Meet the Press full broadcast — Feb. 26

this Sunday defending democracy a year after Russia invaded Ukraine President Biden vows to stand firm against Vladimir Putin's threat Ukraine will never be a victory for Russia, but what does victory look like? Are we giving them enough to win the war or just survive? If you want victory, we have to do more. Additionally, tensions are rising as the United States continues to warn China about sending weapons to Ukraine. Tensions are rising in the South China Sea. Is the Pentagon preparing to move more troops to Taiwan? My guest this morning, the Department of Homeland Security. President Biden's advisor Jake Sullivan and Republican Senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska and off the rails.

I sincerely hope that when all the politicians get here, including Biden, they return from their Ukraine tour and have some money left over for Donald Trump to travel to the site of the trained toxic derailment in Ohio to criticize the Biden Administration for focusing more on the abroad, creating the first real split-screen moment of the 2024 campaign, Joining me for insights and analysis, NBC News Chief White House Correspondent Kristen Welker, NPR White House Correspondent, Tamara, key Republican strategist Al. cardness and journalist and author Jonathan Alton welcome to Sunday is NBC News' Meet the Press in Washington the longest-running program in television history this is Meet the Press with Chuck Todd good Sundays on morning As the war in Ukraine enters its second year the question is what will victory seem quite clear?

No one involved, not the United States nor our European allies, Ukraine or Russia, can afford for this war to be in the same place it is today, entering year three a year from now, and yet both sides , President Biden in a surprise visit to Keith and Vladimir Putin this week in Moscow prepared the world for a protracted conflict a year after this war Putin no longer doubts the strength of our coalition but he still doubts our conviction he doubts our power of permanence but there should be without a doubt our support for Ukraine will not waver NATO will not split and we will not get tired we decided to carry out a special military operation step by step we will continue to solve the objectives before us they started the war and we use force To stop it, Iden's visit to Ukraine was the first time in modern history that a sitting US president visited an active war zone without a US military presence and Biden has tied his legacy to the success of this war.

Stretching into 2024 and the inevitable presidential campaign, the American public is already divided over continued support for Ukraine divided 49-47 over whether Congress should provide more weapons and funding. Isolationism among Republicans is growing with the major presidential contenders out there right now. Trying to show some distance from the Ukraine war on Friday despite Ukraine's request and a growing bipartisan drift in Congress, President Biden made clear that he is ruling out providing F-16 jets for now, while Russia has suffered nearly 200,000 casualties, eight times higher than American casualties. In the two decades of war we fought in Afghanistan, Moscow's winter offensive has so far generated only minor territorial gains.

The only potential beneficiary of a protracted conflict may be China, which offered a peace plan, by the way, that Ukraine did not reject out of hand, the United States did. and is still hurling accusations that China is considering providing lethal aid to Russia. US officials told NBC News that intelligence suggests the aid includes artillery and ammunition, but when US officials sounded the alarm on Friday, President Biden downplayed the threat from China. I don't anticipate We haven't seen it yet, but I don't anticipate a major initiative by China that also provides weaponry to Russia and joining me now, the president's National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan.

Jake, welcome back to

meet

the

press

, thank you. for inviting me, Chuck, I want to start right there, Secretary Blinken, last week and young people all week have been very seriously, uh, seriously concerned about what China might be doing. President Biden appeared to downplay the risk that exists, meaning that his instinct or do he have new intelligence that suggests the Chinese are backing down? Well, we have the same intelligence that we have had that has been behind the comments that Secretary Blinken made and what you just heard from President Biden, which is that we have not yet seen China provide military forces. team to Russia for the purpose of fighting the war in Ukraine, we haven't seen it yet, we're still watching, we'll be watching as President Biden said, but so far we haven't seen it, do you have an idea what it means? your why why would they make the decision to do this what would be their strategic reason for doing it if they did it abroad is a great question Chuck because I don't think China would be interested in doing this I think it would alienate them from several countries around the world including our European allies, and would put them squarely at the center of responsibility for the kinds of war crimes and bombings of civilians and atrocities that the Russians are committing in Ukraine, their weapons would actually be used. over the massacre of people in Ukraine, so I think it would be ill-advised for China to go ahead, but of course that's a decision that Beijing will have to make for itself, other than to say that there would be consequences for getting you or anyone else involved. . no specific consequence is established, why not, why not make public what the consequences could be, whether it be sanctions, whether it be weapons or troops to Taiwan, why not expose it in public?

