CHUCK TODD:
This Sunday, armed rebellion. Russian President Vladimir Putin's hold on power is challenged after his mercenary chief appears to turn on him. Fighters from the Wagner Group pushed towards Moscow after taking control of the Russian military headquarters running the Ukraine war operations. But hours later the militia stopped its advance and turned around. What happens next and how should the U.S. respond? I'll talk to the U-S Secretary of State Antony Blinken and former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul. Plus, Russia's weakness. Ukrainian President Zelensky sees Russia's internal crisis as an opportunity at a critical moment in the war.
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY:
The world saw that the bosses of Russia do not control anything.
CHUCK TODD:
What does this crisis mean for the Ukrainians and the West’s support for them? I'll speak with Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Republican Congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska. And, political strengths and weaknesses. Our new NBC poll reveals Republican primary voters are unmoved by Donald Trump's legal trouble.
FMR. PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
I’m probably the old person in history in this country that’s been indicted and my numbers went up.
CHUCK TODD:
The former president has expanded his lead over his primary rivals even after facing federal criminal charges.
FMR. PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
I had every right to have these documents.
CHUCK TODD:
And yet President Biden, who has his own weaknesses, still leads Donald Trump by 4 points. Joining me for insight and analysis are New York Times Chief White House Correspondent Peter Baker, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander James Stavridis, Anne Applebaum of The Atlantic and Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute. 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. It's been a head-spinning 24 hours as Vladimir Putin has seen the most significant threat to his power since he took leadership nearly a quarter century ago. The mutiny by the head of the mercenary militia, the Wagner Group, comes at a pivotal moment in the war in Ukraine and it raises questions about Putin's hold on power in Russia. Is he a lame duck? On Saturday, Yevgeny Prigozhin ordered his mercenaries to halt a march on Moscow and retreat to field camps in Ukraine, after claiming to seize several military facilities, including the Southern Military District Headquarters, in the southern city of Rostov-on-Don. That's equivalent to a rogue army taking over CENTCOM in Tampa, a U.S. military operations center, then marching on the Pentagon. Now, Putin had promised to crush the armed mutiny and accused Prigozhin of treason. Prigozhin accused Russia’s defense minister Sergei Shoigu of starting the Ukraine war and denying Wagner fighters ammunition. Prigiozhin's forces drove to within 200 miles from Moscow and then as quickly as this crisis had begun, it ended. And shockingly it wasn't Putin, the strongman, who announced it – the deal and the fact that it was a deal but Belarus, Russia's ally which offered Prigozhin amnesty in the country. We don’t know if he is there yet. Notably, Putin blamed internal turmoil. He didn't do a rant against the West for this – for what he called a stab in the back, underscoring how weak he appeared. Prigozhin, also known as Putin's chef for owning a chain of restaurants that were a Putin hangout before he got to power, was responsible for sowing disinformation in the 2016 U.S. election as founder of the Internet Research Agency. In 2014, he, Prigozhin, founded the mercenary army known as the Wagner Group, which has been recruiting Russian convicts to fight in Ukraine to prop up a struggling Russian military. So, this Russian mutiny has raised a number of questions about Russia's resolve to continue to fight a war in Ukraine that Putin was supposed to easily win. On Saturday, Ukraine's President Zelensky said that Russia’s weakness is obvious.
[START TAPE]
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY:
Today the world saw that the bosses of Russia do not control anything. Nothing at all. Complete chaos.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
And joining me now is the Secretary of State, Antony Blinken. Secretary Blinken, welcome back to Meet The Press.
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Thanks, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
Let me just start with your observations. What did we just see over the weekend? And the reason I ask that is because, look, this is a country that misinformation is a feature not a bug. Sometimes there's theater. What should we believe with what we just witnessed in the last 48 hours in Russia?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Well, Chuck, if you put this in perspective, what we've seen is extraordinary. Think about it this way, 16 months ago, Russian forces were on the doorstep of Kiev in Ukraine, believing they would take the capital in a matter of days and erase the country from – from the map as an independent country. Now what we've seen is Russia having to defend Moscow, its capital, against mercenaries of its own making. So, in and of itself, that's extraordinary. And in so doing, we've also seen rise to the surface profound questions about the very premises for this Russian aggression against Ukraine that Prigozhin surfaced very publicly, as well as a direct challenge to Putin's authority. So, I think we've seen more cracks emerge in the Russian facade. It is too soon to tell exactly where they go and when they get there, but certainly we have all sorts of new questions that Putin is going to have to address in the weeks and months ahead.
CHUCK TODD:
What was amazing was what wasn't said. Vladimir Putin didn't blame the west for this. He didn't blame it during his very strident speech, nor the after the fact. What do you make of that?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
It's hard to put myself in Putin's head or Prigozhin's for that matter. And keep in mind, both individuals are responsible for terrible acts committed against the Ukrainian people. Also, in the case of Wagner, in country after country in Africa, wherever Wagner goes, death and destruction and exploitation follow. But I think it does point to the fact that this is an internal matter. This is a challenge coming from within to Putin and that's where his focus has been. Our focus is resolutely and relentlessly on Ukraine, making sure that it has what it needs to defend itself and to take back territory that Russia has seized. The president brought together the national security Cabinet. He brought together our key allies and partners to make sure that the unity of purpose, the unity of action that we've had with regard to Ukraine remains and it does.
