CHUCK TODD:
This Sunday, the art of the deal.
SEN. ANTHONY PADILLA:
The bill is passed.
CHUCK TODD:
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and President Biden strike a bipartisan budget deal averting a catastrophic debt default.
PRES. JOE BIDEN:
Both sides operated in good faith. Both sides kept their word.
REP. KEVIN McCARTHY:
I think we did pretty dang good for the American public.
CHUCK TODD:
Can both parties claim victory? I'll talk to Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Republican Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota. Plus, a crowded field. Former Vice President Mike Pence, Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and North Dakota's Governor Doug Bergum are all set to officially launch their 2024 bids this week. Meanwhile the 2024 GOP frontrunners, Ron DeSantis and Donald Trump, begin to attack each other
GOV. RON DeSANTIS:
He used to say how great Florida was. Hell, his whole family moved to Florida under my governorship. Are you kidding me?
CHUCK TODD:
Will a crowded field do more to help Donald Trump win the nomination? And, Trump on tape. The Special Counsel has an audio recording of the former president admitting to taking a classified document after leaving office.
FMR. PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
All I know is this, everything I did was right. We have the Presidential Records Act which I abided by 100%.
CHUCK TODD:
With the grand jury set to meet again this week, will the former president face more criminal charges? I'll talk to former Trump attorney Tim Parlatore, who recently quit Trump's legal team. Joining me for insight and analysis are NBC News Chief Washington Correspondent Andrea Mitchell, Politico "Playbook" co-author Eugene Daniels, Democratic Strategist Stephanie Schriock and Republican strategist Brad Todd. 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. Something rare happened in Washington this week. Both Democrats and Republicans declared victory after voting for the same exact bill. Of course, not every Democrat or Republican is happy about that bill and that's kind of the point. Both sides had to make concessions. It's called compromise. It’s what politics is supposed to be, the art of the possible. President Biden, who is constantly underestimated politically, did what he promised he would do when he came into office. He secured a bipartisan agreement when gridlock and dysfunction have ruled the day. As a candidate in 2019, Biden predicted Republicans would have a post-Trump epiphany
[START TAPE]
FMR. VICE PRES. JOE BIDEN:
The thing that will fundamentally change this is with Donald Trump out of the White House. not a joke. You will see an epiphany occur among many of my Republican friends.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
And While epiphany might be a strong word, Republicans haven't exactly stopped embracing former President Donald Trump, Biden does seem aware of the deal he cut with swing voters. He's tried to bridge the divide when possible and his bipartisan list of accomplishments are starting to stack up. From the Infrastructure bill to the CHIPS and Science Act to even gun safety legislation and protecting same sex marriage. It's also notable that President Biden praised House Speaker Kevin McCarthy who emerged stronger this week after also being constantly underestimated politically. McCarthy managed to use the threat of a debt default and the leverage of his razor thin majority to force the White House to negotiate a deal. And more than two-thirds of House Republicans agreed to it. He didn't lose his speakership even though 71 Republicans didn't sign on to the deal and at least one Republican Congressman Chip Roy of Texas, who of course was a skeptic of McCarthy as speaker, called it a "turd sandwich.” In the end, more Democrats than Republicans voted to pass the bill in both chambers. In fact because of the defense cuts that were proposed in it only 17 Republicans voted in favor of the bill in the Senate.
[START TAPE]
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
To my House colleagues, I can't believe you did this. To the speaker, I know you got a tough job. I like you but the party of Ronald Reagan is dying
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
But what didn't happen is also worth noting. Republicans didn't destroy the economy. Progressive Democrats didn't destroy the deal. Republicans didn't destroy the Biden agenda and House Republicans didn't get rid of Kevin McCarthy. They walked away with a pretty modest $1.5 trillion in projected savings. And that is on the most optimistic end of the spectrum. So with the threat of default now gone until the next election, President Biden has an accomplishment he can run on in 2024.
[START TAPE]
PRES. JOE BIDEN:
I know bipartisanship is hard. And unity is hard. But we can never stop trying. Because the moments like this one, the ones we just faced, where the American economy and the world economies are at risk of collapsing, there's no other way.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
And joining me now, Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia. He voted in favor of the debt ceiling bill. He was a big part of the behind-the-scenes negotiation. Senator Manchin, welcome back to Meet the Press.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Hey, Chuck. Good to be with you.
CHUCK TODD:
So let me start. How much credit do you give President Biden for making this happen?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
I give everybody credit. I think you said it well. I've been listening to what you've been saying. And I think you hit it – you just nailed it. Both sides had to come together. I think that I give Kevin McCarthy and his team a tremendous amount of credit for doing what people thought he couldn't do. He got a bill out of the House, sent it over to the Senate, got things started. President Biden did what he must do, and what he does, and can do best is bring people together, use this bipartisanship. And – but, you know, 90 days ago, we could have started this. But, you know, the extremes on both sides are pushing further – pushing you further away then basically giving you encouragement to come together. That's what we've got to basically eliminate, Chuck. But I was proud of both of them. I was proud of the House Democrats that – like Hakeem Jeffries leading and working with Kevin McCarthy and his team to basically get it out of the rules when the rules went to the floor, took the Democrats to move the bill. And then together, they voted and passed it on the House – on the Senate, Senate side. We had House Republicans and Democrats working together, knowing that we had to avert this crisis. But why do we always come down to this brinkmanship at the end? It's just not right. It's not who we are.
