CHUCK TODD:
This Sunday: a shot in the arm.
SANDRA LINDSAY:
I feel like healing is coming.
CHUCK TODD:
Americans begin receiving Pfizer's Covid vaccine.
HEALTHCARE WORKER:
It's safe, it's ok and we need to do it.
DR. DEANNE HALL:
A little bit of a sore arm, a little achy muscle, but no fever, headache or anything unusual.
CHUCK TODD:
And Moderna's vaccine is on the way:
DR. SALAM SALMAN:
I think this is the most significant accomplishment in medicine over the past, you know, 100 years.
CHUCK TODD:
But the pandemic is raging, with more than 300,000 Americans now dead.
HEALTHCARE WORKER:
I have to be the one who says, "I'm sorry, you can't come to see your loved one.”
CHUCK TODD:
I'll talk to the former and likely future Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy. Plus, compromising science. Two former CDC officials go public with claims the Trump administration put politics over science and blunted efforts to fight the pandemic.
REP. JIM CLYBURN:
Decisions are being made outside of the scientific world by people with no expertise.
CHUCK TODD:
Kyle McGowan and Amanda Campbell join me this morning in their first television interview. Also, that suspected Russian hack.
JOHN BOLTON:
This is huge across the board. You can not underestimate its significance.
CHUCK TODD:
A growing list of government agencies, private companies and think tanks targeted, a scope never before seen and not fully understood.
SEN. MITT ROMNEY:
Really the modern equivalent of almost Russian bombers reportedly flying undetected over the entire country.
CHUCK TODD:
I'll talk to Senator Mitt Romney of Utah. Joining me for insight and analysis are: NBC News chief White House correspondent Hallie Jackson, Rich Lowry, editor of National Review and Yamiche Alcindor, White House correspondent for PBS NewsHour. 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 Chuck Todd.
CHUCK TODD:
Good Sunday morning. There are two ways to look at the Covid-19 crisis today. Once again, there is real reason for optimism. Americans have begun receiving the Pfizer vaccine and this weekend Moderna's vaccine was authorized for emergency use, adding millions more doses to be rolled out starting this morning especially in more rural parts with normal freezers. All this offers the kind of hope we've been longing for throughout this crisis. At the same time, thought, the pandemic continues to tear through the country. The four highest Covid case counts since the Coronavirus hit were recorded just last week, as were four of the eight highest daily death totals, including the top two. As we've noted, we're now experiencing a 9/11 every day, and it’s worse than a 9/11 on some days. After September 11th, the government created a commission to study what went wrong. How did we miss the clues? Our question this morning: Is it time to establish a 9/11-like commission to study how significant parts of our government missed this -- chose to dismiss the obvious danger making it impossible for health officials to do their jobs. Some things undeniably have gone right, like those vaccines created by our scientists in record-breaking time. But there are many other areas to probe: Like why was the nationwide Covid testing system so deeply flawed? Or the consequences of a president who spent his energy denying the pandemic, mocking safety measures like mask wearing and social distancing. Or allegations that the Trump administration increasingly exerted influence over the CDC's messaging and data to play down the severity of the virus. Our resulting loss of trust in government will only make it harder to fight this pandemic at the very moment people need to be persuaded to take the vaccine and bring this horror to an end.
MAYOR ERIC GARCETTI:
We expect to have more dead bodies than we have spaces in morgues for them.
CHUCK TODD:
As the coronavirus crisis gets worse --
BETH BLADES:
We have patients just waiting for days for a bed.
CHUCK TODD:
-- so does another crisis: trust in government, already declining for decades -- now chipped away by the federal government's massive failure in handling the pandemic. This week, two former CDC officials, Kyle McGowan and Amanda Campbell, went public charging political interference with the agency and pressure to water down public health guidance. Former HHS science adviser Paul Alexander, installed by President Trump, pushed for a herd immunity strategy, writing in a July email: "Infants, kids, teens, young people, young adults, middle aged with no conditions etc. have zero to little risk. So we use them to develop herd. We want them infected”
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
You'll develop herd -- like a herd mentality. It's going, it’s going to be herd developed.
CHUCK TODD:
Last week, another CDC official testified that Director Robert Redfield told her to destroy an email from Alexander showing he attempted to interfere with weekly reports on the virus he believed were unflattering to President Trump.
REP. JIM CLYBURN:
Decisions are being made outside of the scientific world by people with no expertise.
CHUCK TODD:
The political meddling has eroded trust in the agency. In a Gallup poll just 31% of Americans say the CDC has communicated a "clear plan of action" in response to COVID. 33% say the same of President Trump.
REPORTER:
How can the American people trust you on the pandemic when you’re contradicting the head of the CDC in your own administration?
PRES. DONALD TRUMP: Because of the great job we’ve done.