Well, we think it's best to do it directly with the Chinese. Our counterparts privately and indeed Secretary Blinken had the opportunity to

meet

with China's top diplomat at the Munich security conference just a few days ago, so we have channels to be able to make sure China

full

y understands the position. of the United States and what would happen if they did. move forward with this step and we don't see as many gains in microphone diplomacy in this. I understand, do you have the Western allies on board with the immediate response that you want to give with China or is that going to be hard work, we have actually had intense and very positive consultations with our NATO allies with other members of the Coalition who They support Ukraine and, in fact, Chuck, they themselves are taking steps to communicate with Beijing.

Senior officials in Europe are speaking directly with senior officials in China. China ex

press

es its own strong warnings about China's progress in this regard, believing that the serious consequences that the United States would pose to its European and NATO allies would accompany them by remaining away from microphone diplomacy. I will stay away from hypotheses at all times. What I will say is that we have had extremely effective constructive discussions with our European allies about this contingency. I think we're all on the same page about our concern, our alarm if this were to happen, we all see the same thing right now, which is that China has not moved forward and we will address the circumstance that should have occurred in the post.

Many U.S. Administration officials have essentially dismissed it out of hand, but President Zielinski didn't think through his decision and it's a smart move on his part. Foreign Ski said there were parts of the plan he didn't like and parts of the plan he thought might be okay. One part of the plan that I especially liked is point one of the plan. Point one of the plan was to respect sovereignty. Of all nations, the plan could stop there because Russia could end this war by respecting Ukraine's sovereignty and withdrawing, but what President Zielinski also said, and this is critical, Chuck, is that he would like to talk to the president XI.

China presented this plan without having had a single conversation since the war between President XI and President Zielinski began, the Chinese have spoken a lot with the Russians, but at the highest levels they have not spoken with the Ukrainians and it is very difficult to move forward in any type of peace initiative when there is that There is a type of unilateral diplomacy, so, from our perspective, the fundamental thing is that any peace plan offered by anyone has to include the contribution of Ukraine, since President Biden does not has consistently said nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine and that applies as much to this initiative as it does to any other initiative Under the Sun, let's talk about some of the uh some of the uh I I I'll call it I guess criticism, if you will, of some Democrats who they think there is more aid that needs to be sent to Ukraine and that it needs to happen faster, including the f-16s, I want to play a variety of people Jason Crowe Mike Mcfaul, the former ambassador of Russia uh and Jared Golden listen, they need more planes, they need more advanced planes, that's why we've been lobbying the administration on a bipartisan basis to help them advance their Air Force to give them what they need to fight and win.

I think that if you want victory we have to do more, we are not giving them the weapons they need for this counteroffensive they are planning. In the spring and I think time is going to run out, some people expressed concerns about good training last September, many of us asked the administration to begin training on F-16 or fourth generation aircraft, and of course , not that. It hasn't even started so it's time to start this process right now and Jacob said and I want you to respond directly. I understand you saying that F-16s are not something they need right now.

But to Congressman Golden's Point. Why not start training the Ukrainians on This now so that when we inevitably do this or probably will, they are ready to use them well first, Chuck, it is important for people to understand that Ukrainian pilots are currently flying day in and day out, they are flying their Soviet-era Mig fighters. Sukhoi and the Coalition are providing spare parts for those aircraft to ensure they can stay in the sky, so first of all, we are providing a substantial amount of support to the Ukrainian Air Force for the limited types of missions that the current war demands.

Second, the central focus of all of our efforts right now is to help them recapture the territory that Russia currently occupies, and the assessment of our military commanders advising President Biden is that what they need right now are tanks and armored personnel carriers. personal transportation. and infantry fighting vehicles, artillery and air defense systems there on the front line, that is what we are giving them and we are giving it to them quickly, we are giving it to them in large quantities and the issue of the F-16 is really a question for another day for another phase this phase is about ground combat and being able to have the tools in the hands of the Ukrainians to recover the territory that the Russians are occupying.

