CHUCK TODD:
This Sunday: A divided country. In Kenosha, Wisconsin --
JUROR:
We the jury find the defendant, Kyle H. Rittenhouse, not guilty.
CHUCK TODD:
-- Kyle Rittenhouse's acquittal in the killing of two men and the wounding of a third sparks outrage --
WISCONSIN RESIDENT:
Now they have just legalized sport killing. Vigilantism is sport killing.
CHUCK TODD:
-- and applause.
WISCONSIN RESIDENT:
I feel like they made the right choice, you know. It was-- it was simple self-defense.
CHUCK TODD:
Splitting the country along political lines. Plus, more division in Washington, where only two Republicans vote to censure Congressman Paul Gosar after his violent video targeting Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ:
What is so hard about saying that this is wrong?
REP. PAUL GOSAR:
If I must join Alexander Hamiliton, the first person attempted to be censured by this House, so be it.
CHUCK TODD:
I'll talk to Democratic Senator Jon Tester and Republican Senator Kevin Cramer. Plus --
REP. NANCY PELOSI:
The Build Back Better Bill is passed.
CHUCK TODD:
-- Democrats finally pass President Biden's social safety net bill over unanimous Republican opposition.
SEN. PAT TOOMEY:
They didn't get a mandate to transform America.
CHUCK TODD:Now, can it get through the Senate? My guest this morning: the Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. And, the new Covid surge.
DR. SARA SPILSETH:
I'm worried that people are going to die and, and, they never had a chance at getting a bed.
CHUCK TODD:
New cases nearing an average of 100,000 a day. This as the government endorses Pfizer and Moderna boosters for all adults. Joining me for insight and analysis are: NBC News Senior White House correspondent Kelly O'Donnell, the Reverend Al Sharpton, host of "PoliticsNation" on MSNBC, Republican pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson and civil rights attorney David Henderson. Welcome to Sunday. It's Meet the Press.
ANNOUNCER:
From NBC News in Washington, the longest-running show in television history. This is Meet the Press with Chuck Todd.
CHUCK TODD:
Good Sunday morning. This past week we got more evidence of just how divided we've become as a country. On Friday, a Wisconsin jury found Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty on all counts of shooting three men, two fatally, at a Kenosha protest last summer sparked by the shooting of a Black man by a white police officer. At the same time in Georgia right now, there are three men who are on trial, charged with the unprovoked killing of a Black man, Ahmaud Arbery. And earlier in the week, just two House Republicans joined Democrats in censuring Republican Congressman Paul Gosar and stripping him of his committee assignments after Gosar posted an animated video showing him killing his colleague, Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. All three episodes -- the trials at the intersection of race, guns and self-defense -- and the GOP -- at least the House GOP's -- near unanimous dismissal of violent imagery against a Democrat, are further evidence of a fraying America. Yes, the politics of division and the weaponization of grievance have helped both parties raise money and raise the temperature in this country. But the Republican vote in the House condoning Gosar's actions was more than that: It appears to be another step towards embracing former President Trump's radical behavior. The violent rhetoric that he embraces, the coddling of the January 6th rioters, the Big Lie, even attacking Republicans for simply voting for a public works bill, all of it has helped lead us to this moment. What used to be dismissed as dangerous rhetoric from the far right that nobody was listening to is now being mainstreamed by the man who is reshaping the Republican Party in his own image.
JUROR:
We, the jury, find the defendant, Kyle H. Rittenhouse, not guilty.
CHUCK TODD:
The verdict -- not guilty on all counts -- magnifying the divisions in a deeply polarized America.
MARK RICHARDS:
It was a case about self-defense -- the right to protect oneself.
THOMAS BINGER:
You cannot claim self-defense against a danger you create.
CHUCK TODD:
Kyle Rittenhouse came to Kenosha as a counter-protester, he says to protect property, following the police shooting of Jacob Blake last year.
JUSTIN BLAKE:
Self-defense is somebody enters your house and they’re doing you wrong. He was out on the street, he was a provocateur and he had these people come to him.
WISCONSIN RESIDENT:
You just emboldened all of these people that are filled with so much hate. They are now emboldened.
CHUCK TODD:
Rittenhouse was interviewed by Fox News after leaving the courtroom.
FOX NEWS HOST:
How you feel man?
KYLE RITTENHOUSE:
The jury reached the correct verdict: Self-defense is not illegal.
CHUCK TODD:
Throughout the trial, Rittenhouse was praised on right-wing media --
TUCKER CARLSON:
When legitimate authority refuses to do its duty, its sworn duty, others will fill the vacuum.
CHUCK TODD:
-- and lionized by many politicians on the right.
J.D. VANCE:
If we don't defend this young boy who defended his community when no one else was doing it, it may very well be your baby boy that they come for.
REP. MATT GAETZ:
Kyle Rittenhouse would probably make a pretty good congressional intern.
REP. MADISON CAWTHORN:
Kyle Rittenhouse is not guilty my friends. You have a right to defend yourselves. Be armed, be dangerous and be moral.
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
A lot of people would have been very angry in this country if that young man was, was in any way convicted.
