CHUCK TODD:
This Sunday: A big deal.
PRES. JOE BIDEN:
We're taking a giant step forward as a nation.
CHUCK TODD:
Joe Manchin and Democrats finally agree on a bill to spend billions on climate, energy, health care and to cut the deficit.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
I've never been in reverse in my lifetime, and I never walked away.
CHUCK TODD:
It's a political win, but do Democrats have the votes they need?
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER:
We'll all be talking, and hopefully we'll have 50 votes.
CHUCK TODD:
I'll talk to the man at the center of it all, Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Plus, Senate Republicans block a bill they formerly supported to help veterans exposed to toxic burn pits.
JON STEWART:
I’m used to the lies. I’m used to the hypocrisy. But I am not used to the cruelty.
CHUCK TODD:
Democrats say Republicans switched their votes because they were angry about the Manchin deal. I'll talk to veterans advocate and comedian Jon Stewart on the politics of helping vets. Also, those catastrophic floods in Kentucky.
DAVE HARRIS:
Never in my life have we seen it come up that fast.
CHUCK TODD:
Dozens dead, thousands without power or water, in some of the worst flooding in Kentucky's history.
RONNIE SLONE:
Everybody tries to help, but when it comes this fast it's – there’s ain't nothing you can do.
CHUCK TODD:
We'll get the latest from Kentucky's governor, Andy Beshear. Joining me for insight and analysis are: NBC News Chief White House correspondent Kristen Welker, former Republican Congressman Carlos Curbelo, Democratic strategist Adrienne Elrod and White House Bureau Chief for Politico Jonathan Lemire. 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. We're going to get to all the politics, my interviews with Joe Manchin and Jon Stewart, all of that in just a moment. But we need to begin with this historic flooding in eastern Kentucky. It's the worst flooding there in decades. It's left dozens dead. Four children from one family are dead. Officials expect the number to rise in the days ahead. As of yesterday, some 1,300 people had been rescued by air or boat. Fourteen counties have been declared disaster areas, and tens of thousands of homes are either without power, running water, or both. Sadly, more rain is in the forecast. Now, climate experts say global warming is -- has not increased the number of floods. But what it has increased is their severity due to more powerful rainstorms. This is extreme weather in action. I'm joined now by Kentucky's governor, Andy Beshear. Governor Beshear, sadly, this is not the first time I've had you lead off our show due to natural disasters in your state. First, give me an update. You have expressed fear this death toll is going to rise. What is the status this morning?
GOV. ANDY BESHEAR:
It's tough. This is one of the most devastating, deadly floods that we have seen in our history. It wiped out areas where people didn’t have that much to begin with. And, at a time that we're trying to dig out, it's raining. I'm about two hours from the first hard-hit county, and it is really raining. And it's going to continue to rain throughout today. Our death toll right now is at 26. But I know of several additional bodies, and we know it's going to grow. With the level of water, we're going to be finding bodies for weeks, many of them swept hundreds of yards, maybe a quarter mile plus from where they were lost. Thus far, just those four children. I fear that we'll find at least a couple more as well. Water, a big problem with some of these areas, power. And even when we get over the rain, it's going to be really hot in this next week. So we are still in an emergency phase. Even as we work towards what it's going to take to get people stable, we got our first travel trailers to help shelter people as well as opening up our state parks. Have been seeing some reason progress on that, so at least one good sign.
CHUCK TODD:
Do you have a sense of how many people are missing? Because you obviously fear this death toll. I mean, is there a sense that you have your arms around that?
GOV. ANDY BESHEAR:
Now it's really hard when the answer is probably no. Cell phone service still incredibly spotty. And in some of these hollers, think gullies, we don't have a firm count of how many people were there to begin with, how many people were visiting. We have multiple Kentucky state police posts that are taking calls from loved ones that can't connect with those that they are worried about. But it's going to take some time to get a firm grasp on that. We still can't get in to some areas to check on people. We're doubling our National Guard. We're going to work to go door to door, work to find, again, as many people as we can. We're even going to work through the rain. But the weather is complicating it.
CHUCK TODD:
Anything you're not getting from the federal government that you're still asking for?
GOV. ANDY BESHEAR:
Federal government has been responsive. The FEMA administrator was there on day two, on the ground. The president called and said, "Whatever you need." I said, "Mr. President, we need individual assistance, whereby people can apply directly to FEMA." He got that done in about three days. I haven't seen that before. And I'm grateful for it. Definitely cut through a lot of red tape there.
CHUCK TODD:
Look, you said you don't know why Kentucky's been hit more than others. Obviously, these extreme weather instances are becoming more frequent. You had tornadoes in December, right? We don't usually see that in December. This flooding is worse than we've ever seen. What about long term? What do you need for mitigation, for adaptation? Because it's pretty clear these extreme storms are not going to end soon.
GOV. ANDY BESHEAR:
Well, we have to build back stronger. We've got to make sure that our roads, our bridges, our culverts, our flood walls can withstand greater intensity. A lot of this has to do as well with water and wastewater systems that get overwhelmed. You know, rural water is already such a tough issue. The infrastructure is so expensive. I will say that both ARPA and the bipartisan infrastructure bill are a good start. They're helping us do things before this that we haven't been able to do before. But if we truly want to be more resilient, it is going to take a major federal investment, as well as here in the state. We're ready to do our part.
CHUCK TODD:
Governor Beshear, I know it's never easy to deal with situations like this. We're all thinking about you, and we hope this ends soon.
GOV. ANDY BESHEAR:
Thank you.