CHUCK TODD:
The politicizing of the virus has turned health officials into public punching bags. At least 181 state and local public health leaders in 38 states have resigned, retired or been fired since April 1st, according to an investigation by The Associated Press and Kaiser Health News.
BARBARA FERRER:
One woman said, you know, using very foul language, you know, somebody needed to shoot me and another person volunteered to take that task on.
EMILY BROWN:
Other colleagues, other friends that were working in public health had their cars broken into, had been followed home, had rocks thrown through the building.
CHUCK TODD:
Now, as the federal government begins a push to persuade Americans to be vaccinated.
VICE PRES. MIKE PENCE:
Make no mistake about it, it's a medical miracle.
CHUCK TODD:
18% of Americans say they definitely will not get the vaccine. And the vaccine distribution effort is already facing complaints of mismanagement.
GOV. GRETCHEN WHITMER:
Where are our doses? What is holding them up?
GEN. GUSTAVE PERNA:
There is no problem with the process. There is no problem with the Pfizer vaccine. There is no problem with the Moderna vaccine. Right? It was a planning error and I am responsible.
CHUCK TODD:
Well, joining me now is the 19th former surgeon general of the United States who's been tapped by President-elect Biden to become the 21st surgeon general. It's Dr. Vivek Murthy. Dr. Murthy, welcome to Meet the Press. And I want to start with some reporting to see if you can give some clarity about some reporting our -- my colleagues did when we noted that Biden advisors are warning that the Trump mass vaccine timeline may be too optimistic. Dr. Murthy, are you one of those Biden transition officials that are concerned about the vaccine timeline by the Trump administration?
DR. VIVEK MURTHY:
Well, Chuck, it’s good to be with you today. And, you know, unfortunately, this is a grave moment for our country in this pandemic. Look, I think when it comes to the vaccine timeline, we all want the vaccine to be delivered as quickly, as fairly as possible. And you can be sure that every day and night that myself and others on the Biden team are working toward that end. But we also want to be realistic, you know, about the timeline. I think that, you know, in -- if we, if everything goes well, then we may see a circumstance where by late spring, you know, people who are in lower-risk categories can get this vaccine, but that would really require everything to go exactly on schedule. I think it's more realistic to assume that it may be closer to mid-summer or early fall when this vaccine makes its way to the general population. So, we want to be optimistic, but we want to be cautious as well.
CHUCK TODD:
Look, the president-elect made a 100 million vaccinations in the first 100 days, is that timeline a realistic timeline?
DR. VIVEK MURTHY:
Well, again, I think that, you know, is it doable? Yes, I think we can do it. But what we've got to do is we've got to prepare and be ready to execute, and that's actually what's happening right now. For the last many weeks, many of us who are on the Covid team have been working with suppliers and have been working with folks inside the administration as well, and with other partners that we're going to need in order not just to produce the vaccine, Chuck, but actually deliver it and get it into the arms of people all across this country. This is going to be and will be the most, you know, aggressive and ambitious vaccination campaign we've attempted in this country's history. And that's why we're working hard to make sure that we're ready on day one to execute.
CHUCK TODD:
How would you describe the cooperation you're getting? I know you, you're among the leaders of the incoming team that's going to handle the virus going forward. What would you say the level of cooperation you're getting from the White House coronavirus task force?
DR. VIVEK MURTHY:
Well, it's been improving over time. You know, we, we still have more information that we need to gather, many more conversations that we need to have. But I'm glad that those are finally happening. I also want to point out that many of the people we’re talking to, you know, are career officials who are going to be there after January 20th. These are partners that many of us, including myself, know and have worked with in the past, so being able to get information as quickly as possible, rebuild and restart those working relationships are absolutely critical right now.
CHUCK TODD:
I want to ask you about a concerning headline out of the U.K. And that is that they have a more virulent strain of COVID-19. What do you know about this strain? And how concerned are you about it spreading here in the United States, or do we have mutations that are similar to what the U.K. is dealing with?
DR. VIVEK MURTHY:
Well, Chuck, this news from the U.K. is about a strain of the virus that, according to the U.K., appears to be more transmissible and more contagious than the virus that we've seen circulating prior to this. It's important to mention a couple things though. While it seems to be more easily transmissible, we do not have evidence yet that this is a more deadly virus to an individual who acquires it. There's no reason to believe that the vaccines that have been developed will not be effective against this virus, as well. The bottom line is if you're at home and you're hearing this news, it does not change what we do in terms of precautions as individuals that can reduce the spread of this virus. It turns out that masking, that keeping physical distance, washing our hands - these are still the pillars of preventing Covid transmission.
