many americans who landed on omaha beach. and we spoke earlier before, and you mentioned that one of those gentlemen was able to visit you here, one of the veterans. this is part of history which puts us in the world that we are in today. and as the president just said, there are many challenges in this world. and over the past few days. we have one main objective, which is the geopolitical situation. mr. president, i really wish to thank you for making changes to your schedule to meet with us so quickly. i think we've made very substantive steps forward during our discussions, and this is a major step in what we're experiencing today. we had a

video conference with all of the g-7 leaders, which was an opportunity for us to discuss this matter. three days after the russian war in ukraine and to express our support for president zelenskyy to the ukrainian people, but also to speak and share about our desire for a lasting peace. this is what we have spoken about very forcibly over the past few weeks. we thought that this war was only going to last a few weeks when it broke out in 2022. we admire greatly the courage of the ukrainian people. and mr. president, i wish to thank you for this. >> and the. >> idea you mentioned that there are responsibilities on europe's side, and indeed we have invested 128 billion in aid to

ukraine and the ukrainians. ukraine has been able to hold the front of our collective security. it's fought over these past few years for its independence and for its sovereignty, but also for our collective security, because i think that no one in this room wants to live in a world where it's the law of the strongest and international borders can be violated from one day to the next by anyone. over the past few hours. and as you mentioned this, mr. president, we've been able to see a few things take shape. first of all, allow me to commend you on your decision to work with president zelensky and to conclude this agreement that's so important for the us and ukraine on rare earths, critical minerals, but also having substantive conversations with president zelensky during this key phase of achieving this deal, which is a major commitment to ukraine's sovereignty. and i think that's

very commendable. we also have a shared desire to build peace. >> through. >> okay, we will have this responsibility. this is ten years after the war started in crimea. and then we saw the events in donbas and the donbas region. and along the northern part of the country. we want to save lives. we want to bring prisoners back and bring back families and children, because there is also humanitarian tragedy affecting the ukrainian people. we had lengthy discussions with the president, and we spoke about our desire to bring an end to conflicts, to have a truce that is measurable, verifiable, and that enables negotiation of a lasting peace. what we will discuss not only ukraine's reconstruction, its territories, but also the security guarantees, meaning

maintaining peace over the long term. as i said to the president, we have experienced peace accords that were only ceasefires without ensuring security guarantees. minsk one and two. and we want to make sure this doesn't happen again. and i know that the president has expressed the desire to be a player for peace in the region. i've spoken with some 30 european leaders and allies in recent days. we want to bring together these allies, allies, rather, and share the same vision. this peace must not mean a surrender of ukraine. it must not mean a ceasefire without guarantees. this peace must allow for ukrainian sovereignty and allow ukraine to negotiate with other stakeholders regarding the issues it affects. that affects it rather. but it is also a country in which we need to shoulder our

responsibilities so that we ensure security and stability for ukraine and for the entire region and for us europeans. this is an existential issue. we also spoke about these issues at length with the president. we've worked with president zelenskyy and gotten to some of the details of the various phases of the negotiation, and we've also been able to speak about some of this work with our british partners to. talk about deployments of peace forces on ukrainian soil, which are part of these security guarantees. other countries are ready to join in this effort. solidarity and support from the u.s. will be crucial to this. and i thank you, mr. president, for beginning to work with us on this issue and the agreement that you are preparing to sign with ukraine and with all the discussions we've had, our very

solid guarantees that we are understood and that we have the same wish peace as soon as possible, lasting, solid peace for everyone and the renewal of an international situation where we are all able to shoulder our responsibilities. europeans shouldering their responsibilities alongside their american allies who will shoulder their own responsibilities. i also wanted to be very clear, mr. president, about europe's commitment. we have committed to building a lasting peace. as europeans, we have committed to being stakeholders in in these security guarantees. and we are also well aware that europeans need to do more for security in europe, for defense in europe, and to more fairly share the security board and burden that your country has been carrying for so many years. mr.

president, you know how much friendship i showed towards you and i have towards you since your first term? europe is very clear eyed about this. we know what we need to do as europeans, given the threats surrounding us and the responsibilities that we must shoulder. we spoke about the versailles, which allowed the europeans to take a historic step and increase their investments. europeans are ready to do even more and to go even further. and several leaders said that to me before i came here to meet you, mr. president. dear donald, you spoke about this peace through strength. we fully share that because we must recognize the sacrifices made by the ukrainian people and what we owe to them. the president and i also spoke about economic matters and our desire to see more prosperity in the united

states and in europe. we had discussions which will be carried on by our teams, our ministers and secretaries, to flesh out some of those ideas. but the idea is to have fair competition and no bias within competition between our industries. now, the american and european economies are extremely intertwined. some 1.5 billion in trade, a trillion rather in goods and services. and i know you've spoken about wanting to look at the balance of payments. we also have a trade deficit. and i know that we need to look not only at goods, but also digital items and goods which you export. and we want to make a sincere

