wasn't using the word "bidenomics" but when he was saying that we have to build the economy from the bottom up and the middle out. they think that that type of messaging really resonates with people more and obviously makes more sense to people immediately than something like the word "bidenomics" which could mean anything to any number of people. >> right. >> but i think the problem is, you know, you ask people and you said correctly that things are going in the right direction with the economy. when you ask people do you feel that personally or do you see that reflected in your own paycheck or your family, they are like, no, you know? >> yeah, there is the feels and then there's the reals. "washington post" opinion editor and writer alexei mchammond. thank you for getting up early for us for "way too early." i'm going to see you again at 11:00 a.m. back here on msnbc. "morning joe" starts right now. unemployment is down, 3.7%, inflation is down to 3.1%, gas is down to $3.10 a gallon, but this biden is terrible.

he's leading us to a depression. trump asked supporters on wednesday to name one thing that has gotten better under biden and, i don't know, there's a lot, i can think of a lot, but i think maybe number one is we're drinking less bleach. good morning, welcome to "morning joe," it is friday, december 15th. senate majority leader chuck schumer is calling the bluff, he has hopes of hammering out a deal on foreign aid which includes critical funder for ukraine. also ahead, how the biden campaign is trying to capitalize on the impeachment inquiry into the president. plus, rudy giuliani's defense team takes a very odd strategy in closing arguments in his defamation case. i will tell you about their pitch to the jurors. with us this morning we have columnist and associate editor for the "washington post" david ignatius, member of the "new york times" editorial board mara gay, host of the podcast

"unbrand" with donny deutsch, and the co-founder of punchbowl news don bresnahan. >> looks like the senate may be coming back in but a long shot to get the deal for israeli and ukrainian aid because it is tied to immigration. >> i think it's a long shot, i think at the same time it's one of these things that, you know, people run around with their arms in the air. again, it's like the extending -- you know, raising the debt ceiling, they always find a way through. they will find a way to support aid to israel, they will find a way to not let vladimir putin have the keys to kyiv, they will find a way to come up with a really tough deal on the border. the biden administration doesn't want to seem too eager right now in opening rounds of the negotiations. i think they will get there. i think the more interesting thing is what basically the roberto duran defense in rudy giuliani's case yesterday where

the -- where rudy's defense lawyers basically went no mas. he is crazy. he's a flat earther. what do you want us to do? i mean, i didn't -- not even much of a defense. i mean, the guy, i think, is going to be financially ruined because he's lied about these two workers, their lives were put at risk. time and time again giuliani would go out, say terrible things about the court, say terrible things about them, but, again, his own defense attorneys repeatedly called him a flat earther. basically said he was crazy, couldn't help himself. i mean, looking at that picture, who in the world would come to that conclusion, willie? >> i mean, it has been an extraordinary ride. so we are in the penalty phase of this. how much money are the two election workers, ruby freeman and shaye moss going to get? it looks like it's going to be a big number. >> a lot. >> but at the beginning of this

when he was found liable he did say in filings, rudy giuliani, i said things that weren't true. i made things up about them and for that i'm sorry. then he comes here to the penalty phase and he goes out in front of a bunch of cameras and said everything i said was true. he's been all over the place. so then we land in a police that you describe, joe, yesterday where his lawyers just went out and said he's like -- they called him a flat earther, you weren't making that up, he is like a flat earther who believes all of these lies and will not give up on these lies. i think what you can expect and perhaps a message to other people as we enter another election, he's going to have to pay a lot of money and he doesn't have much money left at this point. he's had to have donald trump, you know, hold fundraisers for him at mar-a-lago. he's going to have to give up a lot of money and the lesson hopefully perhaps is that you cannot attack people with lies in this way that turns their lives upside down and causes them so much pain. he is in trouble here. >> no doubt about it. no doubt about it. and also, fascinating, we have david ignatius back, willie, i

can't wait to hear his take on what's happening in israel. a lot of things going on there, a big split. why don't you get us to the news there and then we will get david's read on the latest. back and forth not only in the war itself, but between the united states and bibi netanyahu. >> yeah, so israel continues to bomb parts of southern and northern gaza and now the biden administration urging in even stronger terms israel to end its large-scale ground campaign at least. the exhaust says it wants israel to transition to a lower-intensity operation in gaza that could save lives. jake sullivan relayed that message to prime minister netanyahu and other israeli leaders yesterday, suggesting they adopt more surgical tactics like sending commandos to kill hamas leaders and to rescue hostages. according to the "new york times" officials say the white house wants to see that change in around three weeks or soon thereafter. but israel appears determined to

pursue its current military operation, telling the biden administration the war with hamas will last several months. president biden was asked about america's plan, its idea for israel, yesterday. >> i want them to be focused on how to save civilian lives, not stop going after hamas, but be more careful. >> the push for a new phase of the war comes as the u.s. intelligence assessment has found almost half the munitions israel has used in gaza since the war began are unguided, known colloquially as dumb bombs, that's according to two sources familiar with the matter. dumb bombs are not as accurate of course, helps to explain the war's huge death toll. david ignatius, you are just back from israel, what is your sense of how israelis are feeling about this war and how they're feeling about benjamin netanyahu's prosecution of the war? >> so, willie, i have to be honest, i spent almost all my time on this trip in the west bank. i wanted to take a look at what

palestinians are experiencing, what daily life is like for them and most important, whether the hopes that president biden and i think people around the world have for moving toward a palestinian state are realistic given the level of settlement activity and settler violence by extremist settlers in the west bank. so i did a lot of close-up reporting on that, it was very moving to see the experience of palestinians in the west bank. i don't think it's about to explode in another gaza-like war. on the big story that you're covering, there is no question that jake sullivan went to warn the netanyahu government that we really are nearing a point where u.s. and israeli interests don't coincide. we think that there's a time coming when this war has to be fought on a more limited and careful basis, far fewer civilian casualties. i think the real split is going to come on these day-after

issues. the biden administration is convinced that the answer is to work with saudi arabia, other gulf states, jordan, egypt, toward a real palestinian state with real power, using the palestinian authority that's now in the west bank, moving its people into gaza. that's something that bibi netanyahu strongly opposes and i think what we're heading for, to be honest, is a u.s. offer that this government can't accept which will lead into elections and perhaps a successor to netanyahu. i think that's where we're heading but it will take a while. >> you know, david, we don't understand -- i think in america we don't understand on this show how a guy whose government had warning, had the attack plans from hamas for a year and did nothing about it, had repeated

warnings about it leading up to it, did nothing about it, had his people in qatar who asked the month before the attacks to the netanyahu government -- qatar asked, hey, do you want us to keep funding hamas to the tune of billions of dollars? we've given them billions of dollars through the years at israel's urging. and then after the attacks sat back and did nothing for the most part for six, seven, eight, nine, ten hours. we don't understand how israelis come on and say, well, yes, yes, all of that's bad, but we have to fight this war first. i mean, that's like -- that's like saying you're letting neville chamberlain take you through world war ii except worse. it's certainly an imperfect

analogy, i think neville chamberlain would fight a much more effective battle than even benjamin netanyahu has done, but the question is how do you have somebody who failed on every front, knowing the attack was coming, continuing to fund hamas through qatar and then not acting for six, seven, eight, ten hours to protect israelis being raped, beaten, slaughtered, killed, kidnapped. how does that guy stay in power? how do the israelis say, no, we don't trust him at all, but let's let him finish the war? >> well, joe, i think first many of the things that you said, sharply critical of netanyahu i hear from israelis in tel aviv and jerusalem. there is a sense of really catastrophic mistakes having been made. bibi polarized the country in the year before hamas' invasion and everybody in the arab world

could see it. israel was more sharply divided than i have ever seen it in 40 years of covering the place because of netanyahu's unrelenting campaign supporting his right wing backers who wanted radical changes in the israeli judiciary. that did weaken israel. so i think it's a question of when, not if, about bibi leaving. there is a view in israel that you need to -- you need to fight on through. the middle of a war is not a time to change leaders. there is now a broad war cabinet that includes benny gantz who would run against bibi if there were an election tomorrow, and other people who have been critical of him. >> but, david, we have found -- we have seen and i've heard this from members of the trump administration, as well as members of the biden administration, benjamin netanyahu is not an effective leader, but for the united

states netanyahu's government would fall, israel would be in severe -- in dire straits. at what point does the united states let the israelis know we're standing behind you, but we are not going to keep -- you don't get a blank check for a guy that sat back and had the attack plans in his government for a year, continued the funding of hamas through qatar and did nothing the day that israeli women were being raped and babies were being shot and burned and grandmothers were being killed. like at what stage does the biden administration say that? because i know american taxpayers don't want to keep funding a war that this guy is running when he's not only damaging our reputation across the globe, he's damaging israel's reputation across the globe, and he can't be trusted. >> so, joe, two points. i mean, first, obviously we

never want to blame bibi netanyahu or any other israeli for raping israeli women -- >> no. no. no. >> horrific attacks. >> i was talking about because they didn't -- they didn't do anything while that was happening for five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten hours. that's what i was saying. >> there was a long delay. he is going to pay for it politically. i think we are now in the season where the united states is trying to develop a position for what the day after looks like that's clearly enough to find that it contains an offer that this government -- bibi's alliances with the people who care more about their west bank settlements than they do about gaza, that's how they got into this mess. they had their eyes focused on the west bank and pro-settler members of bibi's government who were relentless in that concern. the u.s., i think, is going to say the way forward requires your accepting a palestinian

state and your accepting a role for the palestinian authority which you hate and it's going to be such a forceful presentation this government, i don't think, can accept it and so there will be elections and we will see whether israel is prepared to elect a government that could actually move forward. and this is going to be hard. i toured -- spent three days looking at these settlements. do you know, joe, there are 700,000 israelis who are living in the west bank. 700,000. when we talk about a palestinian state, you've got to think how are those -- some of those settlers going to be made to leave the country? what government is prepared to make them do that? those are the issues i hope president biden, jake sullivan, secretary blinken are thinking about now because those are the ones just over the next hill that they are going to have to deal with. >> and, again, willie, it's been netanyahu was known cynically over the past ten years as he's done everything to stand in the way of a two-state solution, that that's why he's focused on

the west bank. the more illegal settlements he can put up in the west bank the less likely it is that they're going to be able to get out and have a two-state solution. so, again, we are not blaming benjamin netanyahu for the terrorist acts, we're saying that those terrorists that committed those acts were absolutely, absolutely just disgusting war criminals. hamas needs to be rooted up, it needs to be destroyed and those people that did that need to be brought to justice. they need to be treated as harshly as possible. we can hold that belief in this hand and also in this hand say we want to do what is best for israel, what is safest for israel and even israelis understand benjamin netanyahu's path forward is a dead end. he has been focusing on the west bank and focused on the west bank so much that he had billions of dollars siphoned to hamas through the years through

qatar so he could focus on the west bank and try to pay hamas, a terrorist group, that said they wanted to kill jews. that's the thing to remember, too, that we all know who hamas is. we've always said hamas' goal is to kill jews. they can't be trusted. they need to be rooted out and destroyed, but benjamin netanyahu knowing that was still having billions of dollars siphoned to this terror group through qatar so he could focus on causing problems in the west bank. >> and with all this it really is striking to see how far apart now publicly in many ways the white house and the prime minister of israel are on a two-state solution, for example, and now how this war should go forward and to have netanyahu effectively saying, thanks for the advice, we're going to do what we want to do here. by the way, we're going to talk to an adviser to benjamin netanyahu coming up a short time from now, we will put some of

these questions to him. meanwhile, in washington there is potential progress this morning in a senate deal on immigration reform. senate majority leader chuck schumer said they will return next week to try to hammer out a deal at the border, something republicans say is crucial to win over their votes to pass funding for ukraine and israel. senator chris murphy of connecticut said negotiations will work through the weekend but republican senator lindsey graham was dismiss i have about a possible deal and house republicans also were skeptical. >> they haven't written anything down. we've been doing this for 90 days. there is no legislative text, the white house just got involved three days ago. you expect to, you know, to run out the clock and get it done? i look forward to voting no to a bad deal next week. i am not going to be pressed to do something that doesn't make sense. >> our position in the house has

been clear from day one, secure the border. we've not changed. >> would you come back if they were able to, let's say, strike a deal next week? >> well, i would say that depends on what this deal looks like. but historically when the senate cuts a deal amongst the senate, it's typically a bad deal for the country. >> so, john bresnahan, you are an insider up there on capitol hill, tell us is there really potential for a deal? this wishful thinking with the senate suggesting maybe it will come back next week to get something done? and what is the proposal that the white house says it could support to get something done here? >> yeah, i mean, i think joe had a really good point before, you know, there's always a chance, you know, everybody talks gloom and doom and then some deal emerges. i don't know in this case. i'm not sure there is a sweet spot on immigration. the senate has, you know, passed a gang of eight bill back in 2013 and it got shot down in the house. immigration is one of the

toughest issues congress deals with. so i'm not sure even republicans can agree amongst themselves, forget about the white house and agreeing with the republicans or the democratic leadership in the house and senate agreeing with republicans, i'm not sure you could get a deal between house and senate republicans on an immigration bill. so i think this is really a difficult issue. i mean, we are talking about parole, we are talking about asylum, we are talking about detention. every time that the white house moves toward republicans, it's got to worry about its left. it's got the hispanic caucus doesn't like what it hears, progressives don't like what they hear. i mean, i had pramila jayapal telling me between this potential deal and what's happening in gaza, that's fraying the coalition, the very coalition that biden needs to get reelected. so i think the timing on this is really, really extraordinarily sensitive. i just -- i have a hard time seeing them doing a deal in the

short term. maybe into january, but in the short term i just have a hard time seeing it come together. >> yeah, i mean, it makes sense by january being able to put something together, write something down. mara, at the end of the day even -- well, i know the republican senators don't want to go out campaigning being the people that stood in the way of aid to israel and aid to ukraine, and also a pretty good deal on the southern border. i think we need to look to what happened with the defense appropriation bill, it passed when normal people rolled over the crazy people on the far right in both parties, republicans, democrats, it passed last night. i suspect there won't be a deal that the hard right back ventures will ever support on immigration, but taken all together it does seem that if they get rolled again it's a possibility, right? >> it seems possible. i think the analogy that keeps

coming to mind, though, is the way we used to talk about abortion. so before roe v. wade got overturned with dobbs, you know, the abortion issue was an extremely powerful one for the republican base because they could use roe v. wade as kind of the boogie man. and the moment that the dobbs decision fell -- came out, that actually just completely reversed the political dynamic and now, of course, this has been an issue that's very powerful for democrats. i think similarly it's very easy when republicans are not in the white house to blame the democratic president, in this case joe biden, of course, for any issue at the border. and i think striking a deal on immigration is probably to their mind not in the best interest at the moment for republicans. now, that doesn't mean -- i mean, it's certainly in the best interest of the country to secure the border, to get a rational immigration system.

