CHUCK TODD:
This Sunday, Leaving Afghanistan.
PRES. JOE BIDEN:
I judged that it was not in the interests of the United States of America to continue fighting this war indefinitely.
CHUCK TODD:
Presiden Biden announces the end of our 20-year war.
PRES. JOE BIDEN:
How many more, how many thousands more of America’s daughters and sons are you willing to risk?
CHUCK TODD:
But with the Taliban quickly gaining ground, renewed fears the country could again become a terrorist haven.
JOHN BOLTON:
September the 11th, 2001. To risk that happening again, which is very much what I think we're doing, is national security malpractice.
CHUCK TODD:
And even the president seems uncertain of the outcome.
PRES. JOE BIDEN:
The mission hasn't failed -- yet.
CHUCK TODD:
We'll get a report from NBC News chief foreign Correspondent Richard Engel in Kabul...and I'll talk to the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Jack Reed of Rhode Island. Plus: Whitewashing January 6th.
REP. ANDREW CLYDE:
You know, if you didn’t know the TV footage was a video from January the 6th you would actually think it was a normal tourist visit.
CHUCK TODD:
As a growing number in the GOP try to deny what actually happened at the Capitol, one Republican says the vast majority in his party know the truth but refuse to admit it. My guest this morning: Congressman Adam Kinzinger of Illinois. Also, Eric Adams beats out progressives in the Democratic primary for New York City mayor.
ERIC ADAMS:
I am the face of the new Democratic Party.
CHUCK TODD:
What the non-woke former police captain's victory says about the kind of Democrats who are winning elections. Joining me for insight and analysis are: NBC News Capitol Hill correspondent Kasie Hunt, Mark Leibovich, chief national correspondent for The New York Times Magazine, former Obama White House senior advisor Stephanie Cutter ,and Republican strategist Al Cardenas. Welcome to Sunday. It's Meet the Press.
ANNOUNCER:
From NBC News in Washington, the longest running show in television history. This is Meet the Press with Chuck Todd.
CHUCK TODD:
Good Sunday morning. Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan began on October 7, 2001. It was less than one month after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. By December of that year, the Taliban, which had provided a safe haven for Al Qaeda, had collapsed. And then, on May 11, 2011, US forces killed Osama bin Laden, one of our goals for going into Afghanistan. But what was once thought of as the, quote, “good war,” as opposed to Iraq at the time, Afghanistan became a forever war, and one that for Americans who did not have friends or relatives serving in the fight, eventually became the forgotten war. And on Thursday, President Biden said 20 years was enough and he announced that the United States would complete its withdrawal from Afghanistan by the end of the month, later, actually, than former President Trump had planned. Left behind though is a resurgent Taliban, which is making sweeping gains against overwhelmed and uninspired Afghan forces. And also left behind? Those Afghan translators and contractors, America's nation building efforts, along with the hopes of establishing a greater level of freedom and more independence for women in that country. In fact, even as he announced the withdrawal, President Biden admitted, "The mission hasn't failed... yet." Still, even if most Americans forgot about this war, as NBC News chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel reports from Kabul, for those left behind, the war is still very real:
RICHARD ENGEL:
The Taliban are laughing it up, in this video re-posted by a Kabul police spokesman. And why not? The Taliban have taken control of most of Afghanistan, in just weeks, often without firing a shot. Afghan troops..are surrendering, handing over posts and weapons..The Taliban give each soldier the equivalent of 80 dollars, pocket money for the trip home. The United States spent more than 80 billion dollars to train and equip Afghan security forces. The return on investment so far is low.
FAWZIA KOOFI:
Corruption is the main reason for failure of some of our, or surrendering of some of our areas to Taliban.
RICHARD ENGEL:
Fawzia Koofi is a member of parliament, and peace negotiator with the Taliban. Extremists have tried to kill her, twice.
FAWZIA KOOFI:
I actually had a meeting yesterday with those people who run away // I said, Why did you leave the area? They were telling me stories, like they did not eat for four days, because there was no food for them.
RICHARD ENGEL:
When we visited Bagram Air Base it was so empty, I was able to bike down the runway.. no one even asked what I was doing. The soldiers seemed almost unaware there’s a war going on. But two units are fighting. Afghanistan’s small airforce and the Commandos. On a mission I saw them on the attack. Advancing into gunfire. But there are just 30,000 commandos, up against around three times as many Taliban. The commandos are doing 90 percent of the fighting. So perhaps no one is holding Afghanistan together more than the Commandos' General, Haibatulla Alizai.
HAIBATULLA ALIZAI:
Everybody was so much relying on our American colleagues and friends here in Afghanistan, we will learn how to alone fight, run this fight.
RICHARD ENGEL:What about foreign fighters, extremists, terrorists, we understand that they are starting to come back in once again? Are you seeing evidence of that?
HAIBATULLA ALIZAI:
We are, you may have been tracking that. Just in the last month, we have killed dozens of Al Qaedas in Helmand and Ghazni, Paktika and different parts of the country.
RICHARD ENGEL:
Do you think Afghanistan could once again be a springboard for international terrorism?
