Meet the Press Full Episode — May 17

[0:00] This Sunday, trade-offs. President Trump meets Chinese President Xi Jinping in a high-stakes [0:07] summit with trade, security, and the future of the world's two largest economies on the line. [0:14] You're a great leader. Sometimes people don't like me saying it, but I say it anyway because [0:19] it's true. I only say the truth. As China expands its global power, [0:24] what did the president actually gain? Plus, cost crisis. The economic fallout from the war [0:30] with Iran is hitting home as inflation climbs to a three-year high and the issue becomes a midterm [0:37] flashpoint. I don't think about American financial situation. I don't think about anybody. I think [0:43] about one thing. We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. Donald Trump and Republicans don't give [0:50] a damn. Short-term pain. It's going to be short-term pain, but the pain is much less than people thought. [0:56] Are Americans paying the price? My guest this morning, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of [1:02] South Carolina and Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. And legal pressure. [1:09] He's a dirty cop. He's a crooked man. [1:11] Former FBI Director James Comey joins us exclusively as he faces a second indictment [1:17] from the Trump administration. Joining me for insight and analysis are NBC News Chief Capitol [1:24] Hill Correspondent Brian Nobles, Adrian Elrod, former senior advisor to the Harris campaign, [1:30] and Lonnie Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution. Welcome to Sunday. It's Meet the Press. [1:37] From NBC News in Washington, the longest running show in television history. This is Meet the Press [1:45] with Kristen Welker. Good Sunday morning. Overnight, the latest target of President Trump's [1:53] retribution campaign going down in defeat. Two-term Louisiana Republican Senator Bill Cassidy [1:59] losing his bid for re-election to a Trump-backed challenger who advances to a runoff. [2:05] This after Senator Cassidy voted to convict Mr. Trump in his impeachment trial during the first term. [2:12] We'll have much more on that coming up. But first, the president returned to Washington [2:17] after his two-day summit in Beijing with Chinese President Xi Jinping. In historic meeting, [2:23] the president said strength in ties between the two nations, but which did not produce a major [2:29] agreement on trade or a commitment from China to help end the war with Iran. [2:34] Did President Xi make any firm commitment to put pressure on the Iranians to reopen the Strait of [2:44] Hormuz? I'm not asking for any favors, because when you ask for favors, you have to do favors in return. [2:51] We don't need favors. Meanwhile, tensions intensifying in the Middle East. A fragile ceasefire [2:57] still holding, but the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, and major questions remain about what comes next. [3:04] Here at home, the economic impact of the war is putting new pressure on American households, [3:10] with inflation hitting a three-year high this week, and gas prices remaining above $4.50 a gallon. [3:17] President Trump making this striking admission earlier in the week. [3:23] Not even a little bit. The only thing that matters when I'm talking about Iran, [3:34] they can't have a nuclear weapon. I don't think about American financial situation, [3:40] and I don't think about anybody. I think about one thing. We cannot let Iran have a nuclear [3:45] weapon. That's all. And joining me now is Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. [3:51] Senator Graham, welcome back to Meet the Press. Thank you very much. [3:54] Thank you for being here after an historic week. Yeah. [3:57] Let's start right there with the President's Summit in China. One of the biggest issues discussed was [4:03] Taiwan, just for our viewers. It's a self-ruling democracy that China has vowed to control. [4:09] Right. Now, Congress voted to approve billions of dollars in arms sales to defend the island. [4:14] But in an interview after the summit, President Trump would not commit to supporting Taiwan. I want [4:20] to play you a little bit of what he had to say. You're waiting on approving billions of dollars [4:25] of weapons for Taiwan. That's right. Is that moving forward? [4:29] Well, I haven't approved it yet. We're going to see what happens. [4:32] What are you looking for? I may do it. I may not do it. [4:34] Yeah. What's your hinge point? Well, I'm not going to say that. But I may do it. I may not do it. [4:39] Senator, can Taiwan be secure without U.S. support? [4:44] Well, I think it's in our interest to make sure they can be secure. The country for a long time has [4:51] a one-China policy now. What does that mean? We don't recognize two Chinas. We recognize one China [4:57] with two systems. It's been the policy of the United States to help provide military aid to Taiwan. [5:03] We have economic integration with Taiwan. So I want to continue that policy. [5:09] Strategic ambiguity. What would we do if China invaded Taiwan? Well, we have strategic ambiguity. [5:16] Trump said, President Trump, it would be up to me and me alone. And he's right about that. [5:20] What can I do as a member of Congress? We'll be introducing with Senator Sullivan from Alaska [5:25] hard-hitting pre-invasion sanctions that would put tariffs and sanctions on China if they did invade [5:33] Taiwan. I want China to know if you invade Taiwan, try to take Taiwan by force. Here's what happens to [5:40] your economy. The full weight and measure of sanctions and tariffs from the United States will kick in on [5:49] day one. That's what I want to do to deter an invasion. As to the weapons sales, if the president [5:54] decides not to approve the package, I'll leave that up to him. But I hope he will be able to tell the [6:00] country by saying no to the weapons package, I got an agreement with China that makes Taiwan more secure. [6:07] We'll see what happens. You want him to send the weapons, though? And does he support the sanctions [6:12] package you just talked about? I haven't talked to him about it, but I think there'll be overwhelming [6:16] support in Congress to let China. If we'd done this with Russia, if you invade Ukraine, here's what [6:23] happens to you on day one. I don't think they would invade it. So let's make it clear to China. If you [6:28] try to take Taiwan