we have needed this for two decades. >> right. >> but i don't know that republicans are thinking about it in those terms. i think they have an election coming up and this is a good boogie man for them. so they can continue to blame the president and democrats, as long as they don't strike a deal. if they do strike a deal they've got to put their name to whatever happens after that and that just doesn't fly with the republican base. >> yeah, they don't want to do that. it's just like health care reform, they want to attack obamacare, it's been 14 years, 13 years. they've never done anything on it. they've never done anything on immigration reform. they were talking about doing something in 2013, two people complained and they all backed off, the gang of seven or whatever gang they called t they all backed off because they're cowards. but in this case you have for democrats at least joe biden has a cover of democratic mayors, democratic governors, you have john fetterman, a progressive from pennsylvania, democratic leaders across the country saying, we need the border

secured. let's figure out a smart, humane, safe way to do it and let's secure the border. so that at least gives joe biden the position, and the request he is can they put a deal out that's simple enough to understand that if republicans say no to it, it can be used against them throughout 2024? >> completely. i mean, the irony here is that the democrats, as you said, are probably the most willing to play ball that they have ever been and of course, you know, it's frustrating because the reality is that the american economy actually needs more workers and so it is in the interest of business across america, of small towns across america to find a way to get this deal done to welcome safely, appropriately more workers into this country. it will help the economy. you know, republicans know that, but they don't want to give up

this boogie man. and i think that's an extremely frustrating point and, of course, what we have, too, is that right now the way they see it is that the democratic cities are paying the price at the moment for the failure to enact immigration reform. so it's working for them. it's working for them politically and they don't want to give up that bone. >> joe mentioned the defense budget that passed yesterday. interesting for what's in it and for what is not in it. the house passed the national defense authorization act by an overwhelming majority yesterday. the defense spending bill had strong bipartisan support in both chambers with house democrats joining republicans afr the bill was stripped of far right republican demands that originally had targeted issuesike abortion access and diversity programs. they are not in the bill. the ndaa authorized $886 billion in spending, an increase o about 3% from last year, it includes a 5.2% pay raise for troops. that's the largestase in

years. and it extends a measure to help ukraine through the end of 2026, authorizing $300 million for the next two fiscal years, though of course that's a fraction of the $61 billion in assistance president bidenassked congress to approve. also in the ndaa, a provision barring future presidents from unilaterally withdrawing from nato without approval from the senate or an act of congress. the legislation was spearheaded by virginia senator tim kaine and republican senator marco rubio of florida. concerns have grown in recent years surrounding whether the united states might withdraw from nato during another trump presidency. with this legislation no president will be able to solely decide to leave that alliance. joe, fascinating budget here because of what's not in it. all the noise about abortion access, the tommy tuberville of it all and then this provision, a bipartisan provision co-sponsored by marco rubio

effectively to stop donald trump potentially from pulling out of nato. >> right. and, donny deutsch, i mean, once again, we have an example of republicans running around, far right republicans running around, spouting crazy talking points, damaging america's military readiness, everybody knows tommy tuberville damaged america's military readiness for over a year. if you don't believe us, ask republican senators. you know, it's just like us refusing to fund ukraine. we're playing right into vladimir putin's hands and republicans have said as much of their fellow republicans. but here once again you have bipartisan legislation passing, biden signing another bipartisan piece of legislation, while crazy people on the far right and some on the far left say, oh, we can't do business with the other side in washington, d.c., things are just too hot, you know, too crazy, yet here we

are. we're still -- we're still doing it and joe biden is signing yet another bipartisan piece of legislation. >> you know, i'm going to coin a new term. joe, you yesterday were talking about all the wonderful people who are enjoying all the fruits that's happening in this country, a record stock market, record low employment. >> yeah. >> record jobs, record bipartisan legislation, and there's a group called biden deniers, just like there are election deniers, they are biden deniers, they only can deny the accomplishments of biden and that's -- >> by the way, if people are just tuning in and they don't know, biden deniers is much nicer than the word i was trying to avoid saying, but these biden deniers are people and we all know them, willie knows them, donny, you know them, i know them, i'm sure mara knows them as well, john knows, they're people that drive around in ferraris, maseratis and convertible mercedes, you know,

revved up bmws and make sure that everybody hears them screeching down the street, you know, and they get out of their cars and, you know, they're looking -- you know them, you see them all the time. >> half of them are my friends, yeah. >> half of them are your friends. you go to lunch with them and while you are in the middle of talking baseball they take out their phone and they're staring at it and they go, i just made $20,000 while you were eating salad. ha, ha, ha. on their stocks. and they made so much money. they do it, don't they? they do that. and then they bitch and whine they're making millions and millions of dollars off of joe biden's economy because they would say it was donald trump's economy so what's fair for the goose is fair for the gander. so they made millions and millions of dollars, some of them billions of dollars in joe biden's economy and then they put the phone down and they

start talking about joe biden is wrecking this economy, he's destroying america. he is a socialist. have you heard him talk? he is a socialist. he's not even running the country. they're biden deniers. the economy is doing incredibly well, record job numbers throughout the first couple of years. we could go on and on and on. the stock market higher than it's ever been and these maserati driving, d, biden deniers, they just keep on, don't they, donny? >> joe, yeah, i was laughing yesterday as you were going through this because as i said just now half of these people are my friends. i'd like to give a direct he is message out there. for all of you whose ira and stock portfolios are at an all time high i want to understand the issue with joe biden, all he's done is be successful. you can't get a straight answer, when you say to somebody what's the problem?

he's too old. he's done a great job and look at your pocket but look at your wallet. and the other thing that's so fascinating, i'm going to use the word stickiness. nothing sticks to biden that's good and nothing stick to trump that's bad. we live in a nonsticky world. the stuff has to start to stick with biden. for all of my friends about to tee off on the first hole of their country clubs just look at your net worth and joe biden is doing a very good job. >> willie, i mean, you know, that was their excuse, yeah, i know donald trump is a fascist but i made a lot of money under donald trump. they're making more under joe biden who likes american democracy. john, we won't pull you into this conversation, but we will -- i do want to talk about as we talk about the future of what's happening in israel and with ukraine aid and what's happening on the border, i would love for you if you could, we tried to talk about it some, but

i don't think our viewers and most americans have enough of an understanding of how there are three parties in washington, d.c. right now, there is the democratic party, there is the house republican party and there's the senate republican party. can you explain how the senate republicans are so different from the house republicans and how they may in the end be able to strike a deal with reasonable house members to actually get this big deal through? >> yeah, you are exactly right, there is what you would think as the old pre donald trump republican party, the last remnant of it is the senate republican conference. there's, you know, probably two-thirds of it that you would see is an old conservative, you know, republican, what you and i grew up as a conservative republican, pro business, you know, but reasonable conservative, you know, have a very strong muscular foreign policy, if you would.

and then there's the america first element of the republican party, which dominates in the house and there's a growing number of them in the senate, republican party, that's true. there are house members that have gotten elected to the senate or won election in the trump era and they are donald trump republicans and that's the big tension in the republican party. it's mitch mcconnell leads that old -- the old bastion of gop in the senate republican conference, but it's probably the last real pre-donald trump remainder of the party if you look at it. i do -- i don't -- i think you have to be careful, though, to say that, you know, there is a deal there. there is a potential for a deal there, but senate -- trump is a big factor here and i do think we have to look at the calendar. we have, you know, iowa caucuses coming up in mid-january, we have new hampshire a week later, the 15th in iowa, january 23rd

in new hampshire. if there is no deal before the holidays and congress has to come back and deal with this in january, you're going to have them talking about this just as voters start, you know, voting for trump and trump is going to be the republican nominee barring some dramatic change. trump will play a role in this debate and if trump doesn't like what he hears or if it suits him not to have a deal as mara said, if it suits trump not to have a deal and have this issue hammering biden throughout the campaign, then it will be hard to strike a deal with the house republican conference and mike johnson. mike johnson is very conservative, he's not going to get out in front of himself on this and it will be hard for senate republicans to get out in front of house republicans on this. so i think there's -- it's very complex inside the republican party here and the calendar is a huge issue. if this had happened six months ago, say, i think we would have a different case. if mccarthy was the speaker and, you know, we weren't so pressing

in the presidential election. but it's happening, you know, it's happening right now in the middle of what's at the beginning of the presidential campaign and, again, one other factor, they're going to impeach biden. no matter what they say, they're going to impeach biden. i really think the house republicans are going to try to vote on impeachment of biden sometime in january or february likely. so, again, this is also a factor. so i think there's a lot of stuff going into this extraordinarily complex. >> john, on that question of impeachment, we had the vote two days ago just to open the inquiry and it was unanimous among republicans straight along party lines. even as we were discussing yesterday among some swing district republicans who were critical, who have said in the past there's nothing really there, we haven't seen any evidence, they voted to open the inquiry. was that to you a clear sign of trump's influence and were you surprised at all that at least that small handful of republicans didn't go the other way? >> yeah, i mean, i was looking at guys like don bacon in

nebraska who is a really rational member, you know, who had talked about he wasn't sold on an inquiry and then turned around and voted for it. i think honestly i hate to say it this way but i think politically there is no down side for them, these swing district republicans voting for an inquiry. you know, they believe that they're not -- biden is for better or worse he's not very strong in the polls. chiefly because of economic issues. like opening an inquiry doesn't hurt them, it buys them some time with conservative groups on their right who would hammer them if they voted against it. so i think they are looking at their own base and saying, you know, i've got my primary coming up, you know, i have to go -- you know, i have to file and run. so, you know, voting for an inquiry is one thing. now, you know, we will have to see how well the white house does in rebutting this stuff. up until now the white house has pushed hard, but i think it's dramatically upping its case

there and they need to do this. they need to push back against this and say there is no real evidence that joe biden did anything wrong. i think the white house has done, you know -- you could say what you want about hunter biden, i mean, that scene the other day was extraordinary, i haven't seen anything like it in my time, but, you know, they need to push back on this harder. so i do think it's interesting that these swing district republicans found that there's no real down side for them voting for an inquiry. >> well, you know, two things, i'm so glad you brought up hunter's press conference the other day. this is not a guy -- i don't think this is a guy that they want to take on publicly, which is why, you know, even after he made the recommendation that they would do it privately or publicly, comer made that recommendation, you know, he melted like a little snowflake when hunter actually took him up on it and said, okay, i will

come testify publicly. and i don't know, maybe some people in tennessee would say just wasn't man enough to take him on one-on-one in-person. i don't know. maybe that's the way they talk in tennessee. we're far more aligned than that in some states but some people would say he wasn't even man enough to take on hunter biden in person. david ignatius, because you and i are the only people old enough to remember 1984, donny, i think, was a high school senior then, you and i are the only people old enough to remember 1984, i want to take you back to 1983. i'm not saying that joe biden is ronald reagan, i will say that newt gingrich said after the 2022 elections at some point we republicans are going to stop being stupid and stop underestimating joe biden the same way democrats underestimated ike and reagan over and over again. but ronald reagan in 1983 in the

gallup poll dropped as low as 35% in the approval rating. do you remember how grim '82 and '83 were for ronald reagan, as do i after his huge landslide victory in 1980. in 1983 the year before the election he averaged 41% approval ratings. that's about where joe biden is. he's averaged throughout his year before the election 41% approval rating. you add on top of that the news from this past week from the fed chair who are going to stop raising interest rates, they expect three interest rate cuts next year, the dow just hit an all time high. i don't know. if i'm in joe biden's camp, despite all the negative headlines, just like the negative headlines reagan got in '83, i'm looking ahead to some bright, sunny days in 2024

economically. i mean, this -- talk about morning in america, you can stack up joe biden's numbers right now economically with what reagan called morning in america and biden is already doing better and with three cuts in interest rates next year, what does 2024 look like? >> so, joe, maybe biden can be the gipper, you know, his aides mike donnell and other people in the white house should be asking him to repeat the phrase, it's morning in america, folks. you know, look at the numbers. look at the actual state of the economy. the thing that strikes me in addition to the real achievements that biden has got in the economy, and i think in foreign policy, is the way that the republicans keep walking farther and farther out on a narrower and narrower ledge and

at some point i just have to believe they're going to fall off. the country simply isn't with them on many of these issues that they're being so strident about. you know that sensible republicans in the senate understand that. that's part of why they're weary. what has infected the republican caucus in the house i don't begin to know. maybe trying to force a real border deal -- not force t but offer it on the part of the democrats, the issue the republicans seem to care most about, is a good strategy in trying to break this logjam, but, again, this is a narrow ledge the republicans are on and they may well fall off. >> yeah. by the way, donny, comer -- i didn't want to claim him for kentucky because both my parents went to kentucky and are huge wild cat fans, but comer i have to admit i think he's from kentucky.

but let's talk really quickly about that again in 2024. i know you were too young to remember 1984, or maybe you didn't remember it for other reasons, but i wouldn't go out saying it's morning in america if i'm team biden, but i would, as the year goes on, and if the numbers keep getting better as interest rates drop, gas prices continue to drop, grocery bills drop, cost of living drops, job openings remain high, i'd start reminding, hey, do you know what, remember when reagan said morning in america? remember when he said that? yeah, inflation was like -- i think it was at like -- jobless rate 7.4% or something. things are even better now than they were then. we still have a long way to go, but, man, what great progress we've made since the last guy left the white house. >> i actually would cut an exact

duplicate commercial morning in america. you want people talking -- anytime you can put ronald reagan in the same sentence as joe biden you're going to win. there's two lanes, number one, morning in america, it's never been better here and contrast donald trump nighttime in america and start to use the f word, the fascist word. don't just say democracy is hanging on a thread, say you will be -- we will be a fascist state. start putting -- cutting commercials together with mussolini and hitler in it. everybody is like you can't do that. we will become a fascist said. use the "f" word for donald trump, morning in america for joe biden. you can't have any more of a stark contrast, morning and night. >> i think that's right. i also think that the president needs to start talking about the ways in which his policies, his actions, starting with the infrastructure bill, i would say, have actually improved lives for americans who may not have iras, they may not be playing on wall street, they are not feeling the same things that

we are talking about in this hour, but they will be and those gains will come. their lives may be more expensive at this moment and people are feeling that, that's very real and i think the president -- that's a challenge he's going to need to speak to that, but also there has been an enormous amount of good that this president has done for main street and he needs to start talking about that and it needs to be louder than every other conversation the republicans are having. >> all right. ma ration stay with us. co-founder of bunch bowl news john bresnahan, thanks so much. coming up, we will talk to a columnist from one of israel's largest newspapers about the escalating tensions between the white house and prime minister benjamin netanyahu. "morning joe" is back in a moment. orning joe" is back in a moment

i'm sholeh, and i lost 75 pounds with golo. i went from a size 20 to a size 6. before golo, nothing seemed to work. i was exercising for over an hour every day. it was really discouraging. but golo's so easy, the weight just falls off. switch to shopify so you can build it better, scale it faster and sell more. much more. take your business to the next stage when you switch to shopify.

benjamin netanyahu. benjamin netanyahu nexium 24hr prevents heartburn acid for twice as long as pepcid. get all-day and all-night heartburn acid prevention with just one pill a day. choose acid prevention. choose nexium. whenever you're hungry, there's a deal on the subway app. buy one footlong, get one 50% off in the subway app today. now that's a deal worth celebrating. man, what are you doing?! get it before it's gone on the subway app. ♪♪

vo: illegal immigrants rush our border in record numbers. more get away than are detained. on the subway app. leaders of “sanctuary cities” spend billions on migrants - creating a magnet for more illegal immigration and fueling the crisis. all while americans struggle to pay for food and housing. and what is the biden administration doing? closing more immigration detention facilities. tell your member of congress: biden's closing of immigration facilities makes this crisis even worse.