commitment towards fair competition where we have smooth trade and more investments. you already invest a great deal in france, and france is the fifth most the fifth largest investor in the united states. and i would like to recognize here all of the american investors who announced investments, some $120 billion that were announced at the ai summit. this is our wish. we want to have more prosperity on both sides of the atlantic. we have a shared agenda in that regard. we also spoke about the middle east, among other subjects. and here again, we have the same desire. we don't want to see iran obtain nuclear weapons. we don't want. or rather, we want an approach with partners in the region that we can trust. given iran's nuclear

activities, we want to limit its ballistic capabilities and avoid any type of regional destabilization. with respect to syria and iraq, we also share the same desire. we don't want to see islamic terrorist groups resume any of their activities, because for some time our armies have very bravely been engaged in the gulf, as you have led, and contributions have been significant and helped stability in the region. and i say this with great sincerity. france was affected by a terrorist attack in 2015, which was linked to the terrorist activity in syria. and we are in that region at your side to work for more security. ladies and gentlemen, we had extremely productive discussions this morning during the conference, and we spoke with our ministers and counselors and

advisors. and i wish to say, after speaking with president trump, i am fully believe that there is a path forward. we share the same beliefs. we know what work needs to be done, and in the weeks to come, we will work on that. our teams will come together in various formats to make sure that we have this solid, lasting peace with great strength. mr. president, thank you so much for welcoming me here today. thank you so much for these productive discussions and for your commitment. thank you. dear donald. >> thank you very much. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. thank you very much. brian, would you like to ask a question? go ahead. >> welcome, president. >> i just. >> want. >> to touch upon real quickly. >> the harvard poll. >> that came out that had thank you very much, the harvard poll that came out had you up nine

plus points and all of your agenda that you ran on. you're accomplishing that. you've got the support of the iraqi people, including stopping the war in ukraine. if you can comment on the latest harvard poll, i appreciate that. >> well, i was honored by it. it was a big poll, and it's usually a poll that leans on the other side of things, the other side of the world, so to speak. but the harvard poll is a respected poll, and it has us not only leading, but leading by a lot and leading on every single issue that we've we've talked about. and as i said, we've become the party of common sense. and i think that's a very important element in our common sense, because what's happening in the world and even in this country, some of the things that took place, many of them are now canceled and the rest are being canceled as we speak. but we've moved very rapidly and i think very effectively. so i was honored by that poll. thank you very much. appreciate it. mr. president, go ahead. please go ahead. >> mr. president. you said

before that you would like to see a russia. >> yes. go ahead. >> are the. >> conditions that you want to meet and every year when you're meeting in saudi arabia with president putin, will that happen regardless of any progress on the ukrainian file? >> yeah. i think the meeting in saudi arabia was a fantastic one. we met with the crown prince, who's a fantastic young guy. he's young, but with great imagination and a tremendously respected all over the world. and he goes right to the king. and the king is incredible. gotten to be friends with both of them very much. and they want to see this ended, and they're going all out to make sure that it is ended. i think russia likewise, i've spoken to president putin and my people are dealing with him constantly, and his people in particular,

and they want to do something. i mean, that's what i do. i do deals my whole life is deals. that's all i know is deals. and i know when somebody wants to make and when somebody doesn't. i will say this before i came here, there was no communication with russia whatsoever. and russia wasn't answering calls. they were not talking to anybody. they wouldn't talk to anybody. and people sort of accepted that as being that they want to go forward and just keep going without stop. but when i got here, one of the first calls i made was to president putin, and we were treated with great respect. and they want to they want to end this war. so that's a big thing, because i didn't know if i could say that, but it's a big thing. they want to do it. and the group in the front row that i introduced, they're very all very active in it. and we're working on deals right now, transactions right now. and in particular the big one is to get the war stopped, whether it's ceasefire or direct to an agreement. and i'd like to

go directly to an agreement. but a cease fire will always happen a little bit quicker. and every day you're saving thousands or at least hundreds, but thousands in some cases lives. so we want to see if we can get that done very quickly. yes. for the president, please. yes. >> thank you. correspondent based in paris. question for both of you. actually, mr. macron, you were one of the last western leaders to speak to putin before ukraine's invasion. what advice? what recommendation could you make to president trump to make sure that this time you can get strong enough guarantees? sorry, from putin to get a peace deal that lasts this time? and mister president trump, what makes you think you can trust putin in those negotiations? thank you.

