Meet the Press NOW — May 8

[0:10] Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Kristen Welker. We begin with breaking news, [0:15] a major development in the nationwide redistricting arms race and the fight for [0:19] control of Congress, with the midterms less than six months away. Today, Republicans getting a big [0:25] boost in their effort to keep the majority, even as the party is facing significant political [0:31] headwinds from the economy, the war with Iran, and a deeply unpopular president. [0:35] The Virginia Supreme Court today siding with Republicans striking down the Democratic-drawn [0:41] congressional map, which voters narrowly approved last month. The court ruled that the ballot measure [0:47] about the new map, which would have given Democrats up to four more House seats, [0:53] violated the state's constitution. It's a blow for Democrats across the country who've struggled to [0:58] counter the redistricting blitz from Republicans. Right now, Republicans are on track to gain as [1:04] many as 14-six seats just from redistricting in the 2026 midterms, compared to just six for [1:11] Democrats. The partisan battle lines on full display today, with Democratic House Leader Hakeem [1:16] Jeffries saying his party is exploring all options to overturn this shocking decision, [1:21] and Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson celebrating, saying the court's ruling was a [1:26] victory for democracy. It comes after yesterday. Tennessee Republicans approved a new congressional map [1:33] eliminating that state's single Democratic congressional district, slicing up the only majority Black [1:40] district in the state. Protests erupted inside and outside the state capitol, with state House Democrats [1:46] walking out of the chamber, and some joining protesters and shaming lawmakers as they left. Take a listen. [1:52] Now, Tennessee is the first state to redraw its map following last week's landmark Supreme Court [2:10] ruling, which effectively eliminated the racial gerrymandering protections from the Voting Rights Act. [2:15] Two lawsuits have been filed challenging the map, including by the NAACP, which called the Tennessee vote, [2:22] quote, a direct attack on our democracy and our Constitution to dismantle majority Black districts. [2:29] That sentiment was echoed by Tennessee Democratic state lawmakers. [2:33] It's easy to say that it's about politics. It's very, very evident. It's very, very clear. And they [2:40] know it, and we both, we all know it, that this is about race. This is about trying to dilute the [2:47] black vote. And they're doing it by splitting us into three separate congressional districts. [2:52] It's disgraceful. They should be ashamed. But sadly, they have no shame. [2:57] Meanwhile, Florida, where the governor signed a new map into law earlier this week, which likely [3:03] halves the number of Democratic districts, also faces a lawsuit alleging the new map is a violation of [3:10] its state constitution. Joining me now from the White House is our chief Capitol Hill correspondent [3:15] and longtime Virginia reporter Ryan Nobles. Also with me is NBC News senior reporter Jane Tim, [3:21] who covers voting policies and election administration. Thanks to both of you for starting us off. Ryan, [3:27] I want to start with you on your expertise about Virginia politics, [3:31] Republicans celebrating the ruling, but considering the political headwinds facing the party. [3:37] Is it still possible Democrats out better come out better than those six seats? [3:42] Yeah, I think that in the grand scheme of things, this is a huge setback for Democrats across the [3:47] country. But the impact it'll have on Virginia specifically, I still think remains an open question. [3:52] The map as it currently exists, which looks more and more like it will be the map that voters [3:57] are working from in the fall election, probably still gives Democrats the possibility of netting [4:02] two seats just based on where the political headwinds are heading in this direction. There's [4:08] two seats that often go back and forth in Virginia and Democrats feel confident about that. So they [4:13] would have had the opportunity of gaining an additional four seats beyond that if this map had gone into [4:19] effect. So there's no doubt that this is a big blow for Democrats in their effort to stem [4:25] this redistricting charge that Republicans have been very successful on across the state. But there [4:30] really is no remedy for Democrats here. The Virginia Supreme Court has the final say when it comes to [4:35] this particular issue, particularly because it was attempted to be pushed through through a [4:40] constitutional referendum, which the Virginia voters did support, albeit not by as wide a margin [4:45] as Democrats initially had thought they had. And we see Republicans in the state and beyond the [4:50] president's political apparatus basically taking a victory lap, arguing that they chose not to [4:56] invest the millions, tens of millions of dollars that Virginia Democrats and national Democrats decided [5:01] to invest in this primarily because they thought they would win at this stage if the Virginia Supreme [5:07] Court would interpret the law as they saw it. So there's no doubt that Republicans feel very good [5:12] about the way this outcome came in their favor. But that does not in any way, shape or form negate the [5:19] overall political headwinds that they're facing in their efforts to hold onto the majority in this [5:23] election cycle, Kristen. Well, let's delve more deeply into exactly what you are hearing [5:29] at the White House. That is where you are posted today. What is President Trump saying about this [5:34] Virginia decision? Well, as you might imagine, the president is taking a major victory lap. He posted [5:41] on his social media channel today. Huge win for the Republican Party and America in Virginia. [5:46] The Virginia Supreme Court has just struck down the Democrats' horrible gerrymander, [5:50] make America great again. Of course, for some reason in Virginia, it's a horrible gerrymander. But [5:54] in all these other states where Republicans have pushed through new maps, somehow that's good for [5:59] democracy, according to Republicans. And you laid out quite eloquently all the different places where [6:05] Republicans have just up ended their maps to make things easier for Republicans to gain [6:11] back seats. You know, there's a lot packed into this issue. And, you know, we spent a lot of time [6:17] analyzing the maps based on the prior performance of political parties in these different states. [6:22] But at the end of the day, it's still the voters that will have