CHUCK TODD:
If you want to be helpful here to the Kentucky flood victims, the governor's office suggests contributing to the Team Eastern Kentucky Flood Relief Fund. I know that's a big URL there. You can find that web address on the Meet the Press Twitter and Facebook pages. Let's turn now to politics. Senator Joe Manchin breathed some new life into the Democrats' reconciliation bill and into Joe Biden's presidency when he agreed to hundreds of billions to fund climate programs and bring down the cost of healthcare. The helpfully named Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, cobbled together with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, also calls for increased tax revenues from high earners and businesses to help trim the deficit. It's a long way from the president's far more ambitious Build Back Better plan. And Democrats still need to pass it without any Republican help – paging Kyrsten Sinema? Plus, the good news stops there because the administration has had to argue that we're not in a recession, despite a second straight quarter of negative economic growth that usually foreshadows a recession. Still, as Democrats face strong headwinds in November, this deal gives Mr. Biden a big victory to brag about and Democrats an unexpected success they can campaign on because disaffected Democratic voters needed a reason to turn out in November.
[START TAPE]
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL:
I think we must stay in session for as long as it takes to get this plan done.
SEN. CHUCK GRASSLEY:
We're in a recession, and it's not the time to increase taxes or spending. It's going to feed the fires of inflation.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
And joining me now is Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Senator Manchin, welcome back to Meet the Press.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Always good to be with you, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
All right, so let me just start with this. Two weeks ago, you said you were adamant. You needed to see the July inflation numbers before you were ready to talk about this bigger budget bill with the Democrats called reconciliation. And then abruptly, you didn't need to see those inflation numbers. What changed your mind?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
It wasn't abruptly, Chuck. We've been working and negotiating off and on very quietly because I didn't know if it'd ever come to fruition. I didn't want to go through the drama that -- eight months ago that we went through for so long, thinking we'll negotiate it, got close, and then it fell apart, and this and that. Never could get there on Build Back Better. It just was too much, and I never could get there. On this one here, we started in April and kept working, and working, and working, and back and forth. And all of a sudden, inflation went from six, to 8.1, to 9.1, and I said, "Hey, Chuck, listen: We'd better wait and let's see what's coming in July, numbers coming in August before we do anything more." And that was the point of where we had been talking and negotiating. And that's when Chuck got upset with me, and I understand that. And he says, "Oh, here we go again," and everything. I said, "No, Chuck." I said, "I'm just being very cautious. I'm not going to be responsible for inflaming the inflation rates. I'm just not going to do it." So then we got a hot weekend. We all cooled off a little bit and talked on Monday. And I said, "Chuck, I've never walked away. We're still working on it." And he says, "Well, okay. Let's do it." And I said, "Well, let's start talking." So to Chuck's credit, our staffs kept talking. We didn't know if we were going to get there or not. But the bottom line was is we reduced it and scrubbed it clear down to 739. Nothing inflammatory in that piece of legislation.
CHUCK TODD:
The initial criticism of this bill from Republicans is, in some ways to some people, a predictable response, which is simply this: You should not increase any taxes during a time of recession. Why is now the right time to hit certain businesses with a tax hike?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
First of all, Chuck, I agree with my Republican friends. We should not increase taxes, and we did not increase taxes, Chuck. That's what we scrubbed out from that Thursday when we shut down, until we started talking again on Monday. The only thing we have done is basically say that every corporation of a billion dollars of value or greater in America should pay at least 15% a minimum corporate tax. Many people in West Virginia don’t, couldn't believe that corporations aren't paying anything, and some of the largest in the country. And with that being said, the rate was at 35% in 2017 when my Republican friends took it to 21. We thought it should stop at 25. It went to 21, a 14% savings. You would at least think that they would be paying at least 15%. Most businesses and all corporations that I know pay 21%. So that's not a tax increase. It's closing a loophole.
CHUCK TODD:
Well, I understand that, but one person's loophole is another person whose tax bill increased. And, you know, the folks over at the National Association of Manufacturers, and look, they're not going to like any, anything that increases their tax bill. I understand that. But here's their main argument. They say, by doing this, you threaten to stifle the very innovation this bill is supposed to spur because if you create that tax penalty and you don't get the credit for investments, then all of a sudden, you don’t see that -- they'll make the decision not to invest. Do you buy that argument?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
I don't because I'll tell you why. The last two years have been massive, record profits. Massive, record profits. And with that being said, it's been the lowest investment of capital expenditure that we've ever had. So it's not the taxes that’s driving this. What's driving people sitting on their money right now is a lack of confidence that we can't get our act together in Congress or government. And they don't have a confidence there, so what we have done is we have total permitting reform. That's the thing everyone has told me. When I've asked them point blank, they said, "If you can just take the leashes off, take the chains off of us, let us go and do it." So we're going to basically reform our permitting so we're able to get these projects completed that are needed now.
CHUCK TODD:
Do you trust -- I know that was the promise you got, and it's one of those where you were promised a bill later. You support reconciliation now, you're going to get permitting reform later. Why did you not insist on permitting reform first before you gave, gave them your vote for reconciliation?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
We would have done permitting reform in this bill but basically because of the Byrd bath and because of reconciliation being around finances, it did not fit. So with that we have an agreement -- from Speaker Pelosi to Majority Leader Schumer to President Biden – we all have made an agreement on this. And you know what, if someone doesn't fulfill, if I don't fulfill my commitment, promise that I will vote and support this bill with all my heart, there's consequences, and there's consequences on both sides. So I have all the trust and faith that this will be accomplished. We'll get this done. And if not, we both are going to face some consequences.
CHUCK TODD:
Speaker Pelosi and Chuck Schumer can keep their word, and the bill still wouldn’t -- and it's possible the bill still doesn't pass. So what are the consequences if you don't get your permitting reform because they don't have the votes?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Well, as I've said before, there’s other avenues and vehicles that we can use. And I've been committed. I've been promised. And I do believe, and I trust. And if any of us don't keep our promises, then there are consequences to pay for this. I don't think that's going to happen at all, Chuck. There's too much at stake here. This is the greatest investment we've ever had in energy security. Energy security, and also investment in the innovation in technology that we need for the fuels of the future. This is an all-American bill – red, white, and blue all the way through.
