for 35 years of it always being there. to finally being able to let her go and dance with mom. that is real satisfaction. real satisfaction. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> ♪♪ ♪♪ this sunday, ballooning @ crisis. >> if any object presents a threat to the safety, security of the american people i will take it down. >> president biden says he doesn't want to damage relations with china after shooting down a chinese spy balloon.

>> we're not looking for a new cold war. >> secretary antony blink en meets for the first time since the president canceled his trip to beijing. i'll ask the secretary of state. plus, critical moment. >> there is no doubt these are crimes against humanity. >> the u.s. accuses russia of crimes against humanity as the war approaches the one-year mark. >> i don't think the ukrainians would collapse or fall. i think they'll continue to fight. >> will the u.s. and its allies defeat putin without boots on the ground? we'll get a report from the front lines. >> and primary fight. >> america is not past our prime. it's just that our politicians are past theirs. >> nikki haley is the first republican candidate to challenge donald trump, but she's not ready to criticize her former boss.

>> the problem is the media wants everybody to be 100% trump or 100% anti-trump. i don't work that way. >> may the best woman win. >> i'll ask one potential candidate who is considering jumping in the race himself. former maryland governor larry hogan. joining me for insight and analysis are nbc news white house correspondent peter alexander, amna nawaz. tom friedman columnist for "the new york times." and danielle pletka of the americanized institute. welcome to sunday. it's "meet the press." >> from nbc news in washington, the longest running show in television history. this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. good sunday morning. 15 days after the u.s. shot down a chinese spy balloon and after a canceled diplomatic trip to beijing, tensions with china have now escalated again to accusations that china may be

supplying russia or may supply russia with lethal aid in its war against ukraine. on thursday the president did try to turn the temperature down a bit with china, acknowledging that the three unidentified objects shot down over lake huron, alaska, and canada were not tied to china but were likely simply research balloons. >> we seek competition, not conflict with china. we're not looking for a new cold war. i expect to be speaking with president xi, and i hope we have -- we will get to the bottom of this. i make no apologies for taking down that balloon. >> china's top foreign policy official responded on saturday in his visit to munich. he told the gathering of world leaders that the u.s. response was a strategic misjudgment and he also called it absurd and hysterical and warned the cold war mentality is back.

well, the secretary of state met with wang lee late on saturday the first time since the u.s. shot down the spy balloon. i spoke with secretary blinken after the meeting, and i'll bring that to you in just a moment. the war in ukraine is dominating at the security council, more so than the balloon, if you will. the u.s. is worried that china may view a lack of resolve on ukraine as a potential sign of weakness as it eyes taiwan over reunification over the next several years. vice president announced that the u.s. determined that russia is committing war crimes in ukraine. >> gruesome acts of murder, torture, rape, and deportation. we have examined the evidence. we know the legal standards, and there is no doubt these are crimes against humanity.

>> this week president biden will be returning to the region, poland specifically, where he spoke after the russian invasion a year ago, and he's going to go there to renew the promise to stand with ukraine as long as it takes, but privately, administration officials have warned ukrainian officials that there is a limit to the patience of the american public and the western alliance. ukraine is asking for dozens of f-16 fighter jets, and addressing the munich conference, ukrainian president zelenskyy warned of fatigue. >> we need to hurry up. we need the speed, the speed of our agreements and the speed of our delivery to strengthen our sling, the strength of decisions to limit russian potential. >> nbc news chief foreign correspondent richard engel is in kramatorsk. you and i were talking earlier. russia is now engaging in a

second war, if you will, a brand-new war plan because the first one didn't work on this one-year anniversary. >> so one year on, russia is starting over again effectively. putin tried to invade this country a year ago. many said he was suffering from hubris. he wasn't listening to advisers or was misadvised and he thought he could take ukraine easily, topple the capital. soldiers brought policing gear in order to manage the population. they didn't really think the ukrainian people would rise up and defend this country. it didn't work, and now a year on, he's starting a totally new war, a new strategy, back to the basics, and instead of having his troops spread out all over the country where they have supply chain issues, logistics issues, it's primarily focused near the russian border out here in the east and a very slow, destructive campaign,