CHUCK TODD:
The president of Belarus apparently mediated this. That seems startling because this is somebody that is portrayed by many western analysts as simply a puppet of Putin. Puppets don't often mediate their puppeteers here. So, what do you make of this? Are we underestimating Belarus here?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
I think it's important for us not to speculate and I suspect that we'll learn more and more in the days and weeks ahead, including the actual details of whatever deal was struck. It may be that Putin didn't want to debase himself to the level of negotiating directly with Prigozhin, so it was useful to get someone like Lukashenko into this on his behalf. But again, that is speculation. We want to avoid that. We want to focus on the facts and we want to keep the focus on Ukraine.
CHUCK TODD:
There were some reports over the weekend that U.S. intelligence analysts seemed to think something was up. How – how – what you ended up seeing versus what the intelligence said, how accurate was it?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Well, Chuck, I'm obviously not going to comment on intelligence matters. What I can say is this, I think it's been no secret to many people over many months that these tensions were rising, they were brewing. Prigozhin was already saying some rather extraordinary things about Russia's conduct of the war in Ukraine and going directly at Russia's military leadership. So, this was a rising storm, but I'm not going to comment on the intelligence itself.
CHUCK TODD:
The dismantling of the Wagner Group. First of all, do you believe it's being dismantled? And if so, what does this mean in Africa and Syria?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Too soon to tell. We'll see if this means that Wagner forces are coming out of Ukraine. I mean, the very fact that over the weekend Wagner forces were coming out of Ukraine and going into Russia and toward Moscow, in and of itself, is extraordinary. But where this goes, whether those forces remain in Ukraine, whether they become integrated into the regular Russian military, what it means for Wagner in Africa, too soon to tell. But the fact that this is, at the least, an added distraction for Putin and for Russia. I think its to the advantage of Ukraine. It continues to move forward with the counteroffensive. These are early days, but they have in hand what they need to be successful. It's going to unfold over weeks and even months, but this just creates another problem for Putin. And keep this in mind, too, Chuck, this is just the latest chapter in a book of failure that Putin has written for himself and for Russia. Economically, militarily, its standing in the world, all of those things have plummeted. We have a united NATO that's stronger than ever before, a Europe that is weaning itself off of Russian energy, Ukraine that Putin has managed to alienate and unite at the same time. Now, with trouble brewing from within, as I said, just adds more questions that he has to find answers for.
CHUCK TODD:
I know that there were – no changes to their nuclear posture. Was there open communication on that front, military to military, on the nuclear issue over the weekend or not?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Chuck, I'm not going to get into what diplomatic or other communications we had with Russia, but of course we're very focused any time there is instability in a major country like Russia, particularly one with nuclear weapons. There has been no change in their nuclear posture, there's no change in our nuclear posture, but it's something that we're watching very carefully.
CHUCK TODD:
Does the instability give you hope that there's an opening for the American citizens that are being held captive in Russia right now? Or do you fear there's going to be a clampdown and this will make it harder?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
I don't want to speculate on that. We're, as always, regardless of anything else that's happening, intensely focused on making sure that we do everything possible to bring home Americans who are unjustly or arbitrarily detained, including in Russia. That focus will remain.
CHUCK TODD:
Does this go to full speed ahead for the Ukraine counteroffensive? Is this a moment of opportunity?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Chuck, it is full speed ahead for their – the counteroffensive, but they have a plan and they have a very deliberate plan. They are prosecuting that plan. And we have more than 50 countries that continue to support them in that effort to make sure that they have everything they need to do as well as they can in taking back the land that was seized from them by Russia over the last 16 months. That is in train, but it's going to take some time, weeks, maybe even months. There are very strong defenses that the Russians have built up in recent months that the Ukrainians are working their way through. But at the end of the day, the bottom line really is this, and it's the reason that Ukraine will prevail: this is about their land. This is about their future. This is about their freedom, not Russia's. And that is, in a sense, the real difference maker that you're going to see unfold.
CHUCK TODD:
We originally booked you to talk about your China visit. That's why you were to come on. I want to ask you, within 24 hours after you leave China, President Biden refers to Xi Jinping as a dictator. And the Chinese government chose to be – chose to be offended. And the reason I word it that way is they didn't have to. We know this. A lot of times countries, you know – domestic rhetoric is domestic political rhetoric. We ignore rhetoric sometimes with countries overseas. Why do you believe the Chinese decided to be so publicly angry over this comment?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Chuck, I can't put myself in their minds. What I can say is this. I went to China at the president's instruction to try to bring a little bit more stability to the relationship. We have an obligation to responsibly manage that relationship. China does as well, and we hear that from countries around the world. And restoring strong lines of communication, making sure that we can talk directly about the many and profound differences we have, as well as looking for places that we might be able to cooperate, that's important. And I think we put that in train. But part of my visit was to tell them very clearly that we're going to continue to do things and we're going to continue to say things that you don't like or won't like, just as you're doing things and saying things that we don't like. But we have to work our way through them. And that's exactly what we're doing.