FAWZAI KOOFI:
Even worse, even worse than 9/11 I'm telling you. Because over the past 20 years, you have invested blood and treasure. You are the main enemy now. Why do you think you will be safe? Why do you think you will be protected? You have killed people in Afghanistan.
RICHARD ENGEL:
The threats Afghans face are more immediate, especially women, who flocked to schools and to take up careers denied by the Taliban. And no one is more at risk than the thousands of contractors and translators who worked for US troops. Men like Tom, which is what the Americans called him. He is now in hiding..
TOM:
If I stay here, I'm going to get killed.
RICHARD ENGEL:
Tom worked for the US military for 2 years and 5 months. He has numerous letters of recommendation, including from his former commander.
US COMMANDER:
I trusted Tom. 100%. And as things deteriorate, I think he has a legitimate reason to fear for his life.
CHUCK TODD:
And Richard Engel joins me now live from Kabul. And Richard, before we get into the debate about should we stay or should we be going as we are, how we're leaving looks very haphazard. It looks rushed. We don't seem to have a plan in place yet for how we're going to deal with the translators. That's what it looks like from here. Is that what it looks like to you?
RICHARD ENGEL:
Very much so. The translator, Tom, just as an example, it took us 45 minutes to connect with his former company commander. And he has been waiting for his visa for four years. So it's been very organized to get the troops out of here, to make sure they're evacuated safety — safely, but in terms of a plan and dealing with all the people who worked with us, that seems very, as you said, haphazard and could be done better.
CHUCK TODD:
Alright, so let's talk about the larger debate here, which is — and we may not know the answer to this debate for 20 years, let alone 20 days or 20 months, and that is, are we going to see history repeat itself as the Taliban takes over Afghanistan? Will it be a safe haven for a reconstituted Al Qaeda or Islamic State?
RICHARD ENGEL:
Well, many senior analysts, political figures, military officials in this country and beyond believe that is exactly what's going to happen because of the symbolic victory that the Taliban has been given right here. They achieved what ISIS couldn't. They were able to achieve a victory over the United States and establish a new safe haven for Islamic extremists. And that is drawing in Islamic extremists. But just a few minutes ago, just, just before coming here, I was speaking to the former senior advisor, the national security advisor to the ex-Taliban leader, Mullah Omar. And he assured me that it won't happen, that the Taliban learned a lesson from hosting Al Qaeda. That keeping Osama bin Laden here wasn't worth 20 years of fighting, and that they will guarantee that this country won't be a springboard for international terrorism. They say they will bring Islamic law here. They will bring Afghan traditions, but that they will focus on Afghanistan, not causing problems for the rest of the world. The question is, do you believe that? And can they control it?
CHUCK TODD:
Let me ask this about Bagram Air Base. What's a more likely future: that the Taliban controls it, that the U.S. goes back and occupies it, or that someday, we're going to have to attack something we built because our enemies are somehow using it?
RICHARD ENGEL:
Well, the big factor at Bagram right now is there are thousands of Taliban prisoners and other prisoners inside, some of them very top leaders from the Taliban. And military officials have, have told me they're concerned because the power's out, the base defenses are disrupted. And if the Taliban tried to liberate their prisoners, and they have already in other towns and cities tried to liberate their prisoners, if they were able to free those, and it's anywhere between five and 10 thousand prisoners inside, if they were able to free them, Bagram is right on the doorsteps of Kabul. It could become a tipping point. And based on what I saw, the base felt very vulnerable. So I think it's possible. Afghans think it's possible that Bagram could become a target because of those prisoners. And then will the U.S. have to attack it, watch it happen, come back? There will be some very tough decisions that will have to be made in real-time if that happens.
CHUCK TODD:
Alright, Richard Engel, on the ground in Kabul for us, as he always is in these unsafe and unstable places. Richard, thank you.
RICHARD ENGEL:
Sure.
CHUCK TODD:
Alright, joining me now is Democratic Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island. He's the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Senator Reed, welcome back to Meet the Press. I do want to make a note, by the way. We know that many of you expected to see National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan here. The White House — he was scheduled to be here — the White House told us yesterday he would be unable to appear for personal reasons. Senator Reed, this is the current headline in the current issue of The Economist: “America's Longest War is Ending in Crushing Defeat.” It's a pretty rough headline. Do you agree with it?
SEN. JACK REED:
It's not accurate, the purpose that we went into Afghanistan for was to degrade and disrupt Al Qaeda, to limit their ability to project the attacks outside of Afghanistan. To a great degree, we've done that, but the job's not over. This is not a closure, this is a transition. We have to maintain continual involvement, both with the Afghan government by supporting them financially. Also, providing the kind of technical assistance they need for their air force and other elements. But I think the president was presented with a, a bad series of choices. The Trump administration had said we were leaving by May 1. The Taliban had no real responsibilities in that agreement, none that they carried out that I can see. And yet, that date I think would have prompted an incredible increase of violence directed against the United States. So, I think the president made a difficult, but the best of many poor choices.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, after your, I believe it may have been your first trip to Afghanistan in 2002, you said you reassured the leadership at the time, of Afghanistan, that America was going to be involved in the, for the long haul, but there was this fear — constant fear — among Afghan, among Afghan reformists that whatever we did, we were going to leave. Well, isn't that what's happening? Aren't their greatest fears being realized? Didn't you, basically — is that an empty promise that was made? We’ve now turned tail?