>> look, i will never give any advice to president trump. we have friendly and trustful discussion. but my experience with president putin is the following. number one, i always think it's good to have discussion with other leaders, and especially when you disagree. i stopped my discussion with president putin after russia and the war crimes because i considered that, i mean, we had nothing to get from him in that time. now, this is a chance. there is a big chance because there is a new us administration. so this is a new context. so there is good reason for president trump to reengage with president putin. but my experience is the following. and i shared it with president trump and the team in 2014. our predecessors negotiated peace with president putin. but because of the lack of guarantees and especially security guarantees, president putin violated this peace. and i

had several discussions, especially beginning of 2022, several times seven hours with president putin, 15 days before. launching of the attack. it denied everything, but we didn't have security guarantees. so this is why being strong and having deterrence capacities is the only way to be sure it will be respected. and i insisted on that. and this is why i believe that the us has the capacity to do so. and this is why i think we should never say i will never send it in boots on the ground, because you give a blank check to violate any type of commitment. so i think it's good to have discussion. i think it's useful to have negotiation. i think it's super important to go to the peace. but my strong point was to say, let's try to

get something first, which is which can be assessed, checked and verified. and let's be sure that we build sufficient guarantees in the short run. and this is where we are ready to be engaged. as for france, a lot of my european colleagues are ready to be engaged, but we do need this american backup because this is part of the credibility of the security guarantees. and this is our collective deterrence capacity. and i have the feeling that the president has this capacity. >> i think. >> it's very. >> much to. >> the benefit of russia to make a deal. and i feel that we will do that. it is what it is. again, it's a war that should have never been started. it's a war that would not have been started if i were president. but it did start, and it's at a terrible level where cities are are burned down and shot down to the ground. it looks like demolition sites, a whole big

pile of demolition sites. and we got to get it stopped. too many people, too much agony. the whole culture is destroyed when you rip down some of those ancient, really ancient or near ancient buildings. it's so sad to see, but i think it's very much to the benefit of this tremendous distrust on both sides. that's why it's good that i'm coming in now, but i think it's to the very much benefit of russia to make a deal and to go on with go on with leading russia in a very positive way. that's that's what you have to do. but i really believe that he wants to make a deal, maybe wrong, but i believe he wants to make a deal. yeah. go ahead please. >> mr. president, next week there's a key deadline. >> for. >> your canada. >> and mexico. >> trip for the. >> i believe those countries have done enough on the. >> border to. >> stop those from taking effect. and for president macron, i'm wondering if you

believe that this critical minerals deal with ukraine represents a de facto security guarantee by the united states, since the us would have an interest in protecting those reserves in ukraine. thank you. >> we're on time with the tariffs, and it seems like that's moving along very rapidly. we've been mistreated very badly by many countries, not just canada and mexico. we've been taken advantage of. we were led by, in some cases, fools because anybody that would sign documents like they signed when they were able to take advantage of the american people, like has happened over the last long period of time, except for a little four year period that took place four years ago. but anybody that would agree to allow this to happen to our country should be ashamed of themselves. no, the tariffs are going forward, on time, on schedule. this is an abuse that took place for many, many years. and i'm not even blaming the other countries that did this. i blame our leadership

for allowing it to happen. i mean, you know, who can blame them if they made these great deals with the united states, took advantage of the united states on on manufacturing, on just about everything, every aspect that you can imagine they took advantage of. i look at some of these agreements. i read them at night and i'd say, who would ever sign a thing like this? so the tariffs will go forward. yes. and we're going to make up a lot of territory. we're going to all we want is reciprocal. we want reciprocity. we want to have the same. so if somebody charges us we charge them. it's very simple. but it'll be very good for our country. our country will be extremely liquid and rich again. plus we're doing other things. as you know, we're finding tremendous waste, fraud and abuse at levels that nobody thought possible. you're seeing what's going on. and that was also part of the harvard poll. do you agree with what president trump is doing with elon and

others that are looking for the waste, fraud and abuse? and the numbers were staggering. it was like 70% to 2%. everybody wants to find out they don't like it. and, you know, the radical left or whoever it may be starts screaming about the constitution, but it has nothing to do with the constitution. it has to do with fairness to this country. it has to do with being ripped off. and when you read the things that all of these billions and i mean many billions, hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent on, that's all you have to do is stand up here and read. i could stand up all day and read the kind of things where we're spending all of this money. the good news is that when you think of how rich a nation we can be when we get rid of this, you know, sometimes you buy a company and you'll see it was really well run. it's they accounted for every penny. well, not much you can do there. you get yourself a bad deal. this one is the exact opposite. tremendous fraud, tremendous waste. and when you think of

what it is, you know, elon uses an expression caring. if we had people that cared, just cared a little bit when they did contracts, when they negotiated with outside vendors for on behalf of the united states, that's what i'm doing now. i'm negotiating for the people of the united states. so we're doing a great job of it. i will say we found it will be hundreds of billions of dollars of waste and fraud and abuse. thank you. please. >> look, i think this discussion is a very important one. first, because it's important for the us and it will be a good occasion for first, very important meeting between president trump and president zelensky. second, i think it's there is a lot of economic upside on both sides. and third, de facto, there is a recognition of ukrainian sovereignty, a recognition of the ukrainian interests. and this is de facto a very important alignment of interests. now, the security guarantees will be negotiated in due time in a full fledged

package of a peace security. but this peace, as it is now written and negotiated, and as this meeting is scheduled, is an important step forward. full fledged peace agreement. >> okay. >> please go ahead. >> good. president. >> mr. president trump. >> president trump, president macron. >> to make a deal. >> with putin. so when you do a. deal it's a win win deal. what are you giving to him and. >> what is he. >> going to give you to america. and i was impressed by the way you referred to notre dame, and that you were impressed by the reconstruction of notre dame. a lot of americans have sent money to paris to participate to the reconstruction of notre dame. as the president of the united states, are you going to contribute to the reconstruction of ukraine? monsieur? president macron. >> president macron, what for