♪ the winter play was really coming together. ♪ until... disaster struck. ♪ tensions... were high. ♪ luckily, replacement costumes were shipped with fedex. which means mr. harvey... could picture the perfect night. ♪ we're delivering more happy for the holidays. ♪ ♪ if there's pain when you try to poo ♪ ♪ and going sometimes feels like you ♪ ♪ pushed through a pineapple or two ♪ ♪ colace is the brand you need ♪ ♪ to soften stools, we're all agreed ♪ ♪ #2 should be easy to do ♪ trust colace to soften stools with no stimulants for comfortable relief.

national security adviser jake sullivan is headed to the west bank today to meet with the leaders of the palestinian authority. it comes just one day after his meeting with israeli leaders during which he urged the country to shift to a more low intensity operation in gaza. the white house also has been pushing for a two-state solution, that's something, though, prime minister benjamin netanyahu's government appears to be against. yesterday israeli president isaac herzog told the associated press now is not the time to discuss post-war plans as israel is still healing from the attack of october 7th. joining us now israeli columnist for wynet news, whose latest article is titled "netanyahu heading for coalition with biden over post-war gaza and more."

great to have you with us. before we get to post-war gaza and that collision course you write b let's talk about the here and now, which is the united states openly calling for israel to change its tactics and strategy in the war, to stop the bombing and to go to commandos who can take out hamas leaders, rescue hostages. what has been the israeli reaction to that proposal from the united states? >> thank you for having me and basically this is about time. israel knew and the idf knows that they're going to shift tactics soon. they would want to do that in the end of january, the biden administration wants this happening right after christmas or christmas vacation and it was meant to happen anyway. and there's a lot -- there's not a lot of daylight here between jack sullivan now visiting israel and the palestinian territories and between the israelis in that sense, and we should take notice of what he said. he said that there is no deadline set in time with a

specific date, but he was talking about several weeks and in any case the idf wanted to shift to a sort of a very targeted raids and sometimes attacks from the air against the leadership of hamas and not remain in the same situation in which it's actually maneuvering in the gaza strip. already took control of the center and the north of the gaza strip right now it's trying to get ahold of khan yunis, that's the base, the base that yahya sinwar, the leader of hamas, the man who ordered the october 7th attack against israel, this is where he comes from. this is the most most important division of hamas. when the idf is over with this place and would want to move to a different tactic and this is what the u.s. wants also to see in gaza. >> nadav, this is david ignatius in washington.

i want to ask you to give us a political picture of the state of things in israel. we've been talking this morning about prime minister netanyahu and a lot of questions that we here in the united states. i know they're repeated in israel about his preparations for the war and someninger in israel. is that growing? do you see netanyahu's position weakening or in fighting against u.s. pressure on him, does he get stronger in israel? >> you know, david, you know very well israeli politics and you know how hectic it is, how intense it is, but right now politically speaking netanyahu is not a viable candidate for the next election. he's just -- when you see the polls, his numbers are just, you know, as dead as you can see. he has no hope at least at the polls we're seeing since october 7th ainge not doing any better

according to the polls we're doing and we're seeing right now politically speaking. now, the question, i think your viewers might have in mind, why is this man still in power, and the answer is that this is a coalition government in israel. it's not the same as the u.s., but even in the u.s. after 9/11 president bush remained in power, and this is what we're seeing in israel. israel is so focussed right now, both the public and people need to understand to acknowledge that we have a reserve army in this country, so many people that i know, many of my friends, many of my friends' daughters and sons are right now serving, so a political crisis right now and the election seems impossible. when you ask israelis in the polls, the main kind of argument is does netanyahu need to resign right now, or should he do this after this stage of the war and it's going to be, david, a long war. this is going -- you probably

remember how much time it took to hit al qaeda and to get osama bin laden, how much time it took to hit isis and to get that over with. hamas is very strong. it's very much supported by the palestinian public. the polls we're seeing from palestinians, it's about 70% support for october 7th, so the public in gaza and the west bank support hamas, so it's very difficult to get to that place in which you can root out hamas and this is one of the reason that the political crisis in israel is not advancing to replacing netanyahu. >> and i guess the question that many americans have that we've been bringing up has been, why israelis would want to continue having their sons and daughters fight under a man whose

government had the attack plans for a year, hamas' plans for a year, who was still asking qatar to funnel the billions of dollars that they funneled to hamas through the years and still asking them to keep that money flowing even through weeks before the attacks, netanyahu's people, and then the most confounding thing to us and we really appreciate you providing any information on this, how could it be that a man who we've heard justify his political existence through security, safety and security for israelis, how did his government fail to respond in any meaningful way for six, seven, eight, nine, ten hours after these attacks began? jewish women were being raped to

death, children were being shot in front of their parents and parents shot in front of their children, israelis, kids having to hide for 13, 14 hours before being rescued? i mean, this government seems to be a government that has failed one test after another after another. so, why would an israeli parent want their children to fight under the leadership of such a man? >> well, first of all, most of israelis right now don't want netanyahu to remain as prime minister, but i want to push back a bit, joe, with your assumption -- your factual assumption. the israeli government is not responsible for the response of the idf that morning and that response was with extreme bravery and valor and it was immediate. the fact that they didn't get to those villages and kibbutzs in time and i'm speaking as someone

who has been there, i have been there down in the south, you know, while fighting was still happening 48 hours after hamas fighters just drove through the borders, the fact is that the israeli commandos and israeli defense forces didn't get there because they were outnumbered and this is, of course, you know, one hell of a failure of the israeli defense force, the security forces and this government that responded. the person responsible for that is the prime minister, but to say that the government did absolutely nothing for six and seven hour, first of all, the immediate response like in the u.s., we have a terror attack on it is by the defense forces, by the security forces, by the idf and police officers and at the beginning it might have seemed to people and people that i spoke with, sometimes people that i knew that the idf is still not coming. the reason it wasn't coming, it was simply overrun and we have just tremendous stories of

bravery from that day, but -- one thing is for sure, immediately at 6:30 a.m. when this attack ensued, the chiefs of staffs were already in tel aviv, already, you know, in the underneath bunker and they were handling this to the best of their ability. now, again, this is a failure, and this failure will be investigated. it's not like netanyahu didn't do anything, the defense minister didn't do anything, they just allowed this to happen and as to the plans, i'm going to have a pushback against the u.s. policy. the u.s. pressured israel again and again to have this kind of quiet for quiet or negotiations of sorts with hamas and, of course, qatar is a great ally of the united states in the middle east, and the fact is that if the israel would have come to the western world, to western europe or maybe even to the u.s. and would have said, look, hamas

is going to attack us, it's a genocidal organization aimed at destroying israel and killing every living person in israel. by the way, including arab-israelis, they would have said, you are fearmongering and want a war. are you crazy to go into the gaza strip to try to occupy it? actually when israel started its defensive in this, the pentagon sent three generals to israel basically saying to the israeli defense forces, if you advance on a ground operation into the gaza strip, it's going to be a disaster for israel, and they were warning the defense minister and the israeli defense forces generals not to do the ground operation as it was planned. well, we're almost two month, a month and a half later, and this ground operation at least for now in the gaza strip has taken

control of both the north and the central of the gaza strip, has killed many terrorists, has managed to release some of the hostages, retrieve bodies of the hostages, pressure hamas to bring some of the bodies. now, again, i go to your bottom line, the bottom line is that israelis are fighting for their lives right now. this is how it seems in the country and most of them want netanyahu gone. this is not my impression, it's not an anecdote. we have poll after poll saying that and the only question is when will the political sphere transcend what the israeli public wants. >> well, let me just say, we have -- pushing back on you pushing back on the first point, i do not discount the fact that there were not individual acts of bravery, extraordinary acts, a 67-year-old general who was riding his bike, you know this story very well. >> yeah. >> got a call, ran home, got a

gun, jumped in his car, drove down and rounded up some people to go in and rescue some israelis but what a sad, pathetic fact if the united states were attacked, and we had to have 67-year-old generals riding down and trying to round up some troops to try to save americans, that would be seen as a gross failure, and for israel to be overrun by drugged up, souped up terrorists and to be -- to have them maintain control as long as they did is a total abject failure, so i want to make sure you understand, i am not discounting for one second that there were individual instances of bravery, but it was a colossal failure,

and we in america still don't understand what in the world happened and why israel, because we've always had these, i guess, exaggerated views of the idf and mossad and what they were capable of doing and just refuse to believe that crazed terrorists on paragliders and mopeds are a stronger force than the idf, and, secondly, you have to admit you talked about, oh, oh, i got to say also, there's a big difference between the united states not wanting israel to go in and invade gaza than there is on the other side, netanyahu's government telling qatar to continue funneling billions of dollars to hamas. there is a huge middle ground there, and, again, a lot of it just doesn't seem to make any sense to us in the united

states, so i'm sure you understand that most americans will be far more comfortable continuing our support of israel, which we are going to do, with a prime minister that's far more effective in keeping israelis safe and secure. >> i completely can understand that and i want to say that sort of the heartfelt sentiment coming from the united states and i saw bernie sanders the other day talking about, very frankly, about how you cannot have a cease-fire with hamas while they are saying they want to have a million october 7s so you can feel the sentiment across the united states, and i can also understand the surprise at this gross failure and i can only join what you said, joe, about the way that israelis were disappointed by their armed forces, and my explanation to that is quite simple, if you would have had a quasi-state and

trying to tell the world that all they want to to have better life in the gaza strip, you'll have day workers coming from that quasi-state and just one morning, they'll do something that seems, you know, just so far-fetched. they'll attack a much stronger state. i was in this house with my kids when they launched their rocket missile attack against the entire state of israel, which was just a decoy for their attack, and they will do this in a matter of seconds, and they will just overrun numerically the idf on that border and it's something people don't understand. these were not only individual acts of bravery, there were those, of course, this general that you just mentioned, a very

famous story but i know, you know, about companies, regiments that were there in a matter of hour -- the most problematic thing is that when you fight there within these outposts and you're fighting 200 highly trained terrorists, by the way, trained by iran, then it's a problem getting to those kibbutzs. to your final point, the bottom line is is that, of course, people in the u.s. question netanyahu and people in israel question netanyahu and i question netanyahu in my article. i'm very critical, but people back home in the u.s. should know that there is a priority here for israelis, and the first priority for israelis is basically for us to be safe, and this is something that we lost on october 7th. >> yeah, and if that doesn't lay at the feet of benjamin netanyahu, i don't know whose responsibility, whose it would be, and i think most israelis would agree with that so thank

you so much for being with us. nadav eyal, greatly appreciate it. >> thank you. >> so, i didn't want -- mara, i didn't want to just turn this into a back and forth debate for the next three hours. there's so much to respond to, but one of the things you got to respond to and got to believe and i want to bring david in in this conversation as well, but he talks about the effectiveness of the invasion of gaza in northern and central gaza talking about all the gains there as if there haven't been catastrophic consequences, as well. by the way, we can be the -- i'll just speak for myself. i am a supporter of israel. i always have been. i always will be. it's much, much harder -- i don't support this government. i don't support netanyahu's government because he made israel less safe, and i've got to say, mara, massive civilian

deaths racking up massive civilian deaths in the coming weeks will make israel even less safe in the future, and, you know, talking about having him, a columnist talk about the great gains israel has made in gaza without understanding the massive consequences there for the palestinian people, but also for israel's long-term security seems to me a bit blind. >> you know, i think for all of the turmoil within the united states and the debates, the protests, the -- i don't want to make any comparison to say it is anything like what israelis went through on october 7th because it isn't, but it's been very painful here, but i think for all of that, the vast, overwhelming majority of americans, they saw what happened on october 7th.

they were devastated. we have also been attacked by terrorists in this country. they understand that hamas means to be destroyed. most americans don't support hamas. there's no debate over this, not any real sense among, you know, reasonable society in the united states. that's not the issue. the concern is that americans do not have an appetite, i believe, for a prolonged -- another prolonged war in the middle east in which we may see just extraordinary, continue to see extraordinary deaths of civilians, and i think that is also painful, and we need to acknowledge that. i think there are a lot of americans also who see these civilian deaths of palestinians and have a hard time understanding how in the long term that will make israelis safer or jews safer around the world. those are not people who support

hamas. i just want to say that. these are people would care about jews and israel and i also think there is an opportunity here, and i think joe biden knows and sees this, to say, you know, israel is a democracy in the middle east, we are a democracy. this is a time in which democraies are under threat from around the world, and we need to show, i believe, in the united states and in israel that democracy can be a force for good for human rights, and one way to show that is by paying respect to palestinian civilians who are suffering. that is a way to show we do care, and we're going to do a much more targeted operation, because we are a democracy, and we care about human rights. this is a good moment, i think, to make a show of support for democracy from both the wartime

cabinet in israel and from the united states, so there's a lot at stake here. >> there is a lot at stake here, and, david, the lead editorial in "the "wall street journal"" talks about joe biden's rising tension with israel and basically complaining that joe biden is telling the israelis how to fight their own wars, making it more dangerous, costing more israeli lives. you've been there. you were there. talk about, though, how in the long term more israeli lives are endangered by just continued bombardment of civilians, if that were to continue, and the radicalizing effect that will have on the west bank, and the impossibility. by the way, when i say two-state solution, i'm not talking about this week or next week, what you wrote about at the beginning of

the war, david, what's the day after this war look like? will there be a two-state solution? no. but they need to fight the war in a way that we can get there eventually and right now if they continue fighting as they have, do we ever get there? >> so, joe, in my mind there are two wars going on. there's israel's attempt to destroy hamas in gaza on a tactical basis and that goes from day to day, israeli accounts are pretty positive. they're controlling northern gaza. they're increasingly in control of southern gaza but there's another war going on, and that's the information war, and i think anybody who cares about israel should recognize and should be honest with israeli leaders that that war is going badly, that israel is increasingly seen in international forums, in the

media, around the world, turn on the bbc if you want an example of what the world is saying about this campaign. israel has to pay more attention to that. i think that's what jake sullivan has been saying, what president biden has been saying, that international opinion matters. yes, go after hamas, the first war on the ground, but do it carefully because you have another war to worry about and the other question we've been talking about of what comes after. the day after, and can the u.s., saudi arabia, the uae and israel be aligned on a transition to something in gaza and the west bank that will be stable and will make israel more secure, that will make palestinians who suffered so much in this war more secure, and that's something that the white house is working, you know, 24/7 on, and they need an assurance from