SEN. JACK REED:
No, I think some of the factors that we have to consider is that in 2002, we were prepared, and we had a permissive situation. We had destroyed the Taliban. One of the critical strategic mistakes was the pivot to Iraq, which I opposed. And one reason I opposed it is I thought it would eventually lead to compromising our resources and our attention to Afghanistan, and it did. We’ve tried to resuscitate that approach to Afghanistan over several surges, they have not been successful, and 20 years of effort and thousands of American lives I don't think represents a, a shallow promise in 2002.
CHUCK TODD:
Let me ask you this. Had President Biden decided, that, you know, because there was this, there's a debate on are we at war or not at war. But there was some thought of a stabilizing force, some presence, not dissimilar to Japan, Korea, or Germany. Would there have been support for that in Congress for a stabilizing force that was basically at Bagram Air Base for an undetermined amount of time?
SEN. JACK REED:
Perhaps. But I don't think there was an overwhelming sense in the Congress that we should stay. I think the reaction to the departure has been one of generally acceptance. I think the other factor that should be considered is that, as long as the Taliban had a safe haven, which they do in Pakistan, they would continue to flow in, put pressure on. We could hold them, perhaps, at bay. But I think at this juncture, the president decided any type of increase in forces, increase in presence would be in the long term, ineffective. And 2,500 personnel is not exactly a decisive force to have, particularly if the Taliban continues to gain strength.
CHUCK TODD:
Well, I want to show what the Taliban strength here. We have this map, it's courtesy of the Foundation of the Defense of Democracy, their Long War Journal. And here, in the, in the dark red are where Taliban control things as of April 13. Now watch how this part of Afghanistan only gets redder, as you will see here, it gets redder and redder. The gray area is what is controlled by Afghan security forces, and the pink, by the way, is contested. The point is, the Taliban, Senator, now have over — control of over half the territory. Do you think Kabul will hold?
SEN. JACK REED:
I think Kabul will hold. The question is, can it hold long enough to create a political solution between the sides? What is — what you've seen is the encroachment of the Taliban, most of that has been without military action, most of that has been essentially going in and persuading or paying off the local leadership and, and they've been preparing for that for many, many months. Again, after Doha in February of 2020, they saw a, you know, free road ahead in terms of ingratiating themselves.
CHUCK TODD:
Do you think Doha was a mistake?
SEN. JACK REED:
I think though that —
CHUCK TODD:
By the way, you keep pointing back to this. You think doh -- the initial agreement that the Trump administration made with the Taliban was a mistake?
SEN. JACK REED:
I think it was, because I think it set a fixed date, rather than imposing conditions that would have then let us depart Afghanistan, and it also, most of the conditions on the, the Taliban were unenforceable. They claimed that they would disassociate themselves from al Qaeda, clearly that's not the case. It — I think that some of the agreement was, you know, “If you don't bother us, Taliban, we won't bother you while we get out,” and that was to protect the evacuation of U.S. forces. But it — it's ended any sort of conditionality, and it set a date, and the most important thing was that people can grasp that, they can see, “Oh, May 1, the Americans didn't leave, they promised to leave, the Taliban was right,” etc, etc. So I think it was, it did not help at all.
CHUCK TODD:
Alright. We're now, we’re not going to be in Afghanistan. We're not going to be in Iraq. What's the future of Gitmo? Are we about to shut it down as a prison facility?
SEN. JACK REED:
I don't think we are. I think we’re in a situation, and again, this is both legal and policy and political. There's still a reluctance, particularly among many of my colleagues on the other side, to bring these prisoners under jurisdiction of a federal court. By the way, that's where we've convicted most of the terrorists that we've captured. And then the legal situation has been so confused over the last 20 years in terms of, you know, what's the proper procedure. That's another complicating factor. One of the concerns we have, and we're trying to address it in the next National Defense Bill, is that at least the health care of these individuals will be appropriately monitored. Now, they're getting into their sixties and seventies. We want — we have a humanitarian and a legal obligation to provide them adequate health care.
CHUCK TODD:
And very quickly, we're apparently, the reason we're delaying the, the, the issue of Afghan translators, is there's a debate about whether they should get legal standing in a U.S. territory. Are we really debating whether to give these Afghan translators due process rights? I mean, why shouldn't they get refugee status on an American territory like Guam?
SEN. JACK REED:
I completely agree with you. We have been trying through the appropriations process, not only to clarify that, or at least work with the administration to clarify that, but we have about 18,000 visas that are still being processed. Sam, the gentleman you interviewed is one of those. We probably need 20,000 more so that we can legally get them out, and Senator Shaheen and others have been leading that effort. We hope we can get that done quickly, but I know the military is planning contingency operations to get them to a safe place where we can process them effectively. We have a moral obligation to help get out people who risked their lives helping us.