moving the front line or trying to move the front line forward into ukrainian territory, but already and we're about a week into this offensive. we're not seeing tremendous advances from the russian side. it seems like it's going to be a very, very slow campaign. >> and, richard, what does that mean for the ukrainian strategy here in this war? because if the russian goal now is to essentially buy time, run out the clock, maybe run out the clock here with support in the united states or western europe, how does ukraine counter that? >> it's a problem because russia is depleting ammunition in this country. ukraine is running out of air defenses and running out of tank rounds. with this slow, destructive strategy that putin is trying right now, he hopes that not only will western support dry up over time, but that the ukrainians eventually will lose the ability to maintain this fight and to sustain this fight. so in a sense, if he's willing to lose a lot of troops -- and by many accounts, russia is

losing more troops now than at any stage since this conflict began, if russia is willing to loose that many troops, over time ukrainians will be dangerously low on both anti-aircraft and regular ammunitions. >> richard engel getting us started. thank you. turning now to my interview tony blinken. i spoke with secretary blinken saturday evening directly after his meeting with china's top diplomat and i asked him about the growing tensions between the two countries. >> i know you just got out of a meeting with your counterpart wang lee of china. i read the readout. we have stated what you said to him. what i am more concerned with, what did he say to you? number one, did it begin with an apology for the balloon? >> chuck, i don't want to characterize what he said. i don't think that would be appropriate, although, i can tell you, no, there was no

apology. but what i can also tell you is this was an opportunity to speak very clearly and very directly about the fact that china sent a surveillance balloon over our territory, violating our sovereignty and violating international law and i told him that that was unacceptable and can never happen again. we are not the only one on the receiving end of the surveillance balloons. more than 40 countries have had these balloons fly over them in cent years, and that's been exposed to the world. i also had an opportunity because we're here in munich, as you know, focused primarily on russia's ongoing aggression against ukraine, to share our very real concerns about china's support for russia in that war, and what we've seen over the past years is, of course, some political and rhetorical support and even some non-lethal support, but we are very concerned that china is considering providing lethal support against russia and

ukraine, and i'm concerned that that may have serious consequences in our relationship, as well, something that president biden has shared with president xi on several occasions. >> finally, i underscored the importance of having direct lines of communication, the importance of continuing to engage in diplomacy between our countries. i think this is something that the world expects of us. they expect us to manage this relationship responsibly, and so it was important that we had that opportunity this evening here in munich. >> i want to start with what i think is the newer piece of information that you're sharing, and i know that we've been reporting separately. this concern that china is considering potential lethal aid in this war to russia. what evidence can you share with us that indicates your concern that they're going to escalate their help to russia? as you said, they've been helping them rhetorically and helping them by buying cheap oil, but what is the other evidence that you have here that they're thinking about doing more? >> well, chuck, china is trying to have it both ways.

publicly they present themselves as a country striving for peace in ukraine, but privately, as i've said, we've seen already over these past months the provision of non-lethal assistance that does go directly to aiding and abetting russia's war effort and some further information that we are sharing today, and that i think will be out there soon that indicates that they are strongly considering providing lethal assistance to russia. to the best of our knowledge -- >> what form is that? >> -- we haven't crossed that line yet, but we're sharing. >> in what form? >> chuck, i don't want to get into the details in this moment, but there are various kinds of lethal assistance that they're contemplating providing to include weapons.

>> what else would you describe as lethal assistance that wasn't weapons? >> again, i'll let the information that we have and that we're sharing speak for itself, but the main concern is materiel support to russia's war effort that would have a lethal effect. >> the material support, i understand you want to let it speak for itself, but can you give me a little bit more? that is a huge charge. we're at another level of escalation here if our two biggest rivals are now in cahoots in a war essentially against the west. >> chuck, what i want to stress is this. we see china considering this. we've not seen them cross that line, so i think it's important that we make clear as i did this evening in my meeting with wang lee, that this is something that is of deep concern to us, and i made clear the importance of not crossing that line and the fact that it would have serious consequences in our own relationship, something that we do not need on top of the balloon incident of china's engagement.