CHUCK TODD:
On vaccine prioritization, look, there seems to be universal agreement on frontline medical workers and those in senior facilities. It's the next line that seems to be a debate. And this is not easy, this ethical debate. Essential workers versus 65 plus. The death toll among 65 plus is obvious, and there's the case there. Obviously, essential workers can't do the mitigation that others can't. How will the Biden administration deal with this dilemma?
DR. VIVEK MURTHY:
Well, Chuck, you're right that these aren't easy questions to answer. And I think the more open and transparent we are with the public about this, the better. We need to have these discussions in the light of day. We need to be able to get public input on some of these decisions. But ultimately, what should drive these decisions should be fact, should be ethical considerations, should be science and expertise. And that's why we're eagerly waiting the input of ACIP, the Advisory Council on Immunization Practices, and why we're also waiting the input from the CDC. But regardless of how this rolls out, here's what's clear, we have got to make sure that we've got enough supply. We've got to make sure that we have both the logistical systems in place as well as people and materials to be able to deliver that vaccine quickly. If we put these together, then we can rapidly get people in our country to the level of herd immunity. And that is ultimately what will let us get back to living our lives which is what we all want.
CHUCK TODD:
It is what we all want. Dr. Vivek Murthy, thank you for coming on. I hope you have a safe and healthy holiday and new year. And fingers cross that this vaccinating process only gets smoother. Thank you, sir.
DR. VIVEK MURTHY:
Thank you so much, Chuck. Best to you.
CHUCK TODD:
Turning now to what appears to be the largest hack of the U.S. government ever. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo admitted Friday, quote, "We can say pretty clearly that it was the Russians who were responsible." But just as the Trump administration seemed ready to speak with one voice on the subject, President Trump tweeted that perhaps China was responsible. There is no evidence China had anything to do with this hack. A who's who of government agencies were penetrated and remain compromised by the security breach that officials are calling, quote, "A grave risk to the federal government." Well, joining me now is Republican Senator Mitt Romney of Utah. Senator Romney, welcome back to Meet the Press. And you made a very impassioned plea for the president in particular to speak out, the administration to speak out on what was going on with this Russian hack. Secretary Pompeo did do that. I imagine what the president tweeted about China is not what you thought needed to be done. What do you make of the president's decision, I guess, to speculate on an alternative theory?
SEN. MITT ROMNEY:
Well, you're absolutely right. I was disappointed at the president's comment. But I think we've come to recognize that the president has a blind spot when it comes to Russia. And the reality here is that the experts, the people who really understand how our systems work and how computers work and software and so forth, the thousands upon thousands at the CIA and the NSA and the Department of Defense have determined that this came from Russia. And it is an extraordinary invasion of our cyberspace. And the implications of this, as Tom Bossert -- who was the -- was President Trump's, if you will, advisor with regards to homeland security -- he said, "Look, you cannot overstate how serious this is." I mean, they basically have the capacity to know what we're doing. They even got into the agency that's responsible for our nuclear capacities, for our research with regards to nuclear weaponry. This is an extraordinarily damaging invasion. And it went on for a long, long time.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, you brought up the president. And you were, I think, very charitable when you called it a “blind spot.” Look, he came into office downplaying what the Russians did in 2016, and he's leaving office now downplaying what the Russians do. We went through the impeachment process during Ukraine, which was, arguably, him embracing a Russian disinformation campaign there. Is there a point where you start to wonder this is more than a blind spot?
SEN. MITT ROMNEY:
Well, I'm not going to psychoanalyze the president. But -- but I think he feels that anything that suggests that Russia is being malevolent or not treating him with the respect he deserves, why, he obviously backs away from that. He doesn't want to recognize Russia as the problem they are and the extraordinarily bad actor they are on the world stage because it reflects poorly on him, at least, perhaps, in his own mind. And the reality is, Russia really is a geopolitical adversary. They go against us on every front. They have now invaded our cyberspace again. They kill people in their own country, whether it's politicians or media people. And we have to recognize, you know, we made -- I made fun of Hillary Clinton saying that we would have a reset with Russia. We've got the same problem in this administration, which is we've not been serious enough at the very top about how damaging an adversary Russia can be.
CHUCK TODD:
What is -- what is the line between espionage and an act of war? And where does this fall?
SEN. MITT ROMNEY:
Well, this basically -- I mean, I'll step back to respond to that and say, look, you remember about 20 years ago as we attacked Baghdad. You saw the videos of the rockets going across the city and then slamming into various buildings. And the places they attacked, of course, were the communication centers and the utility centers because you can bring a country to its knees if people don't have electricity, don't have water and can't communicate. And basically what Russia appears to have done is put themselves in those systems in our country. They don't need rockets to take those things out. They potentially have the capability to take out all of those things and doing it remotely at very small cost. So this is a very dangerous and damaging invasion of cyberspace, which has enormous national security implications. And as Bossert indicated, it's going to take us months, if not years, to understand how far they got. So they're not just gathering information. They potentially have the capacity to cripple us economically. They went into our businesses. They have the potential to also cripple us with regards to our water and electricity and so forth. So this is very, very serious.