by force, here's what happens to your economy on day one. I'm hoping that the [6:34] administration would support that. In terms of weapons sales, it's up to the president. I would [6:39] encourage him to make Taiwan strong so we can deter aggression. If you give an inch on China, [6:45] they'll take them on Taiwan. I think they'll take a mile. But we're not looking for war. We're not looking [6:50] for conflict. I want to keep the status quo. Just to follow up on that point, President Trump warned [6:55] other countries last year that when it comes to Iranian oil, quote, if you buy it, you're not doing any [7:03] business with the United States. As you know, China buys 90% of Iran's oil. Are you disappointed that [7:11] President Trump wasn't able to get China to stop buying Iranian oil during this summit? [7:18] Well, President Trump said, we don't need China. I'm not looking for a favor from China to help to [7:24] end the Iranian conflict. But here's the soft underbelly of Iran. They're a fossil fuel economy. [7:30] As to Russia, we're very close to sanctions being passed by the Congress that will allow the [7:37] president to put tariffs and sanctions on the shadow fleet. And any country that buys cheap Russian [7:43] oil to prop up Putin that doesn't help Ukraine can be tariffed. He put a 25% tariff on India, [7:48] President Trump did, for buying Russian oil. There'll come a moment here where China is going [7:53] to have to be held accountable for what they're doing. And without China buying Iranian oil, their [7:59] economy would collapse. So where are we with Iran? I think we've hit a wall when it comes to negotiations. [8:04] Here's what the president said just a couple of days ago. Basically, I can say this with a, [8:13] I'm not going to be much more patient. Any sane person would make a deal, but they might be crazy. [8:19] The president's had it with moving the goalpost. You get a deal, the next day they wake up and the [8:26] president's word, it's like we never had the conversation. So what happens next? I think we [8:30] had a wall on deal making. I would encourage the president, look at reducing Iran's military [8:36] capability even further. They've been dramatically weakened, but they're still targets that could [8:41] weaken them more militarily. And I would also keep the embargo on to weaken their economy. And I'd let [8:47] the Iranians know if you keep terrorizing the region, Kargisland, which is your source of revenue, [8:52] will be in play. I think that's, that would be the smart next play. You can't pursue a deal [8:58] more than the people on the other side want a deal. [9:00] Let me ask you, I just want to be very explicit. You are saying you think these negotiations have [9:05] hit a wall. Are you saying, Senator, that you think it's time for President Trump to resume [9:12] military action against Iran? I think you can't get a coherent answer from Iran because they can't [9:18] be coherent. I think they're so disheveled now. They're so weakened. They agree to things and the [9:23] next day they back up. President Trump's very frustrated. So what to do next? I think it's going [9:29] to be very difficult to get a deal with the current regime. Is there any evidence they've [9:34] changed? I talked to the CIA director yesterday. Is there any evidence that the crowd in charge now [9:39] is any less committed to destroying Israel, going after us, the great Satan, purifying Islam? I think [9:46] the answer is no. So weaken them further and you may get a deal later, but you're not going to get a deal [9:51] with this crowd until you hurt them more. So you're saying it sounds like you do support more military [9:57] action at this point. Do you think that's something that will happen? Do you think it could happen in [10:01] days, weeks, months? I think the status quo is hurting us all. The longer the strait is closed, [10:07] the more we try to pursue a deal that never happens, the stronger Iran gets. So according [10:13] my analysis is there's nothing to suggest that the people in charge now are any different in terms of [10:19] the regime's goal to terrorize the world, destroy Israel, come after us. So what do you do next? [10:26] You weaken them further. What President Trump has done, it's been amazing militarily, [10:31] but there's still more targets to be had and there's things we can do to hurt their, [10:35] the energy infrastructure is their soft underbelly. If you go back to the fight, [10:40] I put energy on top of the list. So you're calling for strikes on the energy infrastructure? [10:45] Yeah, I'm calling to hurt this regime. If you do the same old thing, you're going to get the same [10:49] result. Hurt them more, maybe they'll make a deal if you hurt them enough. But right now, [10:54] I think they're trying to wait us out. I think they're playing games. And in the words of the [10:58] president, I think they're crazy. I think he's right. Senator, the goal of this, one of the key [11:03] goals from President Trump was to get their Iran nuclear capabilities to wipe that out. How does [11:11] the United States retrieve Iran's nuclear material without sending in ground forces? Well, hopefully [11:16] you can do it diplomatically. But don't you need to send in ground forces if you want to retrieve it, [11:22] which is what we've heard Prime Minister. He wants to get the nuclear dust. There's another [11:25] way to do it. And I talked to him about it yesterday. Draw a circle around where we know [11:29] it's at. Call it the circle of death. Anybody goes inside this circle is going to die until we can [11:36] find a way to deal with this. The goal is to make sure they can't retrieve it. They can't make a dirty [11:42] bomb. They can't further enrich. Their enrichment capability has been obliterated at least for a [11:46] couple of years. All right. Let me turn to the economy and the economic effects of the war, [11:51] which are being felt here at home. Inflation has climbed to the highest end rate in three years. [11:57] Gas prices are at a four-year high. Grocery prices are climbing. President Trump was pressed on how [12:02] all of these factors impact how he views his negotiations with Iran. Take a look. [12:07] About Americans' financial situation, I don't think about anybody. I think about one thing. [12:16] We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. That's all. [12:20] Do you agree with the president