth of its student body, to either transfer or lose their legal status — the Ivy League school sued the administration. And hours later, a judge issued an injunction. In addition to Öztürk, others who were detained are no longer in ICE custody, including Georgetown scholar Badar Khan Suri and Mohsen Mahdawi, a U.S. permanent resident who was born and raised in a refugee camp in the occupied West Bank. The judge in Khan Suri's case ruled that his detention was in violation of the First Amendment, which protects the right to free speech, and the Fifth Amendment, which protects the right to due process. What might be next for international students? Though the recent nationwide injunction provides some relief, students can still be vulnerable to visa revocation. Legal experts say the temporary restraining order blocks the government from arresting or detaining students, or terminating their legal statuses. But it's possible that visas can still be revoked. And many expect the Trump administration to hit back. 'This is a federal district court decision. It is not a final decision, and it seems likely that the executive branch will appeal this decision,' Elora Mukherjee, director of the Immigrants' Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School. Mukherjee also added that the Chinese international students referred to in Rubio's new statement are likely not protected by the injunction either. 'What they're likely to claim in court in defense of this policy is that the secretary of state and the executive branch deserves deference with regard to quote, unquote, foreign affairs,' Mukherjee said. However, with backlash already brewing, Mukherjee said she expects that the policy will be challenged legally, with immigration attorneys and activists arguing that it is unconstitutional. Legal experts said that with many decisions surrounding international students' fate far from decided, foreign-born scholars should first and foremost remain in the country. She also said it's important to seek legal counsel in the event that students are also eligible for other forms of relief, including asylum or other humanitarian visas. Razeen Zaman, director of immigrant rights at the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said it's particularly important for American citizens to speak out against the immigration policies on behalf of foreign-born students, as many of these students may not be able to push back themselves. 'You have to have a certain amount of resources to be able to do that. You have to have a certain amount of connections. There's even some people who are too afraid to seek counsel,' Zaman said. 'U.S. citizens have the most protections. … And the reality is, even if you're stopped at the border, they do have to still let you in as a U.S. citizen.' And given how the Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Trump administration to revoke the temporary legal status of more than 500,000 immigrants from four Latin American countries, Zaman said, it's likely that even more groups will be targeted without fierce advocacy and protest. 'This is about the First Amendment today. It's Chinese people, the CCP, whoever they decide is tied to the Chinese government,' Zaman said.
The Guardian
32 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘Insidious fear' fills universities as Trump escalates conflict in commencement season
It is graduation season in the United States and with it a tradition of commencement speeches to departing college students, usually from high-profile figures who seek to inspire those leaving academia. But, as with many things under Donald Trump's second term in the White House, commencement season this year has been far from normal, especially as the US president and his allies have waged conflicts against the nation's universities. Amid concerns about the Trump administration undermining US residents' free speech rights, some commencement ceremonies featured speakers who warned about the president's abuses of power, while others hosted pop culture figures who delivered more innocuous remarks, and Trump himself went off script at the nation's most famous military academy. The politically charged speeches could hold increased significance this year as university leaders grapple with how to respond to Trump's efforts to exert more control over federal funding to schools; campus protests and curriculum; and which international students are allowed to study in the United States, according to people who study such addresses. 'A lot of folks this spring will turn to these commencement speeches, especially now with the advent of social media, which allows us to distribute the clips much more widely, to see what people are saying in this critical moment, where our democracy is so fragile,' said James Peterson, a Philadelphia columnist and radio show host who has written about commencement addresses. US graduation ceremonies have long provided a forum for speakers to not only deliver a message to students but also to shape public opinion. In 1837, the philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson delivered a speech at Harvard University titled the 'The American Scholar' in which he argued that colleges 'can only highly serve us, when they aim not to drill but to create; when they gather from far every ray of various genius to their hospitable halls and by the concentrated fires, set the hearts of their youth on flame'. US supreme court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr described the speech as the country's 'intellectual Declaration of Independence'. More recently, some of the most famous speeches include ones from then president John F Kennedy in 1963 at American University, David Foster Wallace in 2005 at Kenyon College, and Apple founder Steve Jobs the same year at Stanford University. While plenty of commencement speakers have sparked a backlash – after delivering another speech in 1938, Emerson was banned from Harvard for 30 years – the stakes could be higher this year for universities that host speakers who criticize Trump, who has withheld federal funding from universities that didn't agree to his demands. In recent weeks, the administration halted Harvard's ability to enroll international students and ordered federal agencies to cancel all contracts with the school because it 'continues to engage in race discrimination' and shows a 'disturbing lack of concern for the safety and wellbeing of Jewish students'. A Harvard spokesperson said was the ban on international students was 'unlawful' and 'undermines Harvard's academic and research mission'. 