CHUCK TODD:
That's for sure. Senator Jack Reed, Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Appreciate you coming on with the last minute invite. Thank you, sir.
SEN. JACK REED:
Thanks, Chuck. Take care.
CHUCK TODD:
You got it. When we come back, whitewashing history. The many Republicans who are trying to convince the public that somehow, these scenes from January 6th you're looking at, it never really happened. Well, I'm going to talk to Congressman Adam Kinzinger, who says his fellow Republicans actually know better.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. January 6th, like September 11th or December 7th, is a date that immediately communicates the horror of that single day. But since then many Republican members of Congress have tried to rewrite history, denying there was a riot at the Capitol, some denying the violence by pro-Trump insurrectionists, some denying that somehow former President Trump didn't incite the riot. Well, Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger is not one of those Republicans. In fact, he says the vast majority of his Republican colleagues do believe the former president did incite the riot, but have remained silent simply to keep their jobs. Well, Congressman Kinzinger joins me now. Congressman, before I get to January 6th, you're a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, not just as a member of Congress dealing with it. You were there. I want to ask you about the headline in The Economist basically calling it a crushing defeat. Do you agree or disagree with that headline?
REP. ADAM KINZINGER:
No, I agree. It's a crushing defeat. You know, the Taliban always had a saying. They said, "The U.S. -- America has the watches, but we have the time." You know, I'm proud of the American people for sticking by this mission for 20 years. We actually needed to do it longer and we still have troops in Kosovo, but unfortunately it worked. The Taliban have outlasted the will of the United States. It was not a hot war, really. It was basically a peacekeeping operation and we may have to go back now. It is a crushing defeat and I'm really sad about it, honestly.
CHUCK TODD:
Is -- What do you think is going to end up -- I mean is this -- I mean, look at Bagram Air Base. Do you think we're more likely to occupy Bagram or have to somehow attack it because our enemies have taken it over?
REP. ADAM KINZINGER:
Oh, I do think it's quite likely we're going to have to either, when we return to Afghanistan because, you know, of the existential threat to us or our allies, re-occupy Bagram or we may have to bomb it if there's some kind of an air mission. It's sad. And again, I think the big thing is this. We had set out --- Look, I wish it would have been a lot shorter of a mission, shorter of a time, but we set out so that the Afghanistan government could defend itself. And we only had 2,500 troops there, 5,000 NATO troops. And the Afghanistan government was doing 98% of the fighting against the Taliban. It's no wonder they're collapsing when the U.S. says, "We're gone." But it was really a small price to pay for frankly holding off the inevitable bad that unfortunately we're going to see.
CHUCK TODD:
All right, I want to turn to January 6th. I think it's safe to say on January 7th that a majority of people even in Congress or Republicans in Congress said, okay, this was going to be the turning point. This was going to be the moment that Republicans realized Trumpism is a virus inside the Republican Party that needs to be eradicated. Here we are six months and four days, five days later and boy, and let me read you this headline in Oklahoma. This is a censure resolution in Oklahoma, not for people that voted to impeach, like you did. This resolution is to censure Senators James Lankford and Jim Inhofe for failure to delay the certification of fraudulent electoral votes in the 2020 presidential election. That's the actual wording in this county Republican party. And just so you think I'm not picking on one county in Oklahoma, the actual chair of the Republican Party has endorsed a primary challenger to James Lankford over this issue. Senator Lankford was standing up there to object to the electoral votes in Arizona when Vice President Pence was, was taken off the Senate floor. Senator Lankford is a traitor now inside Trump's Republican Party, Congressman? Seriously?
REP. ADAM KINZINGER:
Oh, look. Oh, look, here's what's happened. It's just like Donald Trump's method, right? I mean, the biggest enemy to MAGA world right now is not even me or Liz Cheney; it's Mike Pence. Mike Pence was one of the most faithful people to Donald Trump, but if you ever turn an ounce against Donald Trump, you're out of the tribe. And so, to all of my colleagues in politics, let me say this to you. You either have to be a zombie for the MAGA belief system, whatever that is today or tomorrow -- it varies every day based on Donald Trump's whims -- or actually stand up and tell your constituents the truth. And that's what we have to do is tell people the truth. We all know what the truth is. You guys know what the truth is. The American people and your base deserve to hear it. So, that's the moment we're in, just this kind of chaotic, people scared to do anything, scared of their own shadow, absolutely desperate to get re-elected. And meanwhile, the innocent people of our base that, in many cases, have been led to believe that the election was stolen, is not hearing anything from any of the people that they trust.
CHUCK TODD:
And actually there are members of this base who are so believing misinformation that they're getting themselves killed from the coronavirus. Let me ask you this, Congressman. You're running for re-election. You're running sort of unabashedly on this. If you lose your primary, what does that say? I mean, does it mean that misinformation is winning? Does it mean our democracy is, is as fragile as it appears?
