Meet the Press NOW — April 11

If it's Thursday, all eyes are on Arizona, as abortion rights, immigration and election integrity are converging in a critical battleground state that could decide the future of the White House and control of Congress, in addition to a union to counter China. President Biden is set to hold a first-of-its-kind trilateral summit moments from now as the United States, Japan and the Philippines seek to bolster relations in response to Chinese aggression and from the Hall of Fame to the trial of the century, a look back at the rise and fall and life and death of OJ Simpson welcome to

meet

the

press

now I'm Kristen Welker we start today in the battleground state of Arizona, which is now poised to be the center of the 2024 political universe , the biggest fights over the biggest issues, including immigration abortion and election procedures.

They are all converging on a state that could decide control of the White House and Congress this November. Right now, the issue of abortion, of course, looms large amid local and national backlash over the state Supreme Court's decision to uphold a Civil War-era territorial ban. The proceeding on the heels of that decision, the Biden campaign today launched a seven-figure digital TV ad campaign focused on just that issue. Because Donald Trump, millions of women lost the fundamental freedom to control their own bodies and now lives of women are in danger because the question is if Donald Trump returns to power, what freedom will you lose next?

Your body and your decisions belong to you, not the government, not Donald Trump. I will fight like hell to get your freedom back now look, this is all part of democracy. In an effort to seize this moment, Vice President Harris is indeed heading to the state tomorrow, meanwhile many Republicans are trying to distance themselves from the ruling, including Arizona Republican Senate candidate Carrie Lake, who today reiterated her opposition to that ban of 1864 despite her earlier comments in which she supported him. This complete ban on abortion that the Arizona Supreme Court just ruled is not in line with where the people of this state are.

The problem is not so much prohibiting abortion but rather saving babies. I agree with President Trump, this is such. A personal and private problem that arises after the presumptive Republican presidential candidate, Donald Trump, also distanced himself from the law and in a social media post last night noted that he is eager to try to overcome this problem. We did something that no one thought we had achieved. back to the states where he belongs and where everyone wanted him the states will make the decision Republicans are now free to run for office based on the horrible border inflation, the bad economy, the death and destruction of our country and of course , Trump's Supreme Court justices are responsible for overturning roie Wade, returning this issue to the states, now in Arizona, an effort in the state legislature to repeal the law was issued yesterday, causing a huge outburst on the floor of the Arizona Democrats.

If you're joining me now to kick this whole thing off, I'm Jeremy Duda, Arizona politics reporter for axios Jeremy, thank you so much for joining me. I really appreciate it, thanks for having me. We saw that drama in the state house yesterday, so get us up to speed on this effort to repeal the 1864 ban, of course, Democrats and some Republicans supported this, but do you think this is likely to happen? I imagine it's now been blocked by Republican legislators, so I mean, I think the votes to do it are probably probably there, we know they're there in the state senate, the Republicans only have a one-vote majority in each chamber, so Democrats just need a couple of them to vote to promote appeal for that to happen, it's just a The question of whether they'll actually be able to bring that to a vote, yesterday we saw some procedural maneuvering by Republicans to block that.

Both Chambers will return to the room next Wednesday. I'm sure we'll see that again next time. week and probably every day until it happens uh Ben Toma, who is the speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives, said he hopes that comes back, but he doesn't want to, he doesn't think we should rush into something like this, but it seems like everyone the days pass. every day that repeal is not passed is another day that the Democrats will continue to beat the Republicans on this, yes, so ultimately, just to be clear, you believe that it will eventually be repealed.

If I had to guess, I would say Probably yes, I think the votes are there and I think eventually there will be some Republicans who probably won't necessarily be on the side of the efforts to play a leadership role in this, but eventually, if it doesn't happen, I think They will probably change sides at some point. just because I think this is so critically important to the election, the Democrats have seized on this immediately and are saying people vote Democrat everywhere on the ballot if they want abortion rights, eventually I think enough Republicans will decide I don't want to play, you know, the games in the legislature and deal with these procedural maneuvers and eventually I think that's probably going to happen.

There's been a lot of discussion, of course, about an amendment that would need enough signatures to be voted on in November that would effectively protect reproductive rights. Do you think those signatures will be there? Can they get past that? It seems quite likely. I mean, they already announced it. I think a few weeks ago they had about half a million signatures, which is a little more than they need now, of course, you need a really big cushion when you're talking about citizen initiatives to compensate for signatures that are invalidated and things like that, but from the beginning I could see that there is a ton of money out there for this lot of organizing that is going on between Arizona and, you know, national political figures, Democrats and abortion rights groups that they were talking about.