CHUCK TODD:
You're asking me, you’re – a question that I was going to sort of put to you. But let me ask it this way are – realistically, is bipartisanship probably dead until November 2024, now? You know, are we going to be entering a period where everybody has to put on the jerseys?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Well, I sure hope not. We've been able to show that we can do something when we have to. We have to have a permitting process now that basically encumbers everything. We've touched on that in this bill. We have some permitting reforms that were done, but we need an awful lot more. If you're going to have the energy security our country needs, you're going to have to be able to build the infrastructure. Whether it's the pipelines or whether it's the transmission lines, we have to have an all-in policy, but we've got to be energy independent to be secure, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
Look the big thing you've got out of it –
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
That could be a big win for all of us.
CHUCK TODD:
Look, the big thing you got out of this is this Mountain Valley Pipeline provision and a lot of Democrats not happy with it. The timely completion – let me just read from the text of the bill – “the timely completion of construction and operation of the Mountain Valley Pipeline is required to the national – in the national interest.” I found something interesting that you said to Politico. You said, "being undecided about running for reelection helped make this happen," that somehow if you were already a candidate for reelection, you seem to think that this wouldn't have happened. Why is that?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Well, Chuck, I think that, basically, this system is so toxic anymore that whenever you are an announced candidate for anything, you're absolutely basically cannon fodder for the other side. I mean, everybody wants to – 51. Politics are basically taking over the control versus the policies and, basically, the responsiveness that we should have. My purpose is, is to have progressive movements to where we're doing something, that helps the economy, that helps the people, helps security. I don't put, I don’t put politics in front. A lot of people do. It's about politics. Mine's about policy and basically performing for my country and my state. So I'm not going to be worried about polls and all this other stuff when I have a purpose to perform. I've got to perform.
CHUCK TODD:
Getting this pipeline, does this make you feel as if you now have a case for reelection that you can make that might be able to win?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Well, it – what it does, it basically gives West Virginia tremendous opportunity to provide the energy security our nation needs. West Virginia's an energy juggernaut. We've got, we’ve got fossil fuels. We do it cleaner and better than anywhere in the world. We have – in the Carolinas, we have people paying ten times more, whenever there's any weather interruptions, they're paying ten times more than we do in West Virginia, and they're right next door. You've got to be able to deliver that energy, Chuck, and that's what we're doing. So this has been a tremendous win for the West Virginia. I've been spearheading this thing from day one. I've taken all the bullets, you know that. I've taken all the spears on this. And the bottom line is we've got it accomplished.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, it's interesting to me that in many of these bills that you've been in the middle of, right, you've actually been working with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer. Are you surprised Mitch McConnell's spending so much of his political activity trying to convince you not to run for reelection? Does that make it harder to work with Republicans?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
It doesn't make it harder for me. I understand this is not the most honorable profession. It's a shame to say that. And it's supposed to be the most honorable profession when you can provide services to the people that you represent. But when you have to fight your own colleagues to try to do your job, it makes it pretty tough. When I said people put – sometimes, people put politics," I think that Mitch is in a position where it's all about, as I've observed, politics first, protecting his caucus. Fifty one votes is what his determination is. And with that, and sometimes policy doesn't get the benefit. Mine is about the policy end of it. If we can do something good, I don't care who takes credit because I can't do it by myself. There's no way we could pass any of this without the help of the other side. So I look at it differently, and then also my oath to the Constitution. So my performance for my state and my oath to the Constitution more than takes care of everything I'm supposed to do versus the politics.
CHUCK TODD:
Before I let you go –
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
And I work with 51 on either side.
CHUCK TODD:
Yeah. Before I let you go, I know you've been flirting with the No Labels movement. They're on the air right now with an ad trying to get on the ballot in Maine. I want to play a clip of it and ask you about it on the other side.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Sure.
[START TAPE]
JOE LIEBERMAN:
Blind loyalty is the opposite of choice. And choice is what real democracy is all about. No Labels was born to unite Democrats, Republicans, and Independents to solve our country's biggest problems, bringing more choices to voters and more voices to the national conversation.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
I understand the, the message there and this idea of trying to bring folks together. But let me ask you this, didn't President Biden just sort of perform as No Labels wanted him to, by bringing people together and doing compromise.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Oh, I think that basically the results – yeah, Chuck, the results that you saw there was Joe Biden working with Kevin McCarthy, Kevin McCarthy taking the lead and pushing it over, so, "okay. Let's sit down and get serious." Should it come to the brinkmanship, the last day or the last few days? No. What the movement of No Labels has done, which I think has been admirable, is basically saying there is a middle. There's more people in the silent majority of the middle that have no voice whatsoever so they're forced to their respective corners, far Left and far Right. They're not comfortable there. They're showing that now, there's a place in the middle. And if the middle can basically show, "you can't go to the Left. You're not going to get elected and you're not going to govern from there." Decisions are made from the middle.
CHUCK TODD:
But given – what I'm curious –
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
So that was my friend Joe Lieberman on that.
CHUCK TODD:
Right. Well, I'm curious, though, does it make you less interested in running for president if Joe Biden's moving to the middle like this?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Chuck, the bottom line is – let me just talk about what's going on right now with what happened on the debt ceiling. Don't you think that we should have a risk evaluation of where we are as a country on finances? Don't you think we should have a risk management team the same as banks are supposed to have risk managers? Can't we do something to prevent this on a daily basis, versus a crisis with the last minute? So on that being said, how are we governed? You can't continue to be pushed to the left and pushed to the right. Stay in that middle and pull people back to the middle.