>> what kind of consequences are you talking about? what did you share with him? >> i'm not going to get into that, but i can again tell you that this is something that president biden has raised directly with president xi. >> and have you -- if he's raised it directly with president xi, so this is not new, this warning here, it looks like so far they've not heeded the warnings? >> no. again, this is something that president biden has shared with president xi almost going back to day one of the russian aggression against ukraine. they spoke two weeks into the russian aggression, back last march, and at that time in that very first conversation after the russian aggression, president biden said to him it's going to be very important going forward that you not provide any direct military support to russia for this war in ukraine as well as engaging in any systematic efforts to evade the

sanctions we've imposed on individuals and companies who are aiding the war effort in ukraine by russia. so this is something that we've been concerned about from day one because you remember, chuck, before the russian aggression, president xi and president putin got together and talked about a partnership with no limits. in that context, one of the concerns we had no limits might include providing lethal support to russia in the war. so this is something we've been watching from day one, and the reason that we're sharing further information now is we are concerned that this is something that china was not doing for many, many months, but may be considering doing now. >> have we shared all of this evidence with our allies? >> we are in the process of doing that. >> let me move a little bit more to the balloon incident itself. the director of national intelligence admiral haines had this to say about the balloon earlier this week when asked how should we think about this?

anything you can say about it? she started off. i know it's crazy and sort of like an episode of "veep" on some level, and clearly the other three objects. is it fair to say that in hindsight we overreacted on the shoot-down of the other three objects? >> no, chuck. the president spoke to this himself just the other day. with regard to the surveillance balloon from china itself, as you know, we spotted it, we took action to protect sensitive information on the ground that it was attempting to surveil. we got information from the balloon itself as it traversed the united states and when it was safe to do so in terms of not posing a danger to people on the ground. we shot it down and now we're in the process of recovering what remains of the balloon to learn more about the technology that it had onboard. what happened after that was we recalibrated our radars because

this balloon program based on information we have now has been going on for some time. in years past we weren't necessarily looking at the space in which this was happening. we recalibrated the radars and as a result, we saw more things that we weren't seeing in the past and among those things were these three objects that were shot down that, unlike the chinese surveillance balloon were flying lower and posed a threat to commercial aviation, and so one of the main reasons that the president ordered that action be taken was to make sure there was no threat to commercial aviation. i think one of the things that comes out of this more broadly is this is -- this has been in many ways unregulated airspace and subspace, and we need to do much more, i think, to make sure that we and countries around the world have a better idea of what's up, when, and where in order to make sure that we can

proceed safely, securely, and not have objects that pose a threat to our people or to our country, but at the same time, making sure the things that are there and proceeding with peaceful purpose can do so as long as they don't pose a threat to aviation. >> do we still believe that the balloon, the surveillance balloon over the continental united states was an intentional act or do you believe that part of it was an accident? >> well, chuck, what i can tell you is this. what is clear is that once the balloon was over the united states and flying what was basically west to east, it attempted to surveil very sensitive military sites. in some cases it loitered or returned to them as it progressed east. so there is no doubt in our minds at all that, a, this was a surveillance balloon, and, b, it

was attempting to engage in active surveillance. >> i want to go back to your readout with your chinese counterpart. the other thing outside in there is you re-emphasized the issue that we don't want to have a cold war with china, but what else do you describe our relationship with them or expanding our military presence in guam or expanding our military presence in japan. we continue to arm taiwan and send weapons there. if it's not a cold war, what is it? >> chuck, this is obviously among the most consequential but also most complex relationships that we have and probably the same could be said for other countries around the world, and, of course, we're in a vigorous competition with china, and that's not something at all that we are shy about, and we attempt to compete vigorously, and we've

taken important steps over the last couple of years to invest in ourselves so that we compete effectively and also to ally with allies and partners around the world so we can approach the challenges that china poses. as we're doing that we have a strong interest in trying to manage the relationship responsibly and to make sure to the best of our ability that competition doesn't veer into conflict or into cold war. i don't think that's in our interest. also, it's important to note that there are some very big issues out there that are affecting all of our citizens and affecting people around the world where if we can, it would be urgent to find ways to cooperate on climate, on global health, on the macro economic situation around the world and we have a responsibility to at least try to do that. so that's why you can't reduce this to a bumper sticker or to a label. it's complicated. it's consequential and we need to manage it responsibly. >> complicated so people on social media understand. did you reschedule a meeting, reschedule your visit to beijing? did this meeting do that or does