I think a $50 million campaign from the beginning. So it's pretty hard to imagine a scenario where they don't get the signatures because they want to make sure that they can and will get enough, I think that's to make sure that they can withstand any kind of inevitable cut. The challenge comes, yes, it looks like it's a practical effort right now, let me ask you, the Republican I'm about to talk to, Matt Gres, brought, of course, that effort to repeal the 1864 ban to the floor, the Democrats . I have accused him of previously sponsoring a fetal personhood bill.

There's a bit of gray area there, although he does clarify what the truth is in terms of what he supported in the past. I haven't looked at that legislation lately, so I couldn't. I'll tell you specifically what's in it. I don't know, if I remember correctly. I don't think there's a real language of personality feeling there. I think, if I remember correctly, last year was more of a slippery argument between Democrats and abortion. human rights defenders, but again I'm not 100% sure what exactly was in the text of the bills. I know Rep. Gres says they weren't fetal personhood bills, let me ask you about something else that's gotten a lot of attention in your say that the attorney general has promised she won't prosecute anyone under that 1864 bill. , but given the fact that Roie Wade has now been revoked, I mean, what is the reality?

It's possible? Can you really realistically say that? I guess that's the question, maybe that's it. It remains to be seen whether Attorney General May is claiming authority under a statute that she says may give her the authority to, I think, the term, supervise county attorneys. Governor Hobbs issued an executive order last year that seeks to take away his authority to prosecute. abortion-related crimes from the 15 county prosecutors and give them to the attorney general, but I think there are some conflicting legal opinions about whether she really has the authority to make this law has only been used once, almost 50 years ago, no fully litigated, but I think the biggest and most important point here is that even if the attorney general can assure abortion providers that there will be no prosecutions for violating this law, I think what we're hearing is that none of them really will perform abortions. if it's illegal if it's illegal on the books it's against the law no one is willing to roll the dice and commit it you know, potentially commit a felony for doing that, I think so, regardless of what the prosecution authority is in and who's going for it. process what I'm pretty sure once we see this kind of pause in law enforcement, it's going to expire in about 60 days or so, abortion services are pretty much going to come to a complete stop in this state okay Jeremy Duda well you're at the center of the political universe right now, so I anticipate that we will speak with you again soon.

Thank you very much for your experience, your excellent report. Really we appreciate. Please join me now as a Republican state representative from Arizona. Matt Grass. Matt, like me, the representative, was saying that you brought that up. motion to force a vote on a bill to repeal the abortion ban of 1864. His effort was effectively blocked by some of his own Republican colleagues. How confident are you that this will ultimately pass when lawmakers return next week? Hi Christian, I'm very confident that when we can Next Wednesday we will vote on the measure and it will prevail in the House and it will be sent to the Senate and the Senate will accept the measure and it will prevail in the Senate and most likely that bill will be in the hands of Governor Hobbs. 'desk at the end of the day you think, but do you think that by the end of Wednesday Governor Hobbs will be able to sign a bill to effectively repeal the abortion ban bill of 1864, that is my expectation based on the conversations I am having with the members um, we're going to have the votes, you know, it's interesting yesterday, the Speaker of the House said that lawmakers need to carefully consider action and not rush legislation, saying, quote, these are difficult conversations that we all need to have and which we can't have at all when they are Democrats. legislators act in a unitary manner and engage in terribly childish behavior, as we saw on the House floor, obviously, that is a response to the outburst that we presented at the top of your program, what is your reaction to that, since you brought this motion to the floor? that you support repealing this ban, you know that Arizona has had a long tradition of leaders, you know, choosing what is right over party affiliation, and on this particular issue, repealing the territorial ban that goes too far and It illegally affects all abortions in the state of Arizona except to save the life of the mother, it does not reflect the will of the electorate, so I think you know that the voters love us.

I represent a district that I think is a microcosm of Arizona and the United States is one third Republican, one third Democrat. and a third independent expect us to get together and talk about this issue, resolve it so we can give the women and doctors of Arizona the certainty that they are not going to be locked up for an abortion. I am very confident that we can have that dialogue and have that vote next Wednesday and it will prevail, Representative Gres, just give us the conclusion here of what your goal is. Do you want to see a return to the 15-week band that had been in place before this state? supreme court decision I am proud to be pro-life and have supported policies that respect women and protect new life and I also believe in a reasonable deadline with exceptions and if we repeal the territorial law the 15we deadline would come back into effect, I think that's where the majority of Arizonans are on this issue with reasonable policies, so that would be my preference and then we also have on the ballot that you mentioned earlier in the segment an abortion access initiative that would effectively allow abortions up to 9 months in In certain circumstances I think it's too extreme, so you have a territorial ban on the one hand and a nine-month abortion initiative on the other, most Arizonans are in the middle on this issue and we need to find Common Ground Ju.