you, is the main area of progress in your meeting with president trump? can you confirm that there is an agreement to send european peacekeeping troops? will france participate in that? how many troops? what would they be doing? would this represent a great danger to send french and european troops to ukraine? >> well, i guess it's a little strange question, because you ask whether or not we're going to, on behalf of the united states, contribute to ukraine. i mean, we're in there for about $350 billion. i think that's a pretty big contribution. i do appreciate the first part of your question, however, because i think they've done an incredible job with the cathedral of notre dame. i think the president has done i know he headed it up and i know how hard he worked. and it took a period of time, but really not a long period of time, considering what that was so delicate, so beautiful. and i was there and i saw the work and i'm very good at construction. i know good

construction, i know bad construction. they did a beautiful job. and this man has to be given a lot of credit for that. it's an incredible cathedral. most people thought it couldn't be saved, and if it was, it would have to be built in a different form. and we didn't want to see a different form. we wanted to see the same form that you built. so i just want to congratulate you. that was an amazing job. i don't think you've gotten enough credit for it. some day you will, some day you will. >> thank you. donald. merci beaucoup. >> and thank you very much. to go back to your question, today's discussion showed several areas of progress. first, we have been working a great deal with president zelensky to have a proposal that's acceptable to ukraine. president trump has confirmed that he will be meeting with president zelensky very soon to finalize the agreement on critical minerals and rare earths, and to speak together

about that matter. that's a very important step forward. the second thing is that during our discussions, we were able to go into some of the details about the proposal that we have just made. to have a truce, a peace, and be able to measure that and then structure our discussions on that basis. france and several other european countries, along with ukraine, are hard at work to build this lasting peace with very specific points, including security guarantees. the territories that belong to ukraine, the issue of reconstruction, the economy and critical minerals. we've been able to go into the details of those proposals. the third area of progress, which really mark a turning point, is the fact that we were able to talk about the details of the security guarantees, and the president

has shown this over the past few days, and he said so a moment ago. we want peace. he wants peace, we want peace, peace swiftly, but we don't want an agreement that is weak. the fact that there are europeans that are ready to engage, to provide for these security guarantees. and now there's a clear american message that the us, as an ally, is ready to provide that solidarity for that approach. that's a turning point, in my view, and that is one of the great areas of progress that we've made during this trip and during this discussion. when it comes to troops in the past, a year ago, specifically, we saw a reason to talk about sending troops to for strategic regions. today, when we talk about troops, we're talking about sending them in after we've negotiated a lasting peace. and once we have that solid, lasting

peace that's part of an agreement signed by ukraine, signed by russia, and for which we will provide the guarantees. then at that point, and recently, francis worked with the uk to provide its contributions. we've worked on plans, we've worked with our militaries not to go to the front lines, not to go into occupied territories, but as a show of support to show that we have a negotiated peace signed by both sides, and that is a peace we will preserve. so these would be peaceful deployments of troops, not for combat. these would be deployments of an assurance force. they would be limited, but they show solidarity. i have also spoken with all of our allies, and they are european and non-european allies who are ready and willing to take part in that effort. countries have helped ukraine

maintain its military capabilities in terms of the number of soldiers it has equipment, whereas others have provided logistical support on the ground. the question is whether or in what form the us will contribute. and during our discussions and during the discussions with russia, we've understood that this would be acceptable to russia. and that's a very important area of progress. and that means that in this context, the europeans will shoulder their part of the burden, their share of the burden. we have a strong alliance that we have built over the decades. we have our solidarity and we have deterrence capacities. what does it mean? would it be dangerous? if there is an agreement signed by ukraine and russia, thanks to the efforts of president trump? and if we provide the guarantees and russia violates the

agreement, then it would be in conflict with everyone who is engaged in the peace process. and that is a change. that was something we did not see in the past. that's not what we saw in 2014. so that is the real change that we're marking. we have this deterrence capacity on the american side. we have the capacity for engagement on the european side. and that's something we're going to continue working on together. it's not dangerous, but it's credible. it's less dangerous than things that could happen in the long term. and i think this is what we need to do to ensure security. and i say this very clearly. we're also talking about security for europeans. i've been saying this for weeks now. if we do not guarantee the security of this territory within europe, then how can we guarantee our own security for one and all? and we live just