CHUCK TODD:
Already, far right groups are calling Rittenhouse "the hero we've been waiting for." Republican Missouri Senate candidate Mark McCloskey -- who launched a career in politics after pleading to guilty to waving his gun at protestors last summer -- showed up at the Kenosha courthouse, photographed with two men flashing white supremacist hand signals. The verdict caps a week marked by signs of America's widening political divide.
REP. NANCY PELOSI:
We cannot have a member joking about murdering each other or threatening the president of the United States.
CHUCK TODD:
After House Republicans all but condoned the posting of that violent video by Congressman Paul Gosar.
REP. PAUL GOSAR:
If I must join Alexander Hamilton, the first person attempted to be censored by this house, so be it.
CHUCK TODD:
What do you believe the action against Paul Gosar accomplished yesterday?
REP. DEBBIE DINGELL:
Making the House even more bitter. But I think you can't let somebody threaten to kill another colleague, even if in jest.
CHUCK TODD:
Republican leader Kevin McCarthy, who joined all House Republicans two years ago to strip then-Congressman Steve King of his committee assignments after King’s white supremacist comments --
REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY:
That is not the party of Lincoln and it is definitely not America.
CHUCK TODD:
-- now defends Gosar.
REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY:
I do not condone violence and representative Gosar had echoed that sentiment. The video was deleted.
CHUCK TODD:
Gosar re-posted the video after his censure, before taking it down again.
CHUCK TODD:
And joining me now is Democratic Senator Jon Tester of Montana. Senator Tester, welcome back to Meet the Press, sir.
SEN. JON TESTER:
Good to be with you, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
Let me start with the fallout of the Rittenhouse trial. And I think you actually can provide a unique perspective. You come from a rural state. You come from one that would I think collectively describe themselves as a pro-Second Amendment state. There are a lot of so-called pro-Second Amendment folks who are hailing this as a victory. Explain that divide as you see it.
SEN. JON TESTER:
So, look, I wasn't in Kenosha, and I certainly wasn't in the courtroom either. But we are a nation of laws, and there was a trial, and the jury issued its verdict. I can't imagine the pain that the families have gone through that lost loved ones in this incident. But nonetheless, I think we need to respect what the jury has done here and respect the decision. Protest, but I would say protest peacefully if you're going to protest.
CHUCK TODD:
What's the issue here in your mind? Is it bad laws?
SEN. JON TESTER:
No. I mean, look, I think everybody has the right to keep and bear arms, law-abiding citizens. And I believe that everybody has the right to protect themselves. I think the debate on this whole issue, like I said, I wasn't there, so I can't tell you what actually happened. But the truth is the whole debate is: Was it self-defense or was it provocation?
CHUCK TODD:
Right. But we've also seen a redefining of these laws in the last 20 years. There's two trends that are all over the country: more open carry laws and more laws written essentially to allow self-defense to be used to defend using your firearm. How much do those laws, do you think, contribute to the situation that we saw in Kenosha?
SEN. JON TESTER:
Look, Chuck, I'm in a situation where for 20 years I made my living with a gun as a custom butcher shop operator. Every day I got up and I used a gun as a tool, which is what it is. It has to be used responsibly. If it's not used responsibly, you can see a lot of bad things that can happen with it. And I can tell you some of the laws that are put out in the last few years are laws that I think enable people that are criminals, not people who are law-abiding citizens. And quite honestly, as a gun owner, as somebody who has, you know, fewer guns than I want, the fact is that we need to have laws that protect law-abiding citizens to be able to have guns. But we also when they're used improperly, we need to enforce the law. The other thing I would say is this. There was a background check law that was put up a few years back to keep guns out of criminals, and court-adjudicated mentally ill folks, and terrorists. That bill did not pass, and I still can't figure out why. Because background checks are key to law-abiding citizens being able to keep their guns.
CHUCK TODD:
Some of this is the larger cultural divide between rural America and suburban and urban America when it comes to the gun issue. And it-- I am curious if you think it's at the root as to why essentially Democrats are bleeding rural support. And you know this very well. You can look at it. We saw the Virginia results. I could put up here, I'll show you the 2008 results in Montana for president and the 2020 results for Montana for president. You know the numbers well. They've gone from a battleground state to a 16-point edge for the Republicans. Is this going to be fatal to the Democratic Party if you don't bridge this divide?
SEN. JON TESTER:
Well, I think it's very important to bridge the divide. I think it's a divide that's been put up to divide this country quite honestly, as many hot button issues are. But in the end, I think common sense gun laws are important to be able to enforce. And I think if Democrats got out and spoke about things about enabling people, law-abiding citizens to be able to protect their gun rights, I think we could-- I think it would help us win in rural America. Unfortunately, what folks in rural America hear a lot about is they want to take away the guns. And that's not what most Democrats want for sure. And so I think it's an important issue in elections because it's been made into an important issue.
CHUCK TODD:
Do you think race plays a role in the Democrats' problems in rural America?
SEN. JON TESTER:
Look, I think the biggest problem the Democrats have is they need to go to work. And I think getting the bipartisan infrastructure package is part of it. Go to work, get a record of accomplishment, get out there and talk to folks about what your vision is and what you've done.
You've got two ears, one mouth. Act accordingly. Listen and react. And I think part of the problem with Democrats in rural America is that we haven't talked enough about what we stand for and what we've accomplished. And we haven't shown up in many places. And those things are going to be very, very important as we go into 2022.