the final say on this. And the [6:26] Democrats that I've talked to do feel buoyed by the political headwinds being at their backs. Yes, [6:32] this makes that process more difficult. But they also point to the fact that if you [6:37] redistrict these different districts across the country, you have to pull Republican voters [6:42] out of Republican safe seats and put them in to Democrat-held seats. That dilutes the ability [6:48] of Republicans to hold onto the seats that in the past were easy wins. And most Democrats believe that [6:54] any seat that was within a plus 13 margin in the 2024 election is within their grasps in the 2026 election. [7:03] And so that puts a whole lot more seats in play because they've done so much redistricting [7:08] around the country. So this is going to be a nail-biter right down to the very end, [7:13] Kristen. But it's certainly not a good day for Democrats, but they have by no means [7:17] backed away their hopes of winning back the majority in the fall. [7:20] Yeah, it's a good way to characterize it, a nail-biter indeed. Ryan, I've been getting a lot of texts [7:25] from Republican sources who seem to feel bullish in the wake of all of this. What are you hearing from [7:32] folks on Capitol Hill and leadership in particular? Well, I think what it's going to do is double [7:37] down Democratic efforts to try and find blue seats in other states. And you see Hakeem Jeffries, [7:43] the House Minority Leader, talking about looking at the maps in places like New York and other [7:48] Northeast states that perhaps they'd have an opportunity to rejigger their maps. But here's [7:53] the thing, Kristen, the time is running out. The clock is ticking. It's very unlikely that the [7:58] Democrats are going to be able to find any more seats in this election cycle. We might be talking [8:02] about election cycles in the future. And the one thing I will say is, regardless of what political [8:07] hat you wear, the fact that we are building more and more congressional districts that are hard right [8:12] and hard left is going to make it immensely more difficult to find any sort of bipartisan consensus [8:18] on Capitol Hill. If you read between the lines there, these shutdowns that keep happening over and [8:23] over and over again, if you're sending back hard partisans to Capitol Hill, shutdowns are just going [8:28] to keep happening with even more frequency as a result of it. Yeah, that big picture perspective, [8:34] so important in terms of what we're watching. Ryan Nobles, thank you so much from the White House. Jane [8:39] Tim, let me turn to you. You have been tracking every twist and turn of this. We highlighted the math [8:46] as it stands right now where Republicans do have an edge, but there are other states, [8:52] as Ryan was just talking about. What are you watching and where are you watching right now? [8:58] Yeah, Kristen, Alabama lawmakers just passed a bill a moment ago that actually makes it possible for this [9:04] for the state to run certain special primaries again. So if they can change their maps, if the courts [9:11] allowed them to go back to one of their previously enacted maps based on this precedent from Calais, [9:17] they're going to run another election in those specific districts, the affected congressional [9:22] districts and affected state Senate districts, and then use those results to go forward into November. [9:27] An extraordinary remedy in an attempt to use a map with one less black congressional district than the [9:35] one that they currently have on the books today. Their primary is scheduled for May 19th, [9:39] and they say as long as they can get it done by August, they'll run a second one just for those [9:44] specific affected areas to use this new map. But other states are also watching Louisiana, [9:50] South Carolina, Tennessee yesterday passed a map that carves up the Memphis seat, as you said, [9:56] into three different districts that spread hundreds of miles. But next, I think Louisiana is going to be [10:02] the one that we're watching next week and Alabama, of course, too. It's just extraordinary. [10:09] What's also extraordinary is that President Trump earlier this week called for states [10:13] who already held primaries to redraw their maps. Is that possible, Jane? What are you hearing? [10:20] I mean, you can rerun an election if you want to. But of course, these things are not free. It is not [10:26] free to redo an election. It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars, millions of dollars. I mean, [10:31] that special election in Virginia was appropriated, I think, $5 million to run an election, which now the [10:36] results are no longer in place. So it's much more unlikely that people are going to redo an election. [10:42] But I think what you see in Alabama is just how far Republican states are willing to go to eke out [10:48] a partisan advantage here. I mean, this is the redistricting gain the White House saw and have [10:53] made clear that they really want to eke out going into midterms where the minority party is already set [11:00] up for success just based on the historical trends that we know. And so far, this year have been [11:04] running really far in advance. Jane, I think one of the big questions that people have is, [11:10] could this push to redistrict, which did start with President Trump in Texas, [11:15] could it actually backfire in some states? [11:18] You know, I think that it does have an impact on how people see their democracy. I mean, [11:24] the idea that you could have a second election once you get the maps you like [11:29] is definitely going to affect people. When you ask people of both parties, [11:32] what do you think about gerrymandering? Most people don't like it. They still want to win, [11:36] though. So there's a back and forth here where people can put aside partisan gain because they [11:41] want to win, like we saw with Virginia voters in that special election saying they're willing to [11:45] gerrymander. But as you saw, it wasn't the same margins that Democrats have been enjoying [11:50] recently in Virginia. So people definitely don't like the idea of gerrymandering. And I think the more [11:55] you do it, the more people are going to get sick of it. [11:59] Jane, Tim, you have been all over this from the very beginning. We really appreciate your [12:05] joining us with your insights and great reporting today. Joining me now is Justin Levitt, professor [12:14] of law at Loyola Marymount University. Professor Levitt, thank you so much for joining us. We really [12:19] appreciate it. A pleasure. [12:22] So let's start off with the news of the day. What is your reaction to today's ruling by the Virginia [12:28] Supreme Court? I think it's disappointing that the Virginia Supreme Court chose to overrule the [12:35] will of the voters by such a narrow margin. It's particularly disappointing to see them do it [12:40] with a lecture to Virginia voters without the national context in mind. But this was always a [12:46] risk coming back months with trying to redo the lines in this particular way. Well, and leader Jeffrey [12:53] says Democrats are now exploring all of their options to get it overturned. I think a lot of people [12:58] are curious about what that means. Could that include appealing the decision all the way to the [13:03] Supreme Court? I think that's unlikely. So this decision was based on the state constitution of [13:09] Virginia, which has some particular requirements for changing the rules. That's going to be very [13:14] tough to overturn. I think there are a lot of other options around the country, even if not in Virginia. [13:20] And I have no doubt that Democrats are looking to explore all of them. [13:25] Well, how willing do you—so you don't think that the Supreme Court would actually engage [13:32] in a ruling by a lower court, is effectively what you're saying? [13:36] On this particular topic, on the Virginia state constitution, that's going to be a really tough [13:41] road. The Supreme Court will engage if there's a federal constitutional problem. But really here, [13:47] what the Virginia Supreme Court said was that the state constitution says you've got to [13:52] go about the process of a constitutional amendment in certain ways. And usually the courts leave that [13:59] to each state to determine. Well, and of course there was the Supreme Court ruling last week that [14:05] dealt with gerrymandering. And I wonder how you see the implications of that. Has that effectively [14:10] supercharged the gerrymandering battle? Yeah, it absolutely has. The U.S. Supreme Court deserves an [14:17] enormous amount of the blame for what we're watching around the country right now, which is some of the worst [14:22] anti-democratic behavior in the modern era. Voters, by the way, hate this across the board. Voters have [14:30] overwhelmingly put their thumb on the scale for fair maps. And the Supreme Court first in 2019, and then [14:36] again just a few days ago, supercharged bad behavior by state politicians that were watching all over the [14:44] country. You go so far as to call this anti-democratic behavior. For folks who are watching, it might not [14:51] understand exactly why it deserves that categorization. What exactly do you mean by that? [14:57] So we have a commitment in this country, or pretend we do, to letting voters pick their representatives. [15:03] What you're watching now across the country is an attempt by incumbents to shore up themselves and [15:10] their friends by picking their voters rather than having the voters pick the politicians. I'll say that [15:16] the redistricting gerrymandering wars of the moment are a little bit like putting up a seawall. They're [15:22] meant to stem opposition party gains in normal times based on keeping out the tides. A tsunami of [15:29] turnout comes right over top of that seawall. So you're watching some very bad behavior leaning against [15:35] the voters. But the voters are still in charge here. And if there's a real wave this fall, [15:41] they could well overcome the biased, tilted, unfair results of a map or two. [15:46] Let me ask you, broadly speaking, about what else we're seeing their court challenges right now [15:52] to the redistricting maps in Florida, in Tennessee, arguing that those maps violate the state's [15:58] constitutions. What do you make of what we might see happen in those states? [16:03] I think Florida is really close to watch. So the voters passed a bill in Florida, [16:09] passed a constitutional amendment in Florida 16 years ago to say no partisan gerrymandering. [16:15] And it's really hard to look at what Florida has done this week and say that they're not violating [16:22] their own state's constitution. I think a lot of eyes are going to be on the courts in Florida [16:27] to see whether they uphold what the law really says should be the case. Same is true in Louisiana, [16:32] where the governor purported to stop an election currently in progress. And the state constitution [16:39] seems to say you can't do that. There are other questions in places like Tennessee, as you've noted, [16:44] in Alabama, which is indicating that it might be joining this train, but an awful lot of litigation [16:50] still to come. There are more than 50 cases right now in the courts, and about 275 have been filed since [16:56] the start of the decade. That's a lot of action in the courts to try and set up really what should be [17:01] controlled by the public. Well, we will be watching it very closely, as I know you will be as well. [17:07] Professor Justin Levitt, thank you so much for bringing us your expertise today. We really [17:11] appreciate it. Great to be with you. And joining me now on set is Kristen Clark, [17:18] general counsel for the NAACP. Thank you so much for being here on a significant day. And I want to start [17:26] with the big picture question of this. The NAACP is, of course, suing Tennessee [17:31] over its new map. You've argued the Republican redistricting effort violates the state's [17:37] constitution. But just to go to that broader look here, as we noted, this is a part of the fallout [17:44] from the Supreme Court's decision on the Voting Rights Act, which the NAACP responded in this way. [17:50] I'm going to read part of your statement. You wrote, quote, [17:52] we are witnessing the full machinery of government aided by the court disenfranchising and silencing [18:00] black America and hijacking democracy as we know it. The mission of the NAACP, of course, [18:07] is to protect voting rights, to protect the rights of minorities, to have their voices heard. [18:13] Do you feel like in this moment, the NAACP is losing that battle? [18:17] No. It is a moment, a dark moment in American democracy. But for over 100 years, the NAACP, [18:27] as the nation's oldest and largest civil rights organization, has always worked to bend that arc [18:33] towards justice. And right now, we are being pressure tested. And it's why we are looking to [18:40] the courts. It is why we are showing up at state houses. It is why we are showing up in the streets [18:48] to really sound an alarm. The dam has broken. Devastating decision by the United States Supreme [18:55] Court. But this is a moment where we have to do everything possible to stand up for American democracy. [19:02] I want to read you a little bit of what the Supreme Court had to say