that he shouldn't be taking Americans' financial situation into [12:26] account when dealing with Iran? That's his Churchill moment. When Churchill came into power, [12:30] he promised blood, sweat, toil, heartache until we deal with the Nazis, who are an existential threat [12:36] to the British way of life. And if Hitler had taken charge of the planet, it would have been the [12:41] darkest hour in humanity. I believe Iran wants a nuclear weapon. They would use it. [12:46] So does President Trump. They would use it as part of their religious agenda. They would destroy [12:50] the Jewish state. They would eventually hold us hostage. So his audience, the Iranian regime, [12:56] do I worry about gas prices? Yes. But President Trump's right. The biggest threat to disability in the [13:01] world is a nuclear-armed Iran. And whatever price we have to pay, we will pay. What did Churchill say? [13:08] Whatever price we have to pay to beat Hitler, we will pay. Same with Iran. The good news, [13:13] we're inside the 10-yard line. I think if we go back to military activity, weaken them further, [13:18] then we can end this thing pretty soon. Senator, you take me to my next question, [13:22] because 70% of Americans in a new poll say President Trump is doing a bad job on the economy, [13:28] the number one issue for voters. As you know, bottom line, is it worth losing the midterms [13:33] if the result is a non-nuclear Iran? It's worth losing my job. If I had to give my job up [13:41] to make sure Iran would never have a nuclear weapon, I would do it. [13:45] Would you give up the House and the Senate? I would give up politically. The most important [13:51] thing I can do with the job I've been given is to protect the American people. Now, you don't have [13:55] to agree with me. But I've been this way for 20 years. I believe there are religious Nazis in Iran. [14:01] If they had a nuclear weapon, they would use it. They've been trying to get one. They've been [14:05] cheating. Obama and Biden were jokes when it came to containing Iran. Trump is doing something people [14:12] should have done a long time ago. But here's the good news. Gas prices will come down when you put [14:17] Iran in a box. Saudi-Israel peace will become possible when you put Iran in a box. The upside of [14:22] dealing with Iran is enormously good, but you've got to deal with them. [14:27] Senator, let me ask you about the news overnight. Senator Bill Cassidy losing his primary in [14:32] Louisiana. You worked closely with Senator Bill Cassidy on a range of different issues, including [14:36] a plan to replace Obamacare. He, of course, voted to convict President Trump back in 2021 in the [14:42] impeachment trial. Now he's lost his seat. Are you glad that Senator Cassidy is no longer going to be [14:49] your colleague, Senator? No, I like Bill. I thought he's a great senator, but he made a [14:53] political decision. He tried to, he voted to impeach President Trump, which would have ruined [14:58] his political life. He could never run for office again. Mass season on the ballot Tuesday. He votes [15:04] against Trump all the time. What's the headline? Trump strong. Those who try to destroy Trump [15:10] politically, stand in the way of his agenda, are going to lose. Bill made a decision. What would LBJ do? [15:15] Is it natural for a politician to go after people who try to destroy their political life? So Bill [15:23] Cassidy's lost because he tried to destroy Trump. Massey's going to lose because he's trying to [15:30] destroy the agenda. You can disagree with President Trump, but if you try to destroy him, you're going [15:35] to lose because this is the party of Donald Trump. Very quickly, does his defeat, send a message, [15:41] if this is the party of Donald Trump, that there's no room in the party to break with President Trump? [15:46] No, I just talked to him a few minutes ago. We have a difference. President Trump, you talked to him. [15:50] Yeah, just a few minutes ago. There's no room in this party to destroy his agenda or to destroy him [15:56] and his family as a Republican. Democrats do it all the time. If you align with Democrats to stop his [16:01] agenda like Massey does, you're going to lose. If you align with Democrats to drive him out of office [16:06] like Cassidy did, you're going to lose. I disagreed with Trump on occasion. He endorsed me. It's been [16:12] enormously helpful to me. Thank you, President Trump, for endorsing me. It's helped me in my [16:17] primary. It's just a reality, and it's a good reality. I think President Trump's doing a hell [16:22] of a good job, and if you try to destroy him, you're going to get destroyed. That's the takeaway. [16:28] All right. Senator Lindsey Graham, thank you so much for being here in person [16:31] to discuss a very busy week. We really appreciate it. When we come back, Democratic Senator [16:35] Chris Van Hollen joins me next. Welcome back, and joining me now is Democratic Senator Chris Van [16:47] Hollen of Maryland. Senator Van Hollen, welcome back to Meet the Press. [16:53] It's great to be with you, Kristen. It's great to have you back. We really appreciate your being [16:56] here. Let's start with President Trump's summit in China. He returned without securing a commitment [17:03] from China to help broker an end to the war in Iran. I'm curious, do you think that the U.S. [17:11] needs China's support in order to bring an end to the war with Iran? [17:19] I don't think we need China's support. I think the fastest way to end the war in Iran [17:22] is just to stop digging a hole even deeper, and that's what we should do right now. After all, [17:29] Donald Trump was the candidate who said he was going to keep us out of wars, and he was going [17:34] to focus on bringing down prices. And of course, he's done just the opposite. Gas and other prices are [17:40] going through the roof. He says he's not thinking about American finances, and he's gotten into [17:45] this in this war that's making us less safe. So no, we don't need China to get us out. We just need to [17:50] end it. Well, you've made it very clear. You agree with the premise of the war, which is that Iran [17:56] should never obtain a nuclear weapon. Based on what you're saying, that it's time to just get out of [18:01] Iran. Do you think diplomacy could actually bring about another Iran nuclear deal at this point, [18:07] Senator? Well, I know if we had people