1500km from ukraine, and the germans and polish are even closer. so our collective security is important. we need to answer this call for europeans to be more engaged, and americans will be there still in solidarity. europeans are working for their collective security. but i really think this was a turning point today in our discussions. >> emmanuel, thank you very much. great job, and it's been wonderful being with you. and say hello to your beautiful wife and we will see you again soon. we'll be speaking often. we'll get this thing worked out. we're going to get it done. so important and great job. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> good to. >> be with you i'm katy tur. >> that's president. >> donald trump and french president emmanuel macron. they're having a bilateral news conference with reporters. macron said that he believes this meeting with president trump was a turning point. we'll

figure out exactly what he means by a turning point and what evidence there is to back that up. today, though, does mark exactly three years since russia launched its full scale invasion of ukraine. three years now, and after three years of a united front against vladimir putin from washington and the european union, everyone standing side by side, donald trump is turning his back on both ukraine and europe, excluding western allies from peace talks lying about who started the war and demanding ukraine pay the united states back. so where does that leave leaders like french president emmanuel macron, who was clearly trying to convince president trump that vladimir putin is not a cool and powerful guy, that he's a brutal dictator who is playing you, president trump arguing it is in america's best interest to stick with europe, stick with ukraine. and he did say, emmanuel macron, that today's meeting with the president was a turning point. it's also presumably the same

thing that uk prime minister keir starmer will do later this week, when he takes his turn at the white house on thursday. so donald trump appeared to listen today. maybe we'll see. but what happens if he changes his mind again, if he turns his back on what emmanuel macron was just saying in that news conference. where does that leave ukraine? where does it leave nato and where does it leave us, the american public? joining us now to try to figure this out, nbc news white house correspondent vaughn hillyard in berlin, nbc news international correspondent raf sanchez following the german elections there, what they mean for all of this. and founding partner and washington correspondent julia ioffe. so a macron there sounded very positive. vaughn. he was clearly trying to play to donald trump's vanity, talking about how good of a partner he's been, the memories they've had together. he was also talking about how europe needed to stand up more, talking about the minerals deal that donald trump wants to make with ukraine, widely panned by

foreign policy experts. but some moves from macron to say, hey, listen, this is not such a bad idea. can you just straighten this out for us? what what can we say, it appears, has come from this meeting, right. >> because to a certain extent, there's an acknowledgment that if a rare earth minerals deal were to be signed between ukraine and the united states, effectively, that would increase the us's own interest in having what would amount to a security agreement to protect ukraine in the future, because they would be protecting their own resources. and of course, that is where you see president macron wholly understanding that they are negotiating with somebody in president trump, whose commitment to ukraine is rather imperative to the future of ukraine's defenses and the region's defenses against further russian aggression and the posture. i think that you saw not only during this press conference, but also the 30 minutes in the oval office just about two hours ago, i think is

striking because in many ways, you saw president macron tout the relationship that the g-7 has in their phone call that they engaged in this morning, but then in their also the bilat between president macron and president trump here this afternoon, in the one moment where you saw him interject was when president trump boosted the idea that somehow the us had invested almost three times the amount of aid to ukraine than the eu has, and that the eu is doing it in the form of a loan. when the us was getting the bad end of the deal, when president macron jumped in to set the record straight, and saying that the eu has in fact contributed 60% of the financial assistance to ukraine's efforts, and that it has not been in the form of a loan to which you saw president trump sort of shrug there. but that was the first time that we have seen a foreign leader really push back against a claim made by the president. but other than that, you saw, by and large, him holding understanding in there and his agreement with

president trump in the direction in which these negotiations are moving. >> julia, it was also interesting is that macron, who, to be fair, had kept up communications with vladimir putin longer than pretty much anybody else after the war started. he said his line was what happened in bucha, the slaughter there and the raping, the awful stories that happened from russian soldiers on ukrainians in bucha. and that's when he stopped. but now he's saying on this three year anniversary that it is time to reengage with vladimir putin. would he be saying that if donald trump did not win the white house. >> i doubt. >> he would be. i think that this is basically him responding, as he said, to a new american reality. he addressed this head on in this press conference. he said, i stopped talking to him because he was lying essentially. and to von's point, macron talked about how we tried to negotiate peace with him in 2014, and he didn't even have to finish the rest of the sentence, because we know where

we are now. 11 years later, we're still ukraine is still at war with russia, right? despite any negotiations putin has entered into, which is what everybody has been warning about. but i guess macron's point is if trump is going to be negotiating with putin anyway, then europe should be at the table because a it affects europe's security first and foremost, at least when it comes to the us and the west, and also because they have underwritten 60% of ukrainian aid. so, you know, it's either you can condemn the talks all you want or you, you know, join them and try to get your point across, get yourself heard. >> sanctions on russia now for three years pretty heavy sanctions. but they have been able to continue waging this war. they've been getting help from the north koreans. they've been getting help from the iranians and from china. could they continue on that path if the us was still standing by

nato, still standing by ukraine, staying on the path it had been on until donald trump was elected, would there come a point where vladimir putin would be left with no other option than to pull out of the war himself? >> i doubt that there have been several prognoses that 2025 was going to be the year that the going got easier for ukraine, both because some of the weapons they ordered early on in the war. again, american weapons made in america by americans in america would be coming online, would be shipped to ukraine. finally. and because russia would be running out of money, it's not just that the north koreans and the chinese are helping them. it's also that india, for example, is buying their oil and countries like turkey and other central asian countries like kazakhstan, armenia, are helping russia bypass sanctions by being kind