REP. ADAM KINZINGER:
Yeah, I mean, look, I think that's a choice. Look, no matter how a primary comes out, I know that I will have put it all on the table and done the right thing. And that's a choice for the Republican Party to make because it's not going to be people like me or some Oklahoma state committeeman. It's going to be the people that go and vote in these primaries. And if our party decides that, you know, Covid vaccine hesitancy or Covid denialism or January 6th was BLM and Antifa, but yet we don't want to investigate it because -- none of that makes sense, if we want to be that as a party, that's the choice the party can make. You will never be a national party again and the American people will find something different to replace you because this is unsustainable. But I'm going to fight for the soul of this party. Right now it's like being on a plane that's been hijacked, screaming towards the ground. And it may feel like a fun ride, but it doesn't end well.
CHUCK TODD:
The House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, has a decision to make on the members, what Republicans to appoint. I'm sure you're hearing scuttlebutt. I'm doubtful he's going to pick you as one of those five but, you know, maybe it's possible. Do you think he's going to appoint folks whose job it is to hijack this committee or at least not be unhelpful to this committee? Where is he going to fall on this?
REP. ADAM KINZINGER:
I think he's going to find people not controversial, besides like maybe Jim Jordan, and that they're going to act to be like really smart kind of scholars and all this, but their job is going to be to scuttle this. If I was Kevin McCarthy, I would be very fearful of the January 6 committee. If I'm a Democrat on the committee, I would be very intent on making sure that this is by the books and doesn't turn political because there's enough information that's going to come out. We want to know all these details. Why didn't the president call the Guard? Where was Kevin? What conversations did Kevin have? What members were involved? And I think we'll get to those answers.
CHUCK TODD:
You think a complete accounting can be found without subpoenaing former President Trump?
REP. ADAM KINZINGER:
I do because I think everybody around him knows what happened. I think if you subpoena Trump, it should only be if you need to because I think the bottom line is that can create a spectacle. But I also think, look, in the future, whether it's a year or two, even through these FBI cases against these insurrectionists, the, all the information will come out. There's this narrative that it wasn't an armed insurrection. Well, it was. There's guns. You know, there were arms. And all of that stuff will come out. So, if I'm a Republican member of Congress or any leader right now, I'd be very careful of the sides I'm taking because, in the very near future people are going to know the truth and I want to be on the side of truth.
CHUCK TODD:
What do you think of Toyota's decision to bow to a pressure campaign not to give money to those who voted to not certify the election? What do you make of this style of politics? Is this something that is needed or do you think this is more polarizing?
REP. ADAM KINZINGER:
So I personally don't like a lot of the, you know, kind of, I don't want to call it cancel culture because that's been hijacked, too.
CHUCK TODD:
Right.
REP. ADAM KINZINGER:
But the kind of forcing people to make decisions based on that loudness. But look, I also can understand why a company would not want to vote, to not help somebody and why a PAC which is made up of employees of that company would not want to help somebody that did not vote to carry out their constitutional duty. I can fully understand that. And so, I'm not critical of a decision to stop giving to those members.
CHUCK TODD:
Congressman Adam Kinzinger, Republican from central Illinois, it's good to have you on, sir. Appreciate you coming on.
REP. ADAM KINZINGER:
You bet.
CHUCK TODD:
When we come back, the rise of the anti-woke Democrat, like New York's Eric Adams, and the fear among many Democrats that their party may be moving too far to the left too fast. The panel is next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Panel is here. NBC News Capitol Hill correspondent Kasie Hunt; Mark Leibovich, the chief national correspondent for The New York Times magazine; Republican strategist Al Cardenas; and Obama White House senior advisor and long-time Democratic strategist Stephanie Cutter. Look, I want to start with New York City mayor. We're focusing on the Democrats here. Let me show you-- and it's sort of, like, what could have been. This was first round results. We would have had, in the old rules, Eric Adams and Maya Wiley would have faced off in a run-off, and we would have been talking about, "Okay, it's the pragmatists versus the progressives." Rank choice voting cut the lead and it's actually Kathryn Garcia who ended up in second after rank choice voting, Eric Adams in first. Stephanie Cutter: Terry McAuliffe, Joe Biden, Eric Adams. There's sort of a pattern here. Is the Democratic Party's electorate more moderate than some of its members these days?
STEPHANIE CUTTER:
Well, you know, I always hesitate to draw national conclusions--
CHUCK TODD:
I understand.
STEPHANIE CUTTER:
--out of a local race, and that's what that was. And he, Eric Adams won by one percentage point against some newbies to Democratic politics. But, the one thing that is true is that crime is rising all over the country, and people are worried about it. And Eric Adams has a unique resume to deal with this. He has more credibility on this issue than anybody. Number one, he was brutalized by police when he was 15. Number two, he joined the police force and made a name for himself for reforming the police force. So, he has credibility to go out there and say, "We need public safety, we need to protect people, but we also need accountability in the police force. We do need reform.” That's a pretty authentic message that very few other people can say. Now, the takeaway is that Democrats-- large majorities of the American people believe that we need safety and accountability. We need strong police forces to keep us safe, but we need police forces to protect all Americans, including people of color. Now, we need to find a better way to talk about it. Defunding the police is not a winning message. Accountability and safety is a winning message.
CHUCK TODD:
Here's what Eric Adams said. He, I think disagrees that what happened in New York--
STEPHANIE CUTTER:
I know he does.