CHUCK TODD:
It's notable that you're not ready to sign off that Joe Biden's been moving to the middle. You don't buy it?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Well, this, this here, I think Joe Biden, that's his inherent – who he is. He's been pushed to the far left. And that far left is not, basically, where the country is. And the far right is not where the country is. Coming back to the middle, then, we can continue to bring people to the middle and do our job.
CHUCK TODD:
Alright.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
That's where it's going to be, the decisions will be made.
CHUCK TODD:
Sounds like I've got a few more months before I'll get you to answer a straightforward political question, so I'll let you go.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN:
Oh. We're still working, Chuck. That's why, that’s why I like coming on with you.
CHUCK TODD:
Sen. Joe Manchin, Democrat of West Virginia, it's good to see you. Thank you for coming on and sharing your perspective.
CHUCK TODD:
So let's get some perspective from the other side of the aisle. Joining me now is Republican Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota. He was one of only 17 Republicans to support the debt deal in the Senate. Was a bit surprising that per capita more House Republicans supported this deal than Senate Republicans. Senator Rounds, welcome back to Meet the Press.
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
Hey, thanks. You worked Joe over pretty hard there.
CHUCK TODD:
Well, let me ask you this. Why do you think fewer Senate Republicans supported this deal?
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
The defense issues. Clearly the concern we have is that if – under certain circumstances, defense would actually go down in terms of the funding, at a time in which we’ve got major challenges, not only from Russia but from China as well. And the fact that we know that we're going to have to have a supplemental when it comes to Ukraine at some point again in the future. And those were a real challenge. And one of the reasons that you heard Senator Graham and others talk very clearly about the concern was that we're all pretty clear that we're going to have to have an increase in defense spending, not a decrease. And under certain circumstances, if we don't do all 12 appropriation bills under this proposal, then defense would end up with less money than what they do today, or under what the Biden-McCarthy deal originally proposes in their caps.
CHUCK TODD:
There's some grumbling from some --
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
That's the reason why --
CHUCK TODD:
Yes, I understand that. Right. There's some grumbling from some Senate Republicans, that they wish Mitch McConnell hadn't walked away – hadn’t said – let Kevin McCarthy be the proxy, essentially, in the words of The Washington Post. Did Senate Republicans regret outsourcing the negotiations to McCarthy, considering House Republicans and Senate Republicans are seeing less eye-to-eye these days on defense spending?
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
There really was not another path forward. Speaker McCarthy is the leader of the majority in the House. We don't control the Senate, we don't control the presidency. Clearly, when Senator McConnell suggested that Speaker McCarthy should take the lead for the Republicans, it basically made a one-on-one then with the president, rather than having not just the minority leader in the House, the majority leader in the Senate, both of whom are Democrats, both participating in it. I think Leader McConnell absolutely hit it on the head. And I think he's probably as responsible as anybody is for actually getting this deal done in this bipartisan way, even though we knew we were taking a risk. And that's one of the reasons why on the floor of the Senate you heard a lot of us going to both leadership camps saying, "We want commitments that we're going to get all 12 appropriation bills on the floor." That's the next major hurdle in terms of the appropriate defense spending after we get the NDAA completed this year.
CHUCK TODD:
Do you think we should change the way we handle the debt ceiling? Or considering that Republicans got a way to at least slow down spending a bit, that this only reinforces the idea that it should be used as a wedge?
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
Yeah, look it's become a tool to point out the fact that we're spending more than we're taking in every single year. And there is no real other location to go except the appropriations process, which seems to only work part of the time. We really need to overhaul the appropriations process so that we can do all 12 of the appropriation bills on a regular basis. You know, we end up with omnibuses, and we end up with continuing resolutions. That is not good for defense, it's not good for the country. It's really not good for growing the economy in the United States. But this is the one opportunity for folks that look at this to bring it up for everybody to see, that we're just --
CHUCK TODD:
So no end in sight --
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
– simply not meeting our budget needs on a regular basis.
CHUCK TODD:
When there's divided government, the debt ceiling --
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
I don't think so. Not at least until we find another alternative.
CHUCK TODD:
Okay. Let me ask about the Republican primary. You're one of the few senators supporting Senator Tim Scott. There are three more candidates getting in this race that arguably are sort of running in the same lane, if you want to call it that, that Tim Scott is running in, more mainstream Republicans and stuff like that. Are you concerned this field is getting too crowded?
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
We suspected that it would get crowded. But at the same time, there's a weeding out process that gives the American people a chance to look at all of the alternatives. A lot of us think that it's time for somebody with a positive message. And I go back, and Chuck, you've heard me talk about this before. I really think that if Ronald Reagan was here today, I think Ronald Reagan would win the Republican nomination for the presidency. I think Tim Scott says a lot of the same things, he has the same focus. I think when people hear him speak, they're going to hear that same ability to convince people that there really is a brighter time ahead for our country, and that he can bring people together. And that's the reason why a lot of us are going to end up supporting Tim, and that we believe that he would make a very, very good president. A lot of people at this stage of the game -- and remember, it's really early right now, I think you're going to find that Tim has a really good shot at it. And yes, the front runners are out there, and a lot of people pay attention because they say, "Well, if they're that far ahead, what are you going to do?" But with Tim, once they hear him, and they meet him, and they see him, I think they're going to find out that he is the guy behind door number three.
CHUCK TODD:
Are you – are you resigned to support whoever the Republicans nominate, even if it's the former president?