netanyahu or from people in israel if they're prepared to break with netanyahu that they're going to support that big idea that the u.s. has, and so i think -- i divided those three parts, tactical war on the ground and information war is clearly going badly then there's the day after that you and i have talked about often. >> let's bring into the conversation senior adviser to israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu, mark regev. mr. regev, thanks for being with us. let me ask you about that meeting yesterday between national security adviser jake sullivan and prime minister netanyahu, among others, in the room where the national security adviser brought with him from the white house the plan that the fighting should sort of wind down, the bombings should wind down and that the united states would like within three or four weeks to see the strategy from israel change, to be more focused to troops, to commandos going in to rescue hostages, to target hamas leaders that way, all with the idea of minimizing

civilian casualties. what's your response to that idea? >> so, we had a good conversation. i think yesterday with the national security adviser, look, israel and the united states, we agree on the strategic aims, which is, you know, israel has to act, we have to protect our people, it's our obligation as a government to remove this threat on our southern frontier. this terror enclave run by hamas, that hamas must be removed from power and any post-conflict situation, hamas can no longer have that military machine in gaza and it can no longer rule the gaza strip, so in the big strategic issues there's eye to eye, washington and jerusalem. now, how we fight this war, obviously you can have different approaches, different opinions, we share the goal that israel as we pursue hamas and we will

pursue hamas and we will destroy hamas, that we have to take steps to safeguard the civilian population as we have been doing and, of course, to facilitate the entrance of humanitarian support for the civilian population, and we're talking about beefing up our effort in both those areas. >> so, mr. regev, we'll stipulate again as we do every time we talk about hamas uses civilians and puts civilians between itself and israeli bombs. that's a strategy, no secret. part of the reason they're dying is that but would you agree too many civilians are dying and a change of strategy as proposed by the united states would be a good idea to minimize civilian casualties in this war? >> so, of course, we want to keep civilian casualty as low as is possible. there are issues here, because hamas has the opposite strategy, but i think what we were seeing in the numbers recently, we're seeing the numbers of civilian casualties going down, that's

because fighting is winding up in the north and in the south the introduction of the ground forces has allowed us to be even more surgical, and our goal, once again, is to get those civilian casualties as low as it possible while pursuing the fight against hamas, and you asked me about a time line. it's important that we finish this correctly, because to finish this with hamas still in power, that's obviously just a band-aid solution, you know, hamas says openly that they would attack israel again given the capability, given the opportunity, they would do another october 7th. they'd do it again and again and again, their words, and so it's crucial that this ends with a decisive defeat for hamas, that their military machine is destroyed, and that there's a new reality in gaza. i think anything short of that, it means that everything that we've gone through has been wasted. it's important that we finish this and achieve our goals, and

the timing for that, we can discuss, but it's crucial that those goals are met. >> so, mark, this is david ignatius in washington, just two questions i wanted to ask. first, is it possible that you could move to a new phase in the campaign that you're describing to destroy hamas' political power that would be as u.s. officials have said more precise, more surgical, more your commando units, more intelligence driven, fewer bombing, tank attacks, that's the first question, and then the second question involves whether israel might be prepared at some point under some conditions to renew the talks through qatar with hamas. it's been reported that your mossad chief was ready to go back to doha and continue those talks, but there was basically a political decision, no, we're

not going to do that now. when might those talks resume? >> so, on the first question about the stages, so, it's important to finish the current stage correctly before you go onto the next stage, and it's clear we've got a stage of intensive fighting, and when we have achieved the goals of that stage, we can move to the more than counterinsurgency stage using more commando forces and based on intelligence and so forth, but we have to finish the current stage. we have to be able to deal with these battalions of hamas fighters that are still active in the south. you know, in the north, things are moving ahead very, very well. we've had surrenders, more and more hamas terrorists are surrendering, coming out, hands raised, their rifles, ak-47s held over their head. that's good. we're seeing the hamas military

machine in northern gaza break. it's only a matter of time that that happens in the south, and as those events move ahead, then we can move to the next stage, but it's important to finish the current stage before going to the next stage. on the second question about the hostages, obviously releasing the hostages is crucial for israel. it's one of our central aims, and if there was a serious proposal on the table for a release of hostages, as we've done in the past, we would not let that go by the wayside. the question is, is there such a serious proposal on the table, and there are always discussions, it came up in the meeting yesterday with sullivan, israel will not let a serious opportunity for the release of hostages go, you know, go unanswered. >> i just want to jump in. you know, it's easy to -- you can't be a human and not say, of course, we don't want innocent civilians be killed, but this is

war and just like in taking out nazis or al qaeda or isis, unfortunately, civilians are going to be killed. israel is in a position that like it or not, their existence is on the line and as our guest has said, hamas has said over and over, we want to kill every jew, every israeli, and no other country in a wartime situation is put in the same position as israel. there were innocent germans who died because the nazis had to be killed. hamas has to be killeds. if new jersey was hamas and new york was israel and new jersey was saying to new york, we are going to obliterate you, would new york be under the same conditions to, oh, we have to do it, you know surgically -- of course, israel wants to do it surgically. israel is not dumb. israel is also built on humanity. it is a western civilized

culture, and i just keep coming back to this is a rubik's cube. we want israel to defend itself. israel has a right to defend itself, yet, if there are innocent civilians killed somehow it backfires on israel. this is war. it's horrible. it's terrible, but i don't know what israel's choices are actually. >> can i respond to that, because, i mean, if you compare israel to perfection, we fall short and our own stated goal is limited civilian casualties and obviously we've had too many but i think if you compare what the israeli defense forces are doing with gaza and the steps that we're taking and compare it with other real world situations where people have been fighting terrorists in urban built-up areas, the struggle against isis in iraq or in syria, they're the most recent examples, i think when you look at the number, the ratio, you know, this is what the experts look at, the ratio between combatants and civilians, i think when compared

to comparable situations, the idf's efforts to safeguard civilian populations, whether in the warnings and directing people to leave areas of combat, and the precision of ammunitions and soy forth, it's true, civilians have been killed, but i think in a comparative situation you'll see israel has done very well in saving civilian lives. >> mr. ambassador, we've all said here and i know you have and benjamin netanyahu has throughout his career, have all talked about how hamas is a terrorist group that wants to kill jews, wants to wipe israel off the face of the earth. many americans questioning the news reports that came out that said even weeks before this attack netanyahu's government was instructing qatar to keep billions of dollars, qatar asking the netanyahu government, should we continue funding hamas, and they have to the tunes of billions of dollars through the years, and the

netanyahu government said, yes, just three weeks before in a meeting in doha just three weeks before the attacks, the netanyahu government said, keep funding hamas. a lot of americans would like to know why in the world would the netanyahu government ever do that. >> and a lot of israelis also have questions. it's not just americans. it's our people who were killed in the terrible massacre of october 7th, and there's a whole series of question, the intelligence failure, how as a country that israel prides itself on having excellent intelligence services yet we had no warning, despite now it's becoming clear there was information there it had never got knee the system in the way people said there's an emergency, and we weren't ready on october 7th to face the attack. then there are questions of how did they cross the fence and enter our communities? what happened to the defenses on the ground, and there are

questions, how long did it take the idf to get there to those places and save the people who could be saved, and take control of our territory again. there's a whole series of questions, and, of course, you're right in asking, what did the prime minister know, when did he know it, the head of the army, the head of military intelligence, the head of the shin bet and go down to the southern command that face the soldiers who face gaza, all these questions will have to be asked, but as david knows, we had a similar or a comparable, i should say, situation 50 years ago when israel was surprised in the north and south, surprise attack from syria and egypt, the yom kippur war, and when that was over and managed to turn the tables, even though it started off very badly for israel, there was a commission of inquiry, questions were asked, politicians, prime minister golda meir at the time was brought to answer questions, and decisions were made.

israel is a democratic country and have checks and balances and have a way that all these questions will be looked into. >> right, okay, but in this case, and, of course, the morning of the 7th, the most shocking thing, how long it took for the idf and for other security forces to come to the aid of israelis, women being raped and israelis being burned, mutilated, killed, tortured, executed, kidnapped by a gang on mopeds and paragliders, and that is certainly something that's going to take quite some time, but this money coming from qatar, that was an ongoing policy of the netanyahu government to encourage qatar to fund hamas. you're a senior advise story benjamin netanyahu. this is policy. this is something that was thought out through the years,

so why did the netanyahu government encourage qatar to give billions of dollars to hamas? >> it was the netanyahu government, it was the previous government as well and -- >> why? >> i think the idea was primarily to prevent a humanitarian crisis in gaza and to try to have a situation where you'd have some sort of stability, and it failed. i mean, hamas -- >> but you're talking about stability with a terrorist organization that has in their founding documents that the murder of jews and the eradication of israel is their top goal, and we saw in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 that they would execute fellow palestinians that even talked about making peace with israel. how do you allow billions of

dollars to go to that terrorist organization when you know who they are? >> so, there was a failure here, and it was israel's failure, but also the failure of many of our international partners, because we were told, look, hamas might be a brutal terrorist organization, but then our ruling 2.2 million people in the gaza strip, they have responsibilities and mike sure people there have what they need, that forces them to become more pragmatic, that forces them to become more moderate, that forces their behavior to become more normal. we heard this also from washington, yes, we have to do what we can to stabilize the situation on the southern border, and we have to hold ourselves accountable, as well, but it was a failure. it didn't work. hamas showed itself for what it really is on october 7th, and so all those illusions about the possibility of living and let live were proven to be just

illusions, exactly that, and you know what makes the point the most, joe, i think, we've seen brutal killers, mass murderers in the past, we saw hitler, we saw stalin. hamas is the first time, you know, hitler tried to keep his crimes a secret. there's the famous speech to the ss where he says what we're doing is really important in killing all the jews but we can never talk about it. these people as they came in and as you said correctly and they murdered and raped and beheaded and burnt people alive and machine gunned the young people in the music festival, they took pictures. they took videos, and they posted them online. a lot of the damaging information about hamas is their stuff, their own material, and they're proud of it. they wanted to advertise their crimes against humanity. this is a new level of depravity we haven't dealt with before. >> yeah, yeah, and it's a level of depravity that they said

interest their founding they were going to try to achieve, and they did. mr. ambassador, thank you so much for being with us, and we certainly wish you and all the israeli people the best of luck in getting as many hostages out as humanly possible and conducting this war in a way that is in israel's best interest, as well as the best interest of the palestinian people. i don't think that's a mutually exclusive wish. thank you so much, mr. ambassador, for being with us. >> thank you for having me, sir. >> all right. hey, david ignatius, before moving on, i just -- the ambassador and i'm so grateful for him coming on, but he used a word and it's something that

it's just something -- it's a word that's hung heavy over me since october 7th, and it's illusion. israel's illusion of hamas as somehow a moderating force is so ridiculous to ever expect hamas to be a moderating force especially when they saw the plans. our illusion of mossad replayed in one hollywood movie after another, mossad being the most competent, ruthlessly efficient, deadly security force on the planet. when people would sit around dinner tables talking and whisper, oh, i hear the mossad is doing such and such, everybody would stop and freeze in washington and across the country over the past 50 years, because there was this illusion

of mossad as the ultimate intelligence force. the illusion of the idf being the ultimate security force, military force, what they did in 1967, what they did in 1973, what they would be able to do if they were ever attacked again, and we've seen one illusion after another after another fall on what we believed israel to be, and i would not be saying this if i didn't believe it in my heart as a strong supporter of israel, it's hard to lay all of this at the feet of one man, but it's hard not to look at the gross miscalculations of benjamin netanyahu has made over the past ten years, whether you're talking about the funding

through qatar of hamas, the complete -- turning a blind eye to the dangers coming from gaza because of his political obsession with pushing illegal settlements in the west bank to make a two-state solution impossible. his splitting the country by declaring war against the supreme court because he was afraid he was going to go to jail, i mean, this is just -- this is just a colossal mess, and i will say, it is so painful as a longtime supporter of israel to see one man cause the israeli people so much pain, so much suffering and cause the state of israel so much political damage. >> so, joe, i think october 7 is the day when those illusions

crumbled in a nightmare, crumble doesn't do justice. if you watched the horrific videos, the level of malevolent hatred and violence was a shock to israel. they just hadn't imagined that that scene could play out, and that was a failure. it was an intelligence failure, a leadership failure, ambassador regev was pretty honest in saying, we have to look at all those things going forward. i just in my own memory, joe, i remember how stunned america was on 9/11. we never could have imagined that people would be so diabolical they'd fly airplanes in the skyscrapers. people didn't think about it. it turns out that every bit of intelligence about the al qaeda bombers was in our intelligence system, but as we said afterwards, people couldn't connect the dots, so israel is

not unique in having that degree of failure and having its illusions crumbled. i just hope that in this period going forward and this has been your point in a lot of conversations, israel will see that it needs to bring the world with it in its campaign to stabilize gaza, to destroy hamas' political power and move on to something that's better. i hope that basic theme comes through. i thought i heard it in some of ambassador regev's comments. i thought i heard it from the israeli journalist, i hope that's so because that's the israel that you're talking about and i'm talking about needs to go. >> all right, from isrl we turn to ukraine. the european union has decided now officially to open talks to bring ukraine into the alliance. ukraine's entry into the eu will take years, but the news represents a major symbolic victory for the nation. going to stday's summit,

though, viktor orban said he planned to block ascension talks for ukraine when it came time to raise objections, he reportedly left the room effectively abstaining from that decision. he did, however, veto the approval of an eu funding package for ukraine blocking something like $60 billion u.s. dollars in funding. all it takes is one member to block it, and it was viktor orban. obviously a close ally of vladimir putin. meanwhile, in moscow yesterday, russian president putin held a four-hour televised press conference where he touched on topics including his war on ukraine, putin said, peace would come only when russia achieves its goals and he appeared to imply western support for ukraine is waning, saying the country is, quote, importing everything as a freeload but this freebie may end someday and apparently it is ending little by little talking about western and american support for ukraine. let's bring in staff writer

susan glasser and, mark, good morning. susan, your new piece is entitled, "a congressional christmas gift to putin" and writes, conventional wisdom has held putin would push to keep his war going until at least next november giving the increasingly real prospect of victory by the putin admiring ukraine skeptic donald trump. instead the unraveling is happening faster than anyone anticipated. if putin's strategy has been to wait out the west until its commitment to ukraine waivers, it's working and even quite possibly ahead o schedule. biden facing the stunning prospect of a signature international cause of aiding ukraine being ban ded by a politics consumed congress now offers a more realistic and chilling assessment. the world is watching what we do, he said at his white house press conference with zelenskyy,

which would send a horrible message to an aggressor and rail lies if we walked away at this time, end quote. on thursday listening to as much of putin's press conference as i could take it seemed fair to conclude the message already had been received. so, susan, you're absolutely right, and most important policy analysts we talk to agree putin has been waiting and perhaps a surprise he didn't have to wait much longer to see republican support for ukraine crack. i guess the question is, how does the white house respond to this? does it make a deal on immigration in order to get that ukrainian money back in the pipeline? >> well, you know, thank you. i mean, i have to say the talks are continuing in the senate but, remember that the senate was supposed to be the easier chamber to crack when it came to the white house's request for billions more to help fund the ukrainian military. the senate republicans by and large support ukraine, but now