CHUCK TODD:
Now the name of this bill, some would argue, is a bit misleading: the Inflation Reduction Act. Can you explain where in this bill inflation will be reduced for folks in the next six months?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Well, first of all, we've got the highest gas prices right now. Inflation is killing. It's hurting everyone in West Virginia right now, and it's hurting all working people across America. And if you want to get the gasoline prices down, you've got to produce your way out of it. We've got to bring more manufacturing to, back to America. And let me tell you what the bill does. It gives us a strong fossil energy that's going to produce the cleanest forms of fossil energy in the world. That's carbon reduction when you're replacing the dirtiest oil right now that's going into the climate and atmosphere. That's something we can do. You producing in America, we become energy independent, you're going to reduce because of supply. Next of all, we pay $300 billion down on debt. 300 billion, the first time in 25 years, Chuck, that we've ever done this. Next of all, we're reducing $288 billion in drug prices because of what we're doing. This is a bill that basically does everything. If someone says it's not going to reduce inflation, my goodness, we've never done anything like it. We didn't raise taxes. We've paid down debt. We've done everything, and we've accelerated our permitting processing so we can get things on the market and to market quicker.
CHUCK TODD:
Look, I understand it doesn't add, I understand it doesn't add to inflation, but here's what the folks at Penn Wharton said. They said, "The impact on inflation is statistically indistinguishable from zero." Isn't calling it the Inflation Reduction Act sort of politically cynical and a bit misleading?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Not at all. If you're producing more and have more supply, and that supply drives -- basically satisfies demand, and then the prices come down because there’s more people shopping for the products, that's capitalism. That's who we are. We haven't done that. If we're able to bring things to market quicker, they're not looking at the long game at all. But, you know, Chuck, you talk to different economists, they all have a different opinion. They told me the 17 laureate -- Nobel laureates were saying that it was going to be transition, transition. And you know what? It wasn't transitory. It was permanent. We have a serious problem in inflation, and we've got to defeat it.
CHUCK TODD:
Are you convinced that Senator Sinema is going to support this bill? Or if she ends up changing some parts of the tax structure because she votes with Republicans, would that impact your support of this reconciliation package?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Let me say that Kyrsten Sinema's a friend of mine, and we work very close together. She has a tremendous, tremendous input in this piece of legislation. This is things that everyone has worked on over the last eight months or more. And she basically insisted that “no tax increases,” we've done that. She was very, very adamant about that, and I support and I agree with her. She was also very instrumental in making sure that we had drug prices that Medicare could compete on certain drugs to bring it down so that there wouldn't be an impact on individuals, on Medicare across. She's done all this, so she has a tremendous amount of input in this piece of legislation. And I would like to think she would be favorable towards it, but I respect her decision. She'll make her own decision based on the contents.
CHUCK TODD:
Senator Manchin, what's your case for Democrats –
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
She's a dear friend of mine, I respect her.
CHUCK TODD:
What’s your case for Democrats to keep control of the House and Senate this election year?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
I don’t know, I just -- if you look back through history, it makes it very difficult, especially in the most toxic times we've ever seen. So it's up in the air right now. With the House, it looks like the House is --
CHUCK TODD:
No, do you – right, but would you like -- do you hope Democrats keep control of the House and Senate?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
I think people are sick and tired of politics, Chuck. I really do. I think they're sick and tired of Democrats and Republicans fighting and feuding and holding pieces of legislation hostage because they didn't get what they wanted, or something or someone might get credit for something. Why don't we start doing something for our country? Why don't we just say, "This is good for America"? I've always said the best politics is good government. Do something good, Chuck. But I'm not going to predict what's going to happen.
CHUCK TODD:
I'm not asking you to predict--
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
I just want to make sure we do something good, and this --
CHUCK TODD:
What result do you want? Do you want the Democrats to keep control of the United States Senate and the House of Representatives?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Oh I’d love -- you know, I'm not making those choices or decisions on that. I'm going to work with whatever I have. I've always said that. I think the Democrats have great candidates that are running. They're good people I've worked with. And I have a tremendous amount of respect and friendship with my Republican colleagues. So I can work on either side very easily.
CHUCK TODD:
So you don't care --
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
So I don't have --
CHUCK TODD:
– the outcome?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
– a problem.
CHUCK TODD:
You don't care about the outcome this year of the election?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Well whatever -- whatever the voters, whatever the voters choose. I can't decide what's going to happen in Kansas or California or Texas. I really can't. I've always taken the approach, “whoever you send me, that's your representative, and I respect them.” I respect the state for the people they send, and I give it my best to work with them, to do the best for my country. I don't play the politics that way. I don't like it that way. That's not who I am.
CHUCK TODD:
There was a new third party organized and announced just last week, a centrist third party. Christine Todd Whitman, Andrew Yang, David Jolly. Is that something that seemed appealing to you? Based on the answers you just gave me, I'm starting to wonder.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Well, I'm starting to wonder when are we going to start worrying about our country more than we do about our political parties? That's what scares me. I think that we all have to come back to what our purpose of being in Washington for and who we're really working for. We're not working for any party. We're not working for any political idealism. We're working for basically, right now, a very challenging world that we're in. We've got what's going on in Europe right now, geopolitical unrest. Now we have threats from China to Taiwan and all this going on. And here we are bickering over political outcomes and who's going to be in charge of what. Right now, let's take care -- the American people are hurting. Inflation, Chuck, is killing them. It is killing them, okay?