CHUCK TODD:
So, no apology for the dictator comment is coming?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Again, I've been very clear that we will continue to do as we've always done, which is to stand up for our interests, stand up for our values, and say what we think. And at the same time, again, they're doing the same thing.
CHUCK TODD:
Are we going to prevent China from having a military base on the island of Cuba?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
We have been not only looking, but also engaging in a number of countries over the last couple of years where China is trying to get a foothold. And we've been engaged diplomatically in a number of places and we've had some success in either preventing that, delaying that, or turning that around. We continue to do that. I've raised that directly with my Chinese counterparts. They know where we stand on that issue.
CHUCK TODD:
I noticed you say you raised it with your Chinese counterparts. We don’t – we have no relations still with Cuba. I mean, this decision to pull back relations with Cuba, did we not just throw them into the arms of the Chinese?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
No, we actually have raised this with the Cubans as well. So, they also, for them, there's no secret about the concerns that we have and the fact that we're watching this very carefully.
CHUCK TODD:
Are we going to make sure it doesn't happen? Is this a line in the sand?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Again, we've made clear that this is a real concern. And as I said, in a variety of places where China's tried to get a foothold militarily or with intelligence, we've been not only looking at that, we've been taking action to try to push back and we've had some success.
CHUCK TODD:
All right. Secretary Blinken, Secretary of State, I know it was a long weekend. I appreciate you coming on and sharing your perspective.
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Thanks, Chuck. It's good to be with you.
CHUCK TODD:
Thank you, sir.
CHUCK TODD:
And joining me now is former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Mike McFaul. Ambassador McFaul, welcome back to Meet the Press. You're playing Kremlinologist for us, and you heard the Secretary of State there not wanting to speculate. You can speculate. Let's start there. What did we just witness? It's a similar question I asked Secretary Blinken. And how weak do you think Vladimir Putin is right now?
AMB. MICHAEL McFAUL:
Well, it was a mutiny. Mr. Prigozhin made it very clear that he wanted to punish the armed forces of Russia for the way they've been fighting in Ukraine, and for the way they attacked him. It was an extraordinary operation. This was not just something he woke up one day and said, "Let's go to Moscow." It's clear there was a lot of planning. And the fact that our intelligence allegedly knew about it in mid-June, of course the Russian intelligence must have known about it as well, and yet did nothing to stop it. And Putin then got on TV and made a very strong statement, Chuck. He was like, "We’re going to take – we're going to crush these guys like a bug. These are traitors." And then several hours later negotiated. So, the fear of escalation, you know, we've been talking about this a lot, Chuck, in Ukraine. He needs an exit strategy. He needs to save face. If we push him here, he's going to escalate. When push came to shove, this time he capitulated.
CHUCK TODD:
So who blinked more here, Prigozhin or Putin?
AMB. MICHAEL McFAUL:
Oh, Putin. There's no doubt in my mind. You know, he did not use force. He could've attacked these forces. They're just marching up a road that I used drive on all the time –
CHUCK TODD:
Prigozhin killed 12 helicopter pilots, did he not?
AMB. MICHAEL McFAUL:
Exactly. That's why to me it's very clear that in this game of chicken it was Putin that stepped down. And it's strange to me that he gave that big speech. Had he not given that speech it would look a lot different. But he gave this big speech saying they're traitors, and then several hours later he decided to negotiate. And don't get me wrong, I understand why he did. He did not want to spark a civil war. These are real fighters. But there's no doubt that he looks weak in the eyes of lots of people inside Russia, and I think lots of people outside of Russia as well.
CHUCK TODD:
Do you expect there to be a new defense minister soon?
AMB. MICHAEL McFAUL:
I don't know. Of course, there's lots of reports that that was part of the deal. And if that's true, that's even another sign of Putin's weakness, if Prigozhin was able to get that. But we have to wait and see. We have not seen exactly what was in those negotiations.
CHUCK TODD:
What do you make of Belarus playing a mediator role here? Again, he's supposed to be the puppet and I don’t – right? And that's what a lot of people assume here. Same question I asked the Secretary of State: are we underestimating Belarus here? Is he a strengthening capo, to speak in mob terms?
AMB. MICHAEL McFAUL:
I don't think so. I think he's a puppet of Putin. Putin wanted him to do this. Remember, Prigozhin is too. That's what's so strange about this whole thing, Prigozhin's been very close to Putin for a long, long time. I just think Putin wanted some distance. In agree with Secretary Blinken here. He didn't want to be the direct interlocutor, but was Lukashenko doing exactly what Putin wants? That's my assessment.