I'm just curious why not take that as F- 16 talking point off the table, you're right, we will provide them with that help in the future because you've said that we are committed to the security and perpetuity of Ukraine, you know that in the end of the day, it's not our It's our job to focus on the question of talking points and you know what's the right thing to say on a Sunday show or in some other public forum. It is our job to find out, morning, noon and night, what the Ukrainian military needs on those front lines and how can we get it to them as quickly as possible?

We have acted with unprecedented speed and scale to get them a massive amount of military assistance so they can effectively defend themselves and take back half of the territory. Until now, Russia previously occupied during this war. A simple question, I know it has a complicated answer. What is victory like for Ukraine? It is up to Ukraine to define it. It has been fundamental for us and I said it just before in this interview. There would be nothing without uh about Ukraine without Ukraine, so it is not up to the United States to define victory for Ukraine, but it is up to the United States to support Ukraine on the battlefield so that they can achieve the victory that they define, that's what that we are determined to do we believe that they can achieve it and we are going to give them the implements and the tools they need to be able to achieve it?

If that is the case, Ukrainian President Zielinski defined victory as he thought victory would be in August of last year. he said that Crimea is Ukrainian and we will never abandon it. This Russian war against Ukraine and against all free Europe began with Crimea and must end with the liberation of Crimea. There have always been doubts among American officials. Jake and I know you're included here. about Crimea specifically and it has always been good, it depends on Ukraine, well, President Zielinski said it. Victory is the entire territory. Why don't we say the same thing now? Well we've talkedrepeatedly on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine with Ukraine in its international policy. recognized borders, the question for us is how to put Ukraine in the best position on the battlefield so that it is ultimately in the best position at the negotiating table, and President Zielinski recently said this week that, Ultimately, we will have to get to a diplomatic phase of this conflict, so from our perspective our goal is to strengthen the presence of the Ukrainians on the battlefield so that they are in the strongest position and with the most influence when they come to the negotiating table to ultimately achieve an outcome that restores Ukraine's

full

sovereignty and territorial integrity, if they want to take Crimea militarily, will the United States help Ukraine achieve this?

Chuck, the bottom line right now is that they need to take back the territory in the south and east that they are currently focused on and we need to give them the tools to be able to do that. The question of Crimea and the question of what will happen in the future is something The fact that we will get to where we are now is that we must focus on the immediate term because it is essential that we move quickly and decisively to help them recover the territory through that line of contact where the Russian troops are.

Currently occupying it seems that you believe that the ideal outcome is that Ukraine can regain more territory. Putin fears losing Crimea and comes to the negotiating table to see if he can keep Crimea. That's the best scenario you're imagining again. I understand why you ask the question, but you have to understand that from the perspective of the United States we are not going to negotiate about the fate and sovereignty of another country that it is up to its democratically elected president to decide what we are going to do. is to give Ukraine the tools it needs, as I said before, to be in the strongest position possible and ultimately be able to turn Battlefield's achievements into diplomatic influence; that's the goal here and it requires us to achieve those Battlefield achievements by providing military assistance. to Ukraine uh, in the open air of our show, people are seeing footage of a Chinese fighter jet warning an American fighter jet over the South China Sea earlier this week, we have a reporter on board, that just underlines all the tension we have.

With China just in the last two weeks we have had a seven-hour meeting with Taiwanese officials. We are sending more troops to Taiwan. China is ignoring calls from our Secretary of Defense. Secretary Blinken canceled this trip. The president wants to take a call. with Chi there is no evidence that anything was programmed this lack of communication how dangerous is this situation with China at this time well we have said repeatedly that we need to have military communication channels to avoid escalation to avoid surprises to avoid mistakes and it is unfortunate that the Chinese Ministry of Defense has refused to take calls from the US Secretary of Defense about China because, from the US perspective to the rest of the world, we are acting responsibly and are prepared to have those lines of communication crisis that we had during the Cold War. at the height of the Cold War, when the United States and the Soviet Union are facing each other, but Chuck, we have the ability to talk to China at high levels and, as I mentioned, Secretary Blinken spoke with his counterpart, China's top diplomat , Wang Yi, in Munich just a few days ago, so it's not that all lines of communication are cut, but rather that we don't have the military-to-military exchanges that we believe are necessary to ensure stability.