CHUCK TODD:
You’re going to be -- the Senate now has the president's Build Back Better. It's now up to you guys. Is this a pass anything that can get 50 votes? I mean, is that where we're at at this point? Or there's some, "Hey, I'm only going to support this. You know, if this gets taken out, I can't support this bill"? Where is your head in this, and where are the Democrats' heads?
SEN. JON TESTER:
Well, yeah, look, I think we have a great opportunity here to do some great things in childcare, and affordable housing, and in climate, in lowering prescription drug costs and health care costs overall. And I think we can do it. I don't think there's any doubt about that. I think people need to be open to compromise. And I think if we compromise like we did in the bipartisan infrastructure package where we had five Democrats and five Republicans that, you know, argued, and fought, and came to a bill that would work, I think it's the same thing within the 50 Democrats, too. We don't all see the world the same way. So let's negotiate and let's come up with a bill that lowers costs for families, and cuts taxes, and gets things done to help move this economy forward so we can stay the premier power in the world. China wants to supplant us. If we don't tend to business here, they well could do that. So this Build Back Better is an important piece of legislation.
CHUCK TODD:
So it sounds like you're going to be a supporter of it, regardless of what it looks like in the details?
SEN. JON TESTER:
Oh no. No, no, no, no, no. It's going to come over the House. There are going to be some changes. I'm going to compare it to what Montana needs--
CHUCK TODD:
Yeah.
SEN. JON TESTER:
-- and that's going to be where I focus on. But, look, we're dealing with reasonable people here. I think we can come up with a bill--
CHUCK TODD:
Alright.
SEN. JON TESTER:
-- that is a very, very good bill that works for states like Montana and other states in the union.
CHUCK TODD:
Very quickly, in September you expressed support for the president to reappoint Jay Powell as Fed chair. A lot of your colleagues would like to see a new Fed chair. If the president goes a different direction, do you think that puts the current economic situation at peril at all?
SEN. JON TESTER:
Yeah, I think it would be a mistake. I think Jerome Powell has a proven track record and Chairman Powell should get reappointed. I think we've got issues that revolve around inflation that he can't do much about as long as he's not confirmed. He needs to be appointed. We need to confirm him. I think he would be confirmed by a large margin if the president appointed him. And then he can get to work as chairman of the Fed and do a good job, as he's done in the past. I think he deserves reappointment.
CHUCK TODD:
All right. Senator Jon Tester, Democrat from Montana, appreciate you coming on, sharing your views with us this morning. Thank you, sir.
SEN. JON TESTER:
Thank you, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
And enjoy turkey week. Joining me now from the other side of the aisle is Republican Senator Kevin Cramer of North Dakota. Senator Cramer, welcome back to Meet the Press.
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
Good to be with you. Thanks, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
Let me start with the Rittenhouse verdict. It's pretty divisive in this country. In some ways, you and I think Senator Tester share similar constituencies. And so I think you have a sense of maybe helping to explain the divide, urban and suburban America. But what was your reaction to the verdict, and why is he being hailed as a hero on the right?
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
Well, Chuck, I don’t know that he’s -- he's probably being hailed as a hero by some. I think largely what he's being hailed as is an innocent person involved in this case. The symbolism that surrounded it I think is not reflective of the facts on the ground. I think frankly Jon Tester explained it pretty well. I mean, justice has been done by a jury of his peers. I think frankly that when you look at the videotape, the videos and things that became more apparent later in the trial, you find a kid that was in the wrong place at the wrong time, should not have had a gun probably with him, but he didn't provoke what was happening to him. He responded in self-defense. I think it should, people should be reminded that the people that he shot were also violent criminals, and armed at that. It's not like he just snuck up on some guys. So the problem is I think justice was done, but the rhetoric surrounding it probably on both sides is inappropriate to the actual event itself.
CHUCK TODD:
I want to read you something from conservative writer David French. And here's what he wrote about the incident earlier this week. He said, "A political movement that turns a deadly and ineffective vigilante into a role model is a movement that is courting more violence and encouraging more young men to recklessly brandish weapons in dangerous places, and that will spill more blood in America's streets." He's not the only one concerned about this. Do you have concern that some people will get the wrong message from this verdict?
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
Well, what I get concerned about is a political movement that devalues police officers, that then cuts their funding, that makes them into the bad guys in keeping our streets safe and our communities safe. That kind of rhetoric, I'm afraid, leads to the very same violence that we're talking about. Now, a lot of people talk about having a discussion. The very first public event I had after I got to Congress was having a discussion around guns that included lots of people, including people of faith, people from schools, practitioners, pastors. And we don't do that anymore. And I agree. I think that we need to have that discussion. But both sides need to want to have that discussion, not just use it for their own political gain.
CHUCK TODD:
The rise in open carry laws and in “stand your ground” laws, is it sending the wrong message of almost encouraging folks to use their weapon in public places?
SEN.KEVIN CRAMER:
No, I think it sends the message that you have a right to defend yourself against increasing violence. And, again, let's get back to supporting our police officers. Let's get back to supporting solid laws that protect innocent people so that innocent people don't feel like they have to always protect themselves. That said, they do have the right to defend themselves, especially in their own homes, which is largely what some of the laws you're talking about are about, particularly “stand your ground.”