CHUCK TODD:
Is this, you know, universally this is a positive for the war in Ukraine, for the Ukrainians? Or is there any chance here that you fear that Putin's desperate and might do something stupid?
AMB. MICHAEL McFAUL:
Well, it's definitely a positive. When Russian forces are threatening to fight each other rather than fighting the Ukrainian Army, that's good for Ukraine. Putin looks a lot weaker today than he did 48 hours, that's good for Ukraine. That doesn't mean, however, that there's going to be some breakthrough as a result of this. The basic fighting forces that Russia have in Ukraine haven't changed. The Wagner folks have left already. But on your escalation point, Chuck, I think it's a really important one. Because we've been debating this now for many, many months. And even the Biden administration from time to time has made decisions not to provide weapons to the Ukrainians, certain types of weapons, because they worry about escalation. But let's remember what we just witnessed here. Putin had the opportunity to escalate, he told the world and his people he was going to escalate, and then he blinked. And I think that, to me, may be the most important lesson from this mutiny in Russia for the war in Ukraine. That this notion that he's going to double down and escalate, 1) he may not want to, and B) he may not have the means to do so.
CHUCK TODD:
Or maybe even the moral authority over his troops. Mike McFaul –
AMB. MICHAEL McFAUL:
Good point —
CHUCK TODD:
– former ambassador to Russia. Always good to get your perspective. Thank you, sir. When we come back, I'm going to get reactions from two key members of Congress, Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar and Republican Congressman Don Bacon.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. So, what's next after this weekend's march on Moscow by armed mercenaries, or near march onto Moscow, as Vladimir Putin faces his most significant threat to his power in more than two decades? Joining me now is Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota. She is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senator Klobuchar, welcome back to Meet the Press.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
Great to be back on. Thanks, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
So, let me just start with, as you were watching things unfold this weekend, first, did you feel as if you were well informed? How much – how many briefings have you been able to get? And what – what do you want us to do? Does this at all shake your resolve about what we're doing in Ukraine?
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
The opposite. We saw here a demonstrable crack in Vladimir Putin's strength. We saw visible rejection of his war policy by someone who had been an ally and now had turned into insubordination, taking over a city of a million people, marching his troops and his tanks within 124 miles of Moscow. And then you see Putin having to condemn this on their own country's TV. That's what happened. And then on the other side – and by the way, this was a guy that, you know, had hired mercenaries in Syria and Libya, someone that had started an internet troll farm in Moscow to attack the American elections. And then on the other side you see President Zelenskyy, who has governed with more moral authority, who has brought his people with him, not through fear, but through their own patriotism and wanting to protect the sovereignty of their country. And you now see this counteroffensive. We always knew it would be a slog, but he is advancing and as of Monday, I think, taken over eight towns.
CHUCK TODD:
Having to choose between Putin and Prigozhin is not a choice anybody wants to have to make. I mean, you look at our philosophy on Russia, we fear a strong Russia and we fear a weak Russia. We want something in between because they're a nuclear power. But, you know, what's the best U.S. role? The best thing that the U.S. can do to sort of encourage that Goldilocks approach?
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
Well, obviously the continuing openness to nuclear discussions and nuclear safety. And the secretary of state and president have assured us that there hasn't been any change in that right now when it comes to Russia. But the second part, of course, is supporting Ukraine. And you see a Congress that has now put forward $40 – over $40 billion in military commitments. You see a president who has really led the world's allies in standing with Ukraine. You see countries like Germany and Poland and Great Britain stepping us as no one thought before, as the secretary just noted, ridding themselves of their dependence on Russian oil. Vladimir Putin has bitten off a lot more than he ever thought possible when he marched into Ukraine.
CHUCK TODD:
I'm going to ask you a couple of political questions here. We've got a new poll out, and we asked various questions having to do with President Biden and his ability to do the job. Does he have the mental and physical health to serve? The concern among Democrats has doubled since October 2020. It was only one in five Democrats that had that concern before Election Day 2020. It's now over 40%. It's 43%. You were just with the president at the state dinner. Do you have any concerns?
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
No, I don't. He did so well at that state dinner. I think we all saw his power at the State of the Union. Our party is united behind him. Why? Because we work in a results-oriented business, Chuck, and he has gotten results. Added over 13 million jobs since the beginning of his presidency. When he took over, our democracy was in shambles. We were in the middle of a pandemic. People were dying. Now we've emerged from that. The economy is moving forward. Manufacturing in our own nation, made in America, is resurging. We finally got veterans healthcare done for those stationed next to burn pits. We've united our allies when it comes to Ukraine. We've finally taken on the pharmaceutical companies, despite everyone talking about it, and passed a version of my bill which allows Medicare to negotiate for lower prices for our seniors. Those aren't small accomplishments. Those are big deal things.
CHUCK TODD:
I want to ask you before you go – I brought up the state dinner. Do you think it was appropriate for Hunter Biden to be at the same event as the attorney general, Merrick Garland, was in the same week he accepted a plea deal?