who were willing to negotiate, we could get it done, [18:14] because we got that done when President Obama was in office. We had the JCPOA. The JCPOA prevented [18:22] Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. It dramatically contained its nuclear enrichment program, [18:28] and it had the world's most intense inspection regime, so that if they cheated, we could catch [18:34] them like that. And of course, just last year, Donald Trump told the country that he had obliterated [18:40] Iran's nuclear enrichment program, taken care of it, and his head of DNI, Tulsi Gabbard, [18:47] testified that they have no evidence that Iran wants to resume it. So the president got dragged into this [18:55] war. Prime Minister Netanyahu said that he'd been waiting 40 years for somebody to go to war with [19:04] him in Iran. He found a president stupid enough to do it. I blame Donald Trump for that decision, [19:09] but here we are. All right. Let me shift gears now, Senator. I do want to ask you about something [19:15] that unfolded this week on Capitol Hill. This was your heated exchange with FBI Director Cash Patel. It was [19:23] during a Senate hearing this week where the two of you sparred over reporting about Patel's alleged [19:28] drinking habits. We have to stress that Patel has denied all of the allegations against him, [19:33] but I do want to play a section from that hearing and get your reaction on the other side. Take a look. [19:40] So there have been no occasions during your tenure when FBI personnel were unable to promptly reach you? [19:45] Absolutely not. You can ask my entire workforce. They hear from me at every single hour of the day, [19:50] as do these great gentlemen here, as do the men and women of the interagency and state and local [19:54] law enforcement in the White House. And so there have been no occasions when your security detail [19:58] had difficulty waking or locating you. Is that right? Nope. It's a total farce. I don't even know [20:03] where you get this stuff, but it doesn't make it credible because you say so. Do you believe that [20:08] the FBI can function effectively with Director Patel in charge? Oh, I don't. But it's not simply because [20:17] of this issue, the fact that there's so many reports that indicate that his drinking has [20:23] meant that he's incapacitated at many times. As I said, Kristen, I really don't care what he does [20:29] on his free time, so long as he's not putting the public at risk, so long as he's not compromising [20:35] his important mission as Director of the FBI. But beyond this, we also have the fact that he has [20:41] completely weaponized the FBI. He went after agents who were helpful, helped investigate the [20:50] January 6th rioters. More recently, he went after agents who were part of the investigation of Trump's [20:57] taking classified materials to Mar-a-Lago. They didn't decide to do that. They were following their [21:04] orders. And by the way, many of them were part of the counter espionage unit with respect to Iran. [21:10] So he fired them at the very moment we need them most when we have this conflict with Iran. So [21:16] I think he needs to go for a whole host of reasons. Well, Senator, you took the alcohol use [21:22] disorders identification test. You challenged Director Patel to do the same. Do you have any [21:30] indication that he's actually going to take that test? Or do you think that that was a challenge [21:35] that to some extent you did just to prove a point? Well, he said in public testimony that he would do [21:44] it. He's also under oath automatically in the sense that lying to Congress is a crime. So he said he's [21:53] going to do it. My sense from Patel's conduct overall is he may or may not do it. But I unfortunately [22:03] won't be able to believe the results because in that hearing, he did lie several times. [22:08] All right. Well, I do want to turn to the redistricting battle where Democrats have faced, [22:14] as you know, Senator, a series of recent setbacks in the courts. Do you believe that Democrats are [22:21] in danger of losing their fight to win back the House? [22:24] I do not. I think the Democrats will win back the House because there's so much momentum. [22:34] People are extremely upset, as they should be, with the fact that, you know, Trump has handled the [22:39] economy in a terrible way. Prices are going through the roof. Life is unaffordable for millions and [22:45] millions of Americans. He started a war that he promised he wouldn't. And so I think the momentum [22:52] is very much there. Now, obviously, these decisions, including the more recent, you know, [22:57] attack on the Voting Rights Act, which was a huge, infamously bad decision, [23:04] provide some setbacks. But I think the political winds, Kristen, are blowing strongly enough [23:09] that Democrats will win back the House. [23:12] Senator Maryland is actually considering redrawing its state maps after the Democrat-led [23:18] state Senate previously rejected measures to redistrict. And these new maps would, in fact, [23:24] eliminate the state's lone Republican representative. Do you support redrawing [23:31] the lines before the midterms? What do you say to the chargers? It's hypocritical. [23:38] Oh, I do if it's possible. Look, here's my view, Kristen. I've always supported nationwide nonpartisan [23:45] redistricting. We should put on a blindfold and we should draw congressional districts [23:49] in nonpartisan ways. But Republicans have blocked that legislation at the federal level. [23:55] Meanwhile, Trump has ordered Texas to engage in redistricting, which they did. [24:01] So I am very much opposed to unilateral disarmament. I want to thank California for what they're [24:07] doing, the Virginians for what they did despite their Supreme Court decision. And Maryland and other [24:12] states should do what we can, because the future control of the House is at stake right here. [24:19] And we need to do everything we can to prevent a continuation of what is a complete rubber stamp [24:25] for Donald Trump. You heard Lindsey Graham. He said this is the party of Donald Trump. It is. [24:30] It's a personality cult. And we need checks and balances, not a personality cult of rubber stamps. [24:36] All right. Senator Chris Van Hollen, thank you so very much for being here. [24:42] Thank you. [24:43] And when we come back, former FBI Director James Comey joins me