Meet the Press NOW – March 18

provided the inputs that make up this annual threat assessment. You won't answer the question. It is the nature of the imminent threat that the president has to make that determination based on a collection and volume of information and intelligence that he is provided with. It comes after yesterday, the director of National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent, resigned over the war, saying Iran did not pose an imminent threat. Today, CIA director, John Ratcliffe, was asked about that resignation. Listen. I want to ask you, Director John Ratcliffe, yesterday, the head of the National Counterterrorism Center resigned, saying that Iran did not represent an imminent threat to the United States. Is there anything to indicate that Iran had ceased in its nuclear ambitions or in its desire to continue to build ballistic missiles capable of threatening American troops and allies in the Middle East? The senator, no, in fact, the intelligence reflects the contrary. So you disagree with Mr. Kent? I do. It all comes as the war continues to intensify. Yesterday, the Pentagon saying U.S. forces used multiple so-called bunker busters to hit Iranian missile sites near the coast of the Strait of Hormuz. Israel also touting its own military operations, saying today it killed Iran's intelligence minister. Iran's president confirmed his killing and called his death and those of other top Iranian officials, quote, cowardly assassinations. This morning in retaliation, Iran fired... cluster munitions, which you can see right here detonating in midair over Tel Aviv. Joining me now is NBC News, Senior National Security correspondent, Courtney Kubi, NBC News White House correspondent, Garrett Haake, and NBC News International correspondent, Matt Bradley. Thanks to all of you for starting us off. We really appreciate it. So Courtney, let me start with you. I want to play a little bit more of what we heard during today's hearing from Director Tulsi Gabbard. Take a look. The ICSS is the regime in Iran appears to be intact but largely degraded due to attacks on its leadership and military capabilities. Its conventional military power projection capabilities have largely been destroyed, leaving limited options. Iran's strategic position has been significantly degraded. Courtney, are your sources at the Pentagon? basically saying that that assessment by Tulsi Gabbard is correct? Yeah, a lot of Iran's conventional capabilities have been destroyed. I mean, it's hard to say if it's more than 50% or more than 75%, but when you just look at the sheer number of targets that they've gone after, it would make sense that it's fair to say a large number of them and even a significant number have been destroyed. And that's specifically what we're talking about, the ballistic missiles, their drones, which they still have more drones than I think. the U.S. would like. We now know they've gone after some of their anti-ship cruise missiles. They're trying to take care of the mine problem. And then they've gone after, of course, the conventional Navy and a lot of the Iranian Air Force. So the Pentagon is also saying it struck an Iranian missile site along the Strait of Hormuz. Talk about the significance.

of that and broadly speaking where this stands. So this addresses what has become the biggest issue right now, and that is the Strait of Hormuz and the fact that it remains closed. This was the U.S. used these pretty large bombs that are known as Bunker Busters because it means they can basically penetrate down through hardened structures like where these anti-ship cruise missiles were being stored along the coast of the Strait of Hormuz, and they presented a direct... threat. We've seen Iran fire these missiles at ships, even in recent days. They're difficult to defend against unless you have air cover or you have some sort of anti-missile system on the ship, which a lot of these commercial ships do not, frankly. So when you look at it from the operationally, this was a win. This was a big win, but it's not going to make an immediate difference in reopening the strait. Iran still has... drones, they still have mines, and they still have their fastboats, including some of these unmanned fast boats, which we don't talk a whole lot about, but also really present a direct threat, because they can send them out in swarms, all it takes is one to smash into one of those tankers. And frankly, again, we've talked about this on the show. They don't even have to hit. They just have to threaten. Well, Courtney, let's talk big picture about the Strait of Formos, because the president... over the weekend had started this campaign to get NATO allies on board with helping to secure the Strait of Formuz. As of this Wednesday, we are not aware of any allies raising their hands to come forward. We heard President Trump yesterday say he can go it alone. He doesn't need NATO clearly. irate with the fact that no one is stepping forward to help. Why didn't the administration build a coalition of the willing on the front end of this? So it's hard to say. If I had to guess, I would say it's probably because there is such a mistrust of allies right now on the part of the Trump administration. And so I could see that they didn't want to let them know that something was going to happen in advance that could potentially leak out that they were going to plan this. when they were going to potentially conduct this mission. But it's also not surprising to me that they would try to do this sort of backwards diplomacy, right, where they begin this operation and then they start asking for help. And it comes on the heels of the president and the Secretary of Defense, demeaning the allies contribution and other conflicts. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, openly demeaning allies who fought and died. alongside U.S. troops in Afghanistan and elsewhere. So I'm not surprised that these allies wouldn't want to step forward. The reality is it is too dangerous for any Navy, no matter what nation they are coming from, unless you're from Iran, it's too dangerous for any of those ships to be trying to sail through the Strait of Hormuz right now. So I'm not surprised allies are not stepping forward. All right, Courtney Kubi, thank you so much for starting us off today. We really appreciate it. Garrett Hake, let me turn to you at the White House. And let's talk about the messaging that we are hearing from the president. It continues to evolve, particularly in talking about the Strait of Hormuz. What are your sources telling you about the strategy and his stance today?