in its ruling. [19:07] The Justice Samuel Alito writing, quote, the vast social change has occurred throughout the country, [19:14] and particularly in the South, which have made great strides in ending entrenched racial [19:21] discrimination. What do you make of that argument by Justice Alito that effectively, [19:27] there has been enough societal change, that this ruling was acceptable, that what was necessary in [19:34] 1965, for example, is not necessary today? It is an aspirational statement at best. [19:41] You know, Justice Roberts doesn't have the lived experience of what it is like to be [19:46] a black person or a person of color in this country, one in which we have seen tremendous progress, [19:52] but where we know that the guardrails were holding as a result of civil rights laws, [19:59] like the Voting Rights Act. You take that away and we see the entire thing fall apart. We're seeing [20:05] democracy literally fall apart, you know, before our very eyes. In just a week since the court has [20:12] issued this ruling, we have seen states racing at lightning speed to strip away electoral opportunity [20:21] from black voters and voters of color. So, to me, everything that we are witnessing right now [20:28] makes clear that Justice Roberts' observation about where we are as a country doesn't hold. [20:35] And as we said at the top, you are in fact suing the state of Tennessee for its newly redrawn map. [20:42] I want to play a little bit of what a state senator had to say defending this new map and [20:48] then get your reaction on the other side. Take a look. The maps were drawn to maximize the potential [20:56] Republican partisan advantage by winning and having a chance and opportunity to win [21:04] all nine congressional districts for the Republican Party. So, the argument he's making [21:10] this has nothing to do with race. He's acknowledging it's a purely political move. What do you make of [21:15] what you just heard there? Justice Alito kind of has given a playbook to lawmakers. Just call it [21:23] partisanship. Say the word over and over and over again. But we know that that is just a veneer. [21:31] What happened in Tennessee was the intentional, purposeful dismantling of one district that provides [21:39] black voters an opportunity to have voice in Congress, a district that is home to Memphis, [21:46] which holds a special place in our country. It is the place where Dr. King gave his life, [21:51] where he was assassinated for fighting for a better America, fighting for the Voting Rights Act, [21:57] standing up for the powerless. So, you know, I find that that lawmaker's statement lacks [22:05] credibility. And it is why we will see a lot of litigation this cycle. The base claims that this [22:12] is all partisanship just will not hold. Are you planning to take this fight all the way to the [22:17] Supreme Court? We plan to fight back in the courts. What we are seeing in the South right now is it is [22:24] very racial and dark and it represents the lowest ideals of our democracy. And quickly, before I [22:32] let you go, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries says all options are on the table to fight back. [22:37] Some Democrats, Congressman Gregory Meeks, for example, in New York, says Democrats should use [22:42] this new ruling of the Supreme Court to redraw maps in northern states where Democrats may have [22:49] an advantage. What do you make of that strategy? Do you think that this tit-for-tat battle over [22:55] redistricting should continue if that's what it takes by Democrats? There is a very tit-for-tat battle, [23:02] but as the NAACP, we will always stand up for Black voters and for the voiceless in our country [23:10] and focus on the ways in which we are seeing this ugly gerrymandering war disenfranchising Black voters in [23:17] this moment. Kristen Clark, thank you so much for being here and thank you for your perspective in [23:22] this moment. We really appreciate it. Thank you for having me. And coming up, [23:27] U.S. and Iranian forces exchange fire again in the Strait of Hormuz. But President Trump insists the [23:33] ceasefire is still on. We have the very latest on the war as the U.S. awaits Tehran's response to a new [23:38] peace proposal. Plus new jobs data and the response from the White House as rising gas and oil prices fuel [23:45] concerns about the state of the U.S. economy. Stay with us. You're watching Meet the Press Now. [24:01] Welcome back. Turning now to the war with Iran and another escalation in the Strait of Hormuz, [24:06] with U.S. forces firing on Iran in two separate incidents. The Pentagon releasing this stunning video. [24:13] Take a look of U.S. forces disabling two Iranian-flagged oil tankers today that it says were violating the [24:19] U.S. naval blockade of Iran's ports. Smoke and explosions clearly visible here. It follows an [24:25] incident yesterday where the U.S. responded to what it called unprovoked Iranian attacks on Navy [24:32] vessels that were transiting the Strait of Hormuz. Yesterday, President Trump downplayed any concern [24:37] that the exchange of fire jeopardized the already fragile ceasefire. [24:41] President Trump downplayed any concern about the U.S. military affairs. [24:51] Yeah, it is. It said they trifled with us today. We blew them away. The talks are going very well, [24:54] but they have to understand if it doesn't get signed, they're going to have a lot of pain. [24:59] What has the response on is the one-page offer? Well, it's more than a one-page offer. It's an offer [25:05] that's basically said they will not have nuclear weapons. They're going to hand us the nuclear dust [25:11] and many other things that we want. Iran now saying the clashes with the U.S. have stopped [25:17] and the situation has come, while also threatening a decisive response if the U.S. interferes with [25:22] Iranian vessels. Secretary Rubio telling reporters the administration is expecting a response from [25:28] Iran to its peace proposal today. And in a phone interview this morning with NBC News, my colleague [25:34] Peter Nicholas asked the president if the war with Iran is over. The president responded, [25:39] no, and added, quote, it's over when it's over. President Trump also telling NBC News that the [25:46] U.S. is in control of the Strait of Hormuz. But according to the latest analysis, zero vessels [25:51] have transited that passageway for the third consecutive day. Joining me now is NBC News [25:56] White House correspondent Monica Alba and NBC News chief international correspondent Keir Simmons. [26:01] Thanks to both of you for being here, Monica. Let me start with you. So you've been talking to [26:06] sources there at the