Do we have anything scheduled with the president and her? On a short-term phone call, there is nothing scheduled at the moment, although I anticipate the two leaders will speak at some point in the not-too-distant future. Okay, Jake Sullivan, President Biden, National Security Advisor, as always, sir, thank you for coming and sharing the administration's perspective when we get back, there's a growing Republican divide over aid to Ukraine as the war winds down. one-year frame, will those skeptics, including some 2024 presidential candidates, affect future war funding? Republican Senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska, the only member of the Senate currently serving in the military joins me next welcome back No issue better illustrates the shift in the Republican Party than the war in Ukraine right now, where the Traditionally tough stance toward Russia has been replaced by deep skepticism about U.S. involvement abroad, particularly when politics is led by a Democratic president named Joe Biden and a Washington Post poll this month, 50 percent of Republicans said the United States was doing too much to support Ukraine, up from just 18 percent who said the same in April of last year.

This week, a handful of congressional Republicans who support Biden's Ukraine policy met with Ukrainian President Zielinski and Keith, while here at home most of the declared and likely presidential hopefuls took a more skeptical tone on Ukraine with One notable exception World War III has never been closer than now: we need to clean house of all the warmongers and America's latest globalists in the Deep State, well, they effectively have a blank check policy with no clear strategic objective. identified and I don't think it's in our interest to get into a proxy war with China getting involved in things like the border areas or Crimea.

I don't think we need to write blank checks, but they have the passion to fight for their own freedom. them the ammunition to do it there can be no room in the GOP leadership for a Putin apologist needless to say there's going to be a robust debate on the presidential debate stage there, but joining me now is Republican Senator Dan Sullivan from Alaska. A member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, he is also a colonel in the Marine Corps Reserve, the only member at this time of the United States Senate currently serving in the military. Senator Sullivan, welcome back to morning meet the press, Chuck, it's good to be on the show, um.

Let me start with the basics that he heard from the National Security Advisor. How do you think victory will be for Ukraine? Well, you know, I think to start, looking at the past year, we need to recognize how we got here. what mistakes were made and what we can do in the future. I think an element that the National Security Advisor does not talk about. I think it was clearly part of the Biden administration's weakness on issues like energy, National Defense, and clearly the failed withdrawal from Afghanistan, which emboldened Putin to undertake the brutal invasion of Ukraine.

However, I think now that we're in this battle, we're very interested in continuing to support the Ukrainians in restoring their territorial integrity and their sovereignty without compromising American forces, but you know, Chuck, your interview actually highlighted one of the problems that Jake Sullivan talks about, well, we're not going to do F-16s today, that's for another time, not now, that's been a pattern in this Administration since the beginning, where they've slowly developed critical military weapons systems. You know, it's a long list, it's the Patriots, it's high Mars, it's the tanks and now it's the F-16s and to me that's a real mistake.

We need to get them what they need now and listen to the Ukrainians. No, not as the political leaders said. They have shown their ability to fight bravely and I think we have to do a much better job. It took nine months to get them the Patriots and I fear the same thing is happening now with the F-16s. You just saw it in Homeland Security. Advisor, do you want the administration to talk more clearly about restoring all of Ukraine's territorial integrity before 2014, which of course means Crimea? Well, I think he saw the concern Jake Sullivan showed when he pressed him.

I agree. that this will depend on the Ukrainians and Zielinski, we have to give them, as I said, the weapons systems to carry out that, but I think they should be clearer, I think it should be the entire territorial integrity of the entire country, which includes Crimea . And yes, I think they need more clarity on that. The National Security Advisor did not demonstrate this in his interview with you today. Let's talk about greater support for Ukraine in the future. In the introduction I highlighted it. There is a growing division in your country. party I think you are now in the minority among the Russian Falcons in your party these days no, I don't think so.

I mean, you look at the US Senate, the members that are on committees like Intel, armed services, like me, Foreign Affairs. I think there is still a strong contingent of Republicans who support supporting the Ukrainians. Now I think there are legitimate criticisms of this administration's conduct in terms of supporting Ukrainians. Let me give you one, in particular, is actually being in Alaska. things you know from the beginning of this Administration, this Administration has been focused on shutting down American Energy production, as you know, Chuck Xi Jinping and Putin fear dominance of American Energy and therefore having an Administration that It is shutting down energy, making movement difficult. energy, uh, rejecting the ability to finance energy for the United States, this actually relates directly to our efforts to push back against Xi Jinping Putin, you know that in many ways his energy policies have been suicide for National Security and I think this is what frustrates Republicans where we I see that other policies of this Administration are not helping at all to roll back what I call this new era of authoritarian aggression led by Putin and Xi Jinping and it is a frustration that you're seeing among Republicans, but it's also frustration among Democrats. but I'm curious to know your opinion on the growing view of this isolationist wing of the Republican Party that used to be basically Ron and Rand Paul, um, it's bigger than that now, to what extent do you think it's a kind of genuine distrust of interventions due to Iraq and Afghanistan by the right and to what extent do you think it is simply because Biden looks Democratic?