next. [24:53] Welcome back. And joining me now is former FBI Director James Comey, author of the new novel, [24:59] Red Verdict. Director Comey, welcome back to Meet the Press. [25:02] Great to be with you. [25:03] Great to have you here. Congratulations on your novel. We'll talk about it in just a moment. [25:07] I do want to start with this extraordinary moment in which you find yourself, you're facing a second [25:14] indictment by the Trump administration, trial in just a few weeks, potentially. I know you're not [25:19] going to comment on the specifics of the case, but I want to ask you a big picture question. [25:24] The charges against you stem from this Instagram post of seashells that spelled out 8647. You see it [25:31] right there. The indictment says it was, quote, a serious expression of an intent to do harm to the [25:37] president of the United States. Has being under this microscope changed the way you live your [25:43] life, Director Comey? [25:45] It's made me want to spend more time as a grandfather, pushing my grandkids on a swing [25:50] and not talking to awesome people like yourself. But it hasn't changed how I see the world or my life. [25:57] Well, I interviewed the acting attorney general, Todd Blanche, earlier this month, and he said, [26:02] quote, [26:02] this is not just about a single Instagram post. This is about a body of evidence that the grand [26:08] jury collected over the series of about 11 months. Do you know what he's talking about? Evidence over [26:14] the series of 11 months? Yeah, I saw that. As you said a few minutes ago, I don't talk about the case [26:21] because the federal court rules require you not. I would urge the acting attorney general to bone up [26:26] on the rules. So, but do you know what he's talking about with? I don't want to comment on it because [26:32] then some would say I'm commenting on the case. He ought not to be talking about it. I can't talk [26:36] about it. That's why we have a judicial process in a courtroom. Fair enough. In an interview with [26:41] Stephen Colbert last year, you did address what you were thinking when you and your wife were walking [26:46] on the beach. You said you saw the shells in the sand. I want to just play a little bit of what you [26:50] told Stephen Colbert. She looked at it and said, why'd someone put their address in the sand? [26:55] All right. And then we stood at it, trying to figure, looked at it, trying to figure out what [27:00] it was. And she'd long been a server in restaurants. And she said, you know what I think it is? I think [27:04] it's a reference to restaurants when you would 86 something in a restaurant. Right. It's off the [27:08] menu. Yeah. I said, no, I remember when I was a kid, you'd say 86 to get out of a place. This place [27:13] stinks. Let's 86 it. And so I said, I think it's a clever political message. And she said, you should [27:18] take a picture of it. I said, sure. And then she said, you should Instagram that. And boom. [27:22] Just big picture, Director Comey, what do you say to those who would argue the former director of the [27:31] FBI shouldn't be putting political posts on Instagram or social media? [27:36] Yeah, I'm a private citizen. I saw a shell in the fall of 2024 where someone wrote an endorsement of [27:43] Kamala Harris in a big seashell. I took a picture of it, thought it was very clever. And I think I wrote, [27:49] Ariel understands the assignment, a reference to the Little Mermaid. I'm a private citizen. Again, [27:54] I'm not going to talk about that particular post, but I use Instagram the way any awkward, nerdy [27:59] dad would. Well, in the past, you've said you have faith in the legal system. As you face this second [28:07] indictment, are you confident that you will be cleared one way or another? [28:11] I have complete faith in our judicial system. It's the genius of our founders. It's frankly, [28:16] the only leg of our three-leg stool that is still standing in the U.S. government, [28:20] but it's standing tall and straight. It is the guardian of the rule of law, [28:25] and I believe in it. And so let's make use of it. [28:29] And you've publicly posted, you haven't done anything wrong. You haven't done anything [28:33] illegal. So are you confident that at the end of the day, you'll be cleared in one way or another? [28:38] All I can do without making my lawyers angry at me is repeat what I said in my initial statement. [28:43] I'm not just not guilty. I am innocent. And so let's go. [28:46] All right. You have, if we look back, been in the crosshairs of politicians in the past. This is [28:52] not new from Hillary Clinton, the email investigation, the Russia probe. Looking back, [28:58] Director Comey, is there anything you would have done differently over the past decade? [29:04] Anything. Yeah, lots of things in my life as a father and a grandfather and as FBI director. [29:12] There are all kinds of things that I screwed up. The major decisions that people often talk about, [29:18] I still see them the same. But yeah, I would be better in all kinds of ways if I had a magic wand. [29:23] Yeah. Well, let me be more specific, because you've wondered out loud whether your decision to [29:29] reopen the Clinton email investigation 11 days before voters went to the polls may have helped [29:34] elect President Trump back in 2016. Knowing what you know now, would you have made the same exact [29:42] decision again? I think so. The only thing I've wondered is whether I should have dumped [29:48] that very difficult decision on the attorney general on October the 28th. She declined to speak [29:55] to me, but I could have just sent her a memo saying, here's what I think we have to do. [29:59] But I decided then, and honestly, 10 years later, it feels the same. That would have been a chicken [30:03] blank thing to do. It was a decision that I had to make, because I testified all summer that the [30:10] investigation was done, and now it's not done. Do I really conceal that from the American people, [30:15] from the Congress? I can't. And it would have been a chicken thing to do to dump it on the AG. [30:19] But sometimes when people are unhappy with me on the street, I think, hmm, I should have left it for [30:24] Loretta Lynch. Well, 10 years later, now that you've had all of this time to think about it, [30:30] do you think that decision did play a role in the election of President Trump? [30:36] I