White House from the administration's perspective. Where do things [26:11] stand in these peace negotiations with Iran? Secretary Rubio obviously saying they're awaiting [26:15] this response from Iran. And it did seem, Kristen, like that response maybe was going to come at some [26:21] point earlier this week. Then it kept being pushed back day by day. So we'll see if there is actually [26:26] an update that is provided today. But I think it's so interesting what the president continues to say [26:31] to our colleague Peter Nicholas as recently today that he doesn't consider this war over when just [26:36] a week ago we were talking about how the administration for legal purposes determined [26:41] in its letter to Congress that the hostilities had terminated or had ended at this point because [26:46] they weren't seeking congressional approval to continue with this military conflict. So the [26:50] actual definition of what's really happening here continues to be a moving target, as is these [26:56] discussions around possible peace negotiations. We know, according to the president, as he stated [27:01] there, he says they continue to review this more than one page plan. But what we don't know, [27:06] Kristen, is really how much has materially changed since those last conversations that we saw weeks ago [27:12] that ended up with the U.S. coming home empty handed from the in-person discussions. And the Trump [27:18] administration really hasn't made clear where there has been progress or where there has been movement. [27:23] And there are still so many questions about these continued hostilities that we are seeing exchanged [27:28] on a daily basis, even if the president tries to downplay them and dismiss them as a, quote, [27:33] love tap and nothing beyond that. Monica, I'm curious because there have been these shots fired between [27:40] the U.S. and Iran, this escalation in the Strait of Hormuz. How much concern is there that that could [27:47] actually derail any progress toward peace? It does look like the number one goal here [27:53] is to see if a deal is possible. But the timeline on which they can maybe get to that point [27:58] is what's a little murkier, because the thinking here is maybe there can be an agreement to try to [28:03] reach an agreement that can be announced. But then that would kick off an actual period of intensive [28:09] negotiation. And it's not clear that they would come away with anything that is firm from that [28:14] either. And again, we've kind of been in that place. That's why this continues to feel like deja vu [28:18] week in and week out, where it seems like there is some momentum, some forward progress toward [28:23] negotiations. Then it changes and the president continues to ramp up his threats. He walks back [28:27] from that. And there we go again and again. But the wild card in the coming week, as you know, [28:31] Kristen, is that the president is set to leave for Beijing in a matter of days. And that trip is [28:36] really a priority for him, we're told. And that's going to be the focus of the next week or so, [28:40] while, of course, he's managing the conflict and the war against Iran, on the other hand, [28:45] as well. Well, and quickly, Monica, before I let you go, of course, we got the latest jobs report [28:50] today. It shows the U.S. economy added 115,000 jobs in April, beating economists' expectations. [28:57] What's been the reaction there? The White House completely touting that, [29:01] but they are not talking about what many people are talking about, which is these high gas prices. [29:05] They, of course, continue to say that eventually those are going to come down, [29:08] but it's very unclear when that is going to happen. As you see the highs that people are [29:13] experiencing day in and day out, the president at one point said he believes those will come down, [29:17] quote, when the war is over. And as we just discussed, there isn't even agreement within [29:21] the administration on how to characterize when that might be. All right, Monica Alba at the White [29:27] House for us. Monica, thank you, as always, for your great reporting. Keir Simmons, let me turn to you. [29:32] How is Iran? How are the Gulf nations reacting to this latest back and forth between the U.S. and Iran? [29:38] Well, the prime minister of Qatar isn't here in Doha. He's actually there in Washington meeting [29:47] with Vice President Vance. That's important because, of course, as you know, Kristen, [29:52] Vice President Vance has most recently been leading the U.S. effort for negotiations. [29:59] And to the point of the conversation you were just having with Monica, I mean, to butcher a famous quote, [30:04] negotiations are war by other means. What we're really seeing in the Strait of Hormuz, [30:10] close to here, is the U.S. trying to maintain pressure on Iran while it negotiates. So the [30:18] reporting is that the two oil tankers that were hit today by the U.S., [30:23] part of the Iranian shadow fleet were empty and very likely were being moved in order to try to use [30:30] them to offload some oil in order to try to keep those Iranian oil wells going. Because as President [30:35] Trump has said, if they've got nowhere to put the oil, well, he said the oil wells explode. It's [30:40] not quite like that. But they certainly do stop working. They're really hard to get back going [30:43] again. So there's a lot going on here, you know, kind of many moving parts, as we like to say. But [30:49] all part of that same effort, as Monica describes it, which is that ultimately the Trump administration [30:54] wants to deal. And the Iranians are playing very, very difficult. I mean, [31:00] Marco Rubio, Secretary Rubio said that they would expect a response from the Iranians today. Well, [31:06] I'm in Doha. It's now 1130 at night. We're in about the same time time zone as Tehran, [31:12] and there's no response. So we're half an hour, 30 minutes from no response today from the Iranians. [31:17] Well, we did get some reaction from Iran's foreign minister, Arachi, who posted on social media, [31:23] quote, every time a diplomatic solution is on the table, the U.S. opts for a reckless military [31:29] adventure. Whatever the cause is, outcome is the same. Iranians never bow to pressure. What [31:35] are the implications of that, Kir? Well, you have to remember that foreign minister Arachi is, [31:42] I mean, I'd use this description cautiously, is on the kind of more liberal side of the Iranian regime. [31:49] So he's one of the ones that's trying to get negotiations to work. So what he's really, [31:54] if you read between the lines there, what he appears to be really saying is, could you [31:57] stop