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
Well, right now I'm hoping it's going to be Tim Scott. And if it's not, then I'm going to have to reassess. Because I've always supported the Republican nominee in the past, I hope Tim is the nominee. There are going to be some other good people as well. But I'm going to hold that back until we find out how Tim does. I'm going to support Tim Scott as long as he stays in the game --
CHUCK TODD:
I was just going to say, that doesn't --
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
I think he has a good shot.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, the fact that you're not ready to automatically pledge it says a lot. Are you waiting to see what the legal – what the legal issues are with the former president?
SEN. MIKE ROUNDS:
Not so much that. I just simply think that there are some very good Republican nominees out there, and I'm going to wait and see which one comes out ahead. But I've supported the Republican nominee in the past. I hope I can support the Republican nominee in the future. If it’s Tim Scott, I know I can support the nominee. And I think there's a whole lot of Republicans out there and Independents who would like to see Tim win this as well.
CHUCK TODD:
You are borrowing some of the tactics of Mr. Manchin before me. Not quite answering, but you're giving me a hint. People will be reading between those lines. Senator Rounds, appreciate you coming on and sharing your perspective with us. Thank you, sir. When we come back, he resigned from the Trump legal team after internal conflicts over how best to defend the former president, and whether to conduct additional searches at Mar-a-Lago. Timothy Parlatore joins us next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. This week, we learned Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation of whether Donald Trump mishandled classified documents apparently includes an audiotape that some consider could be a smoking gun. On that recording, the former president apparently admits he knew he was taking with him documents that had remained classified when he left the White House. What will his defense do now? Joining me now is attorney Timothy Parlatore. He just resigned from the former president's defense team two weeks ago over what he called irreconcilable conflicts with other members of the legal team. Mr. Parlatore, welcome to Meet the Press.
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Thanks for having me.
CHUCK TODD:
Let me start there. You left two weeks ago. Is it advice not being followed? How else would you characterize it?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
You know, it's something that I, yeah, I had discussed on CNN at the time. I had a difficulty being able to do the job that I know how to do. I discussed it for specific reasons at the time. But it's not something I really want to expand on too much.
CHUCK TODD:
No, I understand. It was conflicts with sort of the lead counsel there. Do you feel like the president himself was taking your advice, or could you just not get to him?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
You know, I'm not going to be able to get into the conversation, communications directly with him. But certainly, you know, we would come up with strategies. We'd present it. And we would do what we could.
CHUCK TODD:
Let me start with – what is your understanding of where the Special Counsel is? We have the report this morning here at NBC News that says the grand jury's convening this week. What does that tell you?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Well, that's the first thing that I've heard about any action by the grand jury in several weeks. And, you know, when the--
CHUCK TODD:
What does that mean?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Well, when the grand jury went quiet several weeks back, you know, I kind of looked at it and said, "Okay. This indicates that either they're coming to a charging decision, or maybe they are moving to the stage where investigation is complete, and now Jack Smith's going to start writing up the report" because ultimately, if there are no charges, he's still going to have to write up a report, just like we, you know, recently saw from the other special counsel. And so the lack of action, you know, certainly would indicate, you know, the transition.
CHUCK TODD:
But now that he's convening, that in your mind is more likely to be a charging – potentially charging decision?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Not necessarily. I mean, certainly, you know, it could be that they're continuing an investigation into other things. It could be that the reason for the break is that the last grand jury simply expired and they had to convene a new one. I'm not sure specifically. I mean, I certainly haven't heard of anything, you know, new that would, you know, require new testimony. I can't imagine that there's anybody else in Mar-a-Lago to testify.
CHUCK TODD:
You've dealt with the Feds quite a bit. You've done this. You have experience. That's the reason why you were hired. Would you be surprised if the former president isn't charged with something here?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
No, not at all. Not at all. I think – you know, you have to evaluate every case based on, you know, what are the facts in the law, and is it something that's provable? But then there's also all of the other atmospherics of is this, you know, from a discretion point of view, is this something where a prosecution makes sense? You know, is it something where it is a slam dunk case, where some of these things, you know, could be interpreted a few different ways? And also, when it comes to a specific issue like this, where we are talking about potentially national defense information, is it the type of thing where they want to declassify these things, if they haven't already been declassified and put them out publicly? You know, there are a lot of additional, you know, problems or procedures that you have to go through with that type of a case. And especially when it's, you know, politically sensitive. And I know not a lot of people are going to agree with this, you know, parallel, but to me, even if he did a lot of the things that they're saying that he did, prosecuting him, they're the same reasons why you wouldn't want to prosecute him as to why back in 2016, I was of the opinion that Hillary Clinton shouldn't be prosecuted, because there are all of these other problems. Classification is not binding on the jury. You have to actually take these documents, show them to the jury, and then prove to them that it constitutes national defense information. In doing so, you're putting in --
CHUCK TODD:
You declassify things? I see --
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Exactly.
CHUCK TODD:
I see where you're going there. We shall see. I want to ask you about these voice memos of Evan Corcoran, a former co-counsel of yours, he had to turn over to the special counsel. I mean, I was surprised to hear these were recordings. It wasn't just other stuff. How damning do you think these voice memos could be?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Not at all.