CHUCK TODD:
Right. But the public spaces, do you think there's a point where this goes too far? “Stand your ground” at home I think is one thing. “Stand your ground” anywhere else in the community, it seems that expansiveness is what's got some folks troubled.
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
I don't know, Chuck. There are an awful lot of stories about people who are grateful that the person next to them at a public space was carrying when there wasn't anybody else there to protect them against another violent criminal. I don't think this is so much about guns as it is about the heart of people. There is no question that we are living at a time in our country where the Congress that you see that appears very divided is really a reflection of our communities that are very divided. So we all have a role to play in this --
CHUCK TODD:
You are correct about that.
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
It's not just top-down or just bottom-up. We all have a role, and we ought to use our platforms to do that.
CHUCK TODD:
No, I say Congress is a mirror to society and people need to see that. Speaking of attacks --
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
That's right.
CHUCK TODD:
-- you've been the subject of attacks from the former president for simply supporting a public works bill. On November 7th, the former president wrote, "All Republicans who voted for Democrat longevity should be ashamed of themselves." On November 9th, he said, "Old Crow Mitch McConnell voted for a terrible Democrat socialist infrastructure plan and induced others in his party to do likewise." And then finally on the 13th, “RINO sellouts and known losers” -- that's what saving America starts, needs to do by saving the GOP from. Would you have supported this bill if the vote had been in November instead of August?
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
Oh, I would've. Chuck, I happen to be the ranking member of the Transportation Infrastructure Subcommittee. So I helped write a good part of this bill. I was advocating for it long before Mitch McConnell announced his support for it. So he didn't induce me in any way. President Trump and I had a pretty healthy conversation about it after a previous national television appearance where I talked about the merits of the bill. Yes, I would have. I don't make my decision on legislation based on whether it hurts or helps Donald Trump or whether it hurts or helps Joe Biden. Unfortunately right now, a lot of the rhetoric is centered around, as much as anything, "This gave Joe Biden a victory." Whether he gets a victory or not, I happen to believe that there are -- that every transaction in Washington, not every transaction in Washington requires a loser. And when North Dakotans can win, if Joe Biden looks good in the process, I'm more concerned about the North Dakotans.
CHUCK TODD:
Where are we headed if you do end up, if -- I mean, you see what's going on in the House. They want retribution --
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
Right.
CHUCK TODD:
-- for people that voted for this bill. What happens to governing in America if essentially each party punishes anybody who votes with the other side?
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
Yes. No, what happens is you're going to have a whole bunch of reconciliation bills if the same party has the White House, the House and the Senate. And our founders created a fantastic, exceptional system of self-governance that works really, really well until it doesn't. So I do worry about that, Chuck. Frankly, I think that we need to think more strategically. Obviously political adversaries are a means because our founders, again, created these three co-equal branches, a bicameral legislature on purpose. They did not want a king. They didn't want one party or one philosophy governing this country. So I do worry about that. I think the Senate has been pretty exceptional for the most part.
CHUCK TODD:
Right.
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
But now, we're getting forced with this crazy big government socialist agenda driving up inflation and, you know, driving up our debt and deficit coming at us by the Democratic Party that's gotten very comfortable with antisemitism and socialism. And that's a problem. We all need to get together again and have this conversation about what's good for America, not what's good for our tweets tomorrow.
CHUCK TODD:
I see what you're worried about on the left. On the right though, I think there are some folks that are worried that what you’re seeing -- the fact that Paul Gosar, that Republicans didn't condemn it the way just two years ago, Steve King would have been condemned. That seemed -- it looks as if it's being condoned. Bad look for the party?
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER:
I don't know. I think, Chuck, the problem is -- I don't think that was right. I don’t -- what Paul did probably wasn't right. I've never seen the meme myself. You know, as you know, I did an op-ed criticizing Marjorie Taylor Greene. I've never met the woman, but her rhetoric early on, I just want to make sure that the party was distanced from that. But that said, at the same time, Ilhan Omar spews this gross antisemitic language and she gets, barely gets a slap on the wrist of that. Again, we have polarizing parties, at least parts of our parties that are so polarizing. And I think that there's a tendency to run to those corners rather than stand in the gap, and have a better conversation, and use our influence both ways. You know, when you're sitting in a chair like I'm sitting, you can do one of two things. You can either yield to that or you can use your influence both ways. I try to listen as much as I can, engage people as much as I can, come on Meet the Press when others are afraid to, and then, but then also, you know, facilitate discussion.
CHUCK TODD:
Kevin Cramer, Republican from North Dakota, you do indeed accept our invitations. I appreciate it. Thank you for coming on and sharing your perspective.
SENATOR KEVIN CRAMER:
My pleasure. Thanks.
CHUCK TODD:
You got it.
SENATOR KEVIN CRAMER:
Thank you. Have a happy Thanksgiving.
CHUCK TODD:
You too. When we come back, what the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict tells us about guns, self-defense claims in this divided country that you heard both senators talk about. Panel is next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Panel is with us: NBC News Senior White House correspondent Kelly O'Donnell; civil rights attorney and former prosecutor David Henderson; the Reverend Al Sharpton, president, of course, of the National Action Network and host of PoliticsNation on MSNBC; and Republican pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson. I want to start to talk about the Rittenhouse verdict, beginning with statements from both President Biden and Vice President Harris. Take a listen.