president biden need to speak with president xi first? >> no. we didn't talk about that tonight. we really focused on the balloon incident. we focused on some other areas of concern that we have, and i noted the main one, which is the concerns about chinese support for russia and its war of aggression against ukraine. we also talked about the most recent north korean missile launch and argue that china, given the relationship that it has with north korea, should try to use its influence to try to curb these kinds of actions coming from north korea. >> i know we don't have a lot of time, and i asked a ton of questions on the war on ukraine. let me ask this one. i had robert gates on here a couple of weeks ago, and he thought the only real red line for putin was crimea. are we ready to -- if president zelenskyy wants to retake

crimea, are we going to be there to support him on that or is that something that we told him why don't you focus everything else first? >> chuck, at every step along the way, we've said that fundamentally these questions about ukraine, about its future, belong to the ukrainians. these are their decisions, and we are determined to support them in their efforts to uphold their territorial integrity, their independence, and their sovereignty, but i don't want to speculate about the future. what i can tell you is this, it's really important, whatever happens, in terms of our own interests that there be a just and durable peace, and by that i mean this. just because if we have a peace that somehow ratifies the seizure of land by force, that risks opening a pandora's box around the world where they can do what russia did ant get away with it. durable in that what we don't want in terms of our own interests and certainly in terms

of ukraine's is to arrive at a place where we leave things so that it's likely that russia repeats the exercise a year, two years, five years later. so, broadly, i think that's what we're aiming at and certainly what ukraine is aiming at. in terms of the specific contours of where we can achieve peace, these are fundamental ukraine decisions. >> and, finally, spacex, which is owned by elon musk, has been providing starlink capabilities to help ukraine, but apparently they've restricted some access where ukraine can't use it for some military purposes. given that spacex is a u.s. military contractor in some things, have we asked elon musk to change his policy there and essentially be on the side of ukraine and not to, quote, unquote, be neutral here? >> well, i can't share any conversations we've had other than to say we've had conversations. >> well, i think that answer tells us something to read

between the lines on that. anyway, secretary antony blinken i appreciate you coming on and sharing the administration's perspective. good luck, and i hope you get some rest. >> thanks a lot, chuck. great to be with you. thank you. when we come back, is domestic political pressure china leading the biden administration to overreact? the panel is next. the panel is next.

welcome back. the panel is here, nbc news chief white house correspondent press peter alexander. amna nawaz, the correspondent for "pbs newshour." tom friedman, danielle pletka, really good talk about china and ukraine. tom, let me start with you. this feels like we are at a moment we've never been with with china, are we?

>> i think so, chuck, because if you go back to the start of the war president biden spoke with president xi and jake sullivan spoke with his chinese counterparts and they made one major point. you will not intervene militarily in this war on russia's side, and if you do it will affect your two largest export markets and the european union and the united states of america. the fact that a year later china is considering that according to the administration, i find harrowing -- >> you find it believable? why would china do this? >> it's interesting. i think -- china, first of all, they would like the war prolonged because it keeps us tied down and we're burning through all our weaponry and all of our military stocks. also, they like a weak russia that's forced to be economically dependent on them, but they don't want a collapsed russia. that's a very bad signal for taiwan that if the west can take russia down. so i think the chinese might be concerned about that, but i think you -- you can't exaggerate how important it

would be if china did that. then this becomes a true world war. it affects every global market. >> right. >> and we're in a completely new world. >> what would be our consequence to that, danielle, what would they be if china intervened? >> we have a robust trade relationship with china. they are unbelievably dependent on exports both to the u.s. and the european union, so they would be testing our resolve. right now we limit certain things that are coming from china. we are trying casually to decouple our economy from the chinese economy, but we haven't done it in any effective way, so they would be testing our willingness to take a lot of pain in order to punish them. it's a very weird call. >> i'm trying to figure out where we are here, peter, because you had this interview with the president after he did this speech and was trying to tone things down and in some ways it matched the rhetoric we heard from -- i want to play