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
You know, I think, as the president explains, that's his son. That's a separate thing. And I would like to say about that: that decision was made by an independent prosecutor who is a Trump-appointed U.S. attorney who had ten years of experience, well respected. Philadelphia Inquirer reported that he was a registered Republican. He looked at the facts and evidence and made that decision. And by the way, if that's what the Republicans want to run on in the coming election, good luck, because the president is going to be able to run on the strengths of his work in bringing 13 million jobs back to America and resurging —
CHUCK TODD:
You understand the perception —
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
– manufacturing in our country and in moving forward.
CHUCK TODD:
You understand the perception issue of something like that, though.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
Yes, I do. I do.
CHUCK TODD:
And do you wish that perception were different?
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
You always wish there were different perceptions, but that's not reality. Reality is whether or not someone is going to be able to get their insulin. And the president has made changes. Reality is whether someone has a job. Reality is when they can go visit their grandma again in an assisted living. Those are people's realities, not who is sitting where at a state dinner.
CHUCK TODD:
Secretary Klobuchar – Senator Klobuchar, Democrat from Minnesota —
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
Oh, that's all good.
CHUCK TODD:
There you go. That'll start some rumors.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
Thank you very much.
CHUCK TODD:
Thanks very much. All right. Appreciate it.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
There you go, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
Joining me now —
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
Thank you.
CHUCK TODD:
— from the other side of the aisle, Republican Congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska, member of the House Armed Services Committee. He represents, by the way, one of those 18 House districts that President Biden also won in 2020. Congressman Bacon, welcome back to Meet the Press.
REP. DON BACON:
Good morning, Chuck. It's great to be with you.
CHUCK TODD:
And I should also add he is representing the district that is the home of the College World Series right now, which is always very exciting, in Omaha. But, Congressman —
REP. DON BACON:
It was a great game last night.
CHUCK TODD:
Let me start with what we just saw. You've been a supporter of the Ukrainians. You've been a supporter of aiding them here. Given what we watched over the weekend, what do you say to your House Republicans who have been a bit soft on Putin after what we saw over the weekend? Do you think this will change some minds in your conference?
REP. DON BACON:
You know, I think it's a minority of the Republicans who have been weak on this. I think the majority of us believe that we have to stand by Ukraine. You can't let a bully do what Putin's doing. If you don't stand up to the bully, the bully will come back. And it won't be just Ukraine, it could be the Baltics or other countries next. And I think what we saw this weekend was how fragile Putin's leadership is right now, how fragile the military is, the Russian military. And why is that? They have lost 200,000 troops in this year and a half. That is almost seven times more than what America lost in 20 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. They've lost half their tanks. Their air force has been depleted significantly. The only real answer here is that Putin's got to stop this war and pull out of Ukraine. If he wants to save his country, save his leadership position, I think that's really the only answer, because this will not get better for Putin or Russia. And, by the way, I think we could even do more with the ATACMS and other long-range precision weapons. I believe President Biden's been slow on this. But the bottom line is we see the fragility of Putin, their military, and they are taking significant losses. And that's why.
CHUCK TODD:
I want to pop up something from our poll here. Just so you know, we asked whether you would be more likely or less likely to support a candidate who wants more funding for the war in Ukraine. It's pretty evenly divided overall. But among Republicans, it's 2:1 less likely. Republican primary voters, I know you said it's a minority in the Republican Party, but a majority of Republican primary voters say they're less likely to support a candidate who wants to continue to fund this war in Ukraine. Do you see the funding of the war in Ukraine as directly responsible for this crack in Russia with Putin?
REP. DON BACON:
Yes, I do. I think our actions have helped Ukraine prevail to the extent that they are right now. Still, they're in the middle of a war, Russia controls about 10% of their country. But without our aid, without our support, I think Ukraine would have fallen by now. And I would just like to point out, we have spent roughly 5% of our military, of what we budget for our military, that's what’s gone to Ukraine. And it's depleted roughly half of Russia's army.
CHUCK TODD:
So you see this as a good investment?
REP. DON BACON:
And we've been very effective.
CHUCK TODD:
Five percent of our military budget depletes 50% of theirs?
REP. DON BACON:
Yes. That's what we've done in the last year and a half. And I think this has weakened Russia for, well, maybe a decade to come, which is good for the Baltic countries. It's good for Poland. And it would be different if Putin was wanting to be a peaceful neighbor, but he's not. So we see the barbaric – basically, what he's doing is, "might makes right," and that's not what we want with a major nuclear country. And so I think we have a moral obligation to stand up here and help Ukraine. I think too many Republicans have tried to stay under the radar on this. We do best when we stand for what's right, what's truthful. And I believe in Ronald Reagan's principles of, you know, of strength – we get peace through strength. And you've got to stand up and help out the little guy that's being beat up by the big guy.
CHUCK TODD:
I want to get your response to something Former President Trump said last night about the indictment. Let me play it for you.