there's been this almost sort of tactical disaster of fusing ukraine aid as well as assistance for israel to a border deal. we all know, i mean, let's be real, the border has been the most politically toxic trumpified issue there's been in washington eluding a solution and eluding bipartisan solution for years long predating this conflict, and it only be seen as terrible news for ukraine and for those who support ukraine that those two issues are linked. even if the senate comes up with a deal, which they could do, and they will be staying in session in the hopes of doing so next week, there is no indication whatsoever that the house under the speakership of mike johnson, who has consistently voted against any assistance, military assistance for ukraine in recent months, that he's going to bring that deal for a floor vote in the house or that house republicans will go along with it. so i just think it's essentially cast entire enterprise of

american assistance for ukraine into doubt, and i think many people thought that would happen but they anticipated that happening in 2024 in the middle of a trump campaign. now it's just sort of speeded up the whole timetable. >> mark, this conversation on capitol hill comes in a week when that american intelligence assessment was made public that showed staggering losses for the russian military in terms of troops, in terms of weapons, in terms of tanks, that it has been effectively gutted as a military calling up people from prisons and civilians from the countryside to go fight the war as clint watts puts it, to be thrown into a meat grinder so it would seem if you're looking at aid to ukraine it would be a time when you can say from the western perspective and ukraine's perspective, we can beat these guys, but we can't do it without the support of the united states. >> that's right, and i think, you know, perhaps the u.s., the administration should change their narrative, especially in

the face of some of this gop opposition and let me explain why. this is not a never-ending war. what is needed is the $60 billion package is to get through 2024 when in reality the europeans are stepping up. the germans announcing an aid package in 2025 so instead of saying it's a never-ending war let's say for them to step up now, our european partners as well and consider ukraine for what it is, it is a never-ending ally. >> i want to jump in, susan, and ask you more about your really good analysis, so, first, can you give an estimate, you know, 15%, 25%, 50%, chance that a ukraine package will, in fact, pass over the next, let's say month, you know, before the end of january, and do you see danger from your perspective, do

you hear americans worrying about danger that ukraine itself is heading toward a period of much greater political division that the fighting between zelenskyy and his military commanders is getting worse, are we on the verge of a big blowup in ukraine that's going to make this more complicated? >> yeah, i mean, i think those are such important points, david. first of all, to your second question, absolutely. what we've seen is kind of what you might call the return of politics to kyiv and to ukraine, at least breaking back out in the open after the initial shock, of course, of february 2022 and the russian invasion, you know, there was this incredible rally around the flag inside ukraine and zelenskyy went from having very, very low approval ratings to becoming sort of a churchillian wartime leader for the country and although they are not planning to have a presidential election next year because they're at

war, they are definitely seeing the return of, you know, sharp elbowed public politicking, much more questions about the war strategy, especially because the counteroffensive that was launched with so much fanfare at the beginning of the summer has not produced the kind of game-changing gains that some aspired to it for. what i've heard also from military analysts who have been on the ground and seen what's going on is a real fear and concern about what the military conditions for ukraine are going to be like in 2024. they are predicting and looking at this situation and seeing ukraine on the defensive, not able to really break out and being -- moving much more into defense mode against russia in 2024 and that's putting aside the politics, so i think, you know, 2023 was seen as a chance for big breakout moment that didn't quite happen for ukraine.

there's a lot of fear and trepidation and the politics are, you know, as one person who saw zelenskyy this week in washington put it to me, a minefield of its own for ukraine. the politics here in washington, this is a theater of war, as well, david, because i think what happens here in congress over the next few weeks to your point is going to help determine the ability of ukraine to maintain its independence in 2024. those are really the stakes. there may be another bill approved. i have heard some optimism still that there will be one more round of funding that the white house is able to get out of congress, project not at that full $60 billion level, but great skepticism that anything more than that would be forthcoming. >> president zelenskyy made that exact case on capitol hill when he was in washington this week and found a much different audience than he did, say, last year, some republicans performatively walking out of the meeting. mark, i want to get to your new

piece titled, "more than 30 americans died on october 7th, where is the outrage?" we've had parents sit with us on the set in new york and make the case and tell us the story of their children in the hopes they'll be returned home. what else should we know about the americans who died that day? >> you know, i started thinking about this piece because, you know, there's been so much on protests on campus and white house staffers protesting, you know, outside the white house grounds calling for a cease-fire but i think people are forgetting over 30 americans died in this attack. i remember reading some of the accounts, one individual that struck me, someone who fought in the israeli military but he spent his summers in maine, was a big red sox fan that resonates with all of us here. and no one is really talking about what was a mass casualty terrorist attack where americans were killed and my world of

counterterrorism where when someone -- something like this happens, the fbi tries to come in and bring people to justice. if that doesn't work the u.s. military and intelligence community using unique authorities can remove those terrorists from the battlefield but everyone really matters, and if you have that beautiful blue passport as an american citizen we're always going to come to aid or bring to justice those would killed americans, and i don't see that and in conclusion as i thought through this, you can't help but think, is this because of just this viral anti-semitism that has been brought up in the united states and the world today? do israeli american dual citizens not count as much? my old colleagues are working hard, because, again, 30 americans are killed, and you don't hear a lot about that although i will say ang administration official yesterday talking about what i call high-value target one, the leader of hanks in gaza says he

has american blood on his hands, so i'm glad that was said. i wish more americans thought that way. >> david ignatius, is the american government looking at it that way? that's such an important point that park makes, there were a bunch of americans killed that day and there are americans being held right now in gaza. >> so you hear in president biden's voice concern for the americans. this isn't our war. increasingly we're trying to get some distance between the u.s. and israel. i have a quick question for mark that's not about the war in gaza but about the situation in ukraine. as susan was just describing, we're seeing an attempt to block over military assistance to ukraine, so one of my questions, is it time for the u.s. to be thinking about covert intelligence assistance as an alternative looking at 2024? >> well, that's something that's certainly, you know, going to be on the table.

i imagine there already is a presidential finding that was probably signed after -- right after the invasion. but, david, you're right in the sense, you know, if aid is not going to flow and particularly now at a critical time, you know, 2024 is a time in which ukraine is running out of ammunition. they have been able to intercept, you know, these drone swarms or cruise missiles that russia has launched, but they're running out of this actual critical material. it's going to lead to ukrainian deaths, so i think the u.s. government has to look at different and novel means on getting assistance for it. one of those could be covert action, you know, doing this under the table, but, again, that also requires some congressional notification and congressional approval, as well, and so the fact that you have this kind of, you know, bloc in the gop stopping this will be hard to overcome. >> all right, former cia officer mark polymeropoulos, susan

glasser and david ignatius, thank you so much. an update on the gag order in the civil fraud trial against donald trump's business organization. plus, the so-called architect of the fake elector scheme explains how he gave false hope to the former president that the 2020 election could be overturned. we'll play that new audio for you ahead. up next, emmy award-winning actor courtney b. vance joins us live in studio and discuss his memoir, "the invisible ache" which explores, grief, identity and the challenges facing black men and their mental health. the reverend al sharpton joins us for that conversation as well. "morning joe" is coming right back.

in the u.s. we see millions of cyber threats each year. that rate is increasing as more and more businesses move to the cloud. - so, the question is... - cyber attack! as cyber criminals expand their toolkit, we must expand as well. we need to rethink... next level moments, need the next level network. [speaker continues in the background] the network with 24/7 built-in security. chip? at&t business.

joanna gaines: discoveries at saint jude helped this kid beat cancer at age two. marget: and now this kid has three kids. chip gaines: and that's what we do at saint jude. subject: give thanks for the healthy kids in your life and give a gift that could last a lifetime.

watch how easy it is to put on new hands free skechers slip-ins. i just step in and go. sitting? doesn't matter. i don't even have to touch them. ooo, gangsta. in a hurry? there's not a faster, easier way to put on shoes. they know a 10 when they see it.

suicide rates for young black people in this country, particularly boy young men are climbing at an alarming rate. for young, black males between the ages of 10 and 19, those rates are up 60% over the last two decades which is more than any other racial or ethnic group. that's according to the american academy of child and adolescent psychiatry. our next guest has a personal connection to the subject. courtney b. vance was on broadway when he received a devastating call telling him his father had committed suicide. he's out with a new book "the invisible ache." courtney joins us now along with al sharpton. thank you so much for being on the show with us, for writing this book, and to be so open, it's not something i would ask you about every on national tv unless it were sort of the

center of this story for you, but that moment, the phone call you received about your father, and what it sparked in you. >> first of all, i'm just grateful to be here. it's the first time i've done an event about the book without my co-author, dr. robin smith, but that moment was devastating. he was -- he was and continues to be my hero, and i was just telling dr. al here that -- reverend al, that if my mother hadn't taken my sister and i aside when we were -- we had been there a month and got her affairs in order. there's miss leslie, and she told us as we were leaving, she said, i want you all when you go back to your respective cities to find a therapist. i'll find somebody here in detroit and we'll get to the center of this thing so it doesn't control and lead our lives. so my father couldn't do it, but

my mother made sure that we were able to do it and prepare ourselves for the rest of our lives. >> courtney, we were talking a little about how in the black community a lot of times we will not even talk about mental health. >> yeah. >> and it's almost a thing where we don't want to appear weak or we don't want to have a standard put on us that the broader society already marginalized us. talk about the need to come out and deal with the issue of mental health and pain, and that is not weakness. that is strength to be able to come out with this. >> the shame and the pain of it, reverend al, is we don't talk about it. we leave it buried and try to pretend like we're okay. we're not okay, and that's okay. to actually admit that we have something that is controlling our lives, and that we really, really need some help, and finding someone to unload -- i

mean, we're going to get our cars tuned up. we do our health checks. we go get -- we check our teeth and mammograms and all the things we're supposed to do health-wise hopefully, but our mental wellness, nobody talks about it or does anything about it, and especially coming out of the pandemic, especially for young people, which is why i think the numbers are so high. there was nowhere for them to go, and because we're -- as we all know, we don't talk about politics, religion, or mental -- our mental conditions, there was nowhere for the young peopleto go, and they can't handle it. they haven't been able to handle it and the only thing they know to do is take their lives and let me say one other thing is we don't say committed suicide. we say died of suicide. it's not a crime. taking your life is not a crime, and so we're decriminalizing the whole act of saying what it is.

>> how difficult, as you talked about needing everyone to deal with therapy and deal with themselves, how difficult is it to finally also realize that some things are not your fault, that you have been carrying guilt that is not your fault, and then there are some things that you cause or your reaction? 10% of the world is what happens and 90% is how you react and respond to it. >> well, the beauty is -- is being able to empower yourself to know the difference, to know what things you can -- are contributing to and what things have been put upon you, that you can get out from under. so i found it -- when i finally found, and finding a therapist is not an easy task, you know, for the financial reasons. it's just -- it's like a marriage, and so the actual act of getting -- coming together with someone takes work. so the question really is always for me, what are you going to

do? we have been -- we live with -- we suffer -- we live with suffering so we're used to that, but can we -- we use the same amount of effort and energy and get that suffering off of us, and so i recognize and my mother challenged us, my sister and i and said, you all can do better. there's more things that you can do for yourselves. find that. use that same energy, take that load off of you. if you need some medication which my godson was -- during the pandemic, he took his life, and it was just simply he needed some medication to balance himself out, but because the -- during the pandemic, the parents couldn't go in with their 23-year-old, the therapist and advocate for him. the therapist said, you're fine, and he was 23, and said, i'm fine. so he wasn't. that happened twice, and the third time he took his life.

>> "the invisible ache" is the name of the book. why do you call it the invisible ache, and what do you hope people -- when they read this book, when they put it down, what do you hope they gathered, learned, and are inspired to do? >> that invisible ache, it's because it's something inside of us that we can't touch, that we can't find, but it's controlling us, and so we -- what i hope to -- what dr. robin and i hope folks gain from reading the book is themselves. they get themselves back. they get their lives back, they get control of their lives, and whether it's you need some medication to balance you out or you just need to -- you recognize you need to go in the mornings, get up and go take some walks or do -- do something positive for yourself, get a different rhythm, get out of your rut. whatever you need to do, find what that is. that's your right, your divine

right to find yourself, and you don't have to settle for, oh. you don't have to do that, and you have been doing it, and it's -- it hasn't served you well. >> and your co-author, dr. smith, offers some great tips just for grieving. how do i do it? i love the first one. take off the sunglasses. don't hide your grief which is something we men are not particularly good at whatever race. she says you've got to let it out, and she says it's as important as laughter. >> it is, the tears. it's healing and as an actor, i know that. that catharsis is what, you know, people in plays and movies, you know, they look for the tears, but in life, you know, my therapist, god rest her soul, dr. cornfeld, she said, you spend most of your time stage, courtney. how are you going to center yourself when you're not on

stage, and that's the journey. that's the work. >> there's so much great stuff in this court. courtney b. vance, thank you for writing it. thank you for shining a light on something we need to talk about more. the new book as he said, co-authored with dr. robin smith is titled "the invisible ache: black men identifying their pain and reclaiming their power." . coming up next aid, the efforts to pass a foreign aid package. the house is negotiating a deal which hangs on demands for more funding to secure the southern border. that conversation straight ahead when "morning joe" comes back in 90 seconds. ♪♪ en "morning joe" comes back in 90 seconds ♪

you're probably not easily persuaded to switch mobile providers for your business. but what if we told you it's possible that comcast business mobile can save you up to 75% a year on your wireless bill versus the big three carriers? did we peak your interest? you can get two unlimited lines for just $30 each a month. there are no term contracts or line activation fees. and you can bring your own device. oh, and all on the most reliable 5g mobile network nationwide. wireless that works for you. it's not just possible, it's happening.

unemployment is down 3.7%. inflation is down 3.1%. gas is down to $3.10 per gallon, but this biden is terrible. he's leading us to a depression. trump was asked, name one thing that has gotten better under biden, and i don't know. i can think of a lot of them, but i think maybe number one is we're drinking less bleach. >> good morning. welcome to "morning joe." it is friday, december 15th. senate majority leader chuck schumer is calling republicans' bluff on border security. he's delaying the upper chamber's recess in hopes of hammering out a deal on foreign aid which includes critical funding for ukraine. we'll get into that. also ahead, how the biden campaign is trying to capitalize on the impeachment inquiry into the president.