something from avril haines. i referenced it earlier. how she talked about the balloon incident late last week in an interview at columbia university. take a listen. >> how should we think about this? whatever you can say about the balloon, please? [ laughter ] >> i know, it's so crazy, i feel like an episode of "veep," you know? >> here's our director of national intelligence, sort of almost dismissive of how things went. the president is trying to ratchet things up, and 48 hours later, we're on the brink of a world war. >> that's what struck the conversation with the president i had with the president on thursday. the last thing she wants is to rip up the relationship with the united states and with me. the conversations need to continue. direct communication is critical, and then you have

anthony blinken speaking to you just moments ago where he effectively is dialing things up, it appears. it would appear that the relationship is escalating and the point that he wouldn't get to that you tried to pin him down on is what is that new evidence that china is trying to provide lethal aid to russia right now. notably, he won't say it because you remember when this war began in the u.s., antony blinken was quick to say that there was declassified information and russia would invade and they were right on so why not call them out as the evidence would exist and no one can identify what that evidence is. they just said to me, for china, nothing is off the table is their view. >> amna, it does feel like there's a bit of -- do they want to dial things down or do they not? >> to peter's point, i want to see what that intelligence is to back up those claims because secretary blinken was not the only one to make that assessment. we had vice president harris in her speech at munich warning china not to provide that lethal aid. so i'm curious what's driving that overt public stance right now, but we know that the u.s. officials have been concerned about ongoing tacit and some tactical support china has been providing to russia since the

beginning of the war. to tom's point, they made that warning early and very clear and publicly. a lot of that has been clear. we know in the last year china's economic trade with russia has only deepened, and that means imports have increased with some 40% from russia. exports over some 10%. even though they imported less drud crude oil overall, last year they imported more from russia to the tune of $60 billion, and that undermooins the west to further fuel the war in ukraine. >> let me shift the conversation to a larger question. tom, is our domestic politics actually going to ratchet up tensions and you've been with china for us to watch for 30

years in some ways. did we get it wrong? >> did we get the -- >> the entire idea of what we were trying to do with china thinking economic security for china would bring security to the world? >> i think that chapter is not finally written, chuck. what we've seen in china since 1979 to today is originally that china came out and said we will open ourselves to the world, we are going to engage with the world, and we're not going to be a military threat to the world. you know, and that kind of worked for them. they brought 800 million people out of poverty faster than any time in world history and we had no great power war during that period. that starts to change. in 2006 and 2010, first under hu and then under xi. suddenly you get a much more aggressive china. in the south asian sea, you get a china that that's much more difficult and does these things, and i would say to them, how is it working for you? it was 3% last year, like, half. you've triggered now a global ban, basically, on

semi-conductors, which are the oil of the 21st century. china's basically saying we'll deal with it and we'll push back our own. really, i say? that's like telling me the chinese national basketball team will play the global superstars in basketball on semiconductors forever. so i really wonder where they're going with this. >> all right. i'll leave the conversation there. >> up next, nikki haley was the first republican to take on donald trump this week. will trump benefit from a growing field. former governor of maryland, larry hogan, who's mulling his own bid, joins me next. mullings own bid, joins me next

need a backup plan? get plan b one-step. plan b helps prevent pregnancy before it starts by temporarily delaying ovulation—and you can resume your regular birth control right away. i've got this. ♪♪

welcome back. nikki haley formerly launched her presidential bid in south carolina, making one reference to her former boss donald trump, but not so suddenly. it's time for the party to move on. >> i have a particular message for my fellow republicans. we've lost the popular vote in seven of the last eight

presidential elections. well, that ends today. [ cheering ] >> former president trump wasted no time in attacking haley, trying to tie her to hillary clinton and paul ryan. it starts with two clear front-runners, donald trump and former governor ron desantis. trump leads in one recent poll, 46-23 in a wild field, but when it narrows down to two candidates, trump and desantis, trump's lead narrows dramatically. how will the 2024 republican field be? former governor of maryland, larry hogan. welcome back to "meet the press." >> good morning. usually i reserve the questions for the end, but i'll ask up front here. have you made a decision? >> i haven't. i said i'll take a pretty serious look at this, and i'm traveling around the country just trying to get a feel for what republican voters want,