CHUCK TODD:
But I guess the question about the espionage and act of war, I want to ask it this way. Do we live in a glass house on this issue? Isn't our goal to have similar capabilities inside the Russian government and their networks?
SEN. MITT ROMNEY:
Well, I think what this invasion underscores is that Russia acted with impunity. They didn't fear what we would be able to do from a cyber capacity. They didn't think that our defense systems were particularly adequate. And they apparently didn't think that we would respond in a very aggressive way. And I think all those things have to be addressed. I think we have to be much more serious about our cyber capabilities, offensive and defensive. I think we have to have a rethink about that at the Department of Defense, as well as our other agencies. And I think we have to have a very clear-eyed approach to how we deal with Russia going forward. This demands a response. And the response you'd expect to occur would be a cyber response. I don't know if we have the capacity to do that in a way that would be of the same scale or even greater scale than what Russia has applied to us. But this is something we have to address as soon as possible.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, and that seems to -- apparently we tried to respond a couple of times. Whether it was sanctions, didn't work. Vice -- then-Vice President Biden told me directly that the American public might not know our response but that we were definitely going to inflict some damage. Is this something that actually the world should actually see this time, that whatever response there is the world needs to know in order to put other folks on notice?
SEN. MITT ROMNEY:
Yeah, I don't care so much if the rest of the world knows. Those that are inside the governments of various countries will know what we did or did not do. They know what we did after the last Russia incursion into our cyberspace. And so does Russia. And obviously that was insufficient for them to take a different course. So we have to make sure that what we do is of a scale and of a nature that they say, "Okay, not doing that again." And that's not something we have been able to demonstrate yet.
CHUCK TODD:
Quickly on Covid, I'm going to be speaking with a couple of former CDC officials that are going to speak out on what happened with messaging and the White House interference at the CDC. And it raises a question. We have over 300,000 folks that have died from this. We clearly had a harder time with this pandemic than most of the Western world. Do we need an Iraq study group, 9/11 commission -- you know, pick your, pick your comparative in history -- to figure out what went wrong and how we prevent this from happening again? But a commission. You know, something like --you know, with two leading figures -- a Chris Christie, Jeh Johnson, Jeb Bush, you know, people like that.
SEN. MITT ROMNEY:
Well, I'm not sure whether it's a commission or not, but we certainly need to study what we could have done better and prepare for the next pandemic. Because there will be another one. Hopefully not very, very soon. And so we have to do the things that are necessary to prevent the kind of mistakes that we made this time. There's no question we made all sorts of mistakes. And at this stage, we're getting into the next phase, which is the vaccination phase. We've got to get that right. Because this thing can go on for a long time unless people get vaccinated and are able to get back to work. And by the way, you heard the good news, which is that we have apparently been able to solve the issues with regards to a Covid-relief package. And we're going to be able to get help to the American people who need it right now.
CHUCK TODD:
Very quickly, in 2012 you won 47 percent of the popular vote, more than Donald Trump won in 2016 or 2020. And in 2013, the Republican Party thought they had to do an after action report to figure out why you lost. And in 2020, the Republican Party's not talking about that despite a Republican nominee that performed less well than you did. What explains that?
SEN. MITT ROMNEY:
Well, I believe the Republican Party has changed pretty dramatically. And by that, I mean that the people who consider themselves Republican and voted for President Trump, I think, is a different cohort than the cohort that voted for me. Not entirely, of course, but in many respects. We lost a lot of suburban voters. We attracted a lot of blue-collar Democrats that had voted for Democrats forever before that. And I think the party is -- you look at those that are thinking about running in 2024 -- is trying to see who can be the most like President Trump. And that suggests that the party doesn't want to take a different direction. It wants to go in that same direction. But perhaps with some differences, of course, because personalities are different. I don't think anyone who's looking at running in 2024 has the kind of style and shtick that President Trump has. I mean, he is a unique and capable politician. And so there'll be some differences in personality. But I think the direction you're seeing is one that he set out, and I don't see a different course being considered by those that are looking for 2024.
CHUCK TODD:
You’re still comfortable in this -- are you comfortable in that version of the Republican Party?
SEN. MITT ROMNEY:
Well, no, I'd like to see a different version of the Republican Party, but my side is very small these days. You know, I think over time our party will gravitate back to the principles that formed it. You know, I think we are a party committed to pushing back on nations like Russia, authoritarian regimes. I think we're a party that recognizes we need to balance our budget. I think ultimately we're individuals that say we welcome legal immigration, we don't denigrate people who are coming from other countries. I think we recognize that character actually does count. So these things, I think, will once again have ascendancy within my party, but it's probably going to be a while.