CHUCK TODD:
Senator --
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Let's make --
CHUCK TODD:
– Joe Manchin --
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
– sure we take care of that.
CHUCK TODD:
– the Democratic elected senator from West Virginia. Senator, always good to have you on. Thank you, sir.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Thanks, Chuck. It's always good to be with you.
CHUCK TODD:
When we come back, I'm going to talk to veterans advocate and comedian Jon Stewart about why he's so angry that there's even a fight over health care funding for veterans exposed to toxic burn pits. Stay with us.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. One month ago, 84 senators voted for a bill to aid veterans who were exposed to toxins like Agent Orange or in burn pits in Iraq and Afghanistan. But this past week, 25 Republicans who had voted yes on that bill switched their votes and blocked the bill from passage. Why? Republicans claim the issue is how the bill is being funded.
[START TAPE]
SEN. PAT TOOMEY:
It's a budgetary gimmick that has the intent of making it possible to have a huge explosion in unrelated spending. This is not what this bill was about. We can fix it. We can do it immediately.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
The Democrats suggest another reason: that Republicans were simply retaliating over the surprise announcement of the Manchin-Schumer deal on climate and health care. And among those most outraged by the switch was comedian and veterans advocate Jon Stewart. And Jon Stewart, who hosts “The Problem with Jon Stewart” on Apple TV, joins me now. Mr. Stewart, welcome to Meet the Press.
JON STEWART:
Thanks very much, Chuck. Appreciate it.
CHUCK TODD:
Look, let me start – you were so blindsided by this. I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, you were organizing essentially a thank you press conference to say, "This is what we needed to explain why this bill was so important," and all of a sudden, this happened. Walk me through that shock. And tell me whether you feel any better about this bill being passed today.
JON STEWART:
Well, it was devastating. I mean, the bill passed the House in March, 256 to 174, right? Got sent to the Senate. There were some changes that needed to be made. There were some legitimate concerns about implementation, how the VA could handle the new influx of patients, the specialized care they need. So the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee went to work on the bill, and they improved it. They cut about $40 billion of spending out of it. They made it more accountable. They made it more direct. Then it went to the Senate floor , it passed out of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee unanimously. Senators Tester and Moran, Democrat and a Republican, put it all together. It came out unanimously. And in June, it went to the floor of the Senate and it passed 84 to 14. Which in this Senate, I mean, you can't get this Senate to pass the Ice Cream is Delicious Law –
CHUCK TODD:
Exactly.
JON STEWART:
– 84 to 14. I mean, it was a landslide. There was a technical issue in it, so it had to go back to the House. One sentence. So nothing was added. No gimmick was put in. Nothing was changed. When it came back to the Senate to, what we thought was just a procedural vote, then they shot it down. But nothing had changed in the bill from the one that they had passed 84 to 14 in June. None of us understood it. And I asked Senator Cruz why. What had been inserted into the bill? What gimmick? What budgetary flip had they inserted in there that caused you to change your vote from yes on June 16th to no in July? And do you know what he said, Chuck?
CHUCK TODD:
Go ahead. I was going to play his clip for you, but you beat me to it, so tell me.
JON STEWART:
He didn't say anything. He can't point to anything specific that was changed. They've all just got this mumbo-jumbo about a budgetary gimmick, but nothing changed. This isn't my opinion. It's on Congress.gov. The text of the bill they voted for June 14th is the same bill.
CHUCK TODD:
Well, let me get you to react to him. Here is what Ted Cruz said, directing it to you.
[START TAPE]
SEN. TED CRUZ:
The Democrats played a budgetary trick, which is they took $400 billion in discretionary spending, and they shifted it to mandatory. The reason they did that is they want to spend $400 billion more discretionary funds on completely unrelated matters. And so it's just part of the out-of-control spending from the left.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
Before I get you to respond, I mean, the unrelated matter is it's just not true. This money, even when you create the bigger pool, still only could be spent on veterans. But anyway, go ahead.
JON STEWART:
That's correct. Well, the difference between mandatory and discretionary, is that he’s just – that's just a word salad that he's spewing into his coffee cup on his way to God knows where. As veterans sit in Washington, D.C. in the sweltering heat demanding that they pass this legislation that they've been fighting for for 15 years. Look, anybody can say anything. You know, we could say, “Elvis Presley is still alive.” But at some point, we all have to live in reality. And what he is saying is just factually incorrect. The bill that Ted Cruz voted yes on had the exact same funding provisions as the bill he voted no on. It's the exact same bill. None of this makes any sense, and the trick –
CHUCK TODD:
Have you spoken –
JON STEWART:
Yeah.
CHUCK TODD:
Have you spoken to any other of the Republican senators? I mean, was it really due to their being upset about the Manchin deal?
JON STEWART:
Oh, I mean, honestly, I have no idea. I'm not up there. I'm watching it from the outside, so I don't know why they did it. But I do know this: The explanations that they've given thus far are scattershot, they're all over the place, and none of them make any sense. The thing that people have to realize is the bill that came out of the Senate wasn't a Democrat funding gimmick. It came out of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, with Jon Tester and Jerry Moran, a Democrat and a Republican. It came out of that committee unanimously. Republicans and Democrats. And then it went to the floor, and the Senate approved it 84 to 14. There's been no funding change since then. There's been no gimmick inserted by anybody. None of this makes any sense.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, it's interesting. You've always been very cynical in some ways, correctly so, about sort of how Washington operates, how politics operates. Here, you have thrown yourself in the middle of it on a couple of different bills. How much more cynical are you now, if that's possible?