[START TAPE]
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
Whatever documents the president decides to take with him, he has the absolute right to take them. He has the absolute right to keep them. Or he can give them back to NARA if he wants.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
It's not often that somebody who's accused of something admits it at a function there. Is there any part of that statement that's correct?
REP. DON BACON:
I don't believe so, Chuck. We don't have a right to take top secret information to our home. I've dealt with top secrets since I was 22 years old, in the military for 30 years, and now in Congress. You don't show our attack plans on Iran to people who are not cleared or pick documents that talk about our nuclear technology or where our intelligence resources are located throughout the world. And that's what happened there. And when the government asks for them back, you give them back. And if you deny having them, but then you have them, those are crimes. And so I —
CHUCK TODD:
Why do you think the party rallies around him when these things happen, rather than looks at the facts like you do and say, "You're not supposed to do this, sir?”
REP. DON BACON:
You know, like, we have President Biden, who had classified, but he gave it back when they found it. We have Mike Pence, who had classified, but he gave it back. But I think people see, "Well, there are other people that had classified," but the situations are different. I personally thought Hillary Clinton was wrong for having thousands of emails on her private server that I can guarantee you that Russia and China could penetrate and read some of those emails that were top secret. I thought she should have been held more accountable. But I think a lot of our voters see, or perceive, these inconsistencies. But two wrongs don't make a right. You can't have hundreds of top secret information and be showing our attack plans on Iran to non-cleared people. I think, again, our party does best when we stand on the rule of law, the truth, the principles that made our party strong. And if we walk away from that, we'll be weakened in the short run, for sure.
CHUCK TODD:
All right. Congressman Don Bacon, Republican from Omaha, again, home of the College World Series, one of the great annual tournaments and a great place to watch it. Thanks for coming on and sharing your perspective with us.
REP. DON BACON:
Thank you.
CHUCK TODD:
When we come back, Putin's hold on power is openly challenged for the first time in nearly two decades. What will happen now? Our expert panel is next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. So to translate what's really happening in Russia and what it all means, I'm joined by an expert panel with a lot of Russian experience Anne Applebaum, staff writer for The Atlantic, author of Twilight of Democracy: The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, Admiral Jim Stavridis, Peter Baker, the chief White House correspondent for The New York Times, but he was also a Moscow Bureau Chief in his days at The Washington Post, and Danielle Pletka, senior fellow for the American Enterprise Institute but before that, she was a longtime staffer on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. So I'm very ecstatic about the amount of Russian intellect we have here. Anne, let me start with you. Is this Putin's twilight?
ANNE APPLEBAUM:
Twilight is too early – it's too early to talk about twilight, but it's certainly a kind of turning point. You know, to me, the most interesting thing about yesterday was the way that ordinary people in the city of Rostov reacted to Wagner mercenaries. They came up to them. They smiled at them. They had selfies with them. They waved them goodbye when they left the city in the evening. These were not people who seemed very upset about, you know, violent mercenaries carrying out regime change in their country. These are not people who are going to defend Putin. Many of our assumptions about his longevity, about his popularity, may have just been exploded by yesterday's events. And so I think his – the weaknesses of his regime and of his power structure have just been revealed. And has – is going to have consequences over the next few months. My guess is we're looking at one of two things: either a kind of crackdown, he'll decide he needs more violence to stay in power, or else more chaos, and we'll see more challenges from others.
CHUCK TODD:
What does this do with Prigozhin, Anne? Does this strengthen him? Is he a true political threat to Putin's leadership? Is this somebody that might actually have eyes on this?
ANNE APPLEBAUM:
I actually don’t see – I disagree slightly with Ambassador McFaul from a few minutes ago. I don't see that Prigozhin comes out of this well. The idea that he's going to go to Minsk and just sit there seems very strange to me. He – It seems like he's lost his fighters. Some of them are going to be absorbed into the army. And that was what many people thought this was all about. He was trying to prevent that from happening. He was trying to keep his power. And so I'm not sure what happens to him now. His decision to step down looks very much to me like weakness. I mean, both Putin and he look weak. But he, you know, it's not like he's got a bright future back in Russia and, you know, he's going to be safe from all the people who are angry about what he did yesterday.
CHUCK TODD:
Jim, assess this from a military standpoint. What do you think we're seeing inside the Russian military leadership right now?
ADM. JAMES STAVRIDIS:
Continuing chaos really of a piece, Chuck, with everything we've seen since the start of the war. You've seen terrible logistics, bad intelligence, bad leadership on battlefield, casual use of cell phones. In fact, these events of the last couple days will have unearthed a treasure trove of intelligence for the United States military. In terms of Prigozhin, I couldn't agree more with Anne. You know, the Games of Thrones philosophy applies here. If you go for the king, you better kill the king. Prigozhin didn't do that. He now is going to be isolated from the 35,000 fighters that have protected him. He's like a snake whose head has been cut off from its body. I don't think he'll last 60, 90 days, frankly, because Putin at his dark heart is a never forgive, never forget kind of person. He'll do everything he can to wreak vengeance on Prigozhin.