I think there's always been on both sides sort of wings of each party with an isolationist bent and I think this particular war, you're right, the polls are starting to show a lack of support and I think there are ways to address this. Many Republicans say we should do more on our own border, not in Ukraine and Russia. border my answer to that is, hey, great powers can do both, but it's important to address our own border to secure the border that would eliminate one of the arguments, something else and I hear from Alaskans all the time about this that we must do. a better job, the administration needs to do a better job of getting our European allies to do the right thing, you know?

Chuck, they have committed to spending at a minimum and it should be a floor, not a ceiling, two percent of their GDP on defense, the vast majority of the NATO allies we have don't do that and I think that frustrates Americans. when we see this huge conflict in the heart of Europe and the Europeans are not stepping up enough as they need to. and I think pushing them to do more and getting them to do more can help counter some of the doubts that are starting to spread across the country about Ukraine's support. What do you think is the best way to deter China from helping the Russians? right now it is and if they do what the consequences should be, look, they are already helping the Russians.

I mean, every time you hear Chinese officials talk about this, they're blaming us, they're blaming NATO for the Ukraine war. I agree with that. There should be a serious red line regarding supplying military equipment to the Russians and I think it should be in the form of sanctions, but you know there's a broader issue here, Chuck, and I think this is another one that the Republicans are on. actually more united and it's the war in Ukraine really revealed that we are in this new era of authoritarian aggression led by Xi Jinping and Putin, as you know, they are working together, they are increasingly isolated, they see their democratic neighbors in a very paranoid and I think that this challenge where they are looking to take aggressive action against their neighbors, whether it be Ukraine, whether it be Taiwan, I think it will be with us for decades, we must face it with strategic determination and confidence, there are a number of things that we have with Regarding our strategic advantages over these dictators that we should promote if we are wise enough to use them our military our allies our natural resources and energy and of course our commitment to democracy and freedom I mean that in many ways that was what really gave us helped win the Cold War Xi Jinping and Putin, they already know their greatest vulnerabilities, they fear their own people,True, we have to exploit that as we go, but I think that can unite Republicans and Democrats.

I want to continue with one more thing about China there is another there is a report today that another intelligence arm of the US government, which is within our energy department, has joined with the FBI to conclude that greed began with a lab leak in China if we end up determining if our intelligence community over time determines that this is Most see and it is the opinion of the US government that this was a lab leak in China and that the government covered up What should be the consequences? Well, I think we need to have public hearings on this and really dig into it, think about what just happened.

In the last three years, one of the biggest pandemics in a century, there is a lot of evidence that it comes from the Chinese and when other countries even raise it, like Australia, the Chinese use their coercive economic activities to silence people, so I think we should do a lot. hearings. I hope our Democratic colleagues in Congress can support that. I know Republicans in the House certainly support that, but I think if that happens we need to make sure that every country in the world knows about this look. This is a country that does not have The problem is going out and lying to the world.

We just saw that with this Chinese spy balloon, the nature of a communist dictatorship is to lie to its own people to lie to the world, but I think we need to make sure that all countries know that and then look what the consequences could be, obviously millions of deaths, enormous economic impacts and would show once again that the Chinese Communist Party is not only a threat, but that the nature of these regimes is to lie to the world and we must make that clear. people, I think you are definitely right in those public hearings, at the very least we need to know what we know and the world needs to know what we know Senator Dan Sullivan Republican of the great state of Alaska thank you for getting up so early this morning, and sharing your perspective with us before To go to Greg, I want to show you our Meet the Press minute, which looks at the legacy of President Jimmy Carter, who is receiving hospice care at his home in Plains Georgia for Over 40 years, Carter appeared on this show 11 times in December 1974.