JON STEWART:
It's a pretty difficult place to see how it works because they're so insulated and isolated from the real people whose lives are affected by these various provisions. Look, you know, “a government by the people, of the people,” yes. But the clause they always seem to forget is "for the people." For them. These are real people. I've been with them for four years fighting through this. I've seen them through their defeats and their victories. But here's the other thing, Chuck. I've seen them die. We've had veterans who were advocates alongside us: Sergeant Wesley Black, Captain Kate Hendricks Thomas, who died while fighting for this bill, sick, utterly incapacitated by the injustices and the illnesses that they've been dealing with. And yet, they decided to spend these last precious times of their lives fighting so that the other men and women that they were brothers and sisters with in the military never have to go through this. And so the outrageousness of their inability to see the human toll that their parliamentary – and I'm trying desperately not to curse --
CHUCK TODD:
I hear you. I appreciate that.
JON STEWART:
– because I'm on a respectable network, I believe. This is probably --
CHUCK TODD:
Yeah. No, the FCC does have a little say.
JON STEWART:
– nationally televised. So I'm desperately trying not to curse. But the injustice that is being done is so outrageous. And the reasons for it so utterly unrelated to any of the funding or any of the other things. You know what this is, Chuck? They basically said to veterans on June 16th, "The 15-year fight that you never should've had to go through to get the health care and benefits that you earned from your sacrifice and service in the defense of this country, here it is." And then a month later, they went, "April fools." It's cruel.
CHUCK TODD:
You have shamed them I think to the point they seem to be backtracking. Do you have some optimism that this bill will pass on Tuesday?
JON STEWART:
I mean, I don't have a sense of that. I don't know. I do know this: Rosie Torres of Burn Pits 360, Tim Jensen of Grunt Style, they are camping out on the Capitol steps until this goes through. And I will join them. And we will – we will do our best to make sure that justice is done and that these veterans get, not an entitlement, but what they've earned and that this country has to live up to. These veterans lived up to the oath they made to this country, and our country has to do the same.
CHUCK TODD:
It's the one issue we all thought was above politics, supporting our veterans when it comes to health care. Jon Stewart, who's been a big advocate on this front, appreciate you coming on and sharing your perspective with us, sir.
JON STEWART:
Thanks so much, Chuck, for putting this out there.
CHUCK TODD:
And thank you for not cursing. That, I appreciate. When we come back, Democrats in array? Apparently drop the disarray. Panel is next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Panel is here. NBC News Chief White House Correspondent Kristen Welker, Politico’s White House Bureau Chief Jonathan Lemire, author of the just-released book The Big Lie and also Mr. Way Too Early, former Republican Congressman Carlos Curbelo, and Democratic strategist Adrienne Elrod. Welcome to all of you. A lot to get to. Let’s get to unpacking Joe Manchin. Kristen, you have some news this morning from the other senator who is the star of Waiting for Godot sometimes and that is Kyrsten Sinema. What do you got?
KRISTEN WELKER:
That’s right. Well all eyes are on Kyrsten Sinema. She and her team said that they were going to review the bill over the weekend. I’ve been talking to a source who’s close to the senator, though, who points to the fact that this new reconciliation bill includes the carried interest provision that she has long said that she opposes. Now, Manchin’s team says “tough,” they’re not taking it out. But, this could be where battle lines get drawn. The question is though, Chuck, is there just too much pressure on Sinema? Does she need to find a way to support this? Does she find compromise in some other area like prescription drugs? That’s where you have some Democrats saying, look, they might be able to move a little bit and give her a win, but she wasn’t a part of these final rounds of discussions and that could create a last minute snag here.
CHUCK TODD:
Jonathan, what do you think?
JONATHAN LEMIRE:
Yeah, it’s an extraordinary thing if she were to be the lone vote that sinks a package that is – has so many Democratic priorities and they’ve been trying so long and so hard to get done. We know that the White House largely took a hands-off approach to the deal struck between Manchin and Schumer, though they were in contact with the Senate majority leader’s team. But it would be interesting to see if Joe Biden wants to step in and try to play the role of the closer, you know, drawing upon his decades of the Senate. But right now, they just suggest, they feel like this needs to get done. There's just this almost existential need for Democrats to post this victory, not just because of what it would mean for the Biden presidency, but give them something for November.
CHUCK TODD:
All right. Adrienne, is this that something? And it didn't seem like Joe Manchin was that interested in seeing Democrats keep power. So what are we supposed to take away from this?
ADRIENNE ELROD:
Well, first of all, I mean, I think as a long time Democratic strategist, and I think most people in the White House too, and most other people in Congress, Democrats, we would like to see Democrats keep control of the House and the Senate.
CHUCK TODD:
Why do you think Joe Manchin doesn't care?
ADRIENNE ELROD:
Well, look, there's a reason why he's been reelected multiple times in one of the reddest states in the country. I mean, he's always kind of keeping both sides guessing. And he does a very good job of making both sides relatively happy. But I think he probably would like to keep that chairmanship. So, you know, we'll see what happens. But look, I mean, I think what we need to do is take a step back and look at the fact that President Biden has posted more wins, more legislative victories on the board than a lot of presidents before him. He's already passed three major economic packages, of course, with the CHIPS Act this past week. And yes, I think this Inflation Reduction Act is going to get passed. But I think we also need to look at what we've done so far and take those victories into account.
CHUCK TODD:
And will it matter in November?
CARLOS CURBELO:
Well, look, two things. I think Republicans are going to attack this bill. Number one, because “Inflation Reduction Act” is a bit of a gimmick. I mean, this bill does not actually address any of the fundamental causes of inflation, and number two --
CHUCK TODD:
I had somebody say, "When you get Schumer and Manchin in a room, you're going to get some crazy names."
CARLOS CURBELO:
Yeah, exactly.
CHUCK TODD:
They like to over-title things, over-spin things.