It's hard to get much real information on this, Kristen. You may hear the helicopters behind me. The president is going to land here back at the White House in a short time, and perhaps we'll hear something new from him then. But he has been on a journey the last couple of days when it comes to what the position is on the Strait of Hormuz and who should be defending it. I suppose we should say the active position is the one he posted on Truth Social this morning, which is essentially we broke it, but somebody else will have to buy it and clean it up. The president's suggesting that others should be responsible for the strait. perhaps people who are more dependent on energy that is exported through it will come in and police it. That comes after a period of several days where he suggested the U.S. Navy would do that work, then where he suggested he's been reaching out to allies and that some of them were even on the way into the region to send ships before saying, in fact, we don't need their help at all, and then suggesting, again, today, that other countries be responsible for it. I think it speaks to the reality that, as Courtney was just laying out, this is a very difficult actual problem to solve. here and that nobody really wants to be at the tip of the spear of this particular military situation right now. But again, the president's current position doesn't show a lot of understanding of the nuances of these energy markets. It's not just the consumers of these products that would be affected. It would be the whole global market for everything that comes out of the Middle East, basically, that would be disrupted. Yeah, we are starting to see signs of that already. Garrett, look, we know that there have been divisions within the administration over starting this war in the first place. Vice President JD Vance initially not on board with moving forward with this war. Now the position has been that he's all in. We know that he spoke today. What did we learn? What did he say about his position on the war today? Yeah, if JD Vance is the most prominent, you know, thought to be internal skeptic of this war, his answer to a question about this today was noteworthy because I think it could probably also be conceived as the way he might be talking about this internally, too, essentially saying that you're going to ultimately have to trust the decisions that the president makes and that that's what he's doing. Listen to this. I guarantee the President United States is not interested in getting us, you know, in the kind of... long-term quagmires that we've seen in years past, I know the president, I know the way that he thinks about America's national security, that is not a risk with this president at all. Kristen, I don't think, you know, Lyndon Johnson or George W. Bush wanted to get into the military quagmire's they found themselves in either. But I think what you're seeing here is a line that JD Vance is using that other skeptics of involvement in Iran could probably point to, which is consistent across the administration that ultimately it's the president who makes decisions and in Donald Trump they trust. Yeah, really fascinating to hear him answer that question. Garrett, we know the president attended a dignified transfer for six U.S. service members today. What do we know about that solemn event? I know it was closed to the press.

Yeah, very little, Kristen. I mean, the families ultimately make the decision about whether they want these transfers to be open to any kind of media today. They chose not to. This was for all six crew members of that KC 135 that crashed in the Iraqi desert. I guess it was back over the weekend. Those pictures there of the president arriving in Dover are really all we have. The press pool went back on Air Force One to await the event's conclusion. As I mentioned, the helicopters, still I can hear them behind me, which means the president is on his way back, but hasn't. landed back here at the White House. He had a pretty significant contingent of lawmakers, the Secretary of Defense with him. Perhaps we'll get more in just a few minutes. All right, Garrett, Hayk, at the White House for us, Garrett, thank you so much. Matt Bradley, let me turn to you. Israel killed yet another Top Iranian official last night. This time, the Minister of Intelligence. What do you know about the role he played in the significance of this? Well, he was the head of the intelligence operation in Iran, which means that he played a singular role in suppressing dissent, in controlling internal messaging by the regime in sort of counter espionage. The whole gamut of issues that would have made him basically a very powerful man and one who's very close to the senior leadership. He was assassinated along with two others. Three major figures within the Iranian regime have been killed in just the past. 24 hours, including other people who did similar work. Esmail Khatib is who we're talking about. And then, of course, there was Ali Lerajani before the head of the National Security Council, who was kind of more than just an intelligence guy, more of an actual leader, and really the mover and shaker behind the scenes, even before the senior hominy. was killed the first day of this fighting. So what we're seeing now is the death of yet another senior intelligence official, and one that doesn't necessarily put Trump or Benjamin Netanyahu any closer to finding a leader who they could pluck out and an anoint as the new leader of Iran, one who's more quietest, more cooperative with the West. This was a man who, amongst others, is, by dying, probably going to make that goal even more elusive for those countries who have decided to attack Iran. Wow. Matt, all of this comes as we saw a wave of Iranian attacks overnight, including cluster bombs over Tel Aviv, which is where you are. What was that like to experience that from the ground, Matt? Yeah, we've been seeing cluster bombs being used over Tel Aviv and over Israel for about the past two weeks. In fact, a huge portion of the weapons that the Iranians have been fired have been cluster bombs. Important to note that while the Israelis are saying that cluster bombs, their use by Iran, shows that the Iranians are using indiscriminate weapons that don't necessarily distinguish or aren't necessarily things that can be... aimed properly to avoid civilian casualties. There is a treaty that forbids the use of cluster bombs signed in 2008. Israel is not a party to that. Neither is the United States or Iran or Russia or Ukraine, for that matter. So that's why we've seen cluster bombs being used by the Russians in Ukraine, and now we're seeing them being used.

by the Iranians. I've been speaking to people here, people who are in the military. They say that the cluster bombs aren't necessarily an unusual challenge or a strange risk to the Israeli public, even though they do, by definition, burst in the atmosphere and send little bomblets all around putting a lot of civilians in danger. It's the huge ballistic missiles, the ones that aren't clusters, the ones that don't break up, that are still the primary preoccupation for Israel's military. All right, Matt Bradley, thank you so much. Please continue to stay safe. We really appreciate it. Coming up, Senator Markwayne Mullin, the president's pick to take over the Department of Homeland Security, is grilled on Capitol Hill. As a key Senate Republican announces, he will vote no on his confirmation. Plus... Breaking news, Fed Chair Jerome Powell says the central bank does not know how much the war against Iran could affect the economy as it keeps interest rates steady despite pressure from the president what it means for the economy and inflation and your bottom line ahead. You're watching Meet the Press now.