that what americans are looking for, and we'll make a decision in a relatively short period of time. >> i'm interested on what republican voters want. right now if you watch the other potential rivals, it does seem there's only one issue that seems to be unifying on the base, and that's sort of these culture wars and education. here's a sampling. >> go read books like "gender queer" and see what's in there. it's inappropriate. we've armed parents to object to that and having sure they're having education and not indoctrination. >> across the country, parents' rights are being trampled by politically correct nanny states and telling parents that they have no role with their children, the most important decisions. >> there was all this talk about the florida bill, the don't say gay bill. basically what it said you shouldn't talk about gender before third grade. i'm sorry. i don't think that goes far enough. >> my question to you is not whether this is a legitimate issue to be talking about.

it's about whether this is the main issue or not. do you view this as the main issue for 2024? >> no, i think it's an important issue, and i do hear it, and people are concerned about this as i travel across the country because most people just don't think we should be talking about things like sex to young kids, and the parents want to be more involved in the decisions about what their kids are being taught. however, i think some of this rhetoric is, you know -- demanding that things be done a certain way or that you can't say this and can't say that, you've got to be really careful. >> does it feel like you're going to other way? on the one hand, you have governor desantis claiming i don't want this, but i will tell you what you can say and what you can't say. >> i'm a small government common sens conservative, and to me it sounds like big government and authoritarianism.

you have to agree with me, and i'll tell you what you can and can't do. it's an issue. it's not the most important issue. most people are worried about the economy, inflation and they're concerned about crime, but education is one of the things that we've got to talk about. >> i guess the larger question i have for you, and i feel like you really are an old school reagan republican. >> right. >> there were three legs to the stool. strong on national security, strong government, low taxes and the culture issues, and it seems right now it's only the culture issues that unites the party. the party is actually divided on the other two issues. do you agree with that? >> well, i agree, and i've been talking out about the important issues for a long time, and i was a republican governor in the bluest state in america and got things done working across the aisle with democrats. i can tell you it's not what everyone is talking about, but i can tell you some people are making calculation that base primary voters in the trump lane, and that's what republicans want to talk about. you can't dismiss it, but it's not the only thing we're talking about. >> the rnc is trying to get people to pledge and you have to pledge to support the nominee no matter who it is.

you had an interesting exchange with hugh hewitt, and i don't know where you stand on this. where do you stand on this? >> i think it's silly because it's not going to happen. we already said president trump said numerous time he refuses. >> so if he refuses, why shouldn't you. >> he said, well, if you won't be on the debate stage, then president trump won't be on the debate stage, and i don't think anybody believes that that's going to happen, but look, i think i'm a lifelong republican who wants to support the nominee of the party whoever that is, however, i've said before i didn't support trump. i wouldn't support trump and i put country ahead of party and not put someone in that should not be the president. >> if you thought your candidacy would contribute to inadvertently not to run? >> that would be a pretty good reason not to run. i don't care that much about my

future in the republican party. i care more about the republican party, and if we can stop donald trump and elect a commonsense conservative leader, certainly that would be a factor. >> i'm curious, dominion voting released a lot of internal communications inside of fox news. however people want to classify fox news, i'll use the description conservative town square. it is the town square for conservatives. are you concerned that we now have evidence that essentially the moderators of this town square refuse to tell the truth to their viewers because they are afraid of offending them? >> look, i am concerned about it. i don't know all of the details about it. we're seeing this come forward with this dominion case. i've talked to conservative leaders who agreed with what i was saying. i was out there and pretty direct answering these questions about january 6th, that the

election wasn't stolen, and many of them would say it privately, but then they would go out and say almost the complete opposite, and it sounds like that's what some of the hosts on fox news did. now more people are starting to say exactly what they believe. >> governor, you look at it -- the michigan republican party just elected an election denier's chair, the kansas republican party. it feels like the conservative town square is lying to the base and this is what happens. >> there's no question there's a lot of misinformation out there, and i am concerned about some of the parties and people taking over that are believing conspiracy theories, and i think we've got to get back to a bigger tent party that can appeal to more people, otherwise, we'll keep losing elections. >> when is your town hall? is it spring? is it the end of spring?