He joined us the week he announced his run for the White House to talk about why he wanted the nation's highest office. I think we have a nation that is really great, no. That used to be great or would one day be great again, but it has an innate character that is not adequately recognized, a stability of pride in its past, an economic strength that is not currently adequately recognized by the people of this country and around the world . In the world I also believe that there is a lack of purpose in the government of our country now, which is much more vulnerable than the people deserve.

It is difficult to detect what our objectives are, what common purpose we work for, what kind of sacrifices can be expected of the American people. and if I can exemplify correcting some of the defects that have been brought to our government by politicians and not the people and help restore the greatness of your country, then I would like to do it when we are Donald Trump again. on the side of the Ohio train derailment at a campaign stop to highlight Biden's absence while abroad in Ukraine, our panelists here as we discuss what could be the first split-screen moment of the 2024 campaign, welcome from new to the panelists here, head of NBC News in the White House. correspondent Crystal Welker weekend today co-anchor Jonathan alter journalist and author of his best life uh his best life Jimmy Carter a life apologies there NPR White House Correspondent Tamara Keith welcome and Republican strategist Al cardness okay, um, we really had our first split screen moment and I'm curious Kristen I'm going to touch on it here um essentially uh it was Donald Trump what I thought was a risky move to hold a campaign event in East Palestine here he is we will be with you let us move forward with faith and with conviction and with a commitment permanent desire to be allies, I sincerely hope that when your representatives and all the politicians get here, including Biden, they return from their tour of Ukraine and say that they have some money left so that the president in an interview on Friday was pretty defensive from the response, basically saying, hey, we were there from the beginning, the EPA was there from the beginning and all that behind-the-scenes stuff, any regrets about the optical problems here for them, it's pretty challenging, Chuck, but I have to tell you privately some of the president's allies are concerned that he hasn't been there yet and say he has to go, but I have pressed them again and again if there is any plan for the president to go and they say there are no talks about Let them reiterate what they you just said: we were on the ground two hours after this crisis occurred.

We have obtained all the necessary resources and I think there is a question in the big picture. Optics are important when dealing with a crisis. In this way, there is no doubt that we learned that during Hurricane Katrina, for example, the question is whether this will be counterproductive for President Biden if he does not go, but could it be counterproductive for former President Trump because his visit has highlighted the fact that he rolled back a hundred environmental regulations and that has also become part of this conversation so I think there are risks involved for both and the question is will we see President Biden on the ground the next few weeks right now not yet? plans for that camera I feel like they almost don't want to seem like they've been pushed into anything but Fox News and Donald Trump, are they being stubborn about this and this white house doesn't like to feel like they are?

They are being pushed into things, they have resisted other calls for him, he has to be there, although this weekend we were told that the CDC, EPA and FEMA are going door to door checking on people you know the government is here to help. Something that rejects the idea that these people are forgotten. I don't know if everyone will want to knock on your door from three federal agencies, but that's what they're going to get, you know, the press and Biden. has a habit of being late to almost everything we consider important in Florida during the campaign, Florida Democrats were saying: hey, these guys are here every week, you haven't shown up, they're calling a socialist, you have to come defend us and it finally showed up like three weeks before the election, after a year of being asked for It On the Border, it just showed up at the border, why shouldn't it have been there much sooner?

And now, in this incident, he had a good reason for not being there. there, but he has his reputation for arriving places too late. I just don't think split screen will hurt Biden at all. He is on a very successful journey and his messages were the arsenal of democracy. FDR's message. He is endorsing the modern Winston Churchill Zelensky. What is Trump doing? He is telling the people of Palestine to have fun. He is handing out Maga caps. That's not a very good impression on him. And I was in Poland with President Biden just to add to that point that he was making a broader case.

This war is not just about the war in Ukraine, it is about democracy, it is about defending American ideals and their surprise trip to Ukraine. If you talk to Republicans and Democrats, they say that may be one of the strongest counterpoints yet to this narrative: he's too old for a second term, no, I think it was a great moment for him and vitality at all, it wasn't an easy journey. . The president did what he did, which was spend 25 hours in a country at war, a country where the United States does not have a base of operations.