Traditional home security only alerts you after a break-in, and that's too late. SimpleSafe is changing that. Stop. This is SimplySafe. Police are on the way. We don't just alert. We stop crime before it starts. SimplySafe, plans starting around a dollar a day. Save 50% on your new system with professional monitoring at Simplysafe.com slash SXM or with promo code SXM. Outdoor deterrence requires a Simplysafe Active Guard outdoor protection plan starting at 4999 a month. Visit simplysafe.com slash licenses for alarm license information, Tennessee 2012. Monday AI agents took over my work. And I absolutely love it. Chasing deadlines, writing status reports, updating stakeholders. Agents handle the daily grind now. They live inside Monday.com. So they see the full picture. My work, my team, the whole company. And I don't have to worry about the data. It's safe, which means I'm free to focus on the big stuff, knowing everything runs smoothly in the background. It's completely shifted the way we work. Create your own AI agent in minutes on Monday.com. Yo, it's Jay Uso from WWE, and I'm Jimmy Uso. Chumba Casina and WWE are hyped for the biggest event of the summer, SummerSlan. I know I can't wait. There's nothing better to do while we're waiting than playing Chumba Casino. Sign up today and you could win a VIP experience. With Chumba Casino and with WW4 SummerSlam. So what are you waiting for? Play Chumbo Casino and enter for your chance to win. Let's Chumble. Yeat. No purchase necessary. VGW Group void were prohibited by law. CTNCs, 21 Plus, sponsored by Chumba Casino. Welcome back. We are following developments on Capitol Hill and a potential setback for the president's pick to lead the Department of Homeland Security. Senator Rand Paul, the Republican chair of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, announcing he will oppose fellow Senator Markwayne Mullin's nomination to be DHS Secretary when his committee votes tomorrow. Paul making that announcement after leading Mullen's confirmation hearing today, a hearing that began with this heated exchange between the two. You told the media that I was a freaking snake and that you completely understood why I had been assaulted. I just wonder if someone who applauds violence against their political opponents is the right person to lead an agency that has struggled to accept limits to the proper use of force. I think everybody in this room knows that I'm very blunt and direct to the point. And if I have something to say, I'll say it directly to your face. As far as my terms is the snake in the grass, sir, I work around this room to try to fix problems. I've worked with many people in this room. Seems like you fight Republicans more than you work with us. And as far as me saying that I invoke violence, I don't. I don't think anybody should be hit by surprise. I don't like that. But if I do have something to say, everybody in this room knows I'll come straight to you. I'll say it publicly and I'll say it privately, but I'll never say it behind your back. Republicans control 53 seats in the Senate, but have just a one seat majority on the Homeland Security Committee, which is scheduled to vote tomorrow on whether to advance Mullen's nomination to the full Senate. NBCD News Capitol Hill correspondent, Melanie DeZanona, joins me now. So you just spoke to Senator Rand Paul. What did he say about his decision, Mel?

Well, he was quite fired up. He questioned Mullins' temperament. He said he was not fit to serve in this extremely critical role. And he made very clear that he plans to get vote no, at least in the committee vote tomorrow. Just watch. We're in the midst, I think, of a crisis where there needs to be more direction from the top. And a guy who brawls, a guy who can't even say he's sorry about wishing violence on me and really applauding the attack that happened on me. Can't come to say that. I don't know how he could, from my point of view, be a leader of ICE or Border Patrol. I don't think that kind of person sends the right message to ICE agents who the country at large has said, well, gosh, is there a proper use of force going on? Or do we have to have more rules with our agents so we don't have tragic killings of citizens? Now, Rand Paul has classed with the president on a number of issues. He's also been quite outspoken on Minnesota in the wake of those shootings. So in some ways, not entirely surprising that he came out against Mullen's nomination, but again, just quite remarkable to see him coming out swinging so strongly against one of Trump's nominees. Oh, it's just extraordinary. Let's talk about the math here, Mel. Democrat John Fetterman has indicated he may vote yes to confirm Mullen, which would effectively allow him to be voted out of committee. Is his fate going to come down to a Democrat, Senator John Fetterman? Well, in the committee process, yes, because if Rand Paul votes against him, which we are expecting, that means Mullen will need to pick up a Democrat. So all eyes are on John Fetterman, who has spoken highly of Mullen. Did say he's coming to this process with an open mind. He has not explicitly said how he will vote. But Chris and I would also note, even if he's not able to make it out of committee, technically there are other mechanisms to force this nomination to the floor. So even if fails committee, there are other ways to get this over the finish line. But again, quite extraordinary to see the Republican chairman of this committee come. coming out saying he's a no on the committee vote. Absolutely. And just the fact that there's a question mark over whether he could make it out of committee is just a remarkable place. This is someone who has tried to foster bipartisan relationships. It was assumed he would sort of sail through the confirmation process, although also anticipated tough line of questioning from Democrats. What did we hear there? Yeah, Democrats really wanted answers about how he plans to run immigration enforcement operations. And notably, Mullen really distanced himself from Kristi Noem, who was the one who was just let go from that role. And he even said that he regretted how he talked about Alex Pretti, one of those U.S. citizens who was shot by federal agents in Minnesota. Let's watch that exchange. You called Alex Pretti, quote, a deranged individual that came into cause max damage.