CARLOS CURBELO:
This is like when couples get together to name a baby, you know? This was the last thing on the list, right? So that's number one. Number two, it does raise taxes. And if voters do remain frustrated about the economy, that is an attack that will resonate. In terms of the climate provisions, I think they're fairly popular. Certainly, there's something in this bill for fossil fuels. It was the product of a negotiation. And I think the health care provisions will be popular too. I think more importantly for Democrats, it seemed this week that, for the first time in a long time, Chuck Schumer, and not Mitch McConnell, was in charge of the United States Senate.
CHUCK TODD:
Yeah. I mean, everybody's shocked that the majority leader got the best of the minority leader. But yes, everybody was shocked.
KRISTEN WELKER:
That's right –
CHUCK TODD:
It seems like this is still Mitch McConnell's Senate --
KRISTEN WELKER:
– including --
CHUCK TODD:
Not this week.
KRISTEN WELKER:
– Mitch McConnell. He was out-maneuvered for the first time in, frankly, since anyone can remember covering Washington. But I do think it can't be overstated. This is a significant week for President Biden. There's no doubt about that. And I think the question becomes how does he keep this momentum going? We know he was eager to get back out on the trail. He had a trip planned to Michigan this week. Now he has a rebound case of Covid. The doctor says he has no symptoms. He is eager to get back out though, and really to reset his messaging because, as we've been talking about I think now for months, his messaging hasn't been breaking through on the economy, for example. And I think the big question, Chuck, is really going to come down to one thing: will prices start to come down? Will this legislation, if it passes, help that to happen? That's the argument the Democrats are making. But they now have something to run on. And they didn't have that three days ago.
CHUCK TODD:
Well, they've still got to pass it.
KRISTEN WELKER:
That's right. That's right.
JONATHAN LEMIRE:
Yeah, they still have to pass it. And it was a mixed week on the economy, right? There were some--
KRISTEN WELKER:
It sure was.
JONATHAN LEMIRE:
– encouraging signs, but also some very much not so. And the White House engaged in some semantic battles over whether the word "recession" should be applied here or not. And I think that they say that this bill will have some impact, but it's going to be a while. And it's going – it’s going to take a while. There's only so much the White House or Congress can do to combat inflation. It's about how voters feel. And right now, we know the polling. They don't feel great. They don't feel great about the state of the country. They don't feel great right now about the state of the White House. Biden and his team believe once he bounce – recovers from this Covid bounce-back that they think they finally will have a message they can drive forward.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, Carlos, Republicans seem so rattled, that what were they thinking on this toxic burn pit bill? I mean I just – it does feel like the ultimate in the phrase "unforced error."
CARLOS CURBELO:
Yeah. That's why I'm telling you, this week was just a very different week in the United States Senate. Republicans, I understand, you know, that they're talking about some accounting provision, but at the end of the day, they cannot win the messaging war on this issue. They're going to have to capitulate and vote for it. Senator Rubio, who is in a reelection fight, voted for the bill. That's how you know that there is some perceived political peril there. So this was a big mistake. And, you know, it just feeds this narrative that Democrats are mounting a bit of a comeback.
CHUCK TODD:
Adrienne, this is a – this is a big fossil fuel bill as well. Gives a lot of the fossil fuel industry. Progressives seem to be willing to eat that crow a little bit, or whatever you want to call it, they seem to be willing to eat it for the other investments.
ADRIENNE ELROD:
Exactly.
CHUCK TODD:
Are you confident that it's still going to pass the House?
ADRIENNE ELROD:
Yeah, I am. I mean, look, it's going to be a challenge. The sausage making is never easy, but it's a $369 billion bill, the most historic investments we've ever had in our country when it comes to climate. And activists may not be thrilled with the entire package, but that's part of the deal. And I think holistically, you're seeing both progressives and moderates coming together and saying, "We need to get something done."
CHUCK TODD:
All right, I want to pivot. We've got primaries this Tuesday, and it means Donald Trump, which also means we're going to bring up your book, Jonathan, because it all sort of seems to go together. Because the initial, you call it the “Big Lie” throughout this thing, and you talk about it – it started so early. Initial false claims, subsequent embellishment, incessant repetition, clear signs that he knows the truth, but chooses to keep telling the lie, all enabled by aides either unwilling or unable to stop him. And it began in 2015.
JONATHAN LEMIRE:
Yeah, it did, soon after he became president, it really – a presidential candidate, and it really accelerated in the middle of summer in 2016, when he in an otherwise unremarkable rally in October – in Ohio says that he doesn't think the general election is going to be conducted fairly. And the seeds were planted then. And it was amplified by the conservative media, amplified by other Republicans, especially once he took office. And he was willing to tell lies big or small to condition them to go along with whatever he said, to use the powers of government leading up to January 6th.
CHUCK TODD:
And now, he's divided the Republican party. I think Arizona governor might be the greatest example of this split between sort of Trumpists. Let me play both Kari Lake, Karrin Robson, who sort of show you the two wings of this party right now.
[START TAPE]
KARI LAKE:
We don't get the right person in there, we don't vote Kari Lake, we're going to get an open borders RINO, or we're going to get an open borders socialist.
KARRIN TAYLOR ROBSON:
As governor, I will secure our border. I have a tough six-point plan that begins by calling our legislators into an emergency session.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
You know, Carlos, it really felt like somebody was following the Mitt Romney playbook: "I've got a six-point plan," and somebody who's following the Donald Trump playbook, "Open borders, socialists." Like, that's the party now, huh?