(BEGIN TAPE)
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN:
I stand by what the jury has concluded. The jury system works and we have to abide by it.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS:
As many of you know, I've spent a majority of my career working to make the criminal justice system more equitable. And clearly, there's a lot more work to do.
(END TAPE)
CHUCK TODD:
Reverend Sharpton, I heard two very statements there. They were not necessarily as in sync as I thought they might be.
REVEREND AL SHARPTON:
Well, I think that when you deal with the fact that, as Vice President Harris said, she has dealt with criminal justice cases directly, whereas President Biden didn't. I think that they have different views that converge at the same place. He's respecting the decision of the jury. I think the jury had to deal with bad law. And I think that you can question the prosecution and certainly the judge, who sounded in many cases like he was part of the defense team. But notwithstanding that, I think that she has a background that has dealt with a lot of this. When I was listening to the senators, both senators this morning, I think we are forgetting that the whole context of Rittenhouse coming there was around a protest of a police brutality situation. And this was not like a guy was defending himself at his house. He came to confront a situation of protest. And those kind of protests, I think Vice President Harris is familiar with. And I think that many of us that do protest, as you said, I head National Action Network, are concerned that you send a signal now that people can come into a protest and exacerbate a situation or get involved in a situation and kill people and say, "I was just defending myself." That's very frightening.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, Kristen, this is part of this divide. Is this an issue about guns, or is this an issue about social justice?
KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON:
It can be a little bit of all of those things. I think it's also an issue of where people are getting their information. This is part of why you're going to see such division in this country over this case, because depending on where you get your news, there are some Americans who think everybody who attacked Kyle Rittenhouse that night was armed. And it's the case that the first man who came at him was throwing a plastic bag at him. On the other hand, there are a lot of people who would never have known from the coverage they watch, that that man was not there protesting police brutality in Kenosha. He was not there calling for reform of the police. He was throwing racial slurs at the protesters before he got into his confrontation with Kyle Rittenhouse. Two Americas are hearing two entirely different stories about this case, and neither of them is the full view that that jury got over the days and weeks of that trial.
CHUCK TODD:
Kelly, I've just noticed the White House has not wanted to get so involved in any of these cases right now, whether it's the president or the vice president.
KELLY O'DONNELL:
Well, I was there asking the president for his reaction. And what was also notable is he was very careful and cautious about honoring the jury system. And then later, there was a written statement that came out under his name that went a little further and said that, "Many Americans felt fear and concern and anger, myself included," meaning the president felt that as well. He didn't say that to us on camera in person. And then he went on in that written statement to, again, talk about wanting to tone down the divisions in the country. And that's really what he leaned heavily into there. So the White House clearly felt that they needed the president to, at least, echo some of the anxieties in the community and in the country about that, which the president himself did not do at that time. They want to turn down some of the divisions. And on cases like this, the president is not going to be the first one to step into the fray. And when you talk to advisors about it, they say, "It really is about his predecessor having been someone who would stoke some of these things." They want him to take a different position.
CHUCK TODD:
David, when you and I were talking on Friday in the immediate aftermath, we were talking about sort of what's going to be the fallout from this. And you pointed at, look, there have been a lot of new laws that have been written. And I want to point this out. Stand your ground laws, not a single state had a statute, if you will, on the books before 2005 for the stand your ground law. Now, we have 30 states that have it. There were some that had court-ordered, sort of, stand your ground type of initiatives. And the, there are 32 states that have added open carry this century. So the combination of open carry, stand your ground, you seem to think that maybe the debate about guns ought to turn into public safety. Explain.
DAVID HENDERSON:
Well, Chuck, I mean, first of all, there's an inherent conflict when you have stand your ground laws and open carry states where you've got political division. And as Reverend Sharpton has pointed out before, the modern future of civil rights is voting rights and it's police reform. Both of which are not going to have any progress without activism. And now you know that when you have activism, you're going to have people showing up with guns under situations that are volatile enough for people to begin firing. What stands out to me initially is not the existence of these laws, so much as the fact that people fundamentally do not understand them. When I hear the commentary about the Rittenhouse verdict, it demonstrates for me that people fundamentally do not understand the law as it relates to self-defense. This was a winnable trial. With a different jury, you would've had a very different outcome.
CHUCK TODD:
You think it was a winnable trial?
DAVID HENDERSON:
It was a winnable trial.
CHUCK TODD:
I think some look at the way the law's written and say, "Maybe it just wasn't winnable."
DAVID HENDERSON:
The law is not the problem, so much as the system is the problem. And that's why we talk about systemic injustice. The system is the problem with the way this case was handled. Now, as we discuss the law, let me acknowledge full outright. This was a very difficult case to win. And I said that from the beginning. Based on these facts, this was a difficult case to win. But let's think through what happened here with the law of self-defense, okay? People understand fists for some reason better than they understand guns. If I just said, "Someone was running at me aggressively." And you asked me, "So what did you do?" "Well, I punched him as hard as I could." "And then what happened after that?" "Well, I beat him to death. What other choice did I have?" That's basically what the Rittenhouse defense was. At the end of the day, you just have someone who was running at you aggressively, 5'3", never physically touches you, never physically touches your gun, which is strapped to your body, by the way. And also, the law of self-defense and stand your ground in Wisconsin actually allows the jury to consider, when you're assessing whether or not what Rittenhouse did was reasonable, the law the jury is given allows you to consider whether or not he should have backed down.