of shadow importers for russia. and one of the reasons that russia is able to pay for this war, to continue to pay for this war, is it does have vast energy resources that the world still needs, and most of the world does not really care about this war the way that the west does. and russia's just spending, spending, spending, inflation is crazy in russia right now. it's just been the economy has been flush with cash because of this defense spending. and there have been prognoses that this money would run out. but i don't know that that alone would be enough for putin to stop fighting because he doesn't care about economics. first, he cares about this imperialist project first. >> so the question is, if the us does completely back out, and i know french president emmanuel macron is saying, you know, we had a good meeting today and we i believe this is a turning point. but donald trump is very famous for always agreeing with the last person that he that he

talks to. so we'll see what happens after this. if europe had to stand up on its own. i'll give this question to ralph sanchez. are they going to be able to do that? because the question has been, is there public support among european nations to keep helping ukraine? and i think the german election was something of a test of that. can can you can you infer anything from what happened there? >> so katie anecdote not data, but you'll be able to see behind me the iconic brandenburg gate lit up here in the very heart of berlin, in the colors of the ukrainian flag. and actually just finished here was a very large, very noisy rally of several thousand germans turning out to show their solidarity with ukraine three years into the full scale invasion, i would say these people were here to protest president putin, but a lot of them were also there to protest president trump. we saw a lot of signs in english, one of them saying putin's russia is the aggressor, aggressor in ukraine, which is a pointed message given that over the weekend, several senior trump administration officials really were not able to say those words

that putin's russia started this war in terms of capabilities. katie, the europeans are nowhere near where they would need to be to stand alone militarily without the united states. they're very open about that. absolutely. critical assets like air refueling, missile defense, certain types of long term missiles, long range missiles. the europeans are just almost completely dependent on the united states. but what you are seeing here in europe is an increasing sense of urgency about breaking that dependance. it was very interesting watching the french president from here in berlin taking a sort of non-confrontational approach to donald trump, trying to flatter him where he could point towards areas of agreement because the likely next leader of germany last night, just minutes after exit polls, pointed to his election victory, was absolutely blunt in his assessment of the

crisis in the u.s. european relationship. his name is friedrich mertz. he is from the center right. he's the head of the christian democrats, angela merkel's old party. his party got the most votes. they are likely going to lead the next coalition government. but just a few minutes after that exit poll, he went into a german television studio, and he said, it is very clear to him that the trump administration does not care about the fate of europe. he said it is going to be his top priority as the leader of europe's largest economy, to strengthen europe so it can forge an independent path from the united states, he said he is not at all confident that nato will be able to continue in its current form, and he talked about the fact that both vice president vance and elon musk pretty openly supported the far right in this german election. and he went on to say that the election interference from washington was just as shameful as the election interference from moscow. so these are very stark words from a traditional american ally, from a leader on

the center right, who really feels that the relationship between the united states and its nato allies in western europe is in a very, very dark place right now. >> that is crucial. let's bring in new york times chief white house correspondent peter baker. he's also an msnbc political analyst. peter, i want to bring you into this conversation, but i'm going to start big with you because you just walked out of that news conference between the french president and donald trump, the american president. what stood out to you? >> well, what stood. >> out, of course, was. >> president macron's very, very strenuous. effort to keep this. >> on a friendly basis. they hugged, they shook hands. they smiled. >> they called. >> each other friend. >> macron referred. >> to trump as dear donald. >> they emphasized their shared values. >> but in fact, if you listen. >> carefully, you heard. >> how much they. diverge on. >> ukraine, right? >> as you, i think, probably. reported already. >> president macron, earlier. >> in the day. >> in the oval office. >> said it was russia that is the aggressor. and whereas president trump was asked if

putin is a dictator, given that he calls zelenskyy a dictator, he said, well, i use these words. i don't use these words lightly. meaning he wouldn't call putin a dictator. they also disagreed on aide. trump repeated something he keeps saying, which is not true, that the united states has spent $350 billion in europe, only $100 billion. that's just not true. the aid package numbers that we've seen from analysts show that the united states is actually spending a little bit less than europe. and macron reached over at one point during the oval office session to tap president trump on the arm to say, no, that's not the case. we're spending real money here. so he he corrected trump in a gentle way, in a way to maintain the friendship. but the differences are so stark. what happened in the un today? france joined a resolution condemning the russian invasion. the united states didn't. who did the united states vote with? they voted with russia, north korea and belarus. >> russia, north korea and belarus. the united states voted. is there any other? has there any ever been another time

in history where we voted alongside russia, belarus and north korea? >> not against our european ally? certainly not that i can recall. and this is i think the 93 countries voted for this resolution. we were, you know, in a relatively small minority with some of the worst actors in the world. so it tells you how isolated the united states is when it comes to its new position by trump on who is responsible for this invasion. now, you know, there's an effort here to not push trump too far. that's what you saw macron do today. that's why he rushed here, i think, to see trump as early as he could. keir starmer, the british prime minister, will be here later in the week. i imagine he will reinforce the same message. president duda of poland was here over the weekend, went to cpac to try to see trump there, trying to keep trump from giving away the store, in effect with whatever negotiations happen with russia. since trump is not involved in the europeans at the table, much less the ukrainians. >> peter, can you help us understand what the end goal is here, why donald trump is still