Just to be clear. We are talking about the Constitutional Amendment that would establish the viability threshold at 24 weeks. Yes, well, that's a provision, but they also include an exception beyond 24 weeks if a degree is 32 a health care professional for the life for the mother's life if yes if the mother's life is at risk if there is a health issue there is a mental health provision there so that if a title 32 Prov uh professional identifies a mental health issue as well and Beyond just the life of the mother, that's allwhich is always there throughout the pregnancy and is there under territorial law, but the mental health issue I think has some serious concerns about how easy and legal it would be to have late pregnancy or partial birth abortions going too far well representative gr it's important to note that late term abortions are incredibly rare if you look at polls when talking about a 15 week ban 54% of Americans actually say they oppose it.

I hear you. To say that the majority of people support him, that goes against what the polls show. I've seen polls that say the opposite, where the 15 us time frame is a common sense solution that many voters favor, but what is it? What is very clear is that the majority of voters and the majority of Arizonans want abortion to be permissible. In the state of Arizona they do not want a total ban and they do not want the territorial ban, so that is very important here, when we return next Wednesday we will have an emerging situation that we must urgently address and I call on my Republican and Democratic colleagues to to come together to get Arizona to do the right thing, let me ask you if you think Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump, do you think he has shown CL a lack of clarity around this issue?

He is responsible for overturning Ro v Wade. In response to this, he said it is appropriate that these things be decided at the state level. Although he has also said this goes too far, some conservatives have accused him of hypocrisy and say he has not shown enough clarity. Do you think his lack of clarity will create vulnerabilities for Republicans up and down the ballot? I think President Trump has been pretty clear that this decision should fall to the people and the states, and he also believes in reasonable timelines with exceptions that respect women and protect new lives.

I think he's been very clear on that point, but as you know, several conservative groups have said that, effectively, for him to come out and say that this is a state problem from his perspective does not go far enough to want a candidate who support a national ban. Do you support a national ban on abortion at 15 weeks? I do not support a national ban and I do not support any national action and I do not support a state ban. This is for the people of Arizona to decide and they will decide in November and when the votes are cast and the results are given.

I'm going to look at a place that has policies that protect women and my hope is that we also protect new life and I think the current policy that we have with the territorial ban is not right, State Representative Gres, thank you. Thank you so much for your time, I really appreciate it, Kristen and joining me now is the mayor of Phoenix Kate gyo mayor gyo thank you so much for joining me, I really appreciate it, thank you for having me. Well, we just talked, of course, since you just heard from a state Republican who said that he opposes the abortion ban of 1864, but some Democrats have criticized Republicans for backing down on this issue.

My question: If the goal is to repeal this ban, do you want Democrats to reach across the aisle to work with Republicans to achieve this repeal? In fact, we absolutely have to repeal this ban, it's very scary to think about what's happening with Women's Health right now in Phoenix and in Arizona, we had a doctor shortage to begin with and I'm talking to doctors who just don't feel comfortable. practicing even basic obstetric and gynecological medicine for fear that they might be questioned for their decisions. I see a nurse practitioner right now because my OBGYN left and it was hard to find one and to think that more doctors might be changing the way they practice is unthinkable to think. that doctors have to consider whether a woman is going to die before giving her care so they can't think about things like lifelong chronic pain that could be easily prevented and they don't have the opportunity to do so.

I have had a good friend who was pregnant and married wanted the baby aborted and then came home after a procedure and received an insurance bill for the abortion she didn't even realize that was what she had and just the huge amount of confusion around very safe medical procedures that will not be able to happen in Arizona, we have to do something about this crazy ban, let's talk a lot before we ask you this question, do you expect this repeal to be confirmed? You just heard from the representative, the state representative says that he believes it could happen as soon as Wednesday that it could be on the governor's desk as soon as next Wednesday is what you're hearing do you think is likely?

I am deeply concerned that that will not happen. Some of the Republicans, the very few Republicans who said they would do it. voting for repeal has lost support and gained momentum for his primary rivals, so I think that may hinder his ability to do the right thing. The speaker you cited above is in a hotly contested Republican primary for an open congressional seat. I don't see He allows this to move forward. I sincerely hope so. It's a scary time for our families and women who are losing the ability to control their bodies, so they need to do something, but politics has been very difficult.

As you saw yesterday, the Flower was voted on. and it didn't move forward, let me ask you about this Constitutional Amendment that would effectively guarantee access for up to 24 weeks. You heard Rep. Gres say that he thinks he goes too far, so, first of all, what's your reaction to that to Republicans saying? 24 weeks is too long, there are too many exceptions included in this constitutional amendment. I believe it is a responsible constitutional amendment that allows doctors to practice medicine and women to have access to care. I appreciate you rejecting the representative grass when he called it 9mon no one who has a baby at 8 months wants it, that's not the problem for so many women, there is a challenge right now where you don't even know you're pregnant and these bands do it They are kicking for me.