CHUCK TODD:
Why is that?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Not at all. Obviously, I'm not going to go to the specific content. But there's nothing that I saw that indicates any difference from any other communication with a client. You know, any time that a client who's not a lawyer, who's not experienced in these things, receives a grand jury subpoena, they're going to ask the standard questions. You know, I sit down with them hundreds of times and they say, you know, "Do I have to do this? Do they really have the power to do this? Do we have to give them everything? Don't they have to get a warrant? Don't they have to tell us why? Is there any way to stop this? Is there a way to do a motion to quash," or they usually say, "a motion to squash." And so that is the ordinary attorney-client conversation that you want to have with every client, that you would expect to have with somebody who's not experienced. And it's the reason why you have to do it --
CHUCK TODD:
But do you think he mislead him, where these documents were?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
I --
CHUCK TODD:
And do you feel as if the lawyers were mislead, that Mr. Corcoran in particular was mislead about where these documents would be hiding?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Based on everything I've seen, no. He was told where all of the documents were brought from the White House. He searched there. He was not given a much longer period of time. You know, later, DOJ came back to us and, you know, through a whole series of events, we went back to expand the search. But that was not something that was in play --
CHUCK TODD:
But the fact --
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
– at the time.
CHUCK TODD:
– that maybe it's omission, I mean, you know, one judge apparently in a sealed document, let me read this from what the judge said here, "Notably, no excuse is provided as to how the former president had missed the classified marked documents found in his own bedroom at Mar-a-Lago."
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
That –
CHUCK TODD:
– Judge Howell. He seemed to know he had documents he wasn't supposed to have.
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
So actually, that's an interesting quote that you pulled out because there were no classified documents in his bedroom. You know, what she's talking about there was this folder that there's been some discussion whether the folder said, you know, "Classified Evening Summary," or "Evening Briefing" on it, which is in and of itself not even a classification level. It doesn't mean anything. And here's an important piece. Not only did he know it was there, but the FBI knew it was there. When the FBI conducted the raid of Mar-a-Lago, that folder was there. They saw it. They recognized that it's not classified, it's not something that's subject to, you know, any of these. And the FBI left it there. So, you know, there were no classified documents in his bedroom. It's one of those things where, you know, things get kind of missed in the weeds, unfortunately --
CHUCK TODD:
Let me ask you though. The former president did that town hall when he was asked about it. He again talked about, "Hey, we were negotiating with the archives." What do you negotiate? I don't understand what the negotiation was. Was it financial?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
No, no, no. The negotiation is over the next two years after any president leaves office, they're supposed to go through all of the records and they're supposed to separate out what is personal, what is presidential. Personal, they get to keep. All presidential records end up at the National Archives headquarters in D.C. This ordinarily happens where NARA gets a facility in the town where the president has moved to. So in Chicago for Obama, down in Texas for the Bushes. And all of them are held in that facility. Here, what NARA did instead is they chose not to get a facility like that. They had GSA move everything to his house, and then were asking him to immediately send everything from his house back up to D.C., where he wouldn't be able to go through them at his convenience.
CHUCK TODD:
Again, what did he think the negotiation was about? Just which papers he was going to keep? Because again, I know he's obsessed with the fact that Nixon got paid for his archive.
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Well, the negotiation was over them wanting all the documents back right now, him saying, "Well, I'm going through them." And they went through the first 15 boxes. They sent those back. And, you know, quite frankly, had NARA come back and said, "I have an idea. Why don't we just get a facility in Palm Beach, move them there," that would've solved everything right there.
CHUCK TODD:
Had you attempted to try to get the president to settle with the Justice Department? And did he not want to, or did Justice not want to?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
That's the first time I've ever heard anything like that.
CHUCK TODD:
There was never any thought of trying to find --
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
You know --
CHUCK TODD:
– a settlement here?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
– when I was on the team, communications with the Justice Department were minimal. You know, everybody talks about whether we were being cooperative and everything. But the Justice Department team that I dealt with was very oppositional and very not open to any conversations, even about, you know, simple things. So this team, and it's primarily made up of National Security division people that are not ordinarily criminal prosecutors, is so different than working with any professional U.S. attorney's office.
CHUCK TODD:
Okay. Let me ask you about January 6th.
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Sure.
CHUCK TODD:
You seem to play down the possibility that the former president will get charged with anything on January 6th. The January 6th Committee had four criminal referrals that they thought could be used to charge the president, obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to make a false statement, and then the incitement assisting or aid and comfort of an insurrection. So you really believe none of those four are going to be charges that the former president has to deal with?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
Correct.
CHUCK TODD:
Why?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
You know, that was a political committee. When it comes to actually looking into the statute, all of those require them to prove that, at the time, he knew that all of these allegations of fraud in the election were false.
CHUCK TODD:
You mean the fact that every single person that worked for him told him that it was false? That all of those judicial rulings told him there was no there there? I mean, how many more times would he have to be told before that is seen as he knew?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
If that's what the evidence is, but that's not what the evidence is. He had some people telling him that there was fraud. He had some people tell him that there was no fraud. All the judicial rulings, some of them reached a partial ruling based on the merits, based on not a complete thing. A lot of them said, you know, it was threshold issues of standing. And so yes, there were a lot of judicial rulings against him, but none that said, "Okay, you parties have conducted complete discovery. You've actually gone through everything. And based on the merits, this is what the decision is." And in fact, a lot of those lawsuits at the time, they were seeking these injunctions without discovery. And I think that, you know, in retrospect, had some of those people said, you know, "Look, we're not seeking injunction now. We're seeking expedited discovery."
CHUCK TODD:
You're saying he had a bad legal team? Is that what you think?
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
I think that the way that some of these things were conducted, certainly some of the Sidney Powell, you know, lawsuits were conducted are, you know, things that can be criticized after the fact. I think that if they had gone to ask for expedited discovery and said, "Look, we have an indication of smoke. "We don't know whether there's a fire. There's a fire, it's in the box right there. Tell them to open the box. Let me take a look. If there's a fire, I'm going to come back and ask for an injunction. If there's no fire, I'm going to come back and dismiss the case." If they had done that from the beginning, it'd be a different story. But instead, "I have smoke. Can you overturn the election?" And the judge said, "No."