plus, rudy giuliani's defense team takes a very odd strategy in closing arguments in his defamation case. we'll tell you about their pitch to the jurors. with us this morning, we have columnist and associate editor for "the washington post," david ignatius, donny deutsche, and john bresnahan. the senate may be coming back in for a day or two to figure this out, but still, a long shot to get this deal for israeli aid, for ukrainian aid because it is tied to immigration. >> i think it's a long shot. i think at the same time, it's one of these things that, you know, people run around with arms. again, it's like extending, you know, erasing the debt ceiling. they always find a way through. they're going to find a way to support aid to israel. they're going to find a way to not let vladimir putin to not let the keys to kyiv. they'll find a way to come up

with a really tough deal on the border. the biden administration doesn't want to seem too eager right now in opening rounds of negotiations. i think they'll get there. i think the more interesting thing is what basically the roberto duran defense in that case yesterday where rudy's defense lawyers basically went, no mas. he's crazy. he's a flat earther. what do you want us to do? i mean, not even much of a defense. i think the guy is going to be financially ruined because he's lied about these two workers. their lives were put at risk. time and time again, giuliani would go out, say terrible things about the courts, say terrible things about them, but again, his own defense attorneys repeatedly called him a flat earther, basically said he was

crazy and couldn't help himself. looking at that picture, who in the world would come to that conclusion, willie? >> i mean, it has been an extraordinary ride. so we're in the penalty phase of this now. how much money are the two election workers ruby freeman and shaye moss going to get? it looks like a big number as you said. >> a lot. >> at the beginning of this, when he was found liable, he did say in filings, rudy giuliani, i said things that were not true. i made things up, and for that i'm sorry. then he comes to the penalty phase and goes out in front of cameras and says, everything i said was true. he's been all over the place, and we land in a place as you described, joe, yesterday, where his lawyers just went out and said, he's, like -- they called him a flat earther. you weren't making that up. he's like a flat earther that just believes all these lies and will not give up on these lies, and so i think what you can expect and perhaps a message to other people as we enter an election, he's going to have to pay a lot of money, and he doesn't have much money left at

this point. he's had to have donald trump, you know, fundraisers for him at mar-a-lago. he's going to have to give up a lot of money, and the lesson hopefully, perhaps, is that you cannot attack people with lies in this way that turns their lives upside down and causes them so much pain. he's in trouble here. >> yeah, no doubt about it. no doubt about it, and also fascinating, we've got david ignatius back. willie, i can't wait to hear his take on what's happening in israel. a lot of things going on there. a big split. why don't you get us to the news there, and then we'll get david's read on the latest? well, back and forth not only in the war itself, but between the united states and bb netanyahu. >> yeah, so israel continues to bomb parts of southern and northern gaza, and now the biden administration urging and even in stronger terms, israel, to end its large scale ground campaign at least. the white house says it wants israel to transition to a lower intensity operation in gaza, believing that could save civilian lives.

national security adviser jake sullivan relaid that message to benjamin netanyahu and other israeli leaders yesterday, suggesting they adopt more surgical tactics like sending commandos to kill hamas leaders and rescue hostages. according to the "new york times," the officials say the white house wants to see that change in around three weeks or soon thereafter, but israel appears determined to pursue its current military operation, telling the biden administration the war with hamas will last several months. president biden was asked about america's plan, its idea for israel yesterday. >> i want them to be focused on how to save civilian lives, not stop going after hamas, but be more careful. >> the push for a new phase of the war comes as a u.s. intelligence assessment has found almost half the munitions israel has used in gaza since the war began are unguided, known colocke yally as dumb

bombs. that's not as accurate, and that explains the huge death toll. david ignatius, you are back from israel. what explains how israelis are feeling about this war and benjamin netanyahu's execution of the war? >> i spent almost all my time on this trip in the west bank. i wanted to take a look at what palestinians are experiencing, what daily life is like for them, and most important, whether the hopes that president biden, and i think people around the world have for moving toward a palestinian state are realistic given the level of settlement activity and settler violence by extremist settlers in the west bank. so i did a lot of close-up reporting on that. it was very moving to see the experience of palestinians in the west bank. i don't think it's about to explode into another gaza-like

war. on the big story you're covering that jake sullivan went to war on the netanyahu government that we are nearing a point where the interests don't coincide. there's a time where this war has to be fought on a more limited and careful basis. far fewer civilian casuacasualt. i think the real split is going to come on these day-after issues. the biden administration is convinced that the answer is to work with saudi arabia, other gulf states, jordan, egypt, toward a real palestinian state with real power, using the palestinian authority that's now in the west bank moving its people into gaza. that's something that netanyahu strongly opposes and what i think we're heading for to be honest is a u.s. offer that this government can't accept, which will lead into elections and perhaps a successor to netanyahu. i think that's why we're heading, but it'll take a while. >> david, we don't understand --

i think in america, we don't understand on this show, how a guy whose government had warning, had the attack plans from hamas for a year, and did nothing about it, had repeated warnings about it leading up to it, did nothing about it, had his people in qatar who asked the month before the attacks to the netanyahu government, qatar asked, hey. do you want us to keep funding hamas to the tune of billions of dollars? they've given them billions of dollars through the years, and israel surging, and then after the attacks, sat back and did nothing for the most part for six, seven, eight, nine, ten

hours, and we don't understand how israelis come on and say, yes, yes. all that's bad, but we've got to fight this war first. that's like saying you're letting neville chamberlain take you through world war ii, except worse. i mean, it's certainly an imperfect analogy. i think neville chamberlain would fight a much more effective battle than even netanyahu has done. how do you have someone who has failed on every front knowing the attack was coming, continuing to fund hamas through qatar, and then not acting for six, seven, eight, ten hours to protect israelis being raped, beaten, slaughtered, killed, kidnapped? how does that guy stay in power? how do you -- how do the israelis say, no, we don't trust him at all, but let's let him finish the war? >> well, joe, i think at first,

many of the things that you said, sharply critical of you're i hear from israelis in tel aviv and jerusalem. there is a sense of really catastrophic mistakes having been made. he polarized the country before hamas' invasion, and everybody in the world can see it. israel was more sharply divided than i've ever seen it in four years of covering the place because of netanyahu's unrelenting campaign supporting his right-wing backers who wanted radical changes in the israeli judiciary. that did weaken israel. i think it's a question of when, not if, about him leaving. there is a view in israel that they need to fight on through. the middle of a war is not a time to change leaders. there is now a broad more cabinet that includes others who

would run against netanyahu if there was an election tomorrow and other people who have been critical of him. >> but david -- david, we have found and we have seen, and i remember this from members of the trump administration as well as members of the biden administration. benjamin netanyahu is not an effective leader, but for the united states, netanyahu's government would fall. israel would be in severe -- in dire straits. at what point does the united states let the israelis know, we're standing behind you, but we are not going to keep -- you don't get a blank check for a guy that sat back and had the attack plans in his government for a year, continued the funding of hamas through qatar, and did nothing the day that israeli women were being raped and babies were being shot and burned, and grand mothers were

being killed? what stage does the biden administration say that? they know american taxpayers don't want to keep funding a war like this. he's not only damaging our reputation across the globe, but israel's reputation across the globe and he can't be trusted. >> so, joe, two points. i mean, first, obviously we never want to blame bb netanyahu or any other israeli for raping israeli women. those horrific attacks. >> no, no, no, no. i was talking about because they didn't do anything while that was happening for five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten hours. >> he's going to pay for it politically. i think we are now in the season where the united states is trying to develop a position for what the day after looks like that's clearly enough to find that it contains an offer that this government -- bb's

alliances with people who care more about their west bank settlements than they do about gaza. that's how they got into this mess. they had their eyes on the west bank and this government who were relentless in that concern, and the u.s. i think is going to say, the way forward requires your accepting a palestinian state and your accepting a role for the palestinian authority which you hate, and it's going to be such a forceful presentation, this government i don't think can accept it, and so there will be elections and we'll see whether israel's prepared to elect a government that could actually move forward, and this is going to be hard. i toured -- i spent three days looking at these settlements. do you know, joe, there are 700,000 israelis who are living in the west bank? 700,000, and we talk about a palestinian state. you've got to think, how are some of those settlers going to be made to leave the country? what government is prepared to

make them do that? those are the issues i hope president biden and jake sullivan, secretary blinken are thinking about now because those are the ones just over the next hill that they're going to have to deal with. >> and again, willie, it's been netanyahu who's known cynically over the past ten years as he's done everything to stand in the way of a two-state solution. that's why he's focused on the west bank. the more illegal settlements he can put up in the west bank, the less likely it is they'll be able to get out and have a two-state solution. so again, we're not blaming benjamin netanyahu for the terrorist acts. we're saying that those terrorists that committed those acts were absolutely -- absolutely just disgusting war criminals. hamas needs to be rooted up. it needs to be destroyed, and those people that did that need to be brought to justice, and they needed to be -- they need to be treated as harshly as possible. we can hold that belief in this

hand and also in this hand say, we want to do what is best fr israel, what is safest for israel, and even israelis understand, benjamin netanyahu's path forward is a dead end. he has been focusing on the west bank and focused on the west bank so much that he had billions of dollars siphoned to hamas through the years through qatar so he could focus on the west bank and try to pay hamas, a terrorist group that said they wanted to kill jews. that's a thing to remember too, that we all know who hamas is. we've always said, hamas' goal is to kill jews. they can't be trusted. they need to be rooted out and destroyed, but benjamin netanyahu knowing that, with still having billions of dollars siphoned to this terror group through qatar, so he could focus on causing problems in the west bank. >> and with all this, it really

is striking to see how far apart now publicly in many ways the white house and the prime minister of israel are on a two-state solution for example, and now how this war should go forward, and to have netanyahu effectively saying, thanks for the advice. we're going to do what we want to do here. coming up, can congress work out a plan that both secures the border and helps ukraine to fight off russia? that is the big question right now on capitol hill. we'll get the very latest when "morning joe" comes right back. n "morning joe" comes right back in the u.s. we see millions of cyber threats each year.

that rate is increasing as more and more businesses move to the cloud. - so, the question is... - cyber attack! as cyber criminals expand their toolkit, we must expand as well. we need to rethink... next level moments, need the next level network. [speaker continues in the background] the network with 24/7 built-in security. chip? at&t business. to finally lose 80 pounds and keep it off with golo is amazing. i've been maintaining. the weight is gone and it's never coming back. with golo, i've not only kept off the weight but i'm happier, i'm healthier, and i have a new lease on life. golo is the only thing that will let you lose weight and keep it off. who loses 138 pounds in nine months? i did! golo's a lifestyle change and you make the change and it stays off. (soft music) we're traveling all across america

talking to people about their hearts. who wants to talk about their heart? [honking] how's the heart? how's your heart? how's your heart? - it's good. - is it? - i don't know. - it's okay. - it's okay. - yeah. - good. - you sure? - i think so. - how do you know? it doesn't come with a manual and you're like oh, i got the 20,000 day check up, right? let me show you something. put two fingers right on those pads. look at that. that's your heart. that is pretty awesome. with kardiamobile, you can take a medical grade ekg in just 30 seconds from anywhere. kardiamobile is proven to detect atrial fibrillation, one of the leading causes of stroke. and it's the only personal ekg that's fda cleared to detect normal heart rhythm, bradycardia and tachycardia. how much do you think this costs? probably in the hundreds. $79. oh, wow. that could be cheaper than a tank of gas. for a limited time, kardiamobile is available for just $74. hurry, these prices won't last. get kardiamobile for yourself or a loved one at kardia.com or amazon.

♪♪ in washington, there is potential progress this morning in a senate deal on immigration reform. senate majority leader chuck schumer announced the chamber will delay its holiday break and return next week to try to hammer out a deal on the border,

something republicans say is crucial to winning over their votes to pass more funding for ukraine and israel. chief democratic negotiator, senator chris murphy of connecticut said, negotiators will work through the weekend, but republican senator lindsey graham was dismissive about a possible deal and house republicans also were skeptical. >> they haven't written anything down. we have been doing this for 90 days. there is no legislative text. the white house just got involved three days ago. you expect to, you know, to run out the clock and get it done. i look forward to voting no to a bad deal next week. i am not going to be pressed to do something that doesn't make sense. >> our position in the house has been clear from day one, secure the border. we've not changed. >> would you come back if they were able to let's say strike a deal next week? >> well, i would say that depends on what this deal looks like, but historically when the senate cuts a deal amongst the senate, it's typically a bad

deal for the country. >> so john bresnahan, you're an insider on the hill. tell us about this. is there potential for a deal, or is this wishful thinking that they will come back to get something done, and what is the proposal the white house says it would support to get something done here? >> yeah. i mean, i think joe had a really good point before. there's always a chance, you know, they talk gloom and doom and some deal emerges. i don't know in this case. i'm not sure there's a sweet spot on immigration. the senate has, you know, the past gang of eight bill back in 2013, and it got shot down in the house. immigration is one of the toughest issues congress deals with, so i'm not sure even republicans can agree amongst themselves. forget about the white house and agreeing with the republicans or the democratic leadership in the house and senate agreeing with republicans. i'm not sure you can get an

agreement between house and senate republicans on an immigration bill. i think this is really a difficult issue. i mean, we're talking about parole. we're talking asylum. we're talking about detention. every time that the white house moves toward republicans, it's got to worry about its left. it's got, you know, the hispanic caucus that doesn't like what it hears. progressives don't like what they hear. i mean, i. pramila jayapal talking about what's happening in gaza. that's fraying the very coalition that biden needs to get re-elected. so i think the timing on this is really, really extraordinarily sensitive. i just don't -- i have a hard time seeing them doing a deal in the short-term. maybe into january, but in the short-term, i just have a hard time seeing it come together. >> i mean, it makes sense, and by january being able to put something together, write something down because more at the end of the day -- even i know the republican senators don't want to go out

campaigning, being the people that stood in the way of aid to israel and aid to ukraine, and also a pretty good deal on the southern border. i think we need to look to what happened with the defense appropriation bill. it passed when normal people rolled over the crazy people on the far right in both parties, republicans, democrats passed last night. i suspect there won't be a deal that the hard -- the hard right-backed benchers will ever support on immigration, but taken altogether, it does seem if they get rolled again, it's a possibility, right? >> it seems possible. i think the analogy that i -- that keeps coming to mind though is the way we used to talk about abortion. so before roe v. wade got overturned with dobbs, you know, the abortion issue was an extremely powerful one for the republican base because they could use roe v. wade as kind of the boogeyman, and the moment

that the dobbs decision fell, you know, came out, that actually just completely reversed the political dynamic, and now, of course, this has been an issue that's very powerful for democrats. they think similarly it's very easy when republicans are not in the white house to blame the democratic president, in this case joe biden of course, for any issue at the border, and i think striking a deal on immigration is probably to their mind, not in the best interest at the moment for republicans. now that doesn't mean it's -- i mean, it's certainly in the best interest of the country to secure the border, to get a rational immigration system. we've needed this for two decades, but i don't -- >> right. >> -- know that republicans are thinking about it in those terms. i think they have an election coming up, and this is a good boogeyman for them, so they can continue to blame the president and democrats. >> yeah. >> as long as they don't strike a deal. if they do strike a deal,

they've got to put their name to whatever happens after that, and that just doesn't fly with the republican base. >> yeah. they don't want to do that. it's just like health care reform. they want to attack obamacare. it's been 14 years, 13 years. they've never done anything on it. they've never done anything about immigration reform. they talked about doing something in 2013. the gang of seven or whatever gang they called it, they all backed off because they're cowards, but in this case, you have for democrats at least, joe biden has a cover of democratic mayors, democratic governors. you have john fetterman, a progressive from pennsylvania, democratic leaders across the country saying, we need the border secured. let's figure out a smart, humane, safe way to do it, and let's secure the border. so that at least gives joe biden the position, and the question is, can they put a deal out that's simple enough to understand that if republicans

say no to it, it can be used against them throughout 2024? >> completely. i mean, the irony here is that the democrats as you said, are probably the most willing to play ball that they have ever been, and of course, you know, it's also just frustrating because the reality is that the american economy actually needs more workers, and so it is in the interest of business across america, of small towns across america to find a way to get this deal done, to welcome safely, appropriately, more workers into this country. it will help the economy. you know, republicans know that, but they don't want to give up this boogeyman, and i think that's an extremely frustraing point, and of course, what we have too is that right now the way they see it is that the democratic cities are paying the price at the moment for the failure to enact immigration reform. so it's working for them.