Could we expect those kinds of quick responses if you are confirmed as Secretary? No, Senator. I have a deep amount of respect for you. We've had our differences, but I do respect you. I think I said this privately when we had a conversation. Those words probably should have been retracted. I shouldn't have said that, and Secretary, I wouldn't. The investigation is ongoing. And there is, like I said, there's sometimes going to make a mistake and I own it. That one, I went out there too fast. I was responding immediately without the facts. That's my fault. That won't happen as Secretary. And Melano also said we need to restore trust in the Department of Homeland Security. So very clear he is trying to distance himself and win over some potentially Democrats in that room. All right, Mel Zanona. Thank you so much covering all the angles there for us on Capitol Hill. Really appreciate it. Coming up next, rising gas prices, rising inflation, and now a key decision from the Fed. We're covering multiple developments impacting consumers in the U.S. economy amid the fallout from the war with Iran. Stay with us. I'll meet the press now. Thank you. Traditional home security only alerts you after a break-in, and that's too late. Simpli-Safe is changing that. Stop. This is SimplySafe. Police are on the way. We don't just alert. We stop crime before it starts. SimplySafe, plans starting around a dollar a day. Save 50% on your new system with professional monitoring at Simplysafe.com slash SXM or with promo code SXM. Outdoor deterrence requires a Simplysafe Active Guard outdoor protection plan starting at 4999 a month. Visit simplysafe.com slash licenses for alarm license information, Tennessee 2012. Monday.com AI agents took over my work. And I absolutely love it. Chasing deadlines, writing status reports, updating stakeholders. Agents handle the daily grind now. I stay in the loop only when it matters. Create your own AI agent in minutes on Monday.com. Yo, it's Jay Uso from WWE. And I'm Jimmy Uso. Chumba Casina and WWE are hyped for the biggest event of the summer. Summer swimming. I know I can't wait. There's nothing better to do while we're waiting than playing Chumba Casino. Sign up today and you could win a VIP experience. With Chumba Casino and with WW4 SummerSlam. So what are you waiting for? Play Chumbo Casino and enter for your chance to win. Let's Chumble. Yeat. No purchase necessary. VGW Group void were prohibited by law. CT&Cs, 21 Plus, sponsored by Chumba Casino.

Welcome back, and we are following breaking news on the economy, the Federal Reserve, voting to keep interest rates steady. Once again, bucking the president's demands to juice the economy by lowering them. The central bank announcing that it would not... cut rates, in part because of inflation, saying it's still too high, with the war in Iran sending oil and gas prices soaring and threatening to disrupt the global economy. The decision coming hours after the Labor Department announced wholesale inflation in February was higher than expected. rising seven-tenths of a percent from the prior months and 3.4 percent from a year ago. Most of that data collected before the Iran conflict began. Fed shared Jerome Powell answering questions from reporters this afternoon, saying it's still too early for the Fed to know what the war's long-term effects on the economy will be. The implications of events in the Middle East for the U.S. economy are uncertain. In the near term, higher energy prices will push up overall inflation, but it is too soon to know the scope and duration of the potential effects on the economy. The U.S. economy is doing, you know, pretty well. It's just we don't know what the effects of this will be, and really no one does. Stocks ending the day lower across the board with the Dow falling more than 700 points. NBC News Business and Data Correspondent. Brian Chung joins me now. Brian, you were there with Fed Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. Thanks for being here. So what else did he have to say about the overall state of the economy? Yeah, well, he said that the economy is looking okay. But of course, the big thing hanging over this economy is the conflict in Iran. People are already feeling the pain at the pump in the form of gas prices that on average are up. over 90 cents since the conflict began. And the Fed chairman was interestingly saying, look, we don't know what happens from here. In fact, he was unbelievably frank in this conversation. He said nobody knows. You know, the economics effects could be bigger. They could be smaller. It all depends on how long this conflict goes on. And the Federal Reserve and a room of economists, they just simply don't know. And for that reason, the Fed chairman is saying, let's just figure out what's going on in this economy. They held interest rates right now. The question is how long do they continue to hold interest rates while they see how this is going to impact the economy. Yeah, the big question on everyone's mind. What will the long-term impact be? And he made some news about his own future, too. What did he say? Yeah, well, again, we have to remember that there are some political undercurrents under this chairman as well. His term ends in May. The president has named Kevin Warsh his successor. But you have Thom Tillis in the Senate Banking Committee saying, I'm not going to advance anyone until there is a resolution with the Department of Justice's investigation. into potential cost overruns in a building renovation project at the Federal Reserve, the Fed chairman saying very clearly, and I think the verbate is important, he said, quote, I have no intention of leaving the board until the investigation is well and truly over with transparency and finality. So translation, even if his term expires in May, if there's not a resolution to this Department of Justice investigation, he's going to stay because guess what, Kevin Warsh is not going to get into that role because Thom Tillis is going to stop it. So how long does that...