CHUCK TODD:
Tim Parlatore, I had a lot more questions but, you know, we only have so much time. Thanks for coming in and sharing --
TIMOTHY PARLATORE:
All right, thank you very much.
CHUCK TODD:
– your perspective. I appreciate it. When we come back, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and the man who takes credit for him winning that office went head to head in Iowa this week, jockeying for a position on the right. But can Ron DeSantis gain ground on Donald Trump with more candidates joining the race? Panel is next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Panel is here: NBC News Chief Washington Correspondent and Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent, Andrea Mitchell, White House Correspondent for Politico and the co-author of Political Playbook, Eugene Daniels, partner at OnMessage Strategies, Brad Todd, and the former President of EMILY's List, Stephanie Schriock. Welcome. Well, let me just kick off the conversation by kicking off Trump v. DeSantis this week. Point, counterpoint. Here we go.
[START TAPE]
GOV. RON DESANTIS:
We will fight the woke in the schools. We will fight the woke in the corporations. We will fight the woke in the hot halls of Congress.
FMR. PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:
I don't like the term "woke" because I hear, "Woke, woke, woke." You know, it's, like, just a term they use. Half the people can't even define it. They don't know what it is.
GOV. RON DESANTIS:
And let's just be clear. It really does take two terms as president to be able to finish this job.
FMR. PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:
But when I heard DeSanctus go out and say – and talk about eight years, "we need eight years," you don't need eight years. You need six months. We can turn this thing around so quickly.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
Brad, I got to ask you. This is your side of the aisle. How's the party going to look after six months of that?
BRAD TODD:
Well, I think only the party's paying attention to it, for the most part. And, and you know, I also think you look at your NBC poll most recently when you look at the presidential primary. Donald Trump has about 45%. Everybody else together has about 45%. So there's still plenty of people in this shopping mode. And I think that Donald Trump has a ceiling. So you're going to see more of this jousting.
CHUCK TODD:
Andrea, next week three more candidates are getting in. Is this a reflection of Trump or DeSantis?
ANDREA MITCHELL:
Well, it's a reflection of Trump, really, and DeSantis because DeSantis has not proved himself. He stumbled out of the gate. I think he still is the strongest challenger to Donald Trump. But the fact that a lot of people believe that there needs to be an alternative to DeSantis, that somebody has to challenge Trump, and that nobody has stepped up to that. And what you're mostly seeing is the new, newer candidates, Chris Christie, willing to take on –
CHUCK TODD:
Is there –
ANDREA MITCHELL:
– Donald Trump.
CHUCK TODD:
– a constituency for him in the Republican primary –
EUGENE DANIELS:
For Chris Christie? It's hard to –
CHUCK TODD:
I think in the press –
EUGENE DANIELS:
That's not taken already –
CHUCK TODD:
Maybe. I don't know. Yeah –
EUGENE DANIELS:
– That's not taken already? It's hard to see, right? There are kind of three lanes that a lot of Republican strategists are thinking about this primary. Donald Trump, Ron DeSantis, and kind of everyone else, right? And Chris Christie should really be in one of the first two lanes, right? His personality is more of a, of a DeSantis and a, and a Donald Trump. But he doesn't have a base at this point, right? That could change. A lot could change. I'd like to leave that open. But at the same time, this is a party that is fully onboard with Donald Trump.
CHUCK TODD:
So Stephanie, when you look – if you're the Biden reelection campaign and you see Trump and, and, and DeSantis going after each other, it's almost playing out exactly as you want the next six months to play out, is it not?
STEPHANIE SCHRIOCK:
Oh, messy, messy Republican primary is the best thing for President Biden, absolutely. And I think you get Chris Christie, and like, do I think he has a constituency? No. Do I think he'll say anything about DeSantis and Trump? Yes. Yes, I do because he's going to fight like he's from New Jersey. And so you're going to see, it's just going to get muddier and messier, and messier with louder voices coming in.
CHUCK TODD:
What’s your sense – can Christie get on that debate stage? 40,000 donors seems like a big hill to climb.
BRAD TODD:
I think it is. I mean, that costs about $4 a person to obtain on, on, on email. And so that's going to be a big focus. So they're, they’re going to use every dollar they get in hard money to try to raise it. I do think he's going to fill up Eugene's playbook every day.
CHUCK TODD:
Christie? It's just great quotables on that front. I want to do a tweet. You know, it's interesting. You sent it to me. Other Republican operatives sent it to me. It's this Brian Kemp tweet. "taking our country back from Joe Biden does not start with congratulating North Korea's murderous dictator," Andrea Mitchell
ANDREA MITCHELL:
And that is –
CHUCK TODD:
– referring to Trump's praise of Kim Jong-Un getting on the WHO –
ANDREA MITCHELL:
And Nikki Haley jumped on that also in Iowa. So I think that that is a bridge too far. You know, almost everything else that he says that sounds outrageous –
CHUCK TODD:
I thought Putin was a bridge too far. What happened to that?
ANDREA MITCHELL:
Well, probably Putin as well, but he's backed off a little bit, maybe a little bit. But Kim Jong-Un is, you know, a killer. And – well, Putin's a killer too, but the fact is that he loves strong men. And, you know, Republican voters seem to really love fighters. That's what they want. But not someone who is willing to align himself there. I was really fascinated by what Mike Rounds said to you. Not willing to –
CHUCK TODD:
– he wouldn't commit yet.