I was pregnant once and the first time I went to the doctor with a pregnancy I was diagnosed with the flu so I didn't want to have the baby but I didn't realize that was what was happening and I can't imagine people having circumstances more difficult, including women whose doctors have told them it is not safe for them to have a baby mayor. Do you think there will ultimately be enough votes and signatures to put this amendment to a vote? I think we'll have enough signatures, but the Republican legislature has made ballot initiatives very difficult in Arizona to get over the finish line, there are a lot of loopholes or there are a lot of fair challenges to get something done and you can lose the validity of the signature for simple things like being too out of the ordinary, so there will undoubtedly be legal challenges.

I would feel better if we had legislative leadership. The governor will sign what they told her, in addition to the electoral initiative. Simply put, these decisions are essential for women. to have agency over their own bodies, they protect families and we can't leave it to chance on things like whether the signatures are inside the box. Okay Mayor Kate Gyo, we really appreciate your perspective. Thank you very much for joining me this afternoon. Thanks for coming. Security officials around the world are on edge amid growing fears that Iran may soon retaliate for the Israeli strike in Syria that killed several Iranian officials.

We'll have the latest from the Pentagon. Stay with us. You're watching Meet the Press now. Welcome back right now President Biden is hosting a trilateral summit with the leaders of Japan and the Philippines with a view to countering China's growing military presence in the Indo-Pacific region and especially in the South China Sea. At that

meet

ing, the president announced a series of economic meetings. and security initiatives that further underscore the United States' commitment to that region. I'm joined by NBC's Monica Alba, who is at the White House for us, so Monica talks about the key outcomes of this trilateral meeting.

What does President Biden expect? It's exactly what you said there. At the top, Kristen, this engagement in the South China Sea, that type of cooperation is really critical when you're talking about the potential threat from China and that's something that really over the course of the last few years the Biden Administration has spoken at the highest levels. What's at stake, remember there were all those military engagements between the two and remember there have been incidents in the South China Sea, so the Philippines, for example, has the ability to commit to allowing American service members are located at certain bases there and For Japan to also commit to that type of reciprocity, those are the types of agreements that they are going to talk about in addition to those economic ties, but in reality this is immediately after a state dinner that was held for Japan, but then I wanted to build on that kind of cooperation again.

Shoring up this Alliance in the Indo-Pacific, which is a key priority for this president and for the Kristen administration, absolutely is, particularly now that China is becoming increasingly aggressive, as you say. Monica, let me ask you about Treasury Secretary Janet Yelen, who was in Beijing earlier this week, what can you tell us about that and the goals of her trip? Remember that there was a long period about a year ago when we weren't even sure when high-level US officials could travel. to China because of the Chinese spy balloon incident and at that time Secretary Blinkin had that high profile visit that was scrapped and then it was later and then of course there was this important summit between President Biden and President Xiin Ping to trying to restore military-to-military communications and really just to lower the temperature in the relationship between the US and China and they feel like they've been relatively successful in doing that because they've seen trips like the one that Secretary Yellen just took and because we know that President Biden and the president with her just recently spoke on the phone in the last few weeks and have committed to more frequent and regular contact, so things have calmed down, but of course they are still monitoring any potential threat that comes out of there, that's fine and Monica Alba, we know you will continue to monitor this developing story, thank you for joining us, I really appreciate it, as President Biden will be hosting that trilateral summit, the administration remains focused on the potential for an escalation of violence in the Middle East.

Administration B officials are increasingly concerned about the possibility of a retaliatory attack against Israel. Following last week's attack on the Iranian consulate in Syria that killed two senior commanders, both President Biden and Secretary of State Anthony Blinkin reiterated their support for Israel's defense in the past 24 hours. against any threat posed by Iran and its proxies and just moments ago we learned from its officials that its defense minister spoke with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin about his appointment Preparing for an Iranian attack tracking all of this is NBC's Pentagon correspondent News, Courtney QB Court, thank you. for joining me this afternoon, so what are you hearing from officials about what this Iranian retaliation might look like?

Could it be imminent? Yeah, so reality check, Kristen, we've been hearing for several days that something might be close, but I'm not. I don't want to scare people by saying it's imminent, as if it could happen at any moment, when the reality is that US officials don't seem to know exactly what they're doing and what they're following here. It is an assessment that if in fact Iran follows through on these multiple threats now to retaliate against Israel for this attack on Damascus. Two of the most likely ways they would accomplish this would be with land-attack cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, or drone swarms, or, frankly, a combination of both, but the reality is that the United States isn't really sure. where exactly those targets might be among the options they're considering, according to several U.S. officials we spoke to, they could be inside Israel now if, in fact, the Iranians were to strike inside Israel, officials believe they would pursue something that would be almost reciprocal to the attack in Damascus, that is, something that is a military or even intelligence facility rather than attacking civilians.