it's working for them politically, and they don't want to give up that bone. >> joe mentioned the defense budget that passed yesterday. interesting for what's in it, and what is not in it. the house passed the national defense authorization act by an overwhelming majority yesterday. the defense spending bill had strong bipartisan support in both chambers with house republicans joining democrats after the bill was strippe of far-right republican demands that originally targeted issues like abortion access and diversity programs they're not in the bill. the ndaa authorized $800 billion in spending, an increase from about 3% of last year. it includes 5.2% pay raise for troops. that's the largest increase in years, and it extends a measure to help ukraine through the end of 2016, authorizing $300 million for the next two fiscal years, though of course, that's a fraction of the $61 billion in assistance president biden has asked congress to approve.

also in the ndaa, a prevision barring future presidents from unilaterally withdrawing from nato without approval from the senate or an act of congress. this was spearheaded by tim kaine and republican senator marco rubio of florida. concerns have grown in recent years surrounding whether the united states might withdraw from nato during another trump presidency. with this legislation, no president will be able to solely decide to leave in a alliance. so joe, fascinating budget here because of what's not in it. all the noise about abortion access, the tommy tuberville of it all, and then this provision, a bipartisan provision co-sponsored by marco rubio to stop donald trump from potentially pulling out of nato. >> right, and donny deutsche, once again, we have an example of republicans running around, far-right republicans running around spouting crazy talking points, damaging america's

military readiness. everybody knows tommy tuberville damaged america's military readiness for over a year. if you don't believe us, ask republican senators, you know, it's just like us refusing to fund ukraine. we're playing right into vladimir putin's hands, and republicans have said as much of their fellow republicans. here once again, you have bipartisan legislation passing. biden signing another bipartisan piece of legislation while crazy people on the far right and some on the far left say, oh. we can't do business with the other side in washington, d.c. things are just too hot, you know, too crazy. yet here we are. we're still -- we're still doing it, and joe biden's signing yet another bipartisan piece of legislation. >> you know, i'm going to coin a new tern, you know, joe. you yesterday were talking about the wonderful people who are enjoying all the fruits that's happening in this country, a

record stock market, a record low unemployment. >> yeah. >> record jobs, record bipartisan legislation, and there's a group called biden deniers, just like there are election deniers. there are biden deniers, and they can only deny the accomplishments of biden. >> by the way, if people are just tuning in, and they don't know, biden deniers is much nicer than the word i was trying to avoid saying, but these biden deniers are people, and we all know them. willie knows them. donny, you know them. i know them. i'm sure mara knows them as well. john knows them. they're people that drive around in ferraris, maseratis, in convertible mercedes, revved up bmws and, you know, make sure that everybody hears them screeching down the street, you know, and they get out of their cars and, you know, they're looking. you know them and see them all the time. >> half of them are my friends, yeah, yeah. >> half of them are your

friends. you go to lunch with them and while you're in the middle of talking baseball, they take out their phone and they're staring at it and they go, i just made $20,000 while you were eating salad. ha ha ha. you know? on their stocks, and they made so much money. they do it, don't they? they do that. then they bitch and whine they're making millions and millions of dollars off of joe biden's economy because they would say it was donald trump's economy. so what's fair for the goose is fair for the gander. so they made millions and millions of dollars, some of them billions of dollars in joe biden's economy, and then they put the phone down and they start talking about, joe biden's wrecking this economy. he's destroying america. he's a socialist. if you heard him talk, he's a socialist. he's not even running the country. they're biden deniers. the economy is doing incredibly

well, record job numbers throughout this first couple of years. we could go on and on and on. the stock market, higher than it's ever been, and these maserati-driving biden deniers, they keep on, don't they, donny? >> yeah, and i was laughing yesterday as you were going through this because as i said just now, these people are my friends to i would like to give a direct message. for those of you whose iras and stock markets are at an all-time high, i want to understand the issue with joe biden because all he's done is be successful. you can't get a straight answer out of them. you say, what's problem? well, he's too old. he's done a great job, and look at your pocketbook. look at your wallet, and the other thing that's so fascinating and i'll use the word stickiness, nothing sticks to biden that's good, and nothing sticks to trump that's bad. we live in a non-sticky world. this stuff has got start to stick to biden and for all my

friends who are about to tee off on the first hole at their country clubs, look at your net worth and joe biden is doing a very good job. >> well, i mean, yeah. that was their excuse. yeah, i know donald trump's a fascist, but i made a lot of money under donald trump. they're making more under joe biden who likes american democracy. so anyway, so john, we won't pull you into this conversation, but we will -- i do want to talk about, as we talk about the future of what's happening in israel and with ukraine aid and what's happening on the border, i would love for you if you could, we try to talk about it some, but i don't think our viewers and most americans have enough of an understanding of how there are three parties in washington, d.c. right now. there's the democratic party, there's the house republican party, and there's the senate republican party. can you explain how the senate

republicans are so different from the house republicans, and how they may in the end, be able to strike a deal with reasonable house members to actually get this big deal through? >> yeah, you're exactly right. there is the -- what you would think of the old pre-donald trump republican party, the last remnant of it is the senate republican conference. there's, you know, probably two-thirds of it that you would see as an old conservative, you know, republican -- what you and i grew up as a conservative republican business, but reasonable conservative, you know, have a very strong, muscular foreign policy if you would, so and then there's the america first element of the republican party which dominates in the house, and there's a growing number of them in the senate republican party. that's true. there are house members who have gotten elected to the senate or

they won an election in the trump era, and they are donald trump republicans, and that's the big tension in the republican party. it's mitch mcconnell leads that old -- with the old bastion of gop in the senate republican conference, but it's probably the last real, pre-donald trump remainder of party if you look at it. i do -- i don't -- i think you have to be careful though to say that, you know, there is a deal there. there is a potential for a deal there, but senate republicans -- trump is a big factor here and i do think we have to look at the calendar. we have, you know, iowa caucuses coming up in mid-january, and new hampshire. this would be -- if there's no deal before the holidays and congress has to come back and deal with this in january, you're going to have them talking about this just as voters start, you know, voting for trump, and trump is going to be the republican nominee barring some dramatic change,

and charge will play a role in this debate, and if trump doesn't like what he hears or if it suits him not to have a deal, but if it suits trump not to have a deal and have this issue hammering biden throughout the campaign, then it will be hard to strike a deal with with republican conference, and mike johnson. he's very conservative and he's not going to get out in front of himself on this, and it'll be hard for senate republicans to get out in front of house republicans on this. i think it's very complex inside the republican party here, and the calendar is a huge issue. if this had happened six months ago, say, i think we would have a different case. if mccarthy was the speaker and, you know, we weren't so pressing in the presidential election, but it's happening, you know, it's happening right now in the middle of what's beginning of the presidential campaign, and again, one other factor, they're going to impeach biden. no matter what they say, they're going to impeach biden. i think the house republicans are going to try to vote on an

impeachment of biden sometime in january or february likely, and so again, this is also a factor. so i think there's a lot of stuff going into this extraordinarily complex area. >> on the impeachment, we had the vote to open the inquiry, and it was unanimous even among republicans who were critical, and they said, we haven't seen any evidence. they voted to open the inquiry. was that a clear sign of trump's influence, and were you surprised that at least a small handful of republicans didn't go the other way? >> yeah. i mean, i was looking at guys like don bacon in nebraska who's a real rational member, you know, who had talked about, he wasn't sold on an inquiry, and then turned around and voted for it. i think -- honestly i hate to say it this way, but i think politically there's no downside for them.

these swing district republicans voting for an inquiry, that's the, you know, they believe that they're not -- biden is for better or worse, he's not very strong in the polls chiefly because of economic issues. opening an inquiry doesn't hurt them. it buys them some time with conservative groups on their right to humor them if they voted against it. i think they're looking at their own base and saying, you know, i've got my primary coming up, you know, i've got to go, you know, i've got to file and run so, you know, voting for an inquiry is one thing. now, you know, we'll have to see how well the white house does is rebutting this stuff. up until now, the white house has pushed hard, but i think it's dramatically upping its case there, and they need to do this. they need to push back against this and say there's no real evidence that joe biden did anything wrong. i think the white house has done a, you know, you can say what you want about hunter biden. i mean, that scene the other day was extraordinary. i haven't seen anything like it in my time, but, you know, they

need to push back on this harder. i think it's interesting these swing district republicans found that there's no real downside for them voting for an inquiry. coming up next, we'll talk to a columnist for israel's largest newspaper about escalating tensions between the white house and prime minister netanyahu. "morning joe" is back in a moment. tanyahu. "morning joe" is back in a moment

(vo) in three seconds, janice will win a speedboat.

(woman) bingo! i'm moving to the lake. gotta sell the house. (vo) ooh! that's a lot of work. (woman) ooh! (vo) don't worry. skip the hassels and sell directly to opendoor. (woman) bingo. (vo) get your competitive offer at opendoor dot com.

national security adviser jake sullivan is headed to the west bank today to meet with the leaders of the palestinian authority. it comes just one day after his meeting with israeli leaders during which he urged the country to shift to a more low-intensity operation in gaza. the white house also has been pushing for a two-state solution. that's something though benjamin netanyahu's government appears to be against. yesterday, israeli president isak herzog told the associated press now is not the time to discuss post-war plans as israel

is still healing from the attack of october 7th. joining us now, israeli columnist. his piece title "netanyahu heading for collision with biden over post-war gaza and more." it's great to have you with us. before we get to post-war gaza and you write about, let's talk about the here and now, which is the united states openly calling for israel to change its tactics, to change its strategy in the war, to stop the bombing and go to commandos who can take out hamas leaders, rescue hostages. what has been the israeli reaction to that proposal from the united states? >> thank you for having me, and basically this is about time. israel knew, and the idf knows that they're going to shift tactics soon. they would want to do that in the end of january. the biden administration wants this happening right after christmas or christmas vacation, and it was meant to happen

anyway, and there's not a lot of daylight here between jake sullivan now visiting israel and the palestinian territories and between the israelis in that sense, and we should take notice of what he said. he said that there is no deadline set in time with a specific date, but he was talking about several weeks, and in any case, the idf wanted to shift to a very targeted rate, and sometimes the attacks from the air from hamas don't remain in the same situation in which it's actually maneuvering within the gaza strip. it took control in the center and the north of the gaza strip right now, and it's trying to get a hold of the base or the plate in gaza, where the leader of hamas, the man who ordered the october 7th attack against israel. this is where he comes from. this is the most important regiment or division of hamas, and when the idf is over with

this place, and the idf would want to move to a specific tactic, a different tactic, and this is what the u.s. also wants to see in gaza. >> now nadav, this is david ignatius in washington. >> hi, david. >> i want to ask you to give us a political picture of the state of things in israel. we have been talking this morning about prime minister netanyahu, and a lot of questions that we hear in the united states. i know we repeat it in israel about his preparations for the war. >> yeah. >> some anger in israel. is that growing? do you see netanyahu's position weakening or in fighting against u.s. pressure on him, does he get stronger in israel? >> you know, david, you know very well the israeli politics, and you know how hectic it is, how intensive it is, but right now politically speaking, netanyahu is not a viable

candidate for the next election. he's just -- when you see the polls, his numbers are just, you know, as dead as you can see. he has no hope, at least in the polls we are seeing since october 7th and he's not doing any better according to the poll that is we're doing and we're seeing right now politically speaking. now the question i think your viewers might have in mind is, why is this man still in power? the answer is that this is a coalition government in israel. it's not the same as the u.s., but even in the u.s. after 9/11, president bush remained in power, and this is what we're seeing in israel. israel is so focused right now. both the public and people need to understand and acknowledge that we have a reserve army in this country. so many people that i know, many people, my friends, and my friends' daughters and sons are now serving.

it's a political situation right now, and an election right now seems impossible. the main kind of argument is does netanyahu need to resign right now or should he do this after this stage of the war? it's going to be, david, a long war. this is going to -- and you probably remember how much time it took to hit al qaeda and to get osama bin laden, how much tyke it took to hit isis and to get that over with. hamas is very strong. it's very much supported by the palestinian public. from the polls we're seeing, it's about 70% from gaza. it's difficult to get to that place in which you can root out hamas, and this is one of the reasons that the political crisis in israel is not advancing to replacing netanyahu. coming up, we'll go live to atlanta where former white house chief of staff mark meadows is

trying again to move his election interference case to federal court. a full breakdown of what to expect from fulton county when "morning joe" comes right back. ♪♪ county when "morning joe" comes right back ♪ hmmm... kind of needs to be more, squiggly? perfect! so now, do you have a driver's license? oh. what did you get us? [ chuckling ] with the click of a pen, you can a new volkswagen at the sign, then drive event. sign today and you're off in a new volkswagen during the sign, then drive event. switch to shopify and sell smarter at every stage of your business. take full control of your brand with your own custom store. scale faster with tools that let you manage every sale from every channel.

and sell more with the best converting checkout on the planet. a lot more. take your business to the next stage when you switch to shopify.