CARLOS CURBELO:
Yeah. I mean, it's a reminder of the toxicity that Donald Trump inserted into the Republican party. Some people are fighting to take that out. Obviously, Mike Pence has picked up that flag now. Will they succeed or not? We'll see. I mean, there have been some successes by more traditional or establishment-type Republicans this primary season. It doesn't appear that Donald Trump is the totally dominant, you know, force in the party anymore. He does have some competition. But, you know, these days he's also getting support from Democrats who are funding some of these MAGA Trump candidates, which I think is, you know, a big problem, and I think a scandal that hasn't been discussed enough. But these candidates, you know, they're getting amplified. They're getting heard. And, you know, the more that message is out there, the more it intoxicates our politics.
CHUCK TODD:
Adrienne, are you comfortable with that strategy that the DCCC did this week? And it's not the first time, sort of helping essentially somebody who's an illiberal, small-D democrat?
ADRIENNE ELROD:
Yeah. Look, it's a tale as old as time. Both Democrats and Republicans have been doing this for a long time. You want to make sure that you are running against the weakest opponent that you possibly can. Look, I'm not seeing all the empirical data, but I do have faith that the strategists at the DCCC are seeing something that says, "If we can help get these, you know, crazy insurrectionists over the finish line to be the general election nominee” –
CHUCK TODD:
Yeah, and what if he’s in Congress?
ADRIENNE ELROD:
Well, look, it's a risk that we have to take. But let me also say this, Chuck. Democrats are often criticized for not being tough enough or not being, you know, aggressive enough when it comes to strategy. Here's an example of us doing that, and we're getting criticized.
KRISTEN WELKER:
Well, I think the challenge though when I talk to Democrats who are really frustrated and worried about this strategy, they say the problem is twofold. One, the person might actually get into office. And number two, it makes Democrats look hypocritical for saying, "These people are a threat to the nation's democracy." And Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania is the perfect example, someone who Democrats really wanted to win the primary. Now, he has in the gubernatorial race, and now he's doing better in the polls, Chuck. And that is making Pennsylvania Democrats very nervous --
JONATHAN LEMIRE:
And it undercuts --
KRISTEN WELKER:
– when they look at the polling.
JONATHAN LEMIRE:
-- the work of the January 6th Committee in many ways as well, that it puts it suddenly seemingly like this is okay. It sort of almost blesses this behavior. And it just goes to show that Trump though certainly, maybe he's been weakened somewhat over this past summer by the committee and other things, he is still the loudest voice in the party. It's still – the Big Lie is a litmus test. And it is shaping the politics of the Republican party. And it's not going anywhere. We're going to have to live with this, this year and through '24.
CHUCK TODD:
Well, as I'm going to show, I think the reason why Democrats have a fighting chance: Donald Trump. He doesn't go away, and the Republican Party never got to remake themselves, or remodel themselves. You guys are terrific. Thank you. 100 days until the midterms. And on Tuesday, voters in five states will be going to the polls to decide some statewide elections. Coming up: Why the early indicators of who will win in November, actually don't indicate much at all this year. Stay with us.
CHUCK TODD:
We are back. Data Download time. So today marks exactly 100 days until the November midterm elections. And although a president's first term midterms almost always go bad for the party in power, this upcoming election is proving to be uniquely hard to predict. We have a lot of conflicting pieces of data. Let's take fundraising. It's Democrats that are dominating, particularly in some Senate races here: Pennsylvania, Georgia, even Ohio. These aren't alone, but these are some of the biggest differences that we've seen between D and R. But across the board, Democrats are out-raising Republicans in the battle for the Senate. But when it comes to who's enthusiastic about these midterms, it is Republicans that have this advantage. They've been fired up to get to the polls, really going back to those off-year elections in Virginia. Democrats are closing the gap thanks to the overturn of Roe v. Wade, but it's still a deficit. Meanwhile, the generic Congressional ballot’s all over the map. We have a, we have sort of a more honestly reapportioned House map than ever before. So these numbers are just all over the place. Some have Democrats ahead. Some have Republicans ahead. So again, more contradiction. And then look at this: The two party leaders. Joe Biden, his favorable rating’s just 35%. But this is what makes this election cycle unique. The Republican Party has not moved past Donald Trump. He's their party leader. So it could be a referendum on him, and he's not very favorable either. That's what makes these midterms so unique. When we come back, would the Justice Department indict a former president, even one who could be running again for president? That's next, as we also bid a bittersweet farewell to our colleague and my friend, Pete Williams.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. There have been indications in recent days that the Justice Department is moving more aggressively than first thought in investigating former President Trump's actions on and before January 6th. And this week, the attorney general, Merrick Garland, talked to my colleague Lester Holt about whether he would be concerned about indicting a former president who may be on the verge of announcing his candidacy again.
[START TAPE]
ATTORNEY GENERAL MERRICK GARLAND:
We intend to hold everyone, anyone who was criminally responsible for the events surrounding January 6th or any attempt to interfere with the lawful transfer of power from one administration to another accountable. That's what we do.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
Pete Williams has been covering the Justice Department and the Supreme Court for NBC News since 1993. He’s stepping down unfortunately after those brief 29 years here at this network. So I'm telling you for the last time, joining me now is Pete Williams. Mr. Williams, I want to start a little substance here with Merrick Garland. No matter how Lester Holt asked him a question about investigating Trump, he basically gave a version of that answer.
PETE WILLIAMS:
Right.
CHUCK TODD:
What’s he, what does he want people to take away? What is that Rorschach response that he wants people to hear in their head when he says that?