CHUCK TODD:
Do you expect this to have an impact on Russia's ability to wage war in Ukraine?
ADM. JAMES STAVRIDIS:
Oh, indeed. There's the moral function of this, the internal. Picture yourself as a Russian conscript watching all this unfold. And they are doing so on the internet. They have access. Number two, the material that has gone into the backing-and-forthing here is going to be denied. Number three, leadership changes, potentially. As Mike McFaul said, watch what happens to Shoigu. Does he stay in power? Is he part of the deal? I don't know the answer. No one does. So, bottom line here, it's been a very good turn of events for Kyiv. Still a tough fight ahead, but I think this is one that ups the game for the Ukrainians, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
All right. Dani and Peter, let's talk about this from this side of things. What should the administration be doing? Should they be doing anything differently than they're doing right now?
DANIELLE PLETKA:
No. I mean, you know, this is a fight internal to Russia. And so from that standpoint, I don't think there's any – there’s any reason that the administration needs to stand up. And there are no sides to take here. I mean, it's not as if Prigozhin was somehow better than Putin. No, he's actually a worse version of Putin. So, I think the administration's right to stay out. But it does raise the question in my mind, and I suspect in the minds of a lot of people, "What is our policy towards Russia?" We have a Ukraine policy. We want Russia to lose, and we want Ukraine to win. But we're really not sure how much we want them to win. But what do we want for Russia? I have no idea what this administration's view of that is.
CHUCK TODD:
Peter, what do you think?
PETER BAKER:
Yeah, I mean, look, their strategy yesterday, of course, was strategic silence. They don't want to give Putin any excuse to make the claim that this is somehow a foreign plot. It's interesting that he hasn't made that claim yet, but you'll probably hear it at some point. But the – you know, I mean, for Putin, this is a moment of weakness, and the Americans are now going to have to figure out whether they have an opportunity, as well as a risk because of that, right? So my wife and I, Susan Glasser, in Russia, in 2000 when Putin was elected, he had two main goals when he took power. One was reconsolidate power in the Kremlin, make himself the unchallenged figure domestically, and to begin to reassert power internationally to go in the near-abroad, which is what they call Ukraine and the former Soviet states. Both of those have now been exploded, right? He does not have exclusive control of use of force on his own territory, and the war in Ukraine has been a disaster, and may only now get even worse with the demoralization of the troops after what's happened.
CHUCK TODD:
Anne Applebaum, so if Prigozhin is not the person Putin now needs to fear, who are you watching in Putin's inner circle that may be eyeing the chair, if you will, to use the Games of Thrones metaphor perhaps that Jim threw out there? I've noticed Medvedev, the former president, he uses a lot more harsher rhetoric today than he did ten years ago.
ANNE APPLEBAUM:
Yes, although there are lots of jokes about Medvedev also drinking a lot more than he did a few years ago. So that could be a part of the explanation. You know, there are – there are so many potential people who want power inside the inner circle in the Kremlin that, you know, it's almost risky to name them. I mean, the heads of almost all the secret services, Patrushev. There are former prime ministers – one who seems to be interested in taking power yet – taking power next. And it seems to me – I genuinely thought up until yesterday that what Prigozhin was doing was not so much trying to get rid of Putin, but jockeying to be his replacement, that he was presenting himself as a kind of alternative. And in fact, at some moments, he did that rather well. I mean, in some ways, he better embodies the values certainly of the Russian military than Putin does. You know, he doesn't go on about imperial nonsense in history. He doesn't talk about kind of fake, you know, Christianity that Putin sometimes does. He focuses on, you know, "We just want to win. We want money. We want better weapons." And he has a deep appeal. So the question now is whether he can ever get any of that back, which as I said, I now doubt.