sometime in the spring? >> sometime this spring, i think, is when you really have to get ramped up. we've been working around the last couple of months. do you think that the fact that it's successful in the state makes it harder for you to get a republican nomination. >> i'm strong with democrats and independents and i left one of the successful -- >> maryland independents and democrats don't vote for president in iowa. >> i got the same points that donald trump did and ran 45 point ahead of him in the general. larry hogan, thank you for coming in and for your perspective. artificial intelligence is creating anxiety about its powers. we're going to download the data and let you decide how worried you should be next. ng for colon cancer. yep. with colon cancer rising in adults under 50, the american cancer society recommends starting to screen earlier, at age 45. i'm cologuard, a noninvasive way to screen at home, on your schedule. and i find 92% of colon cancers. i'm for people 45+ at average risk for colon cancer, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider if cologuard is right for you.

why are 93% of sleep number sleepers very satisfied with their bed? maybe it's because you can gently raise your partner's head to help relieve snoring. false positive and negative results may occur. so, you can both stay comfortable all night. and now, save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. ends monday.

welcome back. "data download" time. technology is constantly transforming our lives. it garners both excitement and skepticism. the recent boom in artificial intelligence is now no exception. so let's start with why we've been hearing so much about ai lately. it's due to one thing, the arrival of something called chatgpt launched late last year. if you've logged onto it, you're not alone. 100 million monthly users already, making it the fastest growing consumer application in history. now, if you're thinking this is the first time ai's been in your life, you're wrong, and most people don't realize it. just 30% recently told a pew survey, correctly, were able to

identify places where ai is a part of their lives. your fitness tracker. that's ai powered. the music recommendations you get on your various playlists, that's ai powered, product recommendations and it's already a big part of on our lives and unlike social media that we're excited about, with ai, not so much. we're more concerned than excited as you can see here and perhaps it has to do with the word artificial. are we ever excited about anything that starts with the word "artificial?" >> this week, senator john fetterman's disclosure that he's undergoing treatment for clinical depression signaled a new issue with mental health issues. thomas eagleton was removed for george mcgovern's running mate after he revealed he'd been treated for depression. here's senator mcgovern's wife eleanor described the moment on our broadcast 51 years ago. >> i remember that first morning when senator and mrs. eagleton were in south dakota with us how our hearts and our minds and all of us just reached out to this man who was going through such a

traumatic experience in revealing to the american public his -- his history of trouble. it made me so furious when people say your husband dumped senator eagleton, there was no possible way to do that, but it was a story of such human drama that no one who was there -- who was not there could even be in a position to judge my husband or senator eagleton. i do say that they both made the decision not for themselves, not for senator mcgovern. he knew it would hurt, not for tom eagleton, but for the american people. for all of you out there. >> in some ways we've come a long way in talking about mental health. the question is, have we come far enough? when we come back, nikki haley may have more than donald trump to contend the nomination.

florida governor ron desantis is already the front-runner even before he's announced. e front-r before he's announced.

everything's changing so quickly. before the xfinity 10g network, we didn't have internet that let us play all at once. every device? in every room? why are you up here? when i was your age, we couldn't stream a movie when the power went out. you're only a year older than me. you have no idea how good you've got it. huh? what a time to be alive. introducing the next generation 10g network. only from xfinity. the future starts now.