PETE WILLIAMS:
Well, I think, number one, to indicate that the Justice Department is doing a lot more than it appears. We just don't really have a good clue of what the Justice Department is doing. We get these little glimpses when people testify before a grand jury, but it's quite clear that they're doing a lot more than we see. And two, I think they're quite serious that they don't know where this will end up. Shortly after the Biden administration came into power, I asked a very senior administration official, "Can't we just assume that if you do get the goods on Donald Trump, you'll just decide that that's a bridge too far, that it would be too divisive for the country?" And I was told, "No. Don't assume that. Anything is on the table." Now, of course, he does say, you know, "people who were criminally responsible." And one big question will be, okay, well then, what's the crime? Is it obstructing Congress? Is it dereliction of duty? I mean, that's a difficult thing to say. And I would say one other thing here, Chuck. You know, there is a principle of federal prosecution that prosecutors are not supposed to just roll the dice and take their best shot. They're not supposed to bring a case unless they have a strong reason to think the jury would convict. And I would think if it comes to charging a former president, there would be an even higher standard – that not only you can persuade a jury to convict, but you can also persuade the public that you're doing the right thing.
CHUCK TODD:
Let me take a step back, take the lens back. You've been covering the Supreme Court since 1993. Each – it feels like about every five years, it gets somehow more contested, more controversial, or more – it creates more anger. What is your sort of analysis of how the Supreme Court has evolved over the last 30 years?
PETE WILLIAMS:
So we had a relatively liberal Court when Earl Warren was the chief justice. We had a sort of middle-ground Court when William Rehnquist was chief justice. And now in the John Roberts era, we have a much more conservative Court with these three Trump appointees. The Court now has a solid, conservative majority. And you're now seeing that these goals that people like Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito have had in mind for all these years when they had to just sort of, you know, take their lumps in the minority, now they're in charge. And they are not holding back. They're making up for lost time. And I think we're going to see that again in the coming term.
CHUCK TODD:
How much do you think the confirmation process will change based on how things have gone the last couple years?
PETE WILLIAMS:
Well, it may change over time, but I don't think it's going to change in the short term because we get this flip back and forth. Whenever the other party takes control of the Senate, then they want to extract revenge for what happened to them. And I think that probably will go on for a while.
CHUCK TODD:
All right, I want to celebrate you. For those of us here and even before I knew you, there were a couple of moments that always stick out. You're, like, "Thank God for Pete Williams." Here's one of them. It goes back to 2000 – December of 2000.
[START TAPE]
PETE WILLIAMS:
But there's no doubt here, Tom. There's just no way that the Court thinks a recount is possible. And we should say again, obviously, the justices have had more than 24 hours to prepare this rather splintered up opinion. It's in many sections, but there's no question, it is a five-four vote.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
Look, you did it in that one. You were the first one to – everybody's watching, and I remember myself going, "Oh, Pete's got the goods. He's explaining this." And you did it with the Obamacare one too. Everybody else wasn't sure what happened. You seemed to be the first one to understand it. Do you just know how to read these briefs better than everybody else?
PETE WILLIAMS:
It's a living. Well, you know, I've looked at that Bush v. Gore opinion many times in the comfort of my own office, with the air conditioning on. And I've always thought, "This thing is so easy to understand." But when I was standing out there in the bitter cold on that December night, it seemed to be fairly opaque at the time. There was no head note on it. There were lots of things, language about what it wasn't. And it did take a while to figure out what it was.
CHUCK TODD:
I've been asked this question before. When you know you don't have the safety net – like that's a moment you know the safety net's not there – is it exhilarating or frightening?
PETE WILLIAMS:
It's exhilarating when it's over. It's frightening in the moment because it does occur to you that this is not a good time to screw up.
CHUCK TODD:
So you've always been able to be sort of – you’ve always taken yourself out of the story. Give some advice to a young journalist. They want to be the next Pete Williams. What's your advice?
PETE WILLIAMS:
Well, I don't know whether that's anything to aspire to or not, but I think I've been lucky about covering my beat because, you know, there are two sides to every case that come to the Supreme Court. And you have to be agnostic about who's the winner. And I find that experience — you know, you read the briefs from the first side and you think, "Wow, they're right. They should win." Then you read the other side and you think, "Wow, that's a good argument. They should win. No wonder this is coming to the Supreme Court. It's a tough case." I think the test is can somebody looking at your story or reading your story online tell how you hope it comes out? And if the answer is no, then I think you've done your job.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, it's interesting, you bring up the Supreme Court. I have really enjoyed listening to the real-time audio. I am a junkie for this. I wish I went to law school, okay? I think you've said that before too.
PETE WILLIAMS:
Sure.
CHUCK TODD:
Are they going to take that away from us? Are they going to take this audio away when they decide Covid is no longer an issue?
PETE WILLIAMS:
I don't know. I think they might. Remember why they allowed the live audio. It's because the public couldn't come into the Court because of Covid. So they thought, "Well, all right. Let's replicate the experience of being in the courtroom." You could hear the live audio if you were there. You can't be there, so they'll do the live audio. And I'm sure there will be some inclination to go back to the program, which they used to do, which is release the audio every Friday after all the news value is drained out of it. There are a lot of people pushing for it. I guess the good part of it is it doesn't seem to have hurt the Court any. And that's what they're always worried about.
CHUCK TODD:
You're really going back on the horse you rode in on. You came from Wyoming, and you're going to be spending a lot more time back there, aren't you?
PETE WILLIAMS:
Yes, that's my home state, and that’s – you know, that's the place I love. And so yes.
CHUCK TODD:
What I love is, no matter who I meet from Wyoming, they're always proud. You're a favorite son.
PETE WILLIAMS:
Oh, well, thank you. Thank you.
CHUCK TODD:
Pete Williams --
PETE WILLIAMS:
I'm very proud of my home state.
CHUCK TODD:
I'm going to miss you.
PETE WILLIAMS:
Miss you too, Chuck. Thank you.
CHUCK TODD:
Thank you. Thank you for watching. We'll be back next week. Hopefully Juan Soto is still a National next week, because if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press.