CHUCK TODD:
Senator Mitt Romney, Republican from Utah. Glad to see Congress get this done. Let's hope it gets across -- run through the tape, as they say. And I hope you have a happy holiday season and a happy new year, sir.
SEN. MITT ROMNEY:
Thanks, Chuck. Good to be with you.
CHUCK TODD:
When we come back, two former CDC officials who say the Trump administration has crushed the agency by politicizing science and messaging. They join me next.
CHUCK TODD:
From the start of the pandemic, President Trump and his administration have been accused of playing down the severity of the crisis. And as we mentioned earlier, two former officials at the CDC charged the administration with substituting politics for science, softening regulations to protect business and generally handicapping the agency. Well, among those -- and those two former officials join me now, Kyle McGowan, he's the CDC's former chief of staff and the former deputy chief of staff, Amanda Campbell. Kyle and Amanda, thank you both for being here. The best way I feel like to go through this interview is to pick out certain events that took place over the last year, and I hope you guys can give us some context. The first big moment where there seemed to be some fight between the White House and the CDC was when Nancy Messonnier who was the deputy director, the director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization essentially correctly predicted on February 25th that this virus was going to cause a major disruption in life, stock market falls. The result from that is HHS gets sidelined, CDC gets sidelined, Mike Pence. Kyle McGowan, how significant was that moment?
KYLE McGOWAN:
Well, first off, Chuck, I just want to thank you for having the two of us with you today. And I also want to thank all of the dedicated men and women at the CDC who continue to work every day to make sure that we get out of this pandemic as quickly as we possibly can. They are the people who truly make the CDC the world's most premiere public health institution. And to your question, it was, it was very concerning. And that was just the very beginning with Dr. Messonnier. Nothing she said didn't come true. And nothing she said was false. And, and as Amanda and I worked in the spring and summer, we saw more and more the administration wanting a larger say in the messaging that was coming out of the CDC. And when that messaging, you know, clashed with the science, the messaging won. And, you know, it's our hope moving forward that the CDC will be able to, again, talk directly to the American people.
CHUCK TODD:
Amanda, I want to fast forward to June. The CDC puts out guidelines for schools, the president tweets, he disagrees with them. Tell us what happens next, what happens behind the scenes.
AMANDA CAMPBELL:
Well, I just want to thank you as well, Chuck, for having us here today. You know, when Kyle and I went to the CDC, we were there to be a bridge between the CDC and Washington, and really to provide them with political support that hadn't quite existed there before and to support the incredibly important work that the public health experts there do on a daily basis. And it truly was an honor and a privilege of a lifetime to be able to work alongside them. And you know, throughout the course of the summer and during our time there, we did see more and more often, individuals across the administration commenting and, on the guidance that the CDC was trying to put out. And, you know, unfortunately, that often led to delays. And in some cases, in that particular instance with the president tweeting out, you know, it led to us having to go back and make changes and do additional guidance in order to provide the right information and more information really to the American people. But really what was so critical during that time and what was needed was CDC to be able to get information out quickly to the American people so that they could make the best decisions for themselves and their loved ones. And it's our hope that moving forward they're going to be able to do just that.
CHUCK TODD:
Right. Kyle, I want to go to, try to -- in August, and that was the month you chose to resign. And in August was this dust up when suddenly there were guidelines coming from the CDC that were mixed messaging on whether asymptomatic people needed testing. It was all happening at the same time the president was complaining about essentially too much testing. I'm curious, was that your breaking point?
KYLE McGOWAN:
No. That wasn't. I think, you know, Amanda and I have said all along that we will continue to work in public health and continue to support the CDC in the best way that we can. We had a wonderful ability early on prior to the pandemic to be able to support large initiatives at the CDC, including the ending HIV epidemic, opioids and many things. And then when we got to the pandemic and, frankly, the meddling that was coming out of, out of the administration, we were, you know, not able to do the job that we were sent there for. And, you know, that was, there was no single breaking point, I would say. But in that summer in August, or that time in August, is when Amanda and I started, you know, talking about how we would leave.
CHUCK TODD:
Amanda, it's, it’s my understanding you guys have met with some of the Biden transition officials, essentially to provide your thoughts, your expertise at what you saw, what needs to change. So what, what is one or two reforms that you'd like to see done that helps restore the CDC's good name? You saw those poll numbers. When you're down to 31% trusting what's coming out of the CDC, and this was an agency that sort of had been above politics for most of my lifetime. How does that get restored?