game of chicken last, that's really anyone's guess. Extraordinary defiance today. And you also asked him about economic concerns on Main Street. What did he say there? Yeah, well, again, when the Federal Reserve has these press conferences, they talk in very pie in the sky, big economics lingo. So I asked him, what about affordability? How are you thinking about that? Take a listen to our exchange. How does the Fed's independence play into the ability to address affordability? Independence is what allows us to do our jobs, and stable prices is half of our mandate. Look at every advanced economy that looks anything like the United States, anywhere in the world, in a market economy, in a democracy, and you'll see, you know, pretty much... central bank independence that looks a lot like, in some cases, stronger than what we have. But it's critical that we have that so that we can do the things when we need to do them to preserve price stability. And Kristen, as we know, the Fed chairman is so careful not to comment directly on the president who has been saying in the lead up to this meeting that he wants the Fed to more aggressively cut interest rates. But the Fed chairman is saying independence is critical. And with regards to affordability, he said it's a very real thing. He pointed to things like insurance costs being up. That's something that's certainly a lot of American families feel in addition to now prices at the pump. All right. Brian, Sean, great job pressing the Fed chair. Thank you for being here. It's great to have you in D.C. All right. After the break, if it's Wednesday, we have election results. It was a night dominated by Democratic divisions, and we've got Steve Kornacki at the big board to break it all down. Plus, the night's biggest winners, Juliana Stratton, meets the press fresh off her Senate primary victory as Democrats ramp up their anti-Trump messaging ahead of the midterms. Keep it right here for all of that on Meet the Press Now.

Welcome back. If it's Wednesday, we have election results, including in the Illinois Democratic Senate primary, where lieutenant governor, Juliana Stratton, beat Congressman Raja Christo Morthy and Congresswoman Robin Kelly in the race for retiring Senator Dick Durbin's seat. Stratton celebrating with supporters in Chicago last night and pledging to be a fighter in Washington look. Tonight's message is clear. We're ready to take our democracy back into our own hands. We never lost sight of what's most important. And that is courage. Courage inspired me to run. Courage powered this campaign. And courage will bring this fight straight to Donald Trump's door. And we will speak with the lieutenant governor in just a moment. But first, NBC News chief data analyst, Steve Kornacki, is at the big board to break down that big win. Walk us through how the lieutenant governor pulled this off, Steve. Yeah, Chris, I mean, an upset and I think a broader coalition, clearly, that she put together than many were expecting. What went into that for Stratton? Well, first of all, we expected she was going to do well in the city of Chicago, and the city of Chicago produces. like a third of all the votes statewide in a Democratic primary in Illinois. She certainly did do well in Chicago. She won it over her nearest opponent, Raja Krishnamorthy, by about a two-to-one margin, like a 20-point victory in this city of Chicago. It was, that was fairly expected here. She would do well like that. But then in the suburbs, immediately outside of Chicago in Cook County, okay, Cook County has five million people in it. She also won the suburbs. That was not expected. She won the Cook County suburbs over Krishna-Morty as well. And then when you got outside of Chicago and the Chicagoland area, look, you could see the color coding here. Stratton did a lot better downstate. I think there was a lot of doubt that when you got outside of Chicago land, you know, how she would do there. And yet you see her. in some population centers here. Now, I think there is sort of one dynamic you see here. There is a bit of a class aspect of it here where Raja Krishna-Morthy did well in a blue-collar place like Rockford. This is Moline over here, the Quad Cities. He did well there. Peoria, more blue-collar. He did well in those sort of older blue-collar cities. But places where you have more sort of white-collar professionals, college-educated around the state capital in Springfield, in those metro-east suburbs outside St. Louis and St. Clair in Madison counties. Stratton was winning there. She was winning there big. And I think one thing you can do here looking at this map where she had strength, places where there were high concentrations of college degrees. DeKalb County, Northern Illinois University, McDonough County, Western Illinois University, Jackson County, Southern Illinois University, McLean County, Illinois State University, and Champaign, University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign. All the big... college towns, college counties. She won all of those on top of what she got out of Chicago in its suburbs. All right. Democrats clearly watching that playbook very closely. Steve Kornacki, I know it was a late night. Thanks for joining us. Really appreciate it. And joining me now, fresh off her primary victory is Illinois Lieutenant Governor, Julianna Stratton. Thank you so much for joining us, Lieutenant Governor. Really appreciate it.