with the fighting so we could try and move this towards negotiations? Because remember [32:02] that within the Iranian regime, there are those hardliners, particularly in the IRGC, [32:06] who want to keep fighting, who think they're winning, and they negotiate by firing missiles and [32:11] drones, as they have done here on the Gulf just in the past days. And it's very, very tricky because [32:18] the Trump administration isn't negotiating with one Iranian regime, although they do often seem [32:23] to be quite united in their messaging. And that is one of the reasons why that description that I gave [32:29] of trying to, you know, assert military pressure while negotiating is very tricky to get right. [32:37] Keir Simmons, as always, thank you so much for your great reporting. We really appreciate it. [32:42] Coming up next, we have new reporting on the Justice Department's investigation into some [32:47] suspicious activity in the energy market after a group of traders correctly predicted oil prices [32:53] would go down multiple times, just ahead of market moving announcements by President Trump. [32:58] We'll delve into that next on Meet the Press Now. Welcome back. The Justice Department is now [33:12] investigating a series of trades on the oil market that were made right before important [33:17] policy announcements by President Trump and Iranian officials. The DOJ, as well as an agency that [33:23] regulates commodities, is looking into at least four suspicious transactions in which the traders [33:29] made about $2.6 billion by betting that oil prices would drop right before they did. [33:35] A source also tells NBC News investigators are also looking into suspicious activity [33:40] on predictions market platforms related to the ongoing war against Iran. [33:44] NBC News senior justice reporter Ryan Riley joins me now. So, Ryan, there are essentially two [33:49] categories of trades being investigated, trades on the oil markets and transactions on the prediction [33:55] markets. Walk us through where the investigations stand. [33:59] Yeah, so obviously this is really, you know, this was very valuable information that they were talking [34:03] about here. And if someone had insight into that before it was actually announced, it's essentially, [34:08] you know, insider trading essentially, where you're talking about using non-publicly available information [34:14] to make a lot of money. And that, you know, $2.6 billion in the course of those four transactions in [34:20] the case of the commodities market and then untold numbers as well on the predictions market. So, [34:26] the predictions market is getting a lot of attention more recently as well because of how prominent [34:31] those have been. There's been a lot of discussion about potential regulation around those prediction [34:36] market. But just on the, you know, sort of normal side of things here and on the commodities side, [34:41] that's also really troubling when you have that much money being made off of non-public information. [34:48] Well, to your point about the predictions markets, because they are so highly unregulated, [34:53] what potential criminal charges could someone face? [34:55] Yeah, well, we did see that the prediction market-related case involving the use of classified [35:03] information in connection with the Maduro raid, right? So, we've already seen a case off of that. This [35:08] one is a little bit trickier because it's not involving military information. So, I think that [35:13] might, you might have to find some sort of statute to find a hook for that using government information. [35:20] There's some way, there could be potentially some way to charge it, but you're right because of the [35:24] nature of this being so unregulated that you're going to have to find a little something different, [35:28] I think, out of the statute books. [35:29] So, what are you watching for moving forward, Ryan? [35:31] I mean, right, so who gave that information in the first place is sort of the crux of it. Who [35:38] was using information? Were they giving it to someone who was making those trades? Was there any [35:42] benefit being pushed back to them? I mean, the who is the big question of this, and that's something [35:47] that you would normally think in a normal course of events that they could get to the bottom of, [35:51] because they can figure out who was making these trades, and they can sort of go from there and [35:56] figure out where they were obtaining this information. [35:58] All right, Ryan Riley, thank you so much. Great to see you. Hope you have a great weekend. [36:03] Coming up after the break, Close Encounters will show you never-before-seen footage of UFOs the [36:09] Pentagon just released, and the takeaways from today's tranche of unclassified files that the [36:14] government has been holding onto for decades. Stay with us on Meet the Press now. Tom Costello [36:19] will be here to break it down. Welcome back. In the midst of the ongoing war in Iran, [36:33] the Pentagon today is focusing on another issue, UFOs. The Defense Department releasing more than 160 [36:41] of what it calls never-before-seen files related to unidentified flying objects, what it now refers to [36:47] as Unidentified Anonymous Phenomenon, or UAPs. The files contain numerous sightings and incidents, [36:55] some decades old, including three reported during NASA's Apollo moon missions, with these images from [37:01] Apollo 12, in which a UAP is spotted above the horizon. You see it right there. [37:06] That's Apollo 17, just so you know. Okay, thank you. There we go. The Trump [37:10] administration vowing to release additional UFO-related files on a rolling basis. NBC [37:15] News senior correspondent who you just heard, Tom Costello, covers all things aviation for us, [37:19] which includes UFOs and UAPs, and he joins me now. Elemental PQRs TV. [37:24] Very cool stuff. Anyway, you slice it. What were your biggest takeaways, [37:29] or what have they been so far? No smoking gun and no green aliens. And to our knowledge, [37:34] the government is not hiding an alien spacecraft or aliens, for that matter, in New Mexico or anywhere [37:40] else. Or at least they're still not saying if they have. That was the big takeaway. Otherwise, [37:45] it's a lot of similar imagery to what we've already seen, right? A lot of these videos just like that. [37:50] Now, some of these images of whatever is flying seem to defy the rule of physics and just basic [37:57] flight dynamics. So that's really mystifying. And some of these, of course, suggest that there is [38:04] some sort of an aerial phenomenon. It's not the one I can't tell. There's one of these that is like [38:09] a