CHUCK TODD:
--stays in New York. Kasie Hunt, here's what Eric Adams said.
[BEGIN TAPE]
ERIC ADAMS:
Look at me, and you're seeing the future of the Democratic Party. If the Democratic Party fails to recognize what we did here in New York, they're going to have a problem in the midterm elections, and they're going to have a problem in the presidential election.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
You know, a member of leadership in the House Democratic Party is Hakeem Jeffries who, by the way, endorsed Maya Wiley. It's interesting to me. How many congressional Democrats agree with Eric Adams?
KASIE HUNT:
I think there are quite a few, to be perfectly honest. And I think that there is this growing sentiment that, especially around these cultural issues that I hear privately from moderate Democrats who are hoping to hold onto their seats, is just that sometimes it's a little bit too much. They don't necessarily disagree with progressive messaging around helping working people, that billionaires are too wealthy, that wealth inequality is a problem, all of these priorities that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others say. But, they think that engaging in the culture war things, the way it's sort of unfolded, is just risky and gives Republicans too much ammunition to work with.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, it's interesting when you’re, when we're watching the Democratic Party here, Mark, which is, there's clearly a moderate coalition that wants to vote for Democrats. But they're a bit uncomfortable, a little bit, with the wokeness. Look at this poll in Arizona, because if you just follow social media and some cable news shows, you would think Kyrsten Sinema is really unpopular. She's the most popular politician in Arizona, more popular than Joe Biden, more popular than Mark Kelly. And she is somebody that the left thinks is standing in the way of a bunch of progress. What should the national Democratic Party take away from this?
MARK LEIBOVICH:
I think they should take, obviously every race is different, but I also think, look, if you pay attention to social media, Eric Adams wasn't very popular in New York. And, New York is a very liberal city and, again, the coalition that Eric Adams won with is not unlike, in New York, what Kyrsten Sinema would win with in Arizona, what Joe Biden won with in the national Democratic Party, beginning in South Carolina. And so, look, I do think obviously it's sort of some synthesis of national issues, but certainly very local. And the same mixes do sort of apply here.
CHUCK TODD:
Miami-Dade County. I mean--
MARK LEIBOVICH:
Miami-Dade County.
CHUCK TODD:
Eric Adams could win in Miami-Dade County, couldn't he?
AL CARDENAS:
He could. And listen, as a Republican, I looked at it from different perspectives, right? That race. You know, ethnicity still matters, especially in our urban area politics. If you look at their background. I think there's a new wave of voters that want new faces. I mean, Eric only got less than one third of the vote, and he's been around for a long time. And so, more than two-thirds of the people wanted to see new faces. And, three, the other thing that I thought is, you, know, the candidate still matters. We forget about the candidate sometimes. He was the best networker of the group. In New York, you've got to network with various interest groups in order to win, and he did it better than anyone else. And so, that's kind of what I got out of that race. Having said that, I think the Democrats and Republicans have the same problem and that is, you know, both parties have gotten more to the extremes. And there's a whole voting in the middle of about 40% of the voters who feel like, "Hey, that's not me."
CHUCK TODD:
Stephanie, this seems to be both that, on one hand, Democrats if they run as Biden Democrats, that's a winning coalition.
STEPHANIE CUTTER:
Uh-huh.
CHUCK TODD:
If the Republicans successfully paint the Democrats as the defund-the-police Democrats, that essentially it's almost like the woke-ism versus Trumpism, take, pick your poison here. Does that make it a harder midterms?
STEPHANIE CUTTER:
Midterms are always difficult for the party who holds the White House. That being said, Democrats are not going to be running on defunding the police. They're going to be running on creating jobs, a strong economy, a competent government who can deploy vaccines and keep people safe, on passing a bipartisan infrastructure bill. All of this Republicans voted against. The rescue package that they're now trying to campaign on, they voted against that. That's what this election's going to be about. It's not going to be about defunding the police or some other cultural issue that Republicans will try to leverage. Now, as long as Trump stays on the map, and as long as Trump is dictating who's running in these local races, that's nationalizing this election in a way that Democrats could never nationalize the election. And we welcome that.
CHUCK TODD:
And by the way, we are going to have a deep dive on this in a couple minutes, on sort of what Donald Trump is doing in snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. She brought up Congress, rescue package, infrastructure. I don't want to get bogged down into the weeds here, but this looks like a train wreck that's coming. I mean, I am sorry--
KASIE HUNT:
No pun intended.
CHUCK TODD:
Yeah. This doesn't look like this is going to go swimmingly. This bipartisan deal, how fragile is it?
KASIE HUNT:
It is still fragile, Chuck, and I spent the weekend talking with, you know, half a dozen senators and a bunch of aides to try to figure out where they are. They're actually in the process of writing things right now, and that means it's at a very fragile point because suddenly interest groups, people that have something to gain, something to lose, are finding out, "Hey, is my priority in this? Is it not?" So that's what I'm going to be watching the next--
CHUCK TODD:
AFL and CIO--
KASIE HUNT:
--couple of days.