Thank you for having me. Well, congratulations on your win last night. I do want to start with your reaction to the victory. You do live in a reliably blue state. What is your strategy heading into November? Well, the strategy is to keep doing what I've been doing and why we were so successful last night. You know, I think that there's a lot of frustration with what's happening in Washington. And what I heard from voters is that they were really looking for someone to fight for them. They wanted somebody who was not going to sort of set their own agenda, get to Washington, and forget who they represented, but someone who would listen to the voters and take a message that really reflected what matters to everyday people. And that's exactly what I did. I'm going to spend the next several months of this general campaign doing the exact same thing, talking to voters, making sure that I am addressing what matters to them and letting them know that at a time where they're looking for someone who has the energy, new energy, to meet this moment that I am the fighter that they're looking for. Let me ask you, you got support, not surprisingly, from J.B. Pritzker, who endorsed your campaign. He also contributed to a PAC that backed your campaign. What do you say to voters who might see that kind of boost from a billionaire, even one who's a Democrat, at odds with your broader progressive message? Well, first of all, I'm grateful for the support and friendship of Governor J.B. Pritzker. Remember, the governor and I have served together as partners in governance for the last seven years here in the state of Illinois. We have worked side by side, and we have delivered for the people of Illinois. We've set out to do big things, and we have raised the minimum wage. We've made Illinois a real island for reproductive freedom in the Midwest. We have created thousands of good-paying jobs. put us on a path to a clean energy future. So I know that the governor saw that not only my work ethic, but the leadership that I've provided in this state. And that's why he supported me. And certainly I'm grateful to have his support. Well, I want to ask you a question. I asked the mayor of New York, Zohran Mamdani. I asked if he believes billionaires should exist. When he was a candidate, he said no. And I'm curious where you stand. Do you believe billionaires should exist? Well, first of all, you know, let's talk about what we really need to be focused on, and that is ending the wealth gap. And that's why the message that I am bringing to people day to day is how we need to raise wages, how we need to make health care more affordable, how we need to give families, working class families and middle class families a tax break and pay for it with a tax increase on those making a million dollars or more. Here in Illinois, as you know, that J.B. Pritzker and I both. fought for a fair tax in our state because of some of the fact that

the tax rate should not be reflective where somebody who's making a billion dollars is paying a tax rate that's lower than somebody who's, you know, in working and barely making ends meet. So that's something that we need to shift. This is going to require systemic work. And it's the kind of fight that I want to bring to Washington. When I talk about bringing a fight for everyday working families, that's exactly what I mean. How do we make life more affordable? How do we close the wealth gap? How do we make sure that we expand access to opportunity so everyone can thrive. Let me ask you about some of your policies. As you know, there is a national debate right now over ICE. And polling from our NBC News decision desk last month found that reforming ICE is more popular than abolishing it. Even among Democrats, 50% say it should be reformed. You say ICE should be abolished. Are you concerned that your position is actually farther than the party wants to go on ICE? Well, I always look at what we have witnessed right here in the city of Chicago with Operation Midway Blitz. Remember, we have a president who said that he was going to go after the worst of the worst. And what we saw was tamale vendors being snatched off the street, daycare providers being stuffed into unmarked vehicles by masked agents. with no due process, no warrants, and the terror of Operation Midway Blitz continues in the city of Chicago and the state of Illinois. And what people really want is they want to know that there's going to be some accountability, and I've made it clear that I don't think that this agency can be reformed. We need to do something different. We need to take a holistic approach and how to get people a true path to legal citizenship, how we can invest in immigration judges and social services and community-based resources. But what does not work, and I don't think anyone would say it does, is criminalizing our immigrant neighbors. That's unacceptable, and I've made it clear that ICE and CBP needs to get out of American cities. And in Illinois, we're going to make sure that we hold these bad actors accountable. Well, if not ICE, if not DHS, which agency should be in charge of immigration and deportation? Well, like I said, we need to think about what could be different. Remember, DHS was created as a counterterrorism agency. And so right off the very bat, you start with a punitive approach. When you put ICE under DHS, you already start thinking about our immigrant communities through that punitive lens. And that in and of itself is not... something that's going to really focus on how we provide support and really get people on the path to citizenship. So let's start thinking through a holistic standpoint of what can look differently. How do we make sure that people are getting... access to the resources they need. How do we provide a pathway for DACA recipients and dreamers? Work that, of course, Senator Dick Durbin has led on during his time in the United States Senate. There are many other things that we can do to get to the actual issue of making sure that people can have legal immigration status. But what's not going to get us on that path is snatching people off the streets.

Certainly not with the terror that we've seen right here, not only in Illinois, but in cities and states all over the country, especially blue cities and states. Lieutenant Governor Stratton, let's say you win. Let's say Democrats retake the Senate for the sake of argument. Would you, in fact, advocate for getting rid of the filibuster in order to push your priorities through like abolishing ice? Would you support getting rid of the filibuster? 100%. With the Senate, potentially taking the majority, I would absolutely support that. I mean, look at what we haven't been able to get done, whether it's protecting reproductive freedom, passing common sense gun legislation, protecting voting rights. These are all things that we've been able to do in Illinois, which is why I often talk about how my goal is to bring the Illinois blueprint to Washington, D.C. People want to see us get things done that will better their lives and protect our rights, especially in the wake of a president who is trying to take us backwards. And I believe that we need to protect health care. There's so much more that we can do. And when we overtake and take back the Senate, that's something that I absolutely would support abolishing or at least significantly reforming the filibuster. Well, right now, as you know, there's a big debate over the SAVE Act and Republicans are looking at the possibility of getting rid of the filibuster. Would you support it if they got rid of the filibuster right now? Would that be a good move for the future of the Senate, do you think? Well, let me start by just talking a little bit about what we're seeing this administration do. We are seeing them try to strip away voting rights to suppress the vote and do so much that, you know, is harming our communities. And we're going to see rural communities. We're going to see women. who have been married, and so many others that were going to be kept off the voter rolls if they have their way. So we know that people will have to be on the record with their views, and we're going to have to be ready to stand up and fight back. And I want to see where they're going to be, because if they want to be a party that's taking away voting rights, we need to be prepared to be courageous and bold as Democrats to stand up and fight back. Before I let you go, you are poised if you win to be the sixth black woman ever in the U.S. Senate, ever. And one of three in the current Senate. How significant is that milestone to you? Well, I certainly look forward to representing all of the state of Illinois, but it's not lost on me that... We've only had five black women serve in the United States Senate in history, in history. And so this is an opportunity, as I always say, to make sure that we don't just have policy made for us, but made with us and by us. And the idea that we've made, you know.