flying star and it seems to just bounce around and nobody can track it. Let's go back to the Apollo [38:15] 17 shot, though, if I could, because that's a still image from the moon. [38:20] And what you're looking at, again, shot by the astronauts on the moon right there. [38:23] You see those three things in the sky? What are those? [38:26] You tell me, what are those? [38:28] That's the big question. Now, the Apollo 17 astronauts weren't sure they saw those. [38:33] And then later they thought, I don't know, could they be ice crystals? They don't know, [38:38] we don't know. But those are among the images and videos in this document dump. [38:43] We heard from some of the astronauts themselves. What were some of the biggest takeaways from that? [38:50] Interestingly, on Gemini 7, which was, of course, before Apollo, Gemini 7, and they're just getting [38:55] to understand what it's like to be in space. They reported hundreds of particles suddenly floating by [39:01] them, thinking there's some life form or something outside. In hindsight, that could have been either [39:08] ice crystals coming off the spaceship when they lost the solid rocket booster. Could have been any [39:13] number of things, but it doesn't appear that that was any sort of a life form. I mean, [39:19] what's fascinating here, Kristen, is I talked to Neil deGrasse Tyson, [39:22] I've talked to Adam Frank, who's another, you know, world-famous PhD. They both say, [39:28] when you talk about the totality of the universe, this is mind-boggling, right? There are 2 trillion [39:35] galaxies that we know of. And within those 2 trillion galaxies, there are trillions upon [39:42] trillions of stars. In fact, somewhere in the neighborhood of a set trillion. That's a trillion [39:47] with 24 zeros behind it. It is infinite. What are the chances that there are planets out there hosting [39:54] life, some form of life? Most people think pretty good chance. And most astrophysicists think so. [40:00] However, the distances are so great. And the universal law of physics, that's why they call it [40:07] universal, would suggest it would be virtually impossible to travel to where we are unless they [40:13] have some technology we don't know about. So as someone who covers aviation and space, [40:19] what is this day like for you, Tom Costello? Well, I love to geek out on it. And I have a theory. [40:24] I think all of us are space geeks to some extent, right? There are various degrees of it. [40:29] But I think it's fun and fascinating. And the more that you dive into these mind-boggling stats, [40:37] and you ask questions like, are we alone? It just draws you in even more. [40:40] Well, and it puts our little lives into context. Tom Costello, it's so great to have you here, [40:46] have your insights and all of your information and passion about this. Really appreciate it. [40:49] It's great to see you, Tom. Well, we have much more news and politics ahead. Stay with us. You're [40:54] watching Meet the Press now. Welcome back. As we mentioned, Democrats suffered a setback today in [41:09] the redistricting fight after the Virginia Supreme Court struck down a congressional map [41:14] that would have boosted their midterm chances. This, of course, follows the Supreme Court decision [41:19] last week that reignited the redistricting battle by weakening the Voting Rights Act. [41:24] Joining me now is our Friday panel, Bloomberg White House correspondent, Jeff Mason, [41:29] Democratic strategist and former special assistant to President Biden, Megan Hayes, [41:34] and Republican strategist and former communications director to Senator Cory Gardner, Annalise Keller. [41:40] Thanks to all of you for being here. Really appreciate it. Jeff, let me start off [41:44] with you and this Virginia ruling by the state Supreme Court. How big of a blow is it to Democrats? [41:51] They say they're going to fight back. What are you watching for? Well, it's certainly a blow. It's a [41:54] blow in part because this was one of the Democrats' best place to kind of keep up with Republicans as [42:00] they launched the redistricting effort under President Trump's direction across the country. [42:05] Now there's actually a decent chance that Republicans could hold on to the House, which is [42:10] a complete change in the political wave and in the political logic going into these midterms. That [42:17] doesn't mean they're going to. It doesn't mean Democrats don't still have a lot of chances just [42:21] because of voter upset with the president and the White House. But man, oh man, the map has changed [42:30] and may change even more enough so that it could change the result in November. Megan, it's just stark, [42:35] and Jeff puts it into, I think, the fascinating terms in terms of what happened today, that with [42:42] one decision, the fate of Republicans may change in the midterms because of the maps. [42:49] Take me inside your conversations today. What are Democrats saying? What recourse do Democrats think [42:55] they have? Look, I think they'll fight out in the legal battles and that will be one thing, [42:58] but I also think that we are underestimating how people really feel in this country and they are tired [43:02] of Donald Trump's chaos and his economic policies. And I think that's going to show at the ballot box [43:07] regardless of how things are districted. And you can redistrict all you want. And they're doing it [43:11] in Texas where they redistricted. They think Latinos are all of a sudden going to vote for them [43:14] because they did in 24 when the polling is showing completely different. So just because you [43:18] redistrict something that you think is favorable to your caucus does not mean that's how voters are [43:23] going to turn out. The voters are angry and they do not want to be told what to do here. They want to vote [43:28] with who's going to change their policies and who's going to lower costs. And I don't think that they see [43:32] Republicans doing that. So where this whole redistricting fight is ridiculous to start with [43:36] and it should never have been started, Democrats did do this the right way and had voters vote for [43:40] it, where Republicans are doing it in the backdoor meeting. So I do think that voters, again, [43:44] find this not to be a credible source of way to get votes. Annalise, take me inside your [43:49] conversations today with Republicans. I've gotten a lot of text messages, GOP strategists bullish in the wake [43:56] of what happened today. What are you hearing and respond to what Megan said? Yeah, I mean, [43:59] I think that Republicans are pretty bullish with the outcome here and also obviously what they're [44:04] doing in Tennessee and Florida