AMANDA CAMPBELL:
Yeah, thank you for that question. You know, it's important to remember that CDC is the world premiere public health agency. And that's because of the men and women who work there. And they're the same men and women and dedicated professionals that were there at the start of this pandemic, that have worked tirelessly throughout it to protect the American people, and who are going to be there as we get through this. But it's so critically important that we, moving forward, are able to provide the CDC both the political support that they need to be able to do their job, to be able to communicate directly to the American people again, as Kyle said. But also the financial support that they need to do their jobs. Unfortunately, we've seen administrations and Congresses in the past fund public health in knee-jerk reactions, if you will. Funding for Zika and Ebola to say, "Fix the problem for us," but not having long-term, sustained funding for public health. Because you have to remember too, 70% of all the funding that goes to CDC is actually going out to the states, supporting our public health infrastructure. And they have to have that funding in order to do the important things that we've seen we need moving forward based on this response which is we need to modernize our public health data. We need more laboratory capacity and we need a modernized public health workforce. So I hope that the Biden administration will consider all of those things.
CHUCK TODD:
Kyle McGowan, Amanda Campbell, proof that there are plenty of political appointees who put public service first too. Thanks for speaking out, thanks for coming on here and sharing your perspective with us.
KYLE McGOWAN:
Thank you for having--
AMANDA CAMPBELL:
Thank you.
KYLE MCGOWAN:
--us.
CHUCK TODD:
You got it. When we come back, how should the U.S. respond to this catastrophic security hack? Do we even know how to respond? Panel is next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back, the panel is joining us. NBC News chief White House Correspondent Hallie Jackson, Rich Lowry, editor of The National Review and Yamiche Alcindor, White House correspondent for PBS NewsHour, who was just named yesterday the journalist of the year by the National Association of Black Journalists. Congratulations, Yamiche. I am here to make sure I embarrass you because I know your mom's watching.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR:
Thank you, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
So, congrats on that. Hallie, let me start with the hack and the president's response - in some ways, incredibly predictable, right, over the totality of this administration that you've been covering. But I'm curious, what is happening around him? How concerned are the national security folks? Robert O'Brien cut short a trip that he was taking overseas to deal with this. What is happening behind the scenes in the West Wing?
HALLIE JACKSON:
Right. So, I will tell you, Chuck, you're right. For the national security apparatus, this is a big deal. You laid it out in your interview with Senator Romney earlier in the show. This hack is nothing that can be sort of buried under the rug. Nothing that can be overlooked. But what is the president focusing on, Chuck? I can tell you that from a source that I talked to just recently, the president is incredibly focused, not on this hack, right, not on the response to it, but on what he feels has been this stolen election. An election that he lost. He is fuming about it, he is talking about it, he is almost obsessed with it, according to folks that I've talked to who are familiar with his thinking. That is where his mental energy is right now. Not on this issue of national security that is facing this country. That is immensely frustrating to those around him, including, Chuck, members of Congress who feel like they simply aren't getting enough information. We have been hearing for days now that the impact of this hack is still being assessed, right? There have been statements, this is ongoing. It seems like the administration does not have a handle on just how bad this hack was yet as we continue to get, sort of, the drip, drip, drip on a daily basis of where else the suspected Russian intelligence service may have gotten into, may have breached in this country. Lawmakers wanted more information. They had hoped for a briefing, even this weekend, because they were so dissatisfied with the briefing that they had on the Hill. And this includes some Republicans, not just Democrats. I will tell you though, every time -- and you're right, this administration, the Trump administration, started with concerns that the president was not tough enough on Russia. It is ending with concerns that the president is not tough enough on Russia. And whenever I bring this up to folks who are close with the president, his allies, they go, "Here you go again, media. It's Russia, Russia, Russia." Boy, it's the depiction, right, of the media who cried wolf. Well, Chuck, the wolf is in federal agencies now. The wolf has breached the wall.
CHUCK TODD:
I want to quickly, Rich Lowry, let me play for you how Congress felt about the briefing they got here and put some words to what Hallie just said. Take a listen.
[BEGIN TAPE]
REP. CAROLYN MALONEY:
We're very disturbed. We didn't get the information we wanted.
REP. STEPHEN LYNCH
Very disappointing. It's like pulling teeth.
REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ:
Their briefings were obtuse. Sorely lacking in detail.
REP. THOMAS MASSIE:
There was more in The New York Times than there was in that room.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
So, Thomas Massie saying he learned more from The New York Times. Not surprising when it comes to intel briefings on Capitol Hill. But Rich, you wrote essentially what I would call an ‘enough is enough” editorial here about the president's behavior. And that was before the -- that was three days ago, just as we're learning about this hack. This presidential behavior, I've lost the ability to find an adjective to describe it.