made sure that there's been two so far that are serving together. This is the first time we've ever had two black women serving together. And now there's the potential of three. I've always said that there's not a lot of voices like mine in the United States Senate, but there should be. And a voice like mine is desperately needed. And I look forward to making sure that I bring that voice to Washington and that unique perspective and contribute to my own perspective and lived experience to making the best policy for the people that I represent. All right. Well, we will watch your race very closely. Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton, thank you so much for being here. We really appreciate it. Thank you for having me. Coming up next, the panel weighs in on last night's results. And what it all means for the midterm elections in November, keep it right here on Meet the Press Now.

Welcome back. As we've noted, divisions inside the Democratic Party were on full display up and down the ballot in Tuesday's Illinois primaries, giving a glimpse of what could lie ahead as the party tries to retake control of Congress in November. The results were a split decision for progressives and moderates, handing wins to the progressive side with Evanston Péter Magyar, Daniel Biss, and state representative Lashon Ford. Meanwhile, moderates saw victories with former Congresswoman Melissa Bean and County Commissioner Donna Miller. Among the issues animating these races, U.S. support for Israel, which has become a major battle line among Democrats. According to a recent NBC News Decision Desk poll, a majority of Democrats... hold a negative view of Israel, a significant increase compared to just three years ago. And most Democrats now say they sympathize more with Palestinians than Israelis, which marks a major shift over the last decade. Joining me now is our supersized panel NBC national political reporter Ben Kamasar, NBC Capitol Hill correspondent Julie Circon, Josh Orton, former senior advisor to Vice President Harris and current president of demand justice. And Republican strategist Matt Gorman, he's also in end. NBC News contributor. Thanks to all of you for being here. Ben, let me kick it off with you. Walk us through these results last night. What are the implications? They're fascinating implications both for, like you said, the divides and the party between, you know, over Israel policy and sort of the questions about dark money. And we saw. tens of millions of dollars pop up from these secret groups. We don't entirely know who they are. The opponents of them have accused APEC, the pro-Israel lobby group of being part of it. There's some indirect ties there, but we're not sure yet. Broadly, it just is like a banner moment for the, you know, the way the proliferation of secret money in these races, these groups that you're seeing on the screen right now. The voters don't know who was behind them, and yet they played, you know, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. It's a fascinating dynamic moving forward in the, frankly, the largest of this kind of secret money I've seen in a while. And, Julie, we saw this dynamic playing out in New Jersey as well with Analia Mejia's victory. We did. And in that case, APEC actually funded her challenger, Tom Malinowski, right? And that kind of backfired against the group. And this just brings into focus, as Ben was saying, something that I think we're going to continue to hear more of, not less. After Democrats' 2024 losses, they were trying to find an issue where the party felt energized. And I know Ben knows this more than most people trying to track all those issues and how they're polling. But it seems like... In a time where Zohran Mamdani, the mayor of New York City, ran on affordability. And many Democrats want to keep talking about that, the divide over Israel is what's really front and center. Josh, weigh in on this. How do you see this playing out in these remaining primaries in as we head into the general? Well, I think the interesting thing that we're saying is that APEC itself is facing an existential crisis because I think they're actually now a marginal group. If you looked at how they played in the primaries this week,