hope not. My goal all of that year was to stay out of politics, and having seen two elections after [30:44] that, where, as they said, the difference the FBI made was late deciding voters broke for Trump in 16, [30:50] but then they did again in 20, and then they did again in 24, when I was home in my pajamas for both [30:54] elections. So I don't think so. But again, we made the decision because it was the least bad [31:00] option. Both options sucked, honestly, but this was the one most consistent with the values of the [31:05] department. So as painful as it is, I'd have to do the same thing again. [31:09] President Trump was indicted twice by the Justice Department. As you know, in public posts, he's now [31:16] justified going after his political enemies because of how he believes he was treated. Do you view the [31:23] prosecutions against you as political payback? Well, I can't talk about the shell case. [31:29] Talk about the first one. [31:30] The one before that got dismissed. Absolutely. And we made a motion to have it dismissed as a [31:33] vindictive prosecution. The president of the United States cannot use the Justice Department to [31:39] target people because he wants to retaliate against them. We just can't operate as a republic if [31:45] that happens. And so there's a powerful argument we made that's illegal. We didn't get to that because [31:49] there were all kinds of other problems with the case. But absolutely, going after John [31:53] Brannon, after Jim Clapper, after Adam Schiff, all of these things are not about the merits. [31:58] It's about retaliation. And that is not just wrong. It's a way in which our system cannot operate and [32:04] be effective. Does it make you and your family fearful? [32:07] No, because I know what I'm dealing with. Someone who's announced he's now the hunter. [32:12] Okay, let's go. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told me earlier this month the evidence that [32:19] was presented to a grand jury in this latest case, not the government, not the Department [32:23] of Justice. He said, quote, it's not Todd Blanche that returned an indictment against James Comey. [32:28] It's the grand jury, part of the judicial process. Does the fact that a grand jury issued this latest [32:37] indictment undercut any argument that this latest indictment might be political retribution? Not that [32:44] you have made that argument here, but for those who would make that argument. [32:47] Okay, I'm so tempted to answer that. But can I answer it about the last case, which is now gone? [32:51] Please. [32:52] Same argument was made. A grand jury returned an indictment. Still doesn't change the fact that [32:57] it could be a vindictive prosecution. And there, of course, a magistrate judge found misconduct of a [33:02] variety of kinds by the late-breaking appointed U.S. attorney, Lindsey Halligan. And so it's important. [33:10] The grand jury is an important part of the process, but there's more to follow. [33:13] As you know, the FBI director is meant to serve a nonpartisan 10-year term. I don't have to tell [33:21] you that. You're very familiar with that. Do you think the next president should keep [33:25] FBI Director Kash Patel in his position through his 10-year term? [33:30] The next president should make an evaluation about whether whoever's in that job come January of [33:35] 2029 is performing it in a way that's consistent with the American people's expectations for that [33:41] organization, which is to be competent, honest, and independent. On the current record, it would [33:46] be a tough continuation for the current director, but I don't know. The president, whoever the [33:51] president is then, will have to make that evaluation. [33:53] Let me ask you, because would it undermine the independence of the FBI if the next president [33:59] doesn't allow Patel to serve out that full 10-year term? [34:03] Well, again, the values are independence, competence, and honesty. And if, by some stroke, [34:11] Mr. Patel is reflecting all those values in another two years, then maybe the next president [34:16] will want to keep him. But I think you have to have a competent, honest, and independent person [34:20] leading that institution, else its other contributions to America are lost. [34:25] You've laid out the qualities that you think are necessary to be FBI Director. Do you think [34:29] Kash Patel has those qualities? Has he showcased that? [34:32] Not for me to say. An expression from law school keeps popping in my head. Recips [34:38] a loquitur, which is Latin, I think, for the thing speaks for itself. So I'll let others [34:42] make that judgment. [34:43] Okay. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche says that during the second Trump administration [34:48] so far, more than 200 people have been forced out of the Justice Department. That includes [34:55] your own daughter, who is a federal prosecutor in New York. Do you have confidence in the Justice [35:01] Department to serve the people of this country right now? [35:03] I do not look that from the top level. The people running it, if you're bragging about [35:09] forcing out career prosecutors and agents because the president doesn't like a lawful investigation [35:15] they conducted, something is seriously broken at the top. But I have great confidence in the people [35:21] down below who are just trying to hang on. And I'm urging them, hang on, two and a half years, [35:27] and then we can rebuild these institutions. But we need good people in those roles. America does. [35:32] All right. Director Comey, let me turn to your novel, Red Verdict. Here it is. Great book. [35:39] It's the latest in your series, quite frankly, of legal thrillers. It's number four. [35:43] You write scenes based on your decades of experience inside the DOJ. Do you think your [35:48] novels still reflect the reality of the people serving in the Justice Department today? [35:53] Yes. Again, I'm going to exclude that top layer and sort of skim that off. Down below, yes. People [36:00] join the Department of Justice, the FBI, which is part of the Department of Justice, because they [36:04] want to do the right thing. And in the overwhelming vein, they do. My characters are flawed because [36:10] they're humans, as I am. But they are good people trying to do the right thing. That's what I love [36:16] about this writing. And I hope readers, first, the