CHUCK TODD:
--and the Chamber are going to be on the same page? Because normally that helps. Does that help here?
KASIE HUNT:
Well, I mean, potentially, yeah. You know, I mean, I think we have to see. The Chamber of Commerce is kind of in a different spot than they have been in the past. But I think the bottom line here is Republican and Democratic senators believe, and they're looking to Mitch McConnell to see what he's going to do, whether he's going to say to his caucus, "Okay, go ahead," or to his conference, "It's fine if you vote for it." Now, McConnell's people will dispute that. They say, "Well, he's just going to stand back and listen. The whole conference will decide." But I think that's a real underlying dynamic here. And I do think the one thing that could save it, Chuck, is if Republicans do decide that better politically, politically the better thing to do is to let this go through, claim victory, and then just beat Democrats up on the big reconciliation package when they get that far.
CHUCK TODD:
I think as long as Trump is playing the role he's playing, McConnell has no choice but to let this bipartisan deal go through. But we'll see. And speaking of Trump, we're going to talk about this in a few minutes. When we come back though, though, why it's getting harder and harder to deny climate change wherever you live now. Stay with us.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Data download time. We're just over halfway through 2021 but this has already been a record-breaking year in terms of extreme weather events, and the cost both human and economic, continues to go up, meaning politicians in Washington and state capitals, they're going to be forced to stop debating the existence of climate change. We have to start dealing with it. It is here. Look, let's start with the hurricanes. We are already on the Es. This is the earliest we've ever hit the Es in the Atlantic side ever, okay? And by the way, when we run out of letters of the alphabet on storms, we use the Greek alphabet. Well, we're using the Greek alphabet for Covid variants too, so things could get very confusing by the end of this calendar year. How about the heatwave in the Northwest, right? Look at these records in Seattle, Portland, Salem. This is not even August yet, these are huge records, almost all-time. And of course, it's turned deadly in these places. Thirty deaths in Washington State; a whopping 116 so far in Oregon. And, look, this is not just confined to the United States. Remember, it is winter down in New Zealand; this is their hottest June ever. How about Hong Kong? Hottest May ever. Again, we're seeing this is a global issue. And then of course, let's not forget what happened in Texas and what happened, that winter storm that basically almost shut down their power grid there, led to 150 deaths. One of the most expensive winter storm impacts ever, over $155 billion. So as you can see, this issue of climate change, it's here. We're dealing with it. Politicians have to deal with it. And this aftermath is something that we're only starting to see. When we come back, author and Senate candidate J.D. Vance was against President Trump before he was for him. Why so many Republicans like him have decided, in his words, to “suck it up” and support this former president.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. As we said, we want to focus on the Republican side of things. And, Al, this is fascinating. J.D. Vance, who is the author, Hillbilly Elegy, which became sort of a phenomenon when it turned into a movie. He was a pretty high-profile Trump critic, and as he's now wanting to be an Ohio Senate candidate, where it's a race to see who can hug Trump the most, here's how he put it to Time magazine this week. "Trump is the leader of this movement, and if I actually care about these people and the things I say I care about, I need to just suck it up and support him." Six months and five days after January 6th, six months and five days after Lindsey Graham said, "Enough is enough, I'm off this train," where has the Republican Party gone? At what point that now you have to just suck it up, and, and deal with this Trumpism?
AL CARDENAS:
Yeah. There's a “winning-at-all-costs” commitment, I believe, to get through 2022, and J.D. Vance personifies it. You know, when you, when you watch something on TV, it hits you differently than when you have a personal conversation. And I've had personal conversations with J.D. Vance, along with Mitt Romney. And, and so this is particularly shocking to me. I mean, after you talk personally to somebody about what their values are and how they feel about something, and now this is it --
CHUCK TODD:
So the J.D. Vance you met personally was a different person than the one we're seeing?
AL CARDENAS:
Without a doubt.
MARK LEIBOVICH:
I mean, if the J.D. Vance --
AL CARDENAS:
Without a doubt.
MARK LEIBOVICH:
-- you could have heard talk two years ago, like in, right in his books, I mean, he went to Yale Law School. I mean this is -- look, there is like this “suck it up” ethic has been prevailing in the Republican Party for the last five years. And it's like, what’s the, what was the line? "What's the hurt in, in humoring him for a little bit longer?" I mean, this is essentially just sort of, "Cover your eyes and hope for the best in 2022."
KASIE HUNT:
Well, and the big difference here though, I just have to say, for candidates that are running now and making these decisions now is that, they've seen what happened for the four years of Donald Trump being in office, and they saw what happened on January 6th. I mean, this has all unfolded after the riot on the Capitol. I mean, in the beginning, yes, we had so many Republicans who just essentially said, "Well, I'm going to keep my head down. I'm going to try not to rock the boat just so that I can continue to have some influence." We sort of bought that in the beginning. "Okay, maybe, let's see." We saw how it works. The answer is it didn't.
AL CARDENAS:
But, you know, the beast is growing. Look at what happened in Oklahoma.
CHUCK TODD:
Oklahoma.
AL CARDENAS:
Look at what's happening in Texas.
CHUCK TODD:
Yes!