CHUCK TODD:
So Rev., what does this mean for your movement? What should you be fighting for when it comes to the specific issue of preventing vigilantism if this is your concern?
REVEREND AL SHARPTON:
I think you've got to deal with the law. I think you need federal laws that would supersede a lot of these state laws. I think that, you know, in a few months, we're going to be facing ten years since Trayvon Martin when the stand your ground laws became a national issue. And we never really dealt with it. We never really legislated it on a federal level. I think we must, as a movement, make the Congress and the Senate deal with new laws here because we are, right now looking at the fact, we just had ministers do a big rally and prayer vigil in Georgia -- Brunswick, Georgia -- around the case of Ahmaud Arbery. Now, I would be concerned this week of having a prayer vigil, would somebody come there saying, "I'm coming to defend something." And if they get in an altercation with somebody on the side, a verbal altercation, could take out a gun, an AR-15 at that, and shoot somebody. We're under real threat so we have, in my opinion, we are mandated to try to make laws to protect people that are very clear.
CHUCK TODD:
Kristen, it does feel as if gun rights supporters have shifted the conversation to the right, even amongst their movement, right? Gun Owners of America in some ways has pulled the NRA to the right. How did this become so further?
KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON:
Well, I think in this environment today, you are unlikely to see, at least in any state where Republicans hold any of the levers of power, a winding back of any of these laws. And that's because when you ask voters, do they feel more concerned about crime, do they feel more concerned about their own personal safety, the answer is yes. After big shootings, after big crises, you see sales of guns go up. And so this-- two years ago, we had talks of bipartisan criminal justice reform and these sorts of things. And we are a long ways away from where we were two years ago.
CHUCK TODD:
I'm going to assume that in about a month, we're going to all hear about gun sales and what happens after this verdict. And I have a feeling we all know which way the arrow is going to point. Let me pause here. When we come back, Covid cases back on the rise. Has the government done enough to combat disinformation about mandates, vaccines? That'll be among the questions I have for the Transportation Secretary, Pete Buttigieg. He joins me next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. The government announced on Friday that Americans 18 and older, all Americans 18 and older, are now eligible to receive a Pfizer or Moderna Covid booster shot. The announcement comes as Covid cases are again on the rise. The seven-day average is now approaching 100,000 a day, and appears to still be going up. The other big news on Friday was House Democrats finally passed the president's social safety net bill known as Build Back Better. It now goes to the Senate where, as they say here in Washington, it faces an uncertain future. But you heard the optimism there from Senator Jon Tester, one of the moderates in the caucus there. So joining me now is President Biden's Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. Secretary Buttigieg, welcome back to the show.
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
Good morning. Good to be back.
CHUCK TODD:
Look, I do want to talk with you about the president's agenda. But the mandate for vaccines for federal workers goes into effect tomorrow. I know that TSA, while a part of our transportation infrastructure, is technically under Homeland Security. But there have been some concerns that we're not going to have enough TSA agents meeting the vaccine requirement -- kicks in tomorrow. I know there’s reassurances about travel this week, but how concerned are you about a low rate of vaccinations among TSA agents?
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
I have seen no indication that vaccine requirements are going to impact travel in any way, certainly in terms of our ability as a federal administration to provide the services that are needed. I can tell you in my agency, we've seen numbers approaching 99% of people have gotten in their information per the requirements. Either they're vaccinated, they're in the process of it, or they've put in a request for an exemption. I expect the numbers are similar across the board. Look, let's remember what this is about fundamentally, which is ending the pandemic. All of us are ready to be done with this pandemic, to be done not just with the death and the hospitalization and the grim headlines, but also to be done with the restrictions and the requirements, and the masks. Putting all of that behind us means getting everybody vaccinated. That's what these requirements are about. And from a federal perspective, you know, the deadline tomorrow, that's not a cliff. People aren't getting immediately pulled off their posts. It's part of a process to make sure that everyone in the federal workforce is safe.
CHUCK TODD:
There is not a vaccine requirement for air travel. Why not?
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
Well, there is when it comes to international travel. When it comes to domestic travel, we found other strategies are highly effective, including masks and those protections. Meanwhile, of course, we have employers both inside the travel agency, the travel industry and just across the country advancing vaccines. And that is creating a very safe travel environment for Americans.
CHUCK TODD:
So it sounds like you don't want to implement a vaccine mandate for domestic air travel. I guess, why not? Other than you're nervous about doing something that's politically divisive, I guess. But if we're trying to get to the end of this pandemic, continuing to have sort of loopholes to avoid a vaccine seems to elongate this pandemic.
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
Well, what we're doing right now is working to make air travel safe. Again, it's a little bit of a different picture, of course, when you have international travel because different countries have different standards, which is why, as part of opening our travel again for international travelers, something I was delighted to see happen earlier this month, we did include those vaccine requirements. But look, between the masking and the other mitigations, we're very confident in the safety of air travel and travel generally in this country.