'This is not a time when colleges and universities are trying to attract a ton of attention,' said David Murray, the executive director of the Professional Speechwriters Association. 'Nobody wants to put their head above the fray and give anybody any reason to single them out as the next Harvard.' But some speakers have delivered fiery remarks aimed at Trump. Wake Forest University hosted Scott Pelley, a longtime reporter for the famous CBS show 60 Minutes, amid turmoil at the network. The program's executive producer resigned because he said he no longer had editorial independence. Trump had filed a lawsuit against CBS's parent company, Paramount, over an interview with his Democratic opponent, Kamala Harris. Paramount's controlling shareholder, Shari Redstone, wants to sell the company and needs approval from federal regulators. She reportedly wants to settle the case. Pelley did not mention Trump by name but said: 'Journalism is under attack. Universities are under attack. Freedom of speech is under attack. An insidious fear is reaching through our schools, our businesses, our homes and into our private thoughts.' The speech sparked backlash from rightwing media. Laura Ingraham, a Fox News host, said Pelley was a 'a whiny liberal and still bitter'. At University of Minnesota, Tim Walz, the state's governor and a former vice-presidential candidate, described the president as a 'tyrant' and called the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) 'Trump's modern-day Gestapo'. The Department of Homeland Security account on X posted that Walz's remarks were 'absolutely sickening' and that Ice officers were facing a '413% increase in assaults'. The department did not respond to the Guardian's question about how many assaults have occurred and what time periods they were comparing. Ben Krauss, the CEO of the speechwriting firm Fenway Strategies and former chief speechwriter for Walz, said he thinks commencement addresses are important because there are not many opportunities where you have 'a captive audience, even if it's for 10 minutes'. For speakers to 'break through to society is probably a tall order, but I think the goal of a good commencement should be just to break through to the people in the room', said Krauss, who shared that his agency worked on more than a dozen commencements this year but did not disclose which ones. Still, Murray isn't sure the speeches from Pelley and Walz will have a big impact. 'Pelley's speech made a lot of people mad on the right, and I don't know how much it did on the left or in the center,' Murray said. 'It's really hard to give a speech that really unites everyone, and giving a speech that divides everyone just seems to make the problems worse.' Trump also took political shots during his address to graduating cadets at the United States military academy at West Point. He said past leaders 'subjected the armed forces to all manner of social projects and political causes, while leaving our borders undefended and depleting our arsenals to fight other countries' wars'. He also spoke about postwar housing developer William Levitt, who married 'a trophy wife'. 'I must tell you, a lot of trophy wives, it doesn't work out,' Trump said. 'It's great to hear someone speak truth to power,' Peterson said of Pelley's address. 'It's also sobering to hear a president be, as I think, in many folks' perspectives, disrespectful of a longstanding American institution.' Earlier this week, Trump ordered federal agencies to cancel all contracts with Harvard. On Thursday, the school held its commencement ceremony. Meanwhile, a federal judge issued an injunction blocking the administration's efforts to prevent the school from enrolling international students. Many speakers at the school's events over the last week addressed Trump's impact on the school and worldwide. Yurong 'Luanna' Jiang, a Chinese graduate who studied international development, said she grew up believing that the 'world was becoming a small village' and that she found a global community at Harvard, the Associated Press reported. But these days, her worldview has changed. 'We're starting to believe those who think differently, vote differently or pray differently, whether they are across the ocean or sitting right next to us, are not just wrong – we mistakenly see them as evil,' she said. 'But it doesn't have to be this way.' Other commencement speakers included actor Elizabeth Banks, who at alma mater University of Pennsylvania argued that the main problem affecting the world was not race, religion, ability or gender but the extreme concentration of money, and encouraged graduates to 'wrap it up and keep abortion legal'. At Emory University, the artist Usher argued that a college degree still matters 'in a world where credentials can feel overshadowed by clicks and followers and algorithms'. 'But it's not the paper that gives the power; it's you,' Usher said. And then there was Kermit the Frog at University of Maryland, the alma mater of the Muppets' creator, Jim Henson. The frog, voiced by Matt Vogel, told graduates that life is 'like a movie. Write your own ending. Keep believing. Keep pretending.' He then closed by asking the crowd to join him in singing his classic tune, Rainbow Connection. 'Someday we'll find it, the rainbow connection,' they sang. 'The lovers, the dreamers and me.'