welcome back. well, we had a presidential launch this week coming up, and what i thought was interesting about it welcome back. well, we had a presidential launch this week coming up, and what i thought was interesting about it is that nikki haley got major candidate treatment. >> yeah. >> and i think that's a big deal. the one thing that surprised me a little bit is her decision not to take on trump. >> she got that treatment because she's the first to announce. she's the first to challenge former president trump. let's be clear about that. that's a longer runway for people to take a look at her. but nikki haley always had that complicated relationship with donald trump where she was anti-trump and then she worked with him, and since she left and launched her election campaign, she's not anti-trump. she's occupying an entirely different lane altogether. they have the desantis truck and the trump truck. she's in the parallel lane. she's sort of anti-trump without saying so and not into the

culture warrior stuff, but also really not differentiating herself when it comes to policy. there's a lane there and more than half the public polls say more than half of them have said they don't want to vote for former president trump. >> peter, the race is heating up. in the next week, we'll have a lot of presidential candidates around the country here doing fund-raising stuff. ron desantis goes to chicago, the suburbs of chicago tomorrow and will possibly talk to some donors, and things are starting to heat up. tim scott is headed to iowa as well. >> two south carolinians and nikki haley leaned more into the culture war stuff than i thought she would. she didn't distinguish herself from donald trump and that's what she'll need to do as a challenge and having been on the trail, what a grassroots leader in north carolina, said, and this is why perhaps they think she doesn't have to go to trump

specifically is the republicans in her state, 90% of what donald trump did, but hated 90% of what trump said. so perhaps it's safe not to save anything in terms of policy when she spoke to sean hannity this week and just to be a different representative of the party. >> i think it was interesting that governor hogan admitted that he thought his candidacy would contribute to donald trump, that it would be a reason not to run. >> that was a gentlemanly thing to say. you don't see a lot of that in politics and gentlemen tend not to finish first in politics. i think what's interesting about all of this is that you will see a battle for the soul of the republican party, and at least i really hope so. >> will you? >> so -- you know, there's a reason i'm sitting here. i'm a foreign policy nerd. we weren't talking about foreign policy, and there was a post-trump split on the party now with the isolationists and the tucker carlson wing of the party who are not interested in supporting ukraine and who are not interested in us having a

stronger military and who want to cut defense spending. nikki haley is of the old school reagan stuff on that. she's solid on the culture stuff and she's solid on society and good on economics and she's good on foreign policy. i want to see that fight happen inside the party. >> i think the question, tom, if the fight happened in 16 and trump won? >> just in one of the things in reading up on nikki haley -- >> no, absolutely. >> she was against trump originally and said we shouldn't have a president that can't denounce the kkk. then she was for trump and then served in his administration. then after january 6th she was against trump, and then she was for trump, and then she was against trump in these coming-out interviews. she describes herself as tough as nails, but in her opening

birksd dan from "the washington post" today, she described the 1619 project in "the new york times" being over the top on racism. she talked about the charleston and the black church, and she didn't mention that she was the one that took down the confederate flag. >> that did strike me as tough as nails. >> to my day job, what's striking to me is there's a lot of questions about joe biden as we talk about 2024 right now. i was in north carolina a few weeks ago and even democrats who love what the party has done, every one of them brought up his age unsolicited. the concern about his age right now. he checked off a couple of key boxes and he had a good physical and his doctor says he's vigorous and healthy at the state of the union and democrats say he performed well as well. two-thirds of americans are very uncomfortable with him running again, we are told by those close to the president that he would follow the obama model in terms of the announcement. obama waited 13 months after the announcement to start campaigning.

he has the benefits of incumbency. he could make an announcement in april and wait until next year to get on the trail. >> the strangest thing about the democratic side, the rank-and-file voters clearly would like to see some other candidates, but washington, no. the democrat elite is, like, squashing it. >> this is the gap, right, between what we're seeing with the electorate and where the candidates are showing up with the field and yes, you're right. even among democratic voters they have reservations about supporting mr. biden for another campaign, but this generational issue is one we hear again and again. we heard it from nikki haley, we heard it from tim scott, and we heard it from governor huckabee sanders in her response to the state of the union address. these are republicans saying let's move on, new generation of leadership. we'll see. >> it is sitting there for them and the turn the page argument and it worked for barack obama and we'll see if it works. before we go, on this week's

podcast, i spoke about nikki haley's campaign launch, and wait until you find out what stuff's in the air all the time, and after the broadcast we'll get more from tom friedman. subscribe to the chuck todd podcast by scanning the qr code. we'll be back next week because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." ♪♪ in the case of russia's actions in ukraine, we have