CHUCK TODD:
We're all used to things taking time to be implemented. And we have the new infrastructure bill. I've heard you and others say, "Hey, this is going to unclog the supply chain. This is going to help to lower inflation." It just doesn't come across as realistic for something like this to have an impact in the next three to six months. I mean, how is it that the bill right now that just got passed is going to untangle the supply chain in the next three months?
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
Well, here's the way I would explain it. We have to take a look at the big picture and the long term, and we have to take short-term steps. Now, you know, when we're talking about something that'll make a difference next week, I'm more interested in things like the 24/7 ops at Long Beach and L.A., or the sweeper ships that are picking up empty containers that are having an effect. But it's also true that the sooner we can make investments in and around our ports, the sooner that's going to make a difference. For example, in Georgia, the Port of Savannah is getting a lot of pressure, a lot of demand, a lot of containers. So we are supporting a process to create what are called pop-up container yards. The idea is you take those containers that are taking up that precious real estate on the port, you push them inland, and you sort them out there and get them onto the rail cars and the trucks further inland where there's a little bit more space and things flow a little more smoothly. So we are supporting short-term action. But you're right, this isn't a stimulus like we had in 2009. This is about making sure that America is competitive for the rest of this century. We are, you know, funding repairs that could begin almost immediately that mayors and states have been wanting to do for a long time. But also, we're building cathedrals here in terms of some of the bridge replacements or major projects of national significance, or airport terminals or other things that are going to happen over the years, thanks to this generational investment.
CHUCK TODD:
What do you believe is going to be the heaviest lift in the Senate for the Senate version of Build Back Better?
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
Look, that’s, you know, that's ultimately down to the Senate and the process between the Senate and the House. What I will say is that you can tell that the vast majority of this legislation is cooked. And what it amounts to, even as details get resolved and negotiations continue, is a historic investment in making it easier and more affordable to be a family with kids in this country. It will go down in history, this turning point that we're about to create thanks to Build Back Better --
CHUCK TODD:
Even if paid family leave is not in it?
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
-- to have, for example, childcare costs cut in half --
CHUCK TODD:
If paid family leave's not in it --
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
We’re talking about --
CHUCK TODD:
-- are you still going to be able to make that claim?
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
Of course. I mean, cutting childcare costs in half, delivering free pre-kindergarten education for three and four-year-olds, that is an absolutely historic achievement, even if there are more things that we would like to do and will continue to try to do. There is no question that the framework that the president put out that we're confident will pass the Senate as well as the House represents a historic achievement. And, of course, worth mentioning, given the news of the day, that it is also going to be very helpful in the long run, and the not-so-long run, in cutting the costs that are impacting families who are facing inflation.
CHUCK TODD:
Every time something's written about Vice President Kamala Harris' political standing, your name seems to be in every one of those articles. Has it at all impacted your relationship with the vice president, that it seems as if there's this narrative of a rivalry developing between the two of you?
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
No, because she and I are part of a team that is disciplined and doesn't focus on what's obsessing the commentators. We're too busy with a job to do. She, as the leader in this administration, her leadership role, and I and the president and everybody else in the Cabinet and across the administration, are laser-focused on getting the job done. That would be demanding in any administration. But in one like this, where we have been assigned by the president to take on literally projects and legislation of generational significance, there's no room to get caught up in the parlor games. And I'm proud to be part of the Biden/Harris team.
CHUCK TODD:
I know -- I'm not asking you this as the secretary of Transportation, I'm asking this as a person who ran for president. What was your reaction to the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict?
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
Look, there's a lot of pain in this country. And that pain and that frustration was aroused by the entire case, including the verdict. And for a lot of us, there's a lot to be upset about and a lot to be concerned about. But, you know, we'll move forward as a country. The president continues to believe, and this administration continues to believe in America. And we've got to continue working to bring Americans together.
CHUCK TODD:
Pete Buttigieg, the Secretary of Transportation. I know we got to all of different topics there. I appreciate you coming on and sharing the administration’s and your perspective.
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
Thank you.
CHUCK TODD:
Thank you. Have a good Thanksgiving, by the way. When we come back, why where you live--
SEC. PETE BUTTIGIEG:
Thank you, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
--and how you vote says a lot about how much high gas prices impact you. Stay with us.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Data Download time, and a closer look at those rising gas prices. You might think of them as something that actually impacts every American. But if you look closely, you can see that Democrats and Republicans are experiencing this year's pain at the pump a bit differently. This is a real-life, unintentional impact of the self-sorting that has come to define modern American politics. And it'll explain why the two parties seem to be focusing on the issue with different urgency. As we tell you, the average gas price is up. It's $3.38. This is the highest it's been going back to 2013. So this is real, what we're seeing. But people are experiencing this pain at the pump differently. Check this out. This is most vehicle miles traveled per capita by state. Top ten states -- eight of the top ten are Trump states. The only two blue states, this is the one rural state the Democrats still carry, New Mexico if you will, and then there's Georgia. Have you ever driven in and around Atlanta? Yes, you have a lot of vehicle miles traveled. But as you could see, Republicans, traveling more miles, buying more gas. How about the type of vehicle that Republicans are more likely to have? Well, guess what? New pickup truck sales -- the top ten states of new pickup truck sales per capita, all red states, agricultural-based states. The pickup truck, a necessity to do work. So add all this up: the type of vehicle you need, the miles traveled, and you can see why the issue of gas prices really is right now more of a Republican issue than a Democratic issue, which may explain why the White House urgency on this has been a bit less, and the Republican urgency has been a bit more. When we come back, the growing speculation over whether Vice President Harris or Pete Buttigieg will end up running for president in 2024. Stick with us.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Reverend Sharpton, I want to start with the issue of the vice president here a little bit. I'll be honest, I'm mildly surprised she didn't do your show this weekend, we didn't see her this weekend. And this goes -- after all these little stories and there's this, whatever you want to call it, a whisper campaign. I know you were quoted in that CNN piece that got a wide fare there. Are you surprised not to see her today?