stories are really cool and capture you. But [36:21] most of all, the characters show something that is real and that ought to reassure all of us. [36:26] Well, one of the characters, the central character based on your daughter, you have said. [36:31] I wonder, what do you hope this next chapter will look like for your daughter, for you, [36:38] for your family, in your actual real life? [36:41] Well, next chapter for me will be more books. And then once a year, I will do interviews. [36:46] Maybe we'll see each other again. But for people like my daughter, my son-in-law, [36:50] who resigned from the U.S. Attorney's Office in Virginia the day I was charged, [36:54] they represent hundreds of quality people. I think they're, I don't want to tell them what [37:01] their employment situation should be, but I hope they flow back. And I think lots and lots of great [37:05] people will flow back with the opportunity to rebuild the department, which was what happened [37:09] after Watergate. Great young people came back to save us, and they will again. [37:14] All right. Director James Comey, thank you so much for being here. We really appreciate it. [37:19] Thanks for having me. [37:19] Thank you. Great to talk to you. When we come back, [37:22] President Trump back from Beijing after a high-stakes meeting with Xi Jinping, [37:26] 54 years after Richard Nixon opened the door to China in an historic visit that changed the world. [37:32] Our Meet the Press Minute is next. [37:34] Welcome back. 54 years ago, Richard Nixon made history becoming the first sitting U.S. president [37:46] to visit China, meeting with Mao Zedong, and ending a quarter century of isolation between the two [37:52] countries. The trip helped reshape the global balance of power and ultimately paved the way for [37:59] full diplomatic relations in 1979. Speaking with Meet the Press more than a decade after leaving the White [38:06] House, Nixon reflected on that moment. I would say that as people look back on the Nixon [38:12] administration, they're probably most likely to remember 50 years from now, 100 years from now, [38:18] that it made a difference on a very major issue. We changed the world. If it had not been for the [38:23] China Initiative, which only I could do at that point, we would be in a terrible situation today [38:29] with China aligned with the Soviet Union and the Soviet Union's power. The China Initiative hasn't [38:36] brought peace to the world. We can't be sure what will happen. But without it, we would be in a [38:41] terrible shape. And when we come back, a Republican who voted to convict President Trump loses his [38:47] primary. What does it mean for the GOP? The panel is next. Welcome back. The panel is here. NBC News [38:58] Chief Capitol Hill Correspondent Ryan Nobles, Democratic Strategist Atrian Elrod, and Lonnie Chen, [39:04] a fellow at the Hoover Institution. Welcome to all of you. Thank you for being here on a jam-packed [39:10] Sunday. Ryan, I have to start with you. These results overnight, dramatic Louisiana Senator Bill [39:16] Cassidy going down in defeat, losing his seat to Trump-backed challenger Julia Letlow, who fell [39:23] short of winning outright. She would have needed 50% plus one in order to win. So she goes to a runoff [39:28] with Fleming. What does this moment say about the grip that President Trump has over the Republican [39:34] Party? You heard Senator Lindsey Graham say it's clear this is the party of Trump. Mother, it's [39:39] impossible to be a Republican in American politics right now and not be 100% in lockstep with Donald [39:46] Trump. And that's been proven time and time again. Bill Cassidy, when he cast that vote to convict [39:51] President Trump in the wake of January 6th, he basically sealed his political fate. And there was no [39:56] chance that Donald Trump was ever going to forget about that. But I have to imagine that there are a lot [40:01] of Republicans that are running in very tight midterm elections and swing districts across the [40:06] country that have to question the decision-making process of the Trump political apparatus to spend [40:12] so much time and energy removing Republicans who vote with Donald Trump 90 to 95% of the time. [40:21] It's a lot of expense. It's a lot of time. And the same applies to what's happening in Kentucky here [40:26] on Tuesday with Tom Massey. Donald Trump is on a revenge tour. He often wins those revenge tours. [40:32] But what does it mean for the future health of the Republican Party? Lonnie, pick up on that point, [40:36] the Massey race, the most expensive primary in history. And the fact that, as Ryan is saying, [40:43] he votes with Trump over 90% of the time. So did Cassidy, by the way. [40:47] Yeah, but it's not enough, right? There's two things I'm reminded of here. One is how national [40:51] our politics have become. It used to be the case, you'd like your member of Congress. There was [40:56] somewhat disassociated from your opinion of the national party. You like your member of Congress. [41:01] You don't like Congress in general. We know all these trends from political science. That's not [41:05] the case anymore, right? Politics is nationalized, and there's no greater national figure in Republican [41:10] politics than Donald Trump. The second thing I would say is Donald Trump is the sun, the moon, [41:14] and the stars for Republican voters. He generates a massive gravitational pull. And the reason why [41:20] his political apparatus is spending so much time trying to oust Republicans who vote with him 95% [41:26] of the time is because they can find Republicans who vote with him 100% of the time. And that margin [41:31] is worth it for that political apparatus to be able to have members of Congress who are totally aligned [41:36] with President Trump. I think the warning signs are there for Massey for Tuesday night. The survey [41:42] research suggests that that race has basically flipped against Massey over the last couple of weeks. [41:47] I think people in Kentucky like him. They like Donald Trump more. [41:51] Yeah, it seemed like he was going to hold on. It certainly has gotten a lot tougher based on the [41:55] recent polling. Adrian, let me have you weigh in this redistricting battle. In the wake of these [42:01] legal defeats that Democrats have suffered, according to Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report, [42:08] Democrats, he