so warm towards vladimir putin, why he continues to believe his word over everybody else's? we saw this during the first administration. it was confounding and it's still just as confounding. why would he say that russia didn't start this war? when there's it? they did. we watched it happen unfold in real time. why? why does he continue to side with vladimir putin? what's the end game? >> yeah, i mean that's one of the enduring mysteries of this trump presidency, both all the way back to nine years ago and beyond. even. in fact, his affinity for vladimir putin has never waned. regardless of whatever putin has done, he has. every time there has been a choice seemingly sided with russia over european allies in the first term, there were still sanctions. there were still actions taken by the united states government, but by people below trump. when trump actually heard about them, sometimes he would object, but they like to claim now. well, he was really tough on russia. it wasn't him. it was the people below him, the people below him last time. they're not here this time. the people who were skeptical of

russia in the first term, they're not in this government. and so he is following his instincts. his instincts are side with the strong over the weak. he has demonstrated time and again that he has an affinity for dictators and autocrats, people like sisi of egypt and erdogan of turkey. ms. he just praised him in the east room as a, you know, tremendously respected guy, ignoring the fact that he was responsible for the murder of a journalist for the washington post. so, yeah, i think he has a history here, obviously. and he looks at the european allies with skepticism, if not outright hostility. >> peter baker trying to make sense of the un make sensible put it that way. peter baker, thank you very much. raf and von and julia, thank you guys as well. still ahead for more organized protests to contentious town halls. what the contentious town halls. what the gop is facing from voters amid life, diabetes, there's no slowing down. each day is a unique blend of people to see and things to do. that's why you choose glucerna

to help manage blood sugar response. uniquely designed with carbsteady. glucerna. bring on the day. if you have generalized myasthenia gravis, picture what life could look like with... vyvgart hytrulo, a subcutaneous injection that takes about 30 to 90 seconds. for one thing, could it mean more time for you? vyvgart hytrulo can improve daily abilities and reduce muscle weakness with a treatment plan that's personalized to you. do not use vyvgart hytrulo if you have a serious allergy to any of its ingredients. it can cause serious allergic reactions like trouble breathing and decrease in blood pressure leading to fainting and allergic reactions such as rashes, swelling under the skin, shortness of breath, and hives. the most common side effects are respiratory and urinary tract infections, headache, and injection site reactions. it may increase the risk of infusion-related reactions and infection. tell your doctor if you have a history of infections or symptoms of an infection.

talk to your neurologist about vyvgart hytrulo for gmg and picture your life in motion. this? >> have you checked single care? whenever my customers ask how to get a better price on their meds, i tell them about single care. it's a free app accepted at pharmacies nationwide. >> before i pick up my prescription, i always check the single care price. >> it's quick, easy, and totally free to use. >> single care can literally beat my insurance copay. >> you just search for your prescription and show your single care coupon at the pharmacy. >> so i just show the coupon and get this price. >> that's right. go to care.com and start saving today. >> meet norman, he's. >> part jack russell. >> and part tornado. >> meet the bissell crosswave hydro steam. it's part. vacuum mop. steamer and from the #1 rated brand in cordless outdoor power, the ego zero-turn riding mower with e-steer technology. drives like a car. turns on a dime. and

it cuts up to 2.5 acres on a single charge. find an ego retailer near you. speaker: my little miracle is beckett. [christina perri, "a thousand years"] i have died every day waiting for you. we wouldn't be where we are without saint jude. and in turn, we wouldn't be where we are without those people that have donated. do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy - even a term policy - for an immediate cash payment. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized we needed a way to supplement our income. if you have $100,000 or more of life insurance, you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit coventrydirect.com to find out if your policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance.g. fabletis

is there's something for everybody. get any two leggings for just $24 when you sign up as a new fabletics vip.

>> lawmakers return to capitol hill today after a week long recess back home. and for some republicans who held town halls, it was a not so welcome homecoming. >> when are you. >> going. >> to wrest. >> control as the. >> congress back. >> from the executive and stop. >> hurting your constituents? >> it's over. >> it's. >> separation. hell, yeah, i. now to your town. to your town. like it or not, the president and you are doing us a disservice to set that down and not stand up for us and. >> show up. >> now, when i say. >> affected, it. >> may be for the best, as hard as it might be, as hard as it might be. >> look at that right there. joining us now, nbc news chief capitol hill correspondent ryan nobles. ryan surprising. did the lawmakers find it surprising? >> it did seem as though.