Officials are also telling us that they could be looking for some kind of consular diplomatic military intelligence facility elsewhere in the region, not necessarily in Israel, but what I really want to emphasize here, Kristen, is that American officials simply are not sure what I could doexactly Iran here, but it's public relations. Preparing for the reality that there may be some type of retaliation in the coming hours or days, and we know that the commander of the US Central Command is in the region today, what do we know about that visit and what does he expect to do? achieve it, yes, and in fact we can report now that he traveled to Israel today for a series of meetings with Israeli officials, so this was a trip that was planned some time ago, but they accelerated it, they moved up the given dates.

Regarding tensions in the region, we don't know exactly who we met or what they discussed, but officials admit that they did talk about this threat and that doesn't surprise Kristen, given the fact that President Biden has spoken to Benjamin Netanyahu about it. . and several other officials, including, as you mentioned, Secretary Austin spoke with his counterpart, Minister Galant, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General CQ Brown, also spoke with his counterpart, so there have been a number of discussions that have been going back and forth about this and I will say that US officials, our colleague Carol Lee and I, have told us that, as part of these discussions, the United States has looked at possible response options should the United States find itself dragged into this conflict and in case it turns into a larger regional conflict, but officials here are really hoping that this is not some kind of larger scale attack that turns it into a larger regional conflict.

Yes, Courtney, you and I have been talking about concerns about this potentially turning into a larger regional conflict. regional conflict, as you have been saying for many months Courtney QB, thank you very much, I really appreciate it, as we have mentioned, the Biden administration has focused intensely on a number of foreign policy challenges this week, from the current Israel war and Hamas to countering China in the Indo-Pacific and the fight for funding on Capitol Hill over the US and Ukraine to learn more about all of this. I'm joined now by New York Democratic Congressman Gregory Meeks, the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Congressman, thank you very much for joining me. I really appreciate that it is a pleasure to be with you. I want to start with where we are. I started this segment, which is that trilateral meeting that's going on in the White House right now. What messy message do you think that trilateral meeting sends to China and what are the outcomes you would like to see emerge from it? Well, look, it says that these are the democratic countries of the Indo-Pacific will stand together and work together, you know, it's historic in nature in that sense, so when you look at what President Biden has done bringing together for the first time cap David uh historic with Japan and South Korea uh now also adding uh Australia working together uh Philippines uh is showing that the Indo-Pacific will remain an open area uh uh uh uh uh and that democratic countries are not going to allow an authoritarian government come in and try to use coercion or other things and we're going to work very closely together on that.

Let's now move on to the Middle East and Israel specifically. You have said that you will not approve the sale of F-15 fighter jets. to Israel without what you have called guarantees about what they will be used for, can you help us members of Congress be specific? What type of guarantees do they need to see before approving such a sale? Look, we have a lot of things going on right now and what I want to do is make sure we get all the facts and then know, for example, you know, we have a situation related to Hamas, which now says that they don't have 40 hostages, enough. to continue with the ceasefire Nom uh a conversation uh number two you have a situation where you have uh several we can almost have a famine and salvation uh how many humanitarian trucks to bring aid to feed the Palestinians uh you know what I need To know what is happening on the ground, there is a situation that I heard you talk about in the last interview, where Iran may be trying to attack Israel, so Israel has to have what it needs and also to make sure that it can starve anything that could happen there, so there are a lot of things and it's time for me to make sure I get all the information before I have to make a decision on it.

In fact, we're talking about um, the Los F, the F-15, uh, and what we're talking about really couldn't be delivered to Israel for at least another 5 years, so I think the window is to make sure and The responsibility I have is to do I am sure that all the parties involved guarantee me all the events that are happening on the ground. Well, bring me to my next question because, as you say, the F-15 fighter jets wouldn't get there for quite some time. some time so I guess the question is, Congressman: Is the United States using enough leverage?

Do they need to apply more

press

ure than these verbal warnings to Israel? Do they need? Does the United States need to condition aid to Israel to see the kinds of outcomes that mitigate against civilians? deaths, which is what the president is asking for, well, you see the president is working very hard, and there are certain things that you know, and one of the things I'm trying to figure out is how many gateways there will be. In addition to getting the help in uh or uh, the capacity to have where we have may have 400 trucks coming in, uh, it's going to go up to 700 to 800, let's talk to the world food organization and other NOS that may be on the ground so that Let's know that we are feeding people.