said, initially needed three seats to win back the House. Now he projects it's more [42:12] like 10. Has this become out of reach? You heard Senator Van Hollen say, no, not at all. But [42:18] what are your conversations? Yeah, Senator Van Hollen is exactly right. I mean, look, [42:23] what happened in Virginia was certainly a setback for Democrats. But Kristen, we're going to win at [42:27] the ballot box. And we have been winning at the ballot box. I think the stat is 267 out of 297 [42:33] special elections that have taken place since November of 2024. Democrats have either flipped those [42:39] or significantly overperformed Republicans in those seats. So we are showing that we can win. [42:44] Trump is underwater on almost every issue from the economy, obviously affordability being a huge [42:49] part of the economy, the war in Iran, gas prices. He is substantially underwater. So we are winning at [42:54] the ballot box. And look, we're taking the fight to the states. I think this only underscores the [43:00] importance of Democrats making sure that we have more state legislative wins, that we win more governor's [43:04] seats so that we can fight tooth and nail on this redistricting battle going forward. [43:08] Well, Ryan, pick up on that point, because Adrian's talking about the economy is going to be front [43:13] and center. And here we have these comments that President Trump made as he's departing for China, [43:19] this historic trip he's pressed on the extent to which Americans' financial situation factors [43:24] into his negotiations with Iran. He says, I don't think about it. How much is that playing on the Capitol [43:31] Hill to the campaign trail with Republicans? What are they saying? And you heard Senator Graham [43:35] double down on that point with you today. Listen, President Trump's making a bet. That bet is that the American [43:40] people believe a nuclear-free Iran is worth the cost of $5 a gallon of gasoline. And in many ways, he's making [43:49] the same argument that many presidents have made in the wake of 9-11 during World War II, that Americans [43:55] understand the cost of national security. I just don't think there's a lot of evidence that the situation [44:00] in Iran carries the same level of weight that some of these other international conflicts have. [44:05] And that if you look at the polling, 77% of Americans believe that the war in Iran is costing [44:11] them financially. And if the economy is the dominant issue in the fall election, that is a very [44:17] serious bet for the president to make. And if things don't improve quickly, and I mean, in the next [44:23] couple of weeks, and those prices don't start to come down, it's hard to imagine how Republicans [44:27] don't pay that price in the fall. Well, Lonnie, a recent poll shows 77% say President Trump's [44:32] policies have actually worsened their economic situation. Is there enough time for it to turn [44:39] around, even if the war were to end in the next few weeks, say? I think the impressions are pretty [44:43] well-baked. I mean, if you look at, for example, the public's perception of the president's handling [44:48] of cost of living issues, there's been a 20-point swing between last year and this year. That's [44:52] pretty tremendous. I think the key issue here is Democrats have a lot of energy going into this [44:57] election, but they also have the challenge that their image is limited. I think a lot's capped. [45:02] I think a lot of Americans question, for example, Democrats' positioning on cultural issues. [45:07] They question whether Democrats are really better able to handle the economy. That's going to go up [45:12] against this general trend we see in midterm elections where presidents have a tough time, [45:16] and the president's image in this particular situation on cost of living issues, the top issue, [45:21] is severely underwater. So those are the trends we're going to see. I think the redistricting [45:25] thing has really helped Republicans. The likelihood that they retain the House is a lot higher now [45:30] than it was before, and I still think the Senate stays Republican. [45:33] Adrian? [45:35] Look, I respectfully disagree. I mean, look, the Democratic Party's brand certainly needs some [45:39] work, and I think once we get past the midterms and we start focusing on the presidential campaign [45:43] in 2027, 2028, we've got a number of amazing governors who are running. We've got some really strong [45:48] candidates who are going to come forward, be front and center, and really have an open debate about [45:52] the future of our country, and I think you will see the Democratic Party brand emerge and improve [45:57] when that happens. But at the same time, look, when we're looking at the numbers in the House, [46:01] it seems almost impossible that Republicans would hold on to it. I mean, we are, they're only down a [46:06] couple of seats, or we are, Democrats are only down a couple of seats right now. And with redistricting, [46:11] sure, it's a setback for us. But again, on the issues, Kristen, we are going to win on them. [46:17] We have been, and we will win at the ballot box again in November. [46:20] Ryan, final 30 seconds. What are you going to be watching for on Tuesday night? Six states [46:24] go into the polls. [46:24] Listen, I'm not convinced that Tom Massey can't win on Tuesday. [46:27] Okay. [46:27] And I think there's a possibility that he bucks a trend. But if he does, I don't think we should [46:31] overanalyze that. I think he's a unique politician in a unique district, and it doesn't necessarily [46:36] mean that Donald Trump doesn't still own the Republican Party. [46:38] Well, it is going to be an exciting night, that is for sure. Thank you all for joining [46:42] us. Really appreciate it. And a quick and important programming note, please join me [46:47] along with Hallie Jackson and Steve Kornacki and Ryan Nobles as we break down the results [46:52] of Tuesday's primary elections on NBC News Now, starting at 6.30 Eastern. You don't want [46:58] to miss it. It's going to be a very exciting night. That is all for today. Thank you so much [47:02] for watching. We'll be back next week, because if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press. [47:06] We thank you for watching. And remember, stay updated on breaking news and top stories [47:29] on the NBC News app or watch live on our YouTube channel.