I mean it's a 10 hour train ride each way, it's a remarkable feat for this White House to accomplish and they're very glad they accomplished it, but I want to talk about the fact that you know, I was thinking. Basically, we have had three one-term presidents in our lifetime and two of them lost possibly due to foreign policy issues. Jonathan, you've profiled one of them in Carter and that was the Iran hostage crisis. George H.W. Bush Bill Clinton successfully. I used a message that you already know Trump was using, which is, hey, he's so worried abroad, it's the stupid economy here, this war can't go on until 24, can that be?

I think it very well could, yes, the question is whether it will swamp Joe Biden. the way events overseas ended up swamping Jimmy Carter in the first half of his turn. Carter was very successful, but these events really burdened him, the difference is inflation, so basically talking about what could hurt them both, then the events abroad with the Iranian revolution of 1979, which started a new round of inflation, so Carter ran for re-election with double-digit inflation and double-digit interest rates, he surpassed many of his great achievements that few people remember now, so if Biden can he will manage to keep inflation under control in the next two years, even if there is a stalemate in Ukraine.

I think everything will be fine, go ahead, but I want you to address the growing division in his party. I mean, you're a hawk against authoritarianism as someone like a good South Florida Republican, what's going on with the Saints here? Yes, that's a great question. I mean, here's someone who served in the military after going to Harvard and Yale. I mean, he had the world in front of him without those records, and yet he went into the military, you'd think, like Dan Sullivan, he'd be on Dan Solomon's trail, not the dissident's trail, so that's something that I can't understand, maybe he is worried about the base. that follows Donald Trump, uh, and maybe that's a reason, but I can't understand that one.

I wanted to say that of all the comments we've made about presidents who lost elections, the one who didn't participate in the election but whose circumstances are most similar to Biden's was Lyndon Johnson, yes, he's in the middle of a war with, you know, the Russian blacks and their numbers kept falling and then he said: you know what I am. I'm going to quit, I think, I think. My point is that I think it's a big difference. I think Biden may be dealing with the Linda and Johnson situation before considering his re-election bid. Well, I'll have to leave that there, but it's a fascinating conversation and the point is if this gets to 24, we don't know how this will affect the American people next, the Ohio train disaster was 100 preventable according to federal investigators, the trains still They are, although some of the safest options for transporting dangerous chemicals I'm going to show you why after the break, welcome back, data download time, the East Palestine train derailment and the Causeway chemical spill, some are new questions about the safety of train travel and its use to transport toxic chemicals, how safe is it to ship toxic cargo by train, the answer is somewhat complicated, let me show you that the elements of deer on the train have generally gone decreasing during the last 10 years.

We had more than 1,300 derailments in 2013, just over a thousand in 2022, about three a day. The good news is that not all of these train derailments are trains carrying danger. materials now, however, let's compare hazardous materials spills in railroad incidents, so we had 667 hazardous materials spills in 2013 on railroad tracks, it's down to 355 in 2022, so if you can see, actually has become safer by rail, now let's compare it to road hazardous materials spills, look at this, in 2013 we had almost 14,000. Actually, it's been increasing, we had over 23,000 road hazardous materials spills, alone 355 by train, so it's clearly safer to do this and better to do it by train, well, start looking. financially it's a different story let's take 2022 as an example there were over 23,000 incidents that occurred on the highways the cost of those cleanups $21 million the 355 rail incidents the cost was more than double the $45 million now why is that? is primarily due to a large rail spill in May, a train carrying petroleum products that derailed in Harmar Township, Pennsylvania, spilling more than 3,000 gallons into a creek and costing more than $30 million in damages.

By the way, the railroad operator of that train, none other than Norfolk Southern, the same one behind this month's incident in Palestine, when there are these derailments, they are gigantic accidents, when we come back, more Americans believe that abortion should be legal in all or most cases, it is becoming a major political issue for the Republican Party, welcome back to the Republican Party. has an abortion problem, that's the unequivocal conclusion of this new Public Religion Research Institute national survey of 20,000 Americans. IsEasily the most comprehensive survey on abortion attitudes we've seen since the Dobbs decision. This was able to make both a national poll and 50 separate state polls two-thirds of Americans 64 say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, this is an increase from 2010 of 55 and Republicans Right now they seem to be more out of line only 36 percent favor legal abortion compared to 86 percent of Democrats and look at this number 68 independents the Republican number hasn't moved since 2010 but the Support among Democrats and independents has actually grown by double digits state by state.