and Louisiana. So I think there are a lot of options. I don't [44:09] totally discredit what Megan's alluding to in Texas with Hispanic voters. I think there could be some [44:15] dummy mander here from some of the states. Like if you put a lot of people and you try to mash [44:21] Republicans or Democrats into one congressional district, it doesn't always go your way. [44:25] So I think there is a slight chance that it backfires. I don't even know if I'm as confident [44:31] that Republicans are going to be successful in the midterms as a result of this. I think [44:34] it puts us in a better position, but there and maybe only because there are so few congressional [44:41] districts on the map that are actually in play. And that's why this matters. [44:44] How concerned are you about this possibility that it could backfire, that voters ultimately [44:51] might feel like their right to be heard and to express themselves was taken away? [44:56] Yeah, I don't know if it's as much about that as it is just the atmospherics of what's happening in [45:01] the midterms. Right now, we're hearing a lot about gas prices. A couple of months ago, [45:05] the conversation was about health care. You know, I think it's a little bit too early for me to know [45:11] for sure what the atmospherics are going to be if everyone's going to be talking about inflation or, [45:15] you know, what that's going to look like. But yeah, if the atmospherics are such that Democrats [45:20] have a real, you know, like wind beneath their wings, so to speak, then I then some of this [45:26] can backfire. It just depends. Jeff, let me ask you about what we heard from House [45:31] Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries today. He said, quote, we are exploring all options to overturn this [45:36] shocking decision. He's vowed in his words, maximum warfare when it comes to the overall [45:43] redistricting fight, maximum warfare. A lot of Democrats initially were opposed to redistricting. [45:49] Some even saying, look, it's hypocritical. We can't engage in this tit for tat. How do you see [45:53] this playing out on the Democratic side? Well, I mean, it probably is hypocritical, [45:57] and yet they've made the decision the Democrats did that they basically have to fight fire with fire. [46:02] I mean, there was a time when the Michelle Obama mantra of they go low, we go high was really [46:09] embraced by the Democratic Party. But then even people like Eric Holder who used to be running [46:14] an outfit that was working on unfair redistricting came around to the fact that they just have to [46:20] play the same ball game that the Republicans are playing. So I don't know what Mr. Jeffries has in [46:26] mind in terms of his fight, but they're clearly as a party, I would say, deciding that they want to [46:32] play in the same sandbox that Republicans are playing on this particular issue. Megan, [46:37] is that how you see it? That Democrats have decided to fight fire with fire? It's a shift [46:42] in thinking. Absolutely. But I think that Democrats are realizing if they don't, [46:45] they will get left behind. And this could be even more dramatic and losses far beyond just the mid [46:50] turns of the 2026 cycle. So I do think that they are realizing that they need to play the same game [46:54] Republicans are playing. Annalise, you talk about the atmospherics. I want to delve more deeply with [46:58] all of you into the atmospherics. And I want to do it by putting up the latest NPR poll that we got [47:05] this week, NPR, PBS and Marist poll. It shows President Trump's approval rating, 37%, his [47:11] disapproval rating in the high 50s, the highest it has been, Annalise, in two terms. When you see [47:19] those numbers, how concerned are you? And I heard from a strategist who said, look, [47:23] if the president can't turn this atmospherics around, these atmospherics around in the next six [47:29] weeks, including gas prices, that it's going to be a real disaster. I think that's going to be a [47:34] challenge. Obviously, Republicans are feeling kind of good today with the results of what happened in [47:38] Virginia. And they're feeling like maybe there's a chance for us to hold the House. But you know, [47:42] Donald Trump appreciates that if Democrats do get into the House, it is going to be a world of [47:47] oversight and a world of, you know, he's not going to be able to just continue with his administration [47:53] in the same way. And I know he wants to sort of stop that from happening. So I do think that there [47:59] is reason to be concerned. And there is a little bit of runway here before we get to the midterms. [48:05] We all kind of thought that in the 2022 Biden midterms, Republicans were going to sweep because [48:10] there was a lot of frustration with inflation and with the way that the government [48:14] or with the economy was going. And I think Republicans picked up around 14 or 15 seats. [48:19] So that would probably to me be a blue wave at this point. I don't think it's going to be [48:24] the 40 seats that we saw Republicans lose in 2018. [48:28] Megan, you know, gas prices have been in focus. And yet today, there was a jobs report stronger [48:37] than economists were anticipating. Do those data points make it more challenging for Democrats to [48:43] make the case that the economy is crumbling? No, because if I'm sitting in [48:48] middle America and have to fill up my tank and it's $30 more than it was before this war in Iran, [48:53] they're not caring about jobs numbers because that's a lagging indicator. And if they still [48:56] have a job, it's not really impacting them. This is something that gas prices and food prices and [49:01] healthcare costs that impacts every single person and every single family where jobs numbers, yes, [49:06] those look good for all of us to talk about, but that's not actually how people are feeling. And [49:10] as we learned in 2024, people are going to vote on how they feel. [49:13] All right, guys, great conversation. Thank you very much. Hope you all have a great weekend. We [49:18] really appreciate it. Jeff, Megan and Annalise. And we will be back Monday with more Meet the Press [49:24] Now. And if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press on your local NBC News station. I'll have interviews [49:29] with governors Wes Moore and Sarah Huckabee Sanders as part of our Common Ground series, [49:34] plus philanthropist Olivia Walton and an exclusive interview with Senator Cory Booker. [49:40] There's much more ahead on NBC News now. We thank you for watching and remember, [49:56] stay updated on breaking news and top stories on the NBC News app or watch live on our YouTube channel.