ANDREA MITCHELL:
Not willing to commit to the pledge? So that tells me, you know, there're a lot of people who really like Tim Scott. He's got that Reagan, you know, optimism. He's positive. But other people inside the party think he's got to get specific.
CHUCK TODD:
But is he selling dog food to cats, Eugene? Like, I don't know –
EUGENE DANIELS:
It’s like a completely different party –
CHUCK TODD:
Like, do people want optimism?
EUGENE DANIELS:
It feels like a completely different party, right? This is not a Republican party that is happy, that is looking for a Reagan person. If it was, Donald Trump wouldn't be getting 45% of the NBC poll, right? That is – it is a completely different party. You know, we talk to folks who are strategists who are in that Scott world. They try to compare it to Obama in 20 – in 2007. We had a Democratic party that was angry, and that you bring in someone who's talking about hope and change, and it works. I don't know that it works as well with this current Republican party –
ANDREA MITCHELL:
Tim Scott has not gotten specifically on policies. And he's got to –
CHUCK TODD:
I want to – Steph, go ahead.
BRAD TODD:
Underestimate Tim Scott at your own peril. He's going to have real appeal in Iowa. He's the best grassroots campaigner we have.
EUGENE DANIELS:
Lots of money.
BRAD TODD:
He's the most –
ANDREA MITCHELL:
Absolutely.
BRAD TODD:
– connected to Evangelicals. He's going to do well in Iowa. Just give him time.
CHUCK TODD:
Well, I agree –
BRAD TODD:
Time matters.
CHUCK TODD:
The question is, does that matter?
BRAD TODD:
Yes.
CHUCK TODD:
Let me put up a reminder here. Here are Republicans winners of Iowa in the last three open races. All three of them lost the nomination. More importantly, and let me show you how well they did in New Hampshire. They all ended up 20 or 30 points – winning Iowa is a guarantee to basically make it to the convention, and that's about it.
STEPHANIE SCHRIOCK:
Yeah, it's a, it’s a very different situation than the Democratic side of the aisle. But I think, I think what we're dealing with here is Donald Trump is really hard to beat. And as I believe, more and more Republicans jump in because, yes, they're upset with, like, DeSantis is moving so far to the right. The Republicans that are starting to jump, jump in are not the ones you'd think are super far right. You'd think they're the ones that are more the business Republicans. There's a huge problem with the, I don't even know if I want to call them moderate Republicans anymore, the old Republican party. They're looking for solution, but the base is not. They want Donald Trump and somebody like him.
ANDREA MITCHELL:
But getting back to your original question about Brian Kemp, I think that was a real tell. Why else –
CHUCK TODD:
He's in the bull pen?
ANDREA MITCHELL:
– would he –
CHUCK TODD:
We think –
ANDREA MITCHELL:
Yeah.
CHUCK TODD:
– he's warming up, you know?
ANDREA MITCHELL:
And, and he doesn't have the advantage that perhaps that Young – perhaps Younkin had to get –
CHUCK TODD:
Like a self-funder –
ANDREA MITCHELL:
– in late because he’s – he can self-fund. But Brian Kemp is very popular. He's done very well and he stood up against Trump.
CHUCK TODD:
I want to play one more clip from Joe Biden because I'm wondering if this was meaningful or a troll. Take a listen.
[START TAPE]
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN:
I want to commend senator – Speaker McCarthy. You know, he and I, we and our teams, we were able to get along, get things done.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
Brad, was Kevin McCarthy happy or sad that Biden praised him? I mean, I've had a lot of Republicans say that's going to be a problem.
BRAD TODD:
Kevin McCarthy had the best week of his speakership this week. You can't make him unhappy. So this is the best weekend he's had. And so I, I don't think he cares if Joe Biden says that about him. And Joe Biden's using him as a prop because Biden has not been bipartisan for three years, so now he's trying to lean on Kevin McCarthy to get some bipartisan cred that he promised. It’s not surprising.
CHUCK TODD:
Is the left going to stay quiet, or are they going to start to get cranky about Biden here?
STEPHANIE SCHRIOCK:
The left has already been cranky for two and a half years. And they'll continue to be a little cranky. But the truth is Biden knows, the Biden organization knows, that this is about running through the middle and getting things done. And folks are looking for that, once they can advertise that out.
CHUCK TODD:
All right. I got to pause it there. This week's episode of Meet the Press Reports, our magazine show with a deep dive on one subject, takes a look at the art of the con and how successful it is, in not just business, but politics. Here's a sneak peak.
[START TAPE]
Elizabeth Holmes, the founder of blood testing startup Theranos, was once worth $4.5 billion and celebrated as a woman who could own the future.
CHARLIE ROSE:
You get the same results that you get through Theranos if in fact you went to a doctor and had him take a vial of blood from your veins?
ELIZABETH HOLMES:
We do.
CHUCK TODD:
But in 2015, The Wall Street Journal began unraveling the con, questioning whether Theranos's technology worked.
ELIZABETH HOLMES:
This is what happens when you work to change things. And first they think you're crazy. Then they fight you. And then all of a sudden, you change the world.
CHUCK TODD:
At the end of May, Holmes reported to prison after being sentenced to more than 11 years for defrauding investors, including media mogul Rupert Murdoch, Oracle's Larry Ellison, and the Walton family, founders of Walmart.
JESSICA PRESSLER:
It kind of throws into question, like, the success of some successful people who we might resent for being successful.
CHUCK TODD:
Hey, famous people are just like us. I can get scammed. So can they?