I'm focused on wanting to prevent a famine from happening too, so all of those things are very important, just to know, to take facts and to make decisions. The responsibility that I have, as the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee, is that we get that done and see where we go from there, those are all important things, because, as you pointed out, there is a growing concern that there may be retaliation. Iran's attack on Israel if that were to happen if those concerns grew, would that change your assessment? Would you then be willing to provide those F-15 fighter jets and aid with no conditions attached?

Yes, in my opinion, in my opinion, part of what the deal is is that you know I don't want 1,000 pound, 1,000 pound or 2,000 pound bombs going to Gaza. That seems wrong to me. It causes, you know, the indiscriminate killing of children and women and innocents. It shouldn't happen now at the same time, if Israel is attacked by Iran or Hisb or any of them, then other weapons might be appropriate to be used there, because you're talking about what's coming from there, so I want to make sure that Israel, um, you know, because we know with what hamama, uh hasbalah and Iram, they do not want Israel to exist, we are not going to allow Israel to disappear and we are going to support Israel in that sense to do I am sure that they have the right, as we have talked about all the time, about defending themselves and, therefore, if in fact they are attacked, we in the United States are not going to turn our backs on Israel, we are going to help them, you know? and give them what they need to defend themselves.

I think that's what this is all about, what's happening in Gaza and what's happening with your balah and Iran, and we have to take all of those things into consideration. Of course, I ask you about another critical region: Ukraine, overnight there was another massive Russian airstrike against Ukraine. Congress has yet to approve more aid to Ukraine. What is your opinion on some of these new proposals, such as providing aid to Ukraine in the form of a loan? for example, something that former President Trump has said has support and therefore appears to be gaining support among some Republicans.

I think what we need to do is pass the supplemental bill, the supplemental security bill that was passed in the Senate in a bipartisan manner, that is the quickest way for us to get to Ukraine what they need to defend themselves. and push Russia back, you know, as long as we were supplying them with the weapons they needed, they were not only winning, they were pushing Russia back. You can see more than 300 and some thousands of soldiers they have killed. You can see the destruction of Russian planes, etc., what they need is air cover, what they need are some strikes and other, you know, weapons to push back, they showed. their trust in them they demonstrated their ability over the last few years that this war has continued, they just give them what they need and guess how it helps the Ukrainians, but it's not just in our own national security interest.

You heard what the Prime Minister said. Minister Japan said that they know that China is also watching what is happening, so if they want to counterattack China, this is the way to do it and Ukraine will give Ukraine what it needs and it needs it urgently right now, so I would say to the speaker. just put the Senate bill on the floor so we can then pass that bill here, the next day it will be on the president's desk or that night he will sign it and then we can start giving Ukraine the ammunition it needs to you can continue your fight, okay, Congressman Gregory Meeks, thank you very much for your time, I really appreciate it and after the break, thank you for having me, thank you, let's remember the life of OJ Simpson and what was called the trial of the century what are you watching Meet the press now welcome back well today we learned that one of the most notorious and controversial figures of recent times has died OJ sson passed away yesterday after a battle with cancer, according to his family, he had 76 years old, known as Simpson.

To fans of him, Juice was a college football star and a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame, but for millions of Americans it was the courtroom, not the football field, that defined who Simpson was. He was tried and acquitted of murder for the 1994 murder of his ex. his wife Nicole Brown Simpson and his friend Ronald Goldman in a televised trial that captivated the nation MBC's Jay Gray has more on the life and career of Heisman Trophy winner and NFL Hall of Fame running back OJ Simpson , OJ Simpson will be remembered most for something he could never ran away from orenthal Born James Simpson in 1947 he was raised by a single mother on the tough side of San Francisco when he left American football a college star at USC he was drafted by the Buffalo Bills where He had a record-breaking career in the NFL, including a league MVP.

He retired as one of the best to ever play the game and for OJ the spotlight never went off. No one does it better than transitioning into a successful career in television and movies. That's great. He was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1985. The year he married his second wife, Nicole Brown, the couple had two children but an apparently difficult marriage that included allegations of domestic abuse. Nicole Brown Simpson filed for divorce in February 1992 and just over two years later, she and her friend Ron Goldman were found murdered in The suspect at their Brentwood home may be driving a white or light-colored Bronco 5 days after the attack fatally driven by former teammate Simpson led officers on a low-speed chase through Los Angeles threatening to take his own life before finally surrendering to police. was accused of murder the judicial process dubbed the trial of the century if it doesn't fit you must acquit lasted n months every minute we the jury and the action titled above found the accused innocent or the ortal James Simpson on live television Justice was no use Seeking that justice the Goldman family won a civil suit and Simpson was ordered to pay more than $33 million.