RICH LOWRY:
Well, there are a couple hallmarks of the entire administration and how he's handled this: 1) extremely defensive about Russia and wanting to deny Russian misconduct 2) he -- the president sort of stands outside of his administration oftentimes and just acts as though he's just commenting on it and has nothing to do with it. And the fact is, despite what he said, despite his posture, the U.S. government has taken this threat very seriously. And it just happened to be the things we were focused on were the wrong things. We were very focused on defending the election, actually did a good job on that. Very focused on defending against malware attacks. It's just that this was something different. They used a so-called trusted tool to intrude in all these systems, and it's very concerning that U.S. government agencies didn't discover this, intelligence officials didn't discover this. It was discovered via an automated warning at a private company that very easily could have been ignored. So, there's just no substitute for even more robust defenses than we have now in this realm.
CHUCK TODD:
And Yamiche, the issue of deterrence. The president-elect in October of '16 sat down with us, right before that election. And I asked him about sending Russia a message for what they did in 2016. Here's what he told me then.
[BEGIN TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
Sort of like in baseball, you throw a high hard one to send a message. Why haven't we sent a message yet to Putin?
JOE BIDEN:
We're sending a message. We had the capacity to do it. And the message that we sent, he'll know it. And it will be at the time of our choosing and under the circumstances that has the greatest impact.
CHUCK TODD:
So a message is going to be sent. Will the public know?
JOE BIDEN:
I hope not.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
So Yamiche, this is proof, and we know supposedly the Trump administration went after a troll farm in Russia too. Whatever we've done either in the end of the Obama era or during the Trump era has not worked.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR:
That is clear. And what we hear now from President-elect Biden is this idea that Russia is going to have to pay a substantial cost. That's what he said this week in a statement for these activities. Even if it's different from what President Trump does, and it might be something that, of course, is more strenuous because the president has really wanted to, as Mitt Romney just told you, had a blind spot for Russia. He does not want to recognize them as an adversary. The big question coming for the Biden administration is going to be: how are you going to handle Russia? Fiona Hill told the NewsHour this week that what we really need is a cohesive response to Russia. We really need our allies in the United States working together. We need officials that are on the same page. What we've seen is a president who has continued to be really personally offended by anybody saying that Russia's an adversary. We've seen the president take the word of Putin over his own national security apparatus. And this all comes down to the president not wanting his personal legacy to be questioned, not wanting his win in 2016 to be questioned, even now as we see Republicans and Democrats demanding that the president do more, be more strenuous, be more hard on Russia. The president just can't get himself there. President Trump can't do it. President-elect Biden is going to try.
CHUCK TODD:
Very quickly, Rich, is Mitt Romney right, in some ways? Do you think once Donald Trump disappears the Republican Party will find its spine on Russia again?
RICH LOWRY:
I think there's going to be a long struggle over where the party is on a lot of things, including that. And I think the president's influence in the party is going to be very long-lasting. The conventional scenario is that he'd lose and very quickly his influence will wane. That hasn't happened. Strangely, his grip on the party has even strengthened since he lost the election.
CHUCK TODD:
Despite, again, the numbers that I pointed out to Senator Romney and numbers you're about to see in a minute here. When we come back, why Republicans are learning to love the Electoral College now more than ever. That's next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Data Download time. Despite what President Trump might say, the 2020 election is behind us. States have officially certified the vote and Joe Biden won 306 electoral votes. But one debate does linger. Did President-elect Biden win by a lot or by a little? The answer is both. First, take the popular vote this year. Biden won by a sizable amount, four and a half percentage points and seven million raw votes. And as we noted here a few weeks ago, that is the second largest percentage point margin since the year 2000. It was second only to Obama-Biden in 2008. But let's take a look at the three states that put Biden over the top in the electoral college and compare that to the three states that gave Donald Trump the presidency in 2016. As many disappointed Democrats have pointed out for four years, Mr. Trump won Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan by a total of just under 78,000 votes, a pretty small margin. But Biden won Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin by just about 43,000 votes combined, an even smaller margin to an already small margin. So Biden won by seven million votes. But flip less than one percent of that margin in three states and he loses the election. This is part of the reason Democrats loathe the electoral college these days and Republicans love it. Here's another way to look at it. Consider the 2000 election. Even outside of Florida, the election was extremely close. In eight states, the winning candidate's margin was less than 3.5 percentage points. And that reflected the national popular vote, where the margin was just 547,000. Now compare that to 2020. There were still eight states where the winning candidate's margin was within 3.5 points, different states mostly, but the national popular vote was a whopping seven million. In fact, Biden's entire popular vote margin came from just two states, California and New York. The more that Democratic votes are packed into just a few states, the more Republicans can win the electoral college while losing the popular vote. The result, don't count on Republicans calling for an end to the electoral college any time soon. As a reminder, on the popular vote, we're a center-left nation, but our institutions, like the electoral college, keep us center-right. When we come back, how will the horrible year of 2020 be remembered and how will it change us?