>> many of these. >> republican members, in particular, were caught off guard by the volume of people that were attending these town halls and the vitriol that was sent in their direction around these issues. related to elon musk and. >> the. >> doge effort and the cuts and kind of the flurry of executive actions that. >> have. >> been put in place by the trump administration in the early. >> days of. >> this administration. and they would be wise to take these this reaction from their constituents seriously. there's a long track record of raucous town halls being the leading indicator of an electoral revolt not far down the road. i think back to when i was a local reporter in richmond, virginia, in the early days of the obama administration and seeing all these tea party activists show up at these town halls and make their voices heard, that ultimately led to a huge upheaval in the congress in the following year. and then even some of that revolt blew back on the republican members who the tea party folks thought were not conservative enough. and so this is obviously the

other side of that coin. i think one of the things that's been most interesting in this kind of small sample size that we're experiencing so far in the early days of this blowback on the trump administration, is that we're seeing this play out in ruby red districts, places like in georgia and in wisconsin, in missouri. these are districts where some of these members have won their races by 15 or 20 points and are still seeing full pack town halls with constituents that are angry about what they see playing out. so it's easy to dismiss it. you can say it's, well, these are just my opponents anyway. these were people that were never going to vote for me, but it's often a leading indicator of kind of the pulse of where the community is leading into an election cycle. and, you know, it seems like we're pretty far away from the 2026 midterms, but they will be here quicker than we realize. >> what about the next big legislative or the first big legislative hurdle? they still haven't gotten there. and that's the budget. there's talk about some pretty big cuts to medicaid. how is that landing

with some of the folks who are maybe not in ruby red districts, but are in purple districts? that helped get the republicans the house? >> yeah. i think this is going to be a huge issue for republicans to try and explain to their constituents where exactly these cuts are going to come from. now, republicans are facing criticism from democrats who have basically said, there's no way that you can cut the volume of dollars that you want to cut from the federal budget without taking from some of these entitlement programs, like medicare and medicaid. now, republicans have pushed back and said that they're going to find it all with waste, fraud and abuse. but until they actually put pen to paper and demonstrate where those cuts come from, it's hard to find a way that you get to the volume of cuts that they're talking about. and if it comes from those those programs that a lot of their constituents rely on, there could certainly be pull back the next time the votes come around. >> all right. ryan nobles, thank you very much. joining us now, national affairs correspondent with the nation, john nichols. john read the room for me. is this going to be a problem going

forward, knowing that that, you know, we had a lot of conversations leading up to the election talking about all of the perils that donald trump had with the caveat that, you know, he could still win. are we are we reading these town halls correctly? is it really blowback? >> of course it is. >> there's no question. >> of that. >> it's a question of. >> how much blowback. >> and how many. >> places it occurs. >> does this happen. >> the next. >> time they come back? >> do republicans. start not having. >> town hall meetings? >> i mean. >> that's that becomes a critical question. what i can tell you is this. i know the wisconsin. counties where. >> these town hall meetings occurred. i'm from wisconsin. >> and these are very, very republican places. >> and yes. >> i have no doubt maybe somebody drove 25 or 30 miles from a neighboring county, but the neighboring counties are even more republican. and so when, as an example, glenn grothman, the very conservative congressman from northeast wisconsin, came in to his meeting in algoma, wisconsin, he was booed and jeered as he

walked in by folks from a very republican area. and it wasn't it wasn't just kind of a blanket, unthinking thing. there was a very it's a great deal of reference to medicaid. there was a great deal of reference to social safety net programs. there was a lot a striking level of anger at elon musk and a lot of questions about elon musk's power and how it might be limited and people yelling, he wasn't elected. and so i think this is real. and my sense is that in watching the congressman from wisconsin, at least glenn grothman and scott fitzgerald, who had these, these very confrontational meetings, you could tell they were i think they were very surprised. but by the same token, they were listening. i mean, i do think they were they were taking this in because they didn't think it was was false. they didn't think it was a an outlier. i think they believed this is this is something real that exists in

their districts. >> they're clearly trying to move fast and break things. it's the cliche from the tech industry that's being taken to washington. do you see any any acknowledgment from the trump folks that maybe they don't have the mandate, the fullest mandate that they think they do, that maybe people would like them to be a little more surgical in their cuts? >> i don't see that yet. and i think that you're seeing from elon musk, even in recent days, some really blanket approaches to asking federal employees to explain what they did last week and things like that. so i think this is still a very confrontational moment, but it's also very early. i was out the other day over the weekend, i was out in iowa where bernie sanders was doing a stop oligarchy or fight oligarchy tour, and he went to districts where republicans narrowly held congressional seats in omaha and iowa, omaha, nebraska, iowa city. the crowds were disproportionately large. they

got 2 or 3 times as many people as they had expected. they had to do overflow rooms for these events. and what sanders was saying to these folks is, you know, don't get so excited about me and don't get so excited about what you're hearing from washington. talk to your member of congress and tell them that very soon, they're going to be debating huge tax cuts for people like elon musk, for very rich people. tell your member of congress you don't want that. and so i think that if they start to hear that, that could have a real impact. >> we'll see. it's still very early days. john nichols, thanks for coming on. always good to see you, my friend. that's going to do it for me today. what a day it's been. deadline. white house starts right now. >> hi there everyone. >> it's 4:00. >> in. >> new. >> york to direct the day to day. >> functioning of the agency responsible for preventing and investigating. >> terror attacks.