He returned to court several times over the next few years for traffic violations, including cable television piracy, but was robbed in Las Vegas in 2008 by Simpson. saying he was recovering stolen personal property which ultimately sent him to prison count one conspiracy to commit a crime count guilty sentenced to 33 years served just over nine thank you thank you thank you before being released on parole in 2017 Jay Gray NBC News just It's extraordinary to remember everything that happened there. NBC News Legal Correspondent and Senior Investigator Cynthia Mcfaden covered the OJ Simpson murder trial for ABC News. She joins me now Cynthia.

Thank you very much for being here. It's just amazing that you were actually there. Tell us how it was. To have a front-row seat to see that extraordinary story, as it unfolded well, was extraordinary. I mean, there were only, I guess, about 40 seats in the courtroom and, um, yeah, I actually had the pass for ABC during those nine months of el tri, I don't think I missed a day, it was like being in the hot center of the nation in some way because it was the intersection of celebrity criminal justice careers and money, all of those things came to play. and I think we learned a lot about ourselves and the nation through what happened now, remember that Bronco chase we just saw. 95 million Americans watched it live on television, soIt was a kind of meeting point and then because El tri was televised, as you know, people watched it and at night people had discussions.

I mean, that was the topic of conversation not only for those of us who were lucky enough to have a seat in the courtroom, but America talked about this. trial in a way that I've never had access to a trial before, so it was an extraordinary experience to be there and it's fascinating to hear you tell it Cynthia and of course I think every person remembers where they were during that slow speed chase. and when the verdict was read, I explained to people who might be too young to remember where they were why there was so much interest in this case, the fact that he was a football legend and then suddenly he was accused of murder and much of America's blacks and whites saw it differently Christen.

I mean, you know, when the verdict came, there were a lot of people who were outraged and protested. Furious, feeling that there the prosecution had indeed had a mountain of evidence and that the defense had somehow found a guilty man. and in many parts of black America people felt that finally a black man had finally had a fair trial, had finally had enough money to hire the Dream Team, and had finally had justice done, so the nation responded very differently to this and and I think that, you know, race is still a difficult topic to talk about in America, it was then, but it played out in a very public way and I mean people, that conversation has to continue, but it came up in the context, remember.

Rodney King had been beaten by the LAPD on camera and it was because of that in Los Angeles that this trial took place and that influenced a lot of people's attitudes. I'm so glad you brought that up because it was a big important aspect of that case and that moment and how America saw everything that they witnessed in that courtroom Cynthia Mcfaden we are very fortunate that you helped us remember this story we really appreciate it thank you for join me, it is a pleasure to be with you tonight at 11.00 pm. Um, right here on NBC News, you can now watch a 2-hour DAT Line special about the people versus OJ Simpson.

You won't want to miss it's a fascinating look into the past. We'll be back soon with more. Meet the press. Now, welcome back with his job as president potentially on the line and the rebel right flank ready to rebel. House Speaker Mike Johnson heads to Mar Lago to meet with Donald Trump. He will appear alongside the former president at an event tomorrow to talk about an issue Trump has been talking about. obsessed since losing the 2020 race with what he calls electoral integrity, the trip comes at a perilous time for the speaker as he seeks to reauthorize the surveillance tool known as fisa and as he seeks to pass a foreign aid bill that includes funds for Ukraine. without losing your job for more, I'm joined by my panel, NBC News correspondent Dasha Burns, president and CEO of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, Navine Nyak, and Republican strategist Brad Todd, thanks to all of you By being here, Dasha set the stage for us for tomorrow this joint press conference between Trump and Johnson and they are going to talk about what they say is election integrity, what do you think is the meaning of this moment?

I mean, it's the former president once again establishing the message that he's going to convey. We'll be drilling for the next few months, no matter how many months we have until the election, and he believes 2020 was rigged. He wants to make sure this next election isn't R, but he's been screaming election interference with all these cases and that's it. The main argument you're going to hear him say: Impeach Biden Impeach Biden Impeach Biden over and over again and see Mike Johnson standing next to him right after he just put an obstacle right in front of him and he has this wing of the of the Congress which is really at their behest, you know Kristen, as I've been here in DC talking to sources that I've been talking to on the Republican side, there's a lot of concern about what the Republican Party is and what is it after Donald Trump is right because at this point the fundamental principles of the Republican Party platforms are what Trump says they are and what he wants them to be day in and day out and that is why he is using this moment to talk to voters and to show them, hey, this is my party, it's my party in Congress, it's my party on the Supreme Court and it's my party with the voters, yes Brad, it's a very important point and I want to talk about fisa, which Dasha just mentioned, but he comes, I mean, he's saying this is my party.