JESSICA PRESSLER:
Right.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
You can catch the whole episode later this morning on News Now at 11:30, any time on Meet the Press's website and, of course, Peacock and YouTube. When we come back, America's population is aging. Data Download is next.
CHUCK TODD:
Data Download time. The United States is getting older, but the differences across regions and demographic groups could have big policy impacts as the nation faces questions around program funding and cuts. Let me show you here. As you can see, over the last decade, the 65-and-older population has been growing at a pretty fast rate here: nearly four percentage points since 2010. Our under-18 population is actually shrinking per capita, down to 22% of the population -- a two percentage point drop. And when you look at it across regions, you can see it's the Northeast and the Midwest that is aging faster here, nearly at 4% -- at a 4% clip. The South and the West, a bit younger. That has to do with the fact that there are more Hispanics in the South and West, because I'm going to show you that in a minute. If you look at it by states, Maine and Florida are one two amongst the oldest states -- or the oldest 65-plus populations. And it's Utah and Texas that are among the youngest there; Utah being the youngest state, Texas with its Hispanic population also skewing younger. And check this out, because it's by ethnicity that shows you the dramatic differences here on age. Among whites, the white population is aging at the fastest rate, five percentage points, followed by Asians and African Americans. And then look at Hispanics -- the 65-plus population only aging by less than three percentage points. So we are a country that is aging overall, but certain population centers and certain regions are aging faster than others. This week, former First Lady Rosalynn Carter's family revealed she's been diagnosed with dementia three months after Jimmy Carter had to enter hospice care. Family said Mrs. Carter continues to live happily with her husband at their home in Plains, Georgia. In 1976, the longtime mental health advocate joined Meet the Press and talked about the special community of Plains and her experience hitting the campaign trail.
[START TAPE]
LINDA ELLERBEE:
What appeals to you other than the life you're living?
ROSALYNN CARTER:
Well, I've always enjoyed doing things with my family. I enjoy Plains, Georgia, just being at home in a small town. Everybody knows everybody. Everybody's friendly. No matter what happens in our community, if there's an illness or some kind of sadness, everybody cares. And I think that gives you a stability that to me is so important. And I enjoy that. I enjoy the public life. I've had a chance to travel in the whole country, and it’s just, it's just a great experience. I go into convalescent homes, nursing homes, golden age clubs, homes for the elderly every single day saying, "Will you vote for my husband?" The problems that the elderly have -- my mother's 70, she just retired from the hospital. It was traumatic for her to have to give up her work. Jimmy's mother is 78. She takes care of Amy for me. We know their problems firsthand, but still, when you go in the country and see things, I think that this last year-and-a-half traveling in the country has been probably the greatest experience of my life.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. I have a personal announcement. While today is not my final show, this is going to be my final summer here at Meet the Press. It's been an amazing nearly decade-long run. I'm pretty -- really proud of what this team and I have built over the last decade and frankly the last 15-plus years that I've been here at NBC, which also includes my time as political director. I've loved so much of this job, helping to explain America to Washington and explain Washington to America. When I took over Meet the Press, it was a Sunday show that had a lot of people questioning whether it could still have a place in the modern media space. Well, I think we've answered that question and then some. We've taken Meet the Press from a single Sunday show to a distinct and important political franchise. From our daily show Meet the Press NOW, our magazine show Meet the Press Reports, to our newsletters and podcasts, we've successfully expanded what makes Meet the Press special on Sundays to make it special no matter the topic or where it airs or when it airs. That includes our annual Meet the Press Film Festival as well, which has somehow become one of the most important festivals for Oscar buzz and nominations for news-driven documentaries. But the key to survival of any of these incredible media entities -- including here at Meet the Press -- is for leaders not to overstay their welcome. I'd rather leave a little bit too soon than stay a tad bit too long. I've had two amazing professional chapters, and I already have plans for my next chapter, including some projects right here at NBC News that I've been very focused on. Among them, docuseries and some docudramas focused on trying to educate the public better, bridge our divides and pierce our political bubbles. So while I may be leaving this chair, I'm still going to help NBC navigate and coach colleagues in this 2024 campaign season and beyond. But this is also an important time for me personally. I've let work consume me for nearly 30 years. I can't remember the last time I didn't wake up before 5:00 or 6:00 a.m. And as I've watched too many friends and family let work consume them before it was too late, I promised my family I wouldn't do that. And just as important -- and this is what really makes me happy -- I'm also ready to take a step back because I have so much confidence in the person who I'm going to pass the baton to. She's somebody who's been ready for this for a long time. Kristen Welker. I've had the privilege of working with her from essentially her first day here in Washington. And let me just say, she's the right person in the right moment. And for what it's worth, this is always how I hoped this would end for me, that I'd be passing the baton to her. And I'll officially do that in September. I'll be honest though, I leave feeling concerned about this moment in history but reassured by the standards we've set here. We didn't tolerate propagandists, and this network and program never will. But it doesn't mean sticking your head in the sand either. If you ignore reality, you'll miss the big story. Being a real political journalist isn't about building a brand. It's about reporting what's happening and explaining why it's happening and letting the public absorb the facts. If you do this job seeking popularity, you are doing this job incorrectly. I take the attacks from partisans as compliments, and I take the compliments from partisans with a grain of salt. The goal of this and every Meet the Press episode is to do all of the following in one informative hour: make you mad, make you think, shake your head in disapproval and nod your head in approval. If you do all of that in one hour of this show, we've done our jobs. So, again, this isn't goodbye. But know this: No matter who sits in this chair, if it's Sunday it's Meet the Press.