CHUCK TODD:
All right. Boy, this was a terrific panel, and I think we all learned a lot. When we come back, Donald Trump's lead grows even after the latest indictment of federal criminal charges. I'm going to give you a big taste of the results of our new NBC News poll next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. We have a brand new NBC News poll that we are releasing this morning, and in it voters are deeply dissatisfied with the direction of the country. They're concerned about the mental and physical wellbeing of President Biden. But the story of the last four years is still true today. And in this poll, the best thing for a Biden reelection campaign continues to be the presence of Donald Trump. Just 20% of voters believe this country's headed in the right direction. 74% say the nation is on the wrong track. Let me tell you something about this moment: We have had this sustained period of 70% about a year now. The last two periods in the history of this poll that we've had this kind of sustained negativity about the direction of the country was before the '92 election and before the 2008 election. Both of those changed the party controlling the White House. Now, let's get into more of the poll. Biden's job rating sits at just 43%, about where it's been since with withdrawal from Afghanistan. 53% disapprove. A full 68% of voters, including 43% of Democrats now – which is twice what it was in 2020 – say they are concerned that Biden does not have the necessary mental and physical health to be president. For what it's worth, when we asked the same question about Donald Trump, who's just a couple of years younger than Joe Biden, a majority also have concerns. But it is 55%, a full 13 points lower, than the concerns over President Biden. But in 2020, Biden won more because of who he wasn't, than of who he was. And in a head to-head match-up, Biden leads Trump by the same four points that he defeated him by in 2020, 49/45. In a match-up against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, could see here, it's 47/47. I'll tell you in a few minutes what that difference is, and who are those swing voters. One thing that doesn't appear to be changing voters' minds though so far is Donald Trump's federal indictment. Just 34% of a positive feeling towards Donald Trump. 56% feel negatively. Guess what? This hasn't changed a bit in about a year. And although a majority of voters overall, 55%, have real concerns about these federal charges against Trump, just 23% of Republicans do. In primary voters, just 16% told us they have a major concern about this. Instead, 64% of Republican primary voters call the investigations into Trump a politically motivated attempt to stop him. We asked the same question in April. It's just four points less than what it was in April. 31% say it's important to nominate a candidate who will not be distracted by legal problems and can focus on beating Biden. Pay attention to that 31% a minute here. I'm going to show you something in a minute. Though only half of the Republican party, 49%, say the Republican party should continue to be led by Donald Trump, the Not-Trumpers are not coalescing around any of Trump's rivals. Trump over-performs these numbers. In the Republican race for president, Trump leads Florida Governor Ron DeSantis by 29 percentage points now. He's got 51. DeSantis, the only other candidate in double digits, with 22. This is actually nearly a doubling of what the margin was in April. Trump was under 50%. It was 15 percentage points. And in a head-to-head match-up in a Republican primary, Trump almost has a two-to-one lead here, 60% to 36%. So again, 49% say they don't want Trump to lead the party, and yet he's over-performing that number. There are Never-Trumpers voting for Trump over DeSantis. By the way, the DeSantis voter profile there doesn't match the campaign he's running, for what it's worth. Meanwhile, the groups where Trump does lag behind DeSantis in that match-up against Joe Biden do offer another warning sign for Trump and the Republican party, if he is the nominee, because they represent most of the persuadable electorate. They're independent. They're women without college degrees, voters over 65, swing state voters, and voters who say they only somewhat disapprove of Joe Biden's presidency. So like the soccer moms and office park dads of past cycles, this cycle's key swing voter may be these somewhat-disapprovers, because they were huge in the 2022 Midterms. And right now, they're picking Biden over Trump. And, of course, the other giant red flag in this poll for Trump in the GOP, unlike previous Supreme Court decisions on interracial or same sex marriage, public support for the decision overturning Roe v. Wade is not growing. If anything, it's moving away. A year after the Dobbs decision, it has become even more unpopular. 61% of voters disapprove. Just 36% approve. There's a massive generational gap there, by the way, for what it's worth. When we come back, we're going to look back to 1991 in Moscow, where Boris Yeltsin stood on a tank, and what one prominent American leader said as Russia embraced democracy, briefly, for the very first time.
[START TAPE]
R.W. APPLE:
Do you think that Boris Yeltsin can clean this problem up any better than Mikhail Gorbachev could?
SEC. DICK CHENEY:
I think, couple of points. First of all, I share the euphoria everyone else feels of the events of the last week. It's a phenomenal week in the history of the world. Secondly, there are enormous problems ahead. Third, Yeltsin by virtue of the fact that he's been elected has a legitimacy that's derived from the consent of the governed — that’s an enormously important point. And I think that he probably will be in a very strong position now to move forward with economic reform by virtue of the fact that he does represent the people of Russia.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. That, of course, was then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, just two months after another pivotal moment in Russian history, when Boris Yeltsin became Russia's first democratically-elected president after 70 years of communist rule. And it was just days after hardliners attempted a coup, which failed. It weakened Gorbachev, it strengthened Yeltsin, and it led to the full collapse of the Soviet Union four months later. I still have Peter and Dani here. Russia never took after the '90s. Why?
PETER BAKER:
Yeah. Well, I mean, first of all, the big difference then and now is there are people there we cheered for. Today, with Prigozhin and Putin, these are like two scorpions in a bottle. If they kill each other, we're perfectly happy with that. But it never did take — you're right — because it wasn't a complete collapse. They never actually believed that the system had failed. They simply grew more — grievance and victimhood became the dominating theme that Putin capitalized on.
CHUCK TODD:
Dani, no “what-ifs?”
DANIELLE PLETKA:
No, there are lots of “what-ifs.” But there are people, there are candidates inside Russia. There's Alexei Navalny, who's in prison, who's got a ten-year sentence. There's Vladimir Kara-Murza, another great Russian patriot. These are candidates for a better Russia. I think there's an appetite. Otherwise, Prigozhin wouldn't have cut through —
CHUCK TODD:
No.
DANIELLE PLETKA:
— as he did.
CHUCK TODD:
That's an important point. He had, and he was welcomed. He was welcomed. Wow, what a weekend. That's all we have for today. Thank you for watching. We're going to be back next week because if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press.