Most of the time when they spent money in races, they did not stand with the courage of their convictions and talk about, well, you know, with Daniel Biss, here's someone who supports Israel as a Jewish state but doesn't agree with the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This is a race where in the past, like in Michigan, APEC would have weighed in against such a candidate and won like they did supporting Haley Stevens. Here, they supported a candidate with a... a pack that didn't have anything to do with Israel, ran ads that had nothing to do with Israel, and their candidate came in third. And the winner, Daniel Biss, supports Medicare for All. So it's, you know, I think it's one of these things where if they want to actually stand behind their issues and say, you know what, we support Democrats who only support Benjamin Netanyahu Nat and Yahoo at all costs, then they should say that. But short of that, I think they're going to keep losing in a way, unless they make changes. Matt, how do you expect? I expect Republicans to try to capitalize on these divisions within the Democrats. Certainly, I think Republicans have come a lot more aligned with Israel kind of as a country and as a cause in these last, I would say, 10 years or so. It's far more generational though now, I would say, right? You have younger Republicans, younger Democrats. far more skeptical of Israel and the foreign policy, so to speak. And also, too, these are not, I talked to a JD Vance advisor and people in the JD Vance orbit. And when he went down to Ole Miss and a kid asked about the influence of Israel in American politics, not just on the right, not just in the left, the way it was described was that almost a taboo was broken and people were kind of hitting each other. And there was something that was an unsaid thing in the room. And so whether it's on the left or on the right, different forms of it, absolutely. I'm not... Zohran Mamdani is very different than some on the right, like say I talk Tucker Carlson and in different nuances and the like. However, this skepticism of Israel is real and it's interesting how it comes forward. Ben, talk about some of the other big takeaways from Illinois. I just had the opportunity to interview Lieutenant Governor Stratton. Again, she's running in a general election in a reliably blue state. What do you make of her when she had the support of the governor, obviously? She had the support of the governor, but she also had this sort of this close that was really energetic, right? There's this, we're facing in this Democratic Party, what do Democrats want? And she was really, she had that forceful ad that I'm sure, you know, we can't play on TV because it's got a lot of swear words in it. But right, you're kind of capturing, you know, feelings about Democrats and frustration against Trump trying to galvanize that. You know, when you think about the kinds of people, you know, what the Democrats are looking for, they're looking, they're saying they want a fighter. The question is what is that fighter, right? Julianna Stratton presented. a definition of what she thought a fighter was, and it seems to have met the moment for Illinois voters. Julie, let's talk about another state. Let's talk about Texas. All eyes on Texas as we await. Is President Trump going to endorse Senator John Cornyn or Ken Paxton, who has a lot of political baggage? In my phone conversation with President Trump over the weekend, he said, I'll tell you in about a week or so. He said the SAVE Act is going to be front and center and will determine basically his decision. How do you see this playing out and the fact that it's actually too late for one of these candidates to drop out in time to get their name off of the ballot? Yeah, and I tried talking to John Cornyn, pressing him several times as we tried to chase him in the Capitol. He was very evasive, understandably, after his primary night. Look, he didn't want to speak out of turn in front of the president. Clearly, as you mentioned, it is too late. But when it comes to the Save Act, I was struck at an event that the president held in Kentucky where it seemed like every time he said something that's not popular with his base talking about the Warren.

Iran. He threw in a line about the SAVE Act. But wait till you see what Congress passes on securing the elections and voter ID. He also keeps stressing the mail and ballot provision that is not in the state of act, other red meat base issues that aren't even in the state act. But regardless, the president knows it's not going to pass in the Senate. So now they're doing this thing where John Thune is keeping the floor open trying to essentially show the president how hard he's trying. But it's not going to matter for a Texas endorsement, even though John Cornyn suddenly said he's in favor of potentially doing a way the filibuster, there's not the votes to make that happen anyway. Matt, what are the implications of this? James Talarico starting his general election campaign. Republicans are eager to have a candidate to face off against Talleyco. The polls show John Cornyn does better when he's pitted against James Talarico. But the president told me no, he thinks they're both electable. I think I'm not surprised I'm saying that now. I will point out, right? having your name pulled off the ballot and deadline to drop out are two different things. We often see with presidential primaries, you'll see some people still be in a primary in a state, yet they're not actually running and they get a minimal percent of the vote. So there's a difference there. I think, you know, the SAVE Act was in many ways, Ken Paxton's Hale, Mary, that he connected on when it seemed like there was momentum behind a corner endorsement in those days or even hours after that Texas primary. Ken Paxton kind of pulled it out of the SAVE Act out of nowhere, and at least for a while, got the president to hold off on that endorsement. We'll see if it lasts a little longer. Is there a concern amongst Republicans, though this is getting dragged out? I think, as we all know, Trump is not one to do and wait at his own time. He likes a little drama. I'm not surprised that he played it out a little longer. Josh, what's the view in Democratic circles? Is there a sense that, well, actually, in the state of Texas, yes, Ken Paxton. could be electable, John Corning could be electable. I think the fact that we're even talking about the Senate race in Texas as a winnable race actually is a kind of a bellwether for how it might go with Republicans this November. The second thing I would say is, and I don't normally like to think this way, if I'm a Republican down-ballot candidate or a Republican thinking about seeking higher office next year, the year after, and I'm looking at how Trump is weighing in here or not weighing in, I'm thinking to myself... What exactly does the president believe in? And what exactly does the party look like after he's president or after he endorses in a race? What does he believe in? If he can't make a call between these two candidates, exactly what does the Trump Republican Party stand for? Ben, with our final 30 seconds here. Democrats haven't won a Texas Senate seat in more than three decades. Are the conditions... ripe for them to do it this year? They're more ripe than they've been in a while in the sense of I've covered Texas for more than a decade. And I remember when these races were, they couldn't even put up together real candidates to run statewide. So yes, there's an improvement. I think there's a lot of skepticism about what the kind of money it would take and sort of where it falls in the hierarchy for people as far as trying to make those investments. All right, guys. Great panel. Thank you so much for being here. Ben, Julie, Josh, and Matt, really appreciate it. And we are back tomorrow with more Meet the Press now. There's more ahead on... NBC News Now.

Traditional home security only alerts you after a break-in, and that's too late. SimplySafe is changing that. Stop. This is SimplySafe. Police are on the way. We don't just alert. We stop crime before it starts. SimplySafe, plans starting around a dollar a day. Save 50% on your new system with professional monitoring at Simplysafe.com slash SXM or with promo code SXM. Outdoor deterrence requires a Simplysafe Active Guard outdoor protection plan starting at 4999 a month. Visit simplysafe.com slash licenses for alarm licensed information, Tennessee 2012.