REVEREND AL SHARPTON:
I would've liked to see her today because I think that there's no one, in my opinion, more qualified to address these times than the vice president, as a woman, first woman vice president, as a Black and a minority, and as one who has a criminal justice background. I think that -- when she walks in the door, she is the example of why we need to bring the country together, and who has overcome great odds to get where she's gotten. The down side that she has to look at is that if she pushes too far ahead, then does the media, the same media that's saying, "Where is she," will say, "Oh, you're getting ahead of the president." So she's almost damned if she does. She's damned if she doesn't. You want her to be the vice president, be in a supportive role, so you say, "Oh, do that." But if she's more assertive, than many of us want 00 she spoke at the 30th anniversary of National Action Network three weeks ago. The crowd was roaring. Three or four standing ovations. But if she keeps doing that, you'll say, "Stay in your place. You don't know how to be vice president." And I think it's that kind of real problem of getting her to walk that line because she's not going to be able to satisfy everybody. If it was up to me, she'd be on every day. But then people on the other side would be saying, "See? She doesn't know how to be vice president. That's what you get when you put a woman there or a Black there."
CHUCK TODD:
Kelly O'Donnell, you see this up close. Are the stories about the vice president over-hyped, or are they revealing something that a lot of people have been whispering about, and it just finally went on the record?
KELLY O'DONNELL:
There was a tension there. It's a tightrope, as you were talking about. In some ways, when you talk to people in her circle, they say she hears this chatter, she knows that there are these concerns. She's trying to avoid that noise and focus on the work. They point to her trip to France. They talk about her hosting world leaders, doing speeches and working on behalf of some of the legislative things. At the same time, we often hear President Biden talk about how Barack Obama chose him to be the front man on the Recovery Act years ago, and how pivotal that was. Well, he didn't choose the vice president to do that for infrastructure. Pete Buttigieg is a part of that. Mitch Landrieu has been brought in, other cabinet officials. He did give her volatile topics, like immigration and voting rights, which right now, don't have the votes to move in legislative ways. So those are also magnets for more criticism from the right. So she has a portfolio that makes her perhaps drag in more criticism. And she's trying to not outshine the president. And at the same time, she is struggling with that noise. They say she's going to focus on working. She's going to focus on a good relationship with President Biden. Could he do more to help her? Perhaps he could.
CHUCK TODD:
David, you seemed to imply earlier when we were talking off-camera, in many ways, i think -- you think it's harder to be a candidate of color today running for office than maybe even ten years ago?
DAVID HENDERSON:
Absolutely, Chuck, for the reasons that we're talking about right now. Look at the statements that were released from the White House about the Rittenhouse verdict. I think it's very difficult to say something meaningful, and at the same time not set yourself up for fire from the other side. And, I mean, this really opens it up. You asked me about public safety earlier. And let's just stop and think here. I would've loved to have heard more from her because I think she has a message to deliver that only a prosecutor who's a person of color could deliver. And that is, "Folks, let's be reasonable about keeping each other safe." And I think she can say, "I respect the jury's verdict, although we've got a long way to go." But I've heard several statements from elected officials that are celebrating the loss of life. And elected officials should never do that, regardless of how they feel about the circumstances.
CHUCK TODD:
Kristen, Kamala Harris is in some ways a favorite of the right to beat up on. And I think there are some that think that maybe that enthusiasm on the right is what makes her more cautious. What makes her more of a magnet to attack than President Biden? Is it just race?
KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON:
Take a look at the portfolio that she's been handed. So, for instance, an issue like the border. That is an issue that conservatives are very fired up about, very frustrated about. And so when this becomes an issue that's in her portfolio, it only adds more fuel to the fire. But I also think another reason why there's so much focus on her is our president of the United States, I believe he turned 79 years old yesterday.
CHUCK TODD:
Yesterday, yeah.
KELLY O'DONNELL:
He did.
KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON:
Happy birthday, Mr. President. There's a lot of talk about what are Republicans going to do in 2024? If it's not Joe Biden, is she the next one? They're already focused on 2024.
CHUCK TODD:
Rev., how much should the party be just rallying around Biden right now, or thinking about an alternative?
REVEREND AL SHARPTON:
I think they should rally around Biden. I would take Biden at 79 any day before I would take Trump at 75 or 76.
KELLY O’DONNELL:
He says he's running.
CHUCK TODD:
He did. Yes, he did. That's all we have for today. It was a busy show, as you can see. I appreciate you watching. Have a happy, safe, and please, a healthy Thanksgiving. We'll be back next week because if it's Sunday, even after the leftovers, Meet the Press.