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. It's fair to say that, even 50 years from now, you'll be able to say 2020 and it'll invoke plenty of images in your head in the same way that just saying the year 1968 does for certain Americans over the age of 50. So, it's tough to do what I'm going to ask you guys to do, but Yamiche, 2020, it's this consequential year. There's so many ways to try to dissect this. How do you look at it? It's obviously going to change us. What are you looking for going forward?
YAMICHE ALCINDOR:
The pandemic, obviously, is the thing that was the hallmark of 2020. There was so much mourning, so much loss, so much sadness in this country. And there was a presidency that really failed to meet the moment in ways, objectively speaking, because the president downplayed the virus. He didn't take it seriously. It's a large part, based on my reporting, of why he lost the election. I think you couple the pandemic's terrible loss with the political upheaval. And I also want to point out the statistic that I think continues to stick with me, which is that African Americans are more than two and a half times or three times more likely to die than white Americans of the coronavirus pandemic in the same year that African Americans are some two and a half times to three times more likely to be killed by the police than white Americans. So, this is also a year where the pandemic exposed the long-standing inequalities in this country and it showed that African Americans and people of color continue to not be treated as equal citizens in this country. So, I think that that is the thing that sticks with me. It's those dual crises of health care and economy as well as the racial reckoning that continues to happen.
CHUCK TODD:
Yeah, it was an MRI for that for us. The question is, after we see this MRI, do we do something about it? That's going to be a test. Rich Lowry, what say you about what 2020 looks like, say, 20 years from now?
RICH LOWRY:
Well, obviously Covid, the biggest story, the health effects, the political effects. Presidential election easily could have gone differently if it hadn't been for the pandemic. And the economic effect, hammering people lower down the income scale in a way that'll take them years to recover. And then widening the cultural divisions. And I think, Chuck, this is the year it just became undeniable we are living in an era of poisonous political contention on par with the 1790s, the 1850s, late '60s, early '70s, when neither side is of a mood or state of mind to say the other side is legitimate and considers the other side, a threat, a fundamental threat to our system.
CHUCK TODD:
Hallie Jackson, you've had a unique front row seat, yourself, covering this administration. And in some ways I think the perspective will only be greater the farther away you get from it. But what are you focused on as we look ahead?
HALLIE JACKSON:
I think one thing, Chuck, that started and is sort of a natural, logical, or perhaps illogical conclusion of something that happened right here on this show two days after the inauguration when President Trump took office, and that is Kellyanne Conway, I know you remember this, talking to you about alternative facts in that instance as it related to, I think, inaugural crowd size and the incorrect comments, the incorrect claims by then Press Secretary Sean Spicer. We are now four years later, I think, reaching sort of peak alternative facts-ism. And I'm looking very closely at what the long-term impact of that is going to be because we are seeing it now crystallize this year into not just sort of the poisonous discourse that I think Rich is correctly talking about, but almost this division into two separate realities here in this country. We've seen it as it relates to the health of Americans with this pandemic and the concern, the skepticism that public health experts are so worried about with people not taking Covid seriously, not believing the science, not believing the data. We've seen it with the health of this democracy and people also in this country, those who especially support President Trump, believing not in the sort of foundational structures that hold our democracy up, but believing what President Trump has said instead. Here we are four years later and it's not just alternative facts, Chuck, it's an alternative set of realities. And that is going to have some serious, I think, impacts moving forward, not just in the political sphere, but in the cultural sphere as well. I think you're right. I think it's going to take, I think, all of us who have been covering the Trump administration to look back and see, okay, how do you put this four years into the context of history. But I do think that's going to be a key part of it.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, Yamiche, what kind of appetite do you think the Biden administration's going to have? You know, I talked about a Covid commission. I think that's likely to happen, something like that. But I noticed the New York Times today called for something -- they didn't call it this, but it almost felt like a truth and reconciliation commission. Is that something that our current politics could allow to happen?
YAMICHE ALCINDOR:
I think because of this thing that former President Obama called truth decay, it's very hard to have a truth and reconciliation commission when Americans can't agree on the truth. Hallie Jackson's talking about Kellyanne Conway talking to you about alternative facts. I remember being on Meet The Press when Rudy Giuliani told you, "Truth isn't truth." It is the thing that defined the Trump administration and this era, that they wanted to completely create a new version of the truth. And so many Americans, more than 75 million of them, went along with that for President Trump. I'm not sure if we can get to a place where Americans can sit down and say, "Let's talk about our differences," when we can't even agree on the facts.
CHUCK TODD:
Excellent points all. I really appreciate the three of you, not just this week, but all year long. You've been tremendous contributors to Meet The Press and this roundtable. Thank you all for watching. That's all we have for today. All of us here at Meet The Press want to wish you a safe and joyous Christmas. Have a restful holiday. Remember, take a mental health break, if you can as well. We'll be back next week because, if it's Sunday, it's Meet The Press.