You can see solid majorities in favor of legal abortion in the six historically closest presidential states here. battleground states, all but one of them are over 60 years old and in the three Senate seats held by most vulnerable Democrats look at those states of Montana, Ohio and West Virginia that also have very high percentages for mayor of the legal abortion, what is the Republican Party doing here? a sidebar on abortion, well look, everyone was grateful for Roe v. Wade, Republicans and Democrats wanted to touch it for 60 years for obvious reasons, yeah, now Donald Trump decided he wanted a double favor for evangelicals and appoint three Supreme Court judges who were compromised. when you look at this issue and now you know it and now we have the exposure and the political explosion of having made that Dove decision and in my opinion that is not the only one they are going to make, the Supreme Court of the United States has become the Democrats are the best ally when it comes to what's going on despite the fact that Republicans rejoiced in having a chamber with a six to three majority, that's what they don't know where they stand now, that's right , because they don't really agree, there are some people like former Vice President Mike Pence, very likely presidential candidate, who say we need to stand firm, stand firm on abortion, we need to take a strong position here, then you have someone like Trump which says you know Republicans could be in real trouble here with this issue so it's one of the many things that probably won't be resolved by 2024, but in terms of the identity of the Republican Party it's a challenge because when you start talking of details when something has been taken away and then you start talking about specific details people really care about this issue and that's what showed up in this poll, it's just an increase in support and the White House, I mean, look , I saw Vice President Harris do an event earlier this week.

I mean, I'm going to look back on 2022 and start thinking that we're overrating the impact of Trump's candidates and underrating the impact of abortions. It's true, I mean, we saw the power of Dobbs in the midterm elections and I. I have been told that the vice president is going to be in charge of this issue. You can expect that in the next two years the strategy within the Republican Party will move forward when talking to Republicans, one person said. Something very interesting to me is that Roe was overturned and then the focus turned to banning abortion in the states Instead of talking about maternal health, talking about adoption, talking about what happens to these families, another person said that we are going to focus on the economy.

Well, that is a risky strategy. What will the economy be like in the next year and a half? And it will be a test: is the economy as motivating as the issue of abortion and will the abortion pill be a big issue? There is a decision. Going back to Texas, that goes away, yes, right now 55 of all abortions are medical abortions with the abortion pill, compared to 45 just a couple of years ago and if this decision is made as people expect and then confirmed in the US Supreme Court Court, as people expect, many women who want to use the abortion pill will not be able to do so and will be very upset about it.

I'm going to bring her back. You are my friend from Florida. So, Governor DeSantis feels uncomfortable about what to say about abortion right now because he's 15 weeks, but he noted that he doesn't want this session of the legislature to touch on abortion, right? On this topic, he recognized from the beginning that it is not a winning topic, he has not mentioned the topic and is acting like hey, I'm coming here from Florida. I don't need to get involved in this, let's let this be a national issue until now. it's working for him no one is really standing up to him mainly because the Democratic Party has imploded in Florida but if I were them I would certainly try to corner him but they haven't but with the John Tester news this week and you.

Look at those abortion numbers Finally I look It wasn't very It was pretty I'm pretty pessimistic about the Senate map for the Democrats but suddenly you see those abortion numbers you know how I see the path for the testers I see the path for the browns who can can talk about this issue and make it about people's rights and not just about the libertarian argument. Yes, book, Chuck. I think it's interesting, Tim, your first point about the divisions within the Republican Party, one of the biggest is over these 15 weeks. National Abortion Ban: Many Republicans say Senator Lindsey Graham should have never introduced this because Dobbs' goal was to send it back to the state, except she was actually looking for a compromise number here, I don't know if?

All Democrats will ever even get to 20, much less 50. Okay, and now all the candidates, all the Republican candidates, are going to have to weigh in on that, before we start this week. In the cast of Chuck Todd. I spoke with the former ambassador to Russia. Mike McFall Washington Post Stan Falls and after today's

broadcast

we're going to have a postgame discussion with Jonathan after we talk a little bit about Jimmy Carter, so subscribe to the checkout podcast by skating the QR code on your screen right now or just go. to the nbcnews.com podcast that's all for today thanks for watching we'll be back next week because if it's Sunday let's meet the press thanks for watching our YouTube channel follow today's top stories and breaking news by downloading the NBC News app