AL CARDENAS:
The beast is growing. The beast is not satisfied with just that premise. The beast wants more. And I, to this point, don't know where the beast is going because it's, it’s unheard of that an Abbott would be challenged from the right. It's unheard of that a Lankford would be castigated by a party chairman.
KASIE HUNT:
For sure.
AL CARDENAS:
The things that I'm seeing are just unheard of.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, we just spent a segment, Stephanie, debating the progressives versus the pragmatists in the Democratic Party. There's certainly a, a debate about what should the Democratic Party stand for. There's apparently not a debate in the Republican --
STEPHANIE CUTTER:
There's not a debate --
CHUCK TODD:
-- side.
STEPHANIE CUTTER:
-- in the Republican Party.
CHUCK TODD:
It, it is, I mean, he brought up Greg Abbott. You know, if I were to tell you Greg Abbott in isolation, and yet he's the moderate now compared to Allen West, we've really moved this Overton window.
STEPHANIE CUTTER:
Yeah. Yeah. And he's hardly a moderate. Just look at what he's doing in Texas. You know, the --
CHUCK TODD:
But he thinks he has to do that.
STEPHANIE CUTTER:
He, he has to, but I also don't think --
CHUCK TODD:
He thinks.
STEPHANIE CUTTER:
-- he's got a problem with it. And, you know, it’s, they are looking for these wedge issues which they think will drive out their base. And the Democratic Party, we did just talk about progressives versus moderates, whether Eric Adams is the new face of the Democratic Party. I don't necessarily agree with that. But, the Democratic Party is a big-tent party. That is not true for Republicans. Al, just as you said, that beast is growing. That beast has taken over the Republican Party. And J.D. Vance, although he is a complete phony, he is voicing, giving voice to what every Republican is thinking right now, that, "I do have to suck this up." And there's not enough Republicans who have the courage to stand up.
CHUCK TODD:
The state party chair in Alaska, Mark Leibovich, is against the incumbent Republican senator. The state party chair in Texas, at least as of today, and there's a new one, is challenging the incumbent governor. And, and James Lankford, the state party chair, is endorsing a primary opponent. I mean, Donald Trump's taken over these state parties. And the elected leadership is, apparently had no way to stop it.
MARK LEIBOVICH:
And, look, they are absolutely playing to that base. I mean, the question is does Jim Lankford, does Jim Inhofe, I mean, are they going to lose a Republican primary in these states? Probably not.
CHUCK TODD:
Are you sure?
MARK LEIBOVICH:
No, I'm not, but -- I'm not in Oklahoma. But, I, you know, I, I think it's unlikely. But I also think you're right though. I mean, these are very, very substantial voices in the party. I think, you know, what if you're Lisa Murkowski right now? You're up in two years. You have all this friction coming from the right, from Trump himself, who's going to probably campaign. And, look, I don't know how you do this. I mean, I think at some point, like, this is not New York with Eric Adams. This is not, you know, suburban Virginia where you actually have people sort of voting for where you think the critical mass is. I mean, this is actually, these are actually people who could not win elections because of this.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, there, there seems to be fear to call this out. You know, Mitch McConnell, Kasie Hunt, went on TV and said he was, quote "perplexed" by the reluctance of some to get vaccinated, “totally perplexed,” which of course a lot of people on social media said, "Apparently, if you haven't turned on Fox in primetime lately." I mean, the amount of, of folks in primetime on Fox who are knowingly passing on misinformation that is leading to the death of, of people. It's, it’s astonishing that this is happening, but I don't think we should be perplexed.
KASIE HUNT:
No, I don't think we should be perplexed. However, I do think McConnell is probably speaking from a personal perspective when he says that because he suffered from polio as a child and has been, to his credit, one of the Republicans who has been out there the most saying, "You need to go get vaccinated." He's said it in Washington, Kentucky, the whole time. But you're right, the media ecosystem and, you know, that travels through Facebook. Pinterest has had a problem with anti-vax, vaccination content. They had that problem before we were even dealing with Covid. It is really insidious and problematic. And it's another sce-- it’s another example of how the Republican, the Trump ecosystem is talking to itself in a way that is separating it so far away from the big tent that is kind of the rest of America. And that tent would include Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, who you just spoke with. These people don't really have a home. They don't have a place anymore. And I think that's really where the danger lies going forward.
CHUCK TODD:
Al, this misinformation, this is in English and Spanish now in South Florida, isn't it?
AL CARDENAS:
Yeah, it sure is. And, and it's caught on, in South Florida, I imagine it's going to catch up in other places. Look, just to back up Kasie, I mean, there's a direct relationship between the percentage of people voting for Donald Trump and the percentage of people vaccinated in those states, throughout America. And now we have 90-some percent of people who are hospitalized with Covid because they didn't vaccinate. And so, yeah, it's bad for America --
CHUCK TODD:
Yeah.
AL CARDENAS:
-- and, you know, we need to do something about that.
CHUCK TODD:
The misinformers have blood on their hands. They have blood on their hands. That's all we have for today. Thank you for watching. Enjoy the Olympics. Let's go, Team USA. And remember, if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press.