Also, to some extent, he's trying to protect President Johnson, who has this threat, whether real or not, to Marjorie Taylor. Green says if you approve Aid to Ukraine, we're going to move to get you expelled. The president and Trump and his team are basically saying no, we can't afford to have more chaos in the House, how much do you think that could mitigate that threat from the right flank? I think it's the president, former President Trump, telling Republicans in the House that he's with Mike Johnson. I think that's the goal of the whole exercise. You know, there's a constant tension between campaigning on the future and voting for the past for both candidates.

Yeah, and I think you know part of that part. That is due to having been president for both and living up to the years with long careers. The winner of this campaign will probably be the one who talks the most about the future and the loser will probably be one. that speaks to the H in the past, but I think probably what's most at stake here is that Donald Trump is trying to signal to House conservatives that he's with Mike Johnson yeah navine how do you see this moment? and one of the things that's so interesting that there are Democrats saying that if there was a real threat to Mike Johnson, some of them say yes, we would protect him now.

I don't know if that ultimately helps or hurts him, but when you talk to sources on Capitol Hill. They say one of the things that Mike Johnson has been quite effective at is reaching across the aisle and establishing these relationships that govern, yeah, right, no, I mean, I think of three things, one at the Trump meeting, I think what you're saying is what they're saying. They're not talking about the right thing, they're not talking about fisa or doing something to protect the country, they're not talking about Ukraine and the fact that we have an ally that's really trying to survive a war and massive aggression.

There is no conversation about that. What they're talking about is that the past on Trump's concerns about 2020 and issues that voters don't really care about, that comes first. I find it funny to think that Trump wouldn't want chaos. I mean, that's pretty much what he's striving for at all times, it's indicative that you know he probably doesn't want this, but it also continues to embarrass Mike Johnson. I mean, we saw it again yesterday, yes, it wasn't an overthrow of him, but it was essentially saying that I don't really support you as a speaker in what you want to do and that's another way of underlining how chaotic and dysfunctional this party is.

Yeah, let's talk about fisa, which we've all been talking about, basically, this surveillance program that Donald Trump literally published. kill fisa on social media 19 republic republicans Dasha did exactly that it is important to note that this surveillance program that they were going to reauthorize is not the one that actually bothers him, he is bothered by one that allowed the Stafford campaign in 2016 was watched amid concerns that there may have been some collusion with Russia, but what do you think the implications are and what does it say that Donald Trump can still come in and say kill this bill and 19 Republicans do the same?

I mean, to your point, my party is right, that's him. He keeps saying that with these very matter-of-fact messages, right? You, the voters, are literally saying he says one thing and the Republicans immediately do the same thing and there are a lot of voters who speak on the Democratic side and on the Republican side who are observing this strange realignment. It's happening that Republicans are saying, wait a minute, since when are Democrats more pro-national security than Republicans? wait a minute, since when have Republicans been more pro-Putin and pro-Russia than what's happening here and I think you're seeing a lot, a lot of voters looking at this and saying, I really don't know where I fit in anymore.

I don't know where these parties are going. What I see is what Trump says they will do, which on the one hand could be a selling point for some voters who say Look, he actually really, you know, rules with an iron fist with his party, they will do what him tell them, on the other hand, that means you know you really need to watch Trump closely rather than any of the other leaders to see, uh. What is going to happen to the country? Yeah, I mean, the Republican Party has traditionally been the strong party when it comes to things like foreign policy, that was the topic of conversation, for example, when you think about some of the Republican Party nominees, in the past, McCain . romni, for example, George W.

Bush, etcetera, etcetera, this is a real departure from that. I don't, I don't know, I think I agree with that. I think Republicans still believe in projecting American power abroad and believe in advocating militancy in defending the military and not using it as a social engineering laboratory like many Democrats want to do. Biden's problem remains the first, but beyond his age, which cannot be fixed, it is the core of his downfall. started in the polls is when it was too weak in Afghanistan, so I think that still remains the Achilles heel of this administration and I think Homeland Security voters will still choose to vote against Joe Biden this time NV, what do you think of that? is that it remains his real Achilles heel and today we saw the president introduce these new actions to expand background checks.

This is an executive action that will likely be challenged in court, but it is clearly another issue that he is trying to exploit. Well, I mean. Think Ukraine. I think the president has really handled it very well. I think the American people are very supportive of the way he has brought the world and Europe together. You know, in opposition to Putin's aggression, we have seen an expansion and strengthening of NATO. There's a really powerful story about how he emerged on the world stage and you know you see him today aligning his partners in unique ways to take on China as well.

I think in the background checks there is no doubt that it is a huge success, that is a story that is going to save lives and it is big, it was bipartisan, very good, great discussion guys, many thanks to daos, navine and Brad. I'll be back tomorrow with more Meet the Press Now the news continues with Hy Jackson right now, thanks for watching, stay up to date on the latest news and top stories on the NBC News app or follow us on social media.