-dad, what's with your toenail? -oh, that...? i'm not sure... -it's a nail fungus infection. -...that's gross! -it's nothing, really... -it's contagious. you can even spread it to other people. -mom, come here! -don't worry about it. it'll go away on its own! -no, it won't go away on its own. it's an infection. you need a prescription. nail fungus is a contagious infection. at the first signs, show it to your doctor... ... and ask if jublia is right for you. jublia is a prescription medicine used to treat toenail fungus. its most common side effects include ingrown toenail, application site redness... ... itching, swelling, burning or stinging, blisters and pain. jublia is recognized by the apma. most commercially insured patients may pay as little as $0 copay. go to jubliarx.com now to get started.

loving this pay bump in our allowance. wonder where mom and dad got the extra money? maybe they won the lottery? maybe they inherited a fortune? maybe buried treasure? maybe it fell off a truck? maybe they heard that xfinity customers can save hundreds when they buy one unlimted line and get one free. now i can buy that electric scooter! i'm starting a private-equity fund that specializes in midcap. you do you. visit xfinitymobile.com today.

the evidence i think as things come out, will finally show what the trail is. >> once we show what the trail is, it'll lead us to a series of breadcrumbs, and then that will direct us right to a hint, and then the hint will suggest a map which will finally bring us to a riddle inside a conundrum and smothered in an enigma sauce. the point is i'm hungry. who wants lunch? coming up, one of our next

guests says the impeachment effort in the house will do more to elect president biden than anything else biden could do. michael tomaski joins us straight ahead on "morning joe." s straight ahead on "morning joe." the subway series is taking your favorite to the next level! like the #20. the elite chicken and bacon ranch. built with rotisserie-style chicken and double cheese. i love what i'm seeing here. that's some well-coached chicken. you done, peyton? the subway series just keeps gettin' better. ♪ if there's pain when you try to poo ♪ ♪ and going sometimes feels like you ♪ ♪ pushed through a pineapple or two ♪

♪ colace is the brand you need ♪ ♪ to soften stools, we're all agreed ♪ ♪ #2 should be easy to do ♪ trust colace to soften stools with no stimulants for comfortable relief. in the u.s. we see millions of cyber threats each year. tthat rate is increasing asls more and more businesses move to the cloud. - so, the question is... - cyber attack! as cyber criminals expand their toolkit, we must expand as well. we need to rethink... next level moments, need the next level network. [speaker continues in the background] the network with 24/7 built-in security. chip? at&t business.

hi, i'm kevin, and i've lost 152 pounds on golo. (uplifting music) my biggest concern when i started golo was food. i'm a big guy and, shockingly, i like to eat. i was worried it was gonna be like other diets that were bland and restrictive. but with golo, my meals are great, and i'm no longer hungry like i was before. i'm so pleased i gave golo a shot. don't wait, go to golo.com.

hey. welcome into the fourth hour of "morning joe." it's 6:00 a.m. on the west coast, 9:00 a.m. in the east. in a minute, we're going to be going live to the atlantic courthouse where former trump chief of staff mark meadows is try again to get his election interference case moved to federal court. the chances are good those attempts will fail again. we're also going to get new reporting on how the biden campaign is reacting to the impeachment inquiry vote against the president. in short, it's a really great

political christmas present for joe biden and the entire family. so i'm sure they want to say thank you, speaker johnson for that, a man who says he's the moses of the movement or something like that? i don't know. was moses ever involved in a big lie? no. i don't think so. so i don't think the comparison works, but first, we have new developments in the israel/hamas war. israeli forces continue to bomb parts of southern and northern gaza, but the biden administration is telling officials they need to transition to a lower intensity operation. nbc news chief foreign correspondent richard engel has the latest. >> reporter: as israel continues to attack gaza with the full force of its military to overthrow hamas, two u.s. officials tell nbc news the

biden administration wants israel to transition from a high-intensity military campaign to a targeted one, focusing on intelligence-driven commando raids and more targeted strikes. national security adviser jake sullivan in israel today saying it's up to the israeli government to decide when and how. >> there will be a transition to another phase of this war, one that is focused in more precise ways on targeting the leadership, and on intelligence-driven operations. >> reporter: israel's defense minister has suggested the israeli military still needs months of high-intensity combat to clear out hamas. president biden weighing in thursday. >> i want them to be focused on how to save civilian lives, not stop going after hamas, but be more careful. >> reporter: the israeli government says it's doing all it can to protect civilians in gaza with prior notifications of strikes by phone or leaflet. as a new u.s. intelligence

estimate says of the 29,000 bombs israel has dropped on gaza since october 7th, nearly half were unguided, so-called dumb bombs which are less precise. this refugee camp was hit by air strikes overnight. our camera crew arrived moments after one attack, and recorded as the wounded start emerging. children carried down the narrow alleys. some eventually making their way to a hospital. this boy shaking uncontrollably in shock. arab and u.s. officials in the middle east tell us they fear israel could defeat hamas in gaza, but make more enemies in the process. yesterday authorities in germany, denmark, and the netherlands arrested seven suspects including four described as long-term hamas members. they're accused of plotting to attack jewish institutions across europe as the u.s. is also on high alert for terror

threats elevated after the war began. >> nbc's richard engel reporting. meanwhile, a stark new report from the anti-defamation league reveals the u.s. recorded its highest number of anti-semitic incidents since the group began tracking them in 1979. since the terror attacks on israel, the adl recorded more than 2,000 anti-semitic incidences here in the u.s. that's an increase of 337% from a year ago. let's bring in the ceo of the anti-defamation league, jonathan greenblatt. thank you so much for being with us. so much to talk about, but first, let's talk about this report. the highest number of anti-semitic attacks since you all first started recording this in 1997, and let me just say again, for people at home that are saying yes, but you have a

lot of groups that are under attack right now, let's be very clear that the fbi released stats from last year that jews were the targets of 62% of hate crimes in the united states that were recorded, despite the fact jews make up about 2.1% of america's population. >> yeah. i mean, look, joe. this has been a problem for a long time, and keep in mind that our numbers this year, we're comparing them to last year which was the highest number we previously had ever seen. in an environment where we already had an elevated threat level, this is a tsunami. so we had at the adl, more than 12,000 reports last year. we investigate all of them. this year, joe, in two months, we have had almost half as many. in two months. so i don't ever remember a moment like this, and this is not just the typical, oh,

someone gets harassed, you know, on a street corner although that's bad enough. the tactics have intensified, joe. we've seen coordinated efforts to do things like, quote, target zionist businesses. now i mean, i think you and your audience knows there's no such thing as a zionist business. that's a euphemism for jewish, but we've seen vandalism and barrages of harassment directed at people going to, like, an ice cream shop in the bay area or a restaurant in philadelphia, or a gift shop in southern florida. big companies too like starbucks is being targeted for reasons that escape me because the ceo isn't jewish, and the company has no stores in israel. so we're seeing zionist businesses targeted. >> right. >> we're seeing congress -- members of congress. we've seen district offices

vandalized. dan goldman, his office in brooklyn, or monica de la cruz in texas. they're not even necessarily jewish, but because they voted a certain way, that suddenly puts them on the radar. adam smith, from the seattle area, his home was vandalized. >> right. >> so this is way beyond normal political protest, and, you know, we've talked about campuses before, joe. it is an epidemic on these college campuses. >> well, i'm wondering if you've seen any progress on college campuses. i have -- i've spoken with friends of my kids and talked to quite a few people that go to college campuses who say that the administrations on the campuses are being a bit more mindful. there are security forces out,

more cops -- campus cops out. have you -- have you picked up some help from administrators in understanding that young, jewish kids -- young, jewish kids who were just trying to get an education need to be able to walk across campus and be safe? >> yeah. the environments on these campuses is sort of not to be believed. at harvard university, arguably the most prestigious university in america, they had a menorah up for hanukkah, joe, and the administration made them take it down and put it away at night for fear that it would be vandalized and defaced. >> right. >> i mean, it's hard to believe at harvard that, again, they're not targeting in a pro-bb statute. they're not targeting some, you know, idf memorial. they're targeting a menorah

because it's jewish. so are we feeding -- >> let me ask you this. let me ask you this, jonathan, because we've -- you could go back -- people could go back and watch what i did on scarborough country back 21 years ago, and we were talking about this on college campuses. so let's be really clear that to anybody watching, anti-semitism has been growing quietly among elites, through administrators, college campuses, and of course, professors, through two decades, three decades. it's been a long time coming. i'm wondering though, do you feel like there is a reckoning now after what we saw on capitol hill? is there more of an understanding and a sensitivity to these administrators that have just been willfully -- if not anti-semitic, then willfully

unresponsive to any anti-semitic attacks against students, professors, and people in their college communities? >> yeah, joe, you have been on this issue for many years and i'm grateful for that, and you've just sort of hit the nail on the head. i mean, the truth is it's kind of a willful ignorance. like, liz magill at penn was not anti-semitic, but she seemed ignorant and unwilling to take the steps necessary to protect her jewish students and under the guise of political speech, they would allow the kind of harassment against jews they wouldn't allow against anyone else. at harvard, i'm hopeful that claudine gay will do better. that's what we all want, but we haven't yet seen action. there's a sort of hypocrisy here, joe. it's not about free speech. it's about favorite speech. you could say things about jews and israel that you could never say about any other minority or even country on campus. so all we want is for jews to be treated the same way as everyone

else. all we would ask for are protections. is it going to get better? i think it is, and i'm hopeful it will, and here's why. not because they presidents suddenly find their moral conscience, joe. it's because of title vi concerns. it's because the u.s. congress and elise stefanik are now subpoenaing them and initiating investigations. it's because literally yesterday, joe, the pennsylvania state legislature withheld a $33 million grant to the school of veterinary medicine at penn because of concerns that the university itself wasn't dealing with anti-semitism. so let's be clear with you and with the audience, i don't -- i don't care what it takes. i just want to make sure that jewish kids can walk to class without being assaulted, that jewish institutions -- >> can i ask you this? >> yeah. >> can i ask you this? when we always hear about follow the money, follow the money, and let's just say right here and

now, we are grateful for anybody that wants to contribute to american education. >> mm-hmm. >> i am curious though, your thoughts about the fact that qatar who by the way, the netanyahu government asked to fund hamas and to billions of dollars, qatar also has contributed to american universities, one of the largest donors to american universities, up to $5 billion in contributions, and they set up middle east studies programs and again, nothing wrong with middle east studies programs, but there is a decidedly anti-israel tilt to these studies programs. i'm curious, do we need to start taking a closer look at the billions and billions of dollars that these elite universities are getting from countries like qatar and saudi arabia and see how much it is impacting the

debate on campus? >> i'm less certain about saudi arabia, but qatar for sure. it's scandalous they pumped billions and billions and billions of dollars into our education system, and of course, there are consequences of that. of course, it leads the college president or administrator to think twice before doing something that might upset their patrons. it mean, it is really a problem. now there are some, you know, good news. i think that congress along with groups like adl and a group like fdd are now looking into how these funds were funneled into organizations like students were justice in palestinian that seem intent on harassing and targeting not -- again, israeli interests, but jewish students. that needs to be investigated by law enforcement. where did sjp get their money from? and then these other college presidents. you know, there have been a few positive signs. credit to christina paxton at brown who when students stormed

the administration building, joe, do you know what she did, joe? she had them arrested and fingerprinted and photographed. >> good for her. >> she said, there will be consequences. >> good for her. >> exactly. we need more presidents with a little bit of backbone to demonstrate there will be deterrence when students break the law or abuse the privileges they're afforded at these place. >> yeah, no doubt about it. ceo of the anti-defamation league, jonathan greenblatt, as always, thanks for being with us. let's bring in al sharpton and susan page, as well as eddie gloud jr. i'll start with you, rev. you and john greenblatt have done a lot of work together, fighting racism and anti-semitism together. you've gone shoulder to shoulder. i'm curious your thoughts on what you've heard from jonathan today. >> well, i think that what

jonathan raises is clearly something i agree, that we've got to deal with the rise of anti-semitism, but also deal with the rise of islamaphobia, and against blacks. you cannot have hate crimes only one way. jonathan joined me and others in having the hate crimes summit a year ago, over a year ago at the white house, and i think for those of us in other communities to denounce hate crimes and denounce hates against others than our own base is the challenge. if we only speak when it's in our particular area, then it has no kind of moral strength and it's really inconsistent, but at the same time, i think we cannot have people just on the sidelines try to bring things that has nothing to do with hate crimes into the arena like when i said -- i said it on this show the other day. when bill ackerman attacks the

president of harvard calling her a selected president and said she plagiarized to get there, that is as negative as those that would be silent about those that would say kill the jews marching around harvard university because you cannot come with a biased anti-affirmative action, anti-dei slant that had nothing to do with this black woman being president, and tried to in some way make that part of your argument that is a legitimate argument against people storming the campus saying, kill the jews. >> right, exactly. delegitimatizes that argument right away. eddie, i, of course -- you -- you are connected with princeton, a professor at princeton, and so you have more information than i do. when i say this, i say it out of a bit of ignorance, but princeton doesn't seem to have been a hotbed of sort of infighting. i look at colleges like

dartmouth where you had the head of middle eastern studies and the head of jewish studies get together. they had an open dialogue, and it's been really constructive and productive up at dartmouth, and kudos to them for having, again, having a tough talk. there are so many complicated issues involved in this debate. i'm wondering, your thoughts on the best way for colleges to proceed the next time a crisis like this comes up, and also what has worked at princeton and what hasn't worked? >> i think, first of all, joe, i think most institutions around the country are having difficult conversations. students are arguing, protesting, some civilly, some uncivilly. some of them are trading in noxious views and others are just simply putting forward a position in defense of the rights of palestinians, and i think that's happening for the most part across the 4,000-plus four-year university and

degree-granting colleges across campus, and so when you invoke dartmouth or princeton, we're talking about different cultures, right? brown has a different kind of historical culture. it has a protest culture just like berkeley has. for my former colleague christine paxton to do what she's done, she has in some ways kind of cut against the grain of the kind of ease off at brown in an interesting sort of way. i want to say this very clearly. there are some folk who are out here claiming that the universities and colleges are these hotbeds of anti-semitism and liberalism. i just beg to disagree, joe. i have been working in this space for 30-plus years. i'm one of those professors who are often read as radical because i teach in african american studies, and there's -- anti-semitism is not at the heart of what we're doing. we're trying to create a world of seeing it that opens it up to the world of vast diversity in

this world, and it seems the anti-semitism that has defined the country over these last few years has been exaggerated -- not exaggerated, ignited, grown, expanded as a result of the israel/hamas war, and we have to understand we're in a moment where the country has forgotten how to disagree, and students are arguing in that context. i don't know if that made sense, but there's a lot bubbling up in me after i heard greenblatt give his comments. >> i mean, but even before the hamas -- the vicious hamas terror attacks of october 7th last year -- >> mm-hmm. >> -- 60% of the hate crimes recorded last year were recorded against jews, and jews only make up a little bit over 2% of the population, eddie. >> absolutely. >> that has nothing to do with the war, and i will say, i have been doing this for 20, 30 years myself, and i can tell you that

there has been anti-semitism on college campuses, and it always seems that these stories bubble up time and time again through the years and for some reason, there are elites that have a blind spot towards -- towards jews, and a penchant for hatred towards israel because they see israel as the opresser. it fits naturally into their analytical construct of the world. >> right, so i think it's important for us to concede the claim there has been, in fact, an exponential increase for anti-semitism. we can give an account. having everything to do with great replacement theory, having everything to do with trumpism and maga republicans, and we can give it a count of the very thing that you've talked about, the tree of life massacre. we can give an account of that, joe, but i think it's really important for us to understand the context of the critique of the state of israel.

it's not just simply rooted in a deep-seated hatred of jews. >> right. >> people could have a critique of the state of israel vis-a-vis palestinians without trading in the ugliness of anti-semitism, and i think this is where we begin to disentangle the critique. >> this morning we have been very critical of the -- >> of course. of course, you have. >> -- the new government, and we have been critical for some time, and there are an awful lot of people who -- a lot of jews who have been critical of the netanyahu regime, but that -- there's a big difference between that and jews -- the kids not being able to walk across the college campus without being berated or harassed. or menorahs not being able to be put up on college campuses without them being deface sgld

-- defaced. >> you're conflating two points here. i said, they hold protests. some hold noxious views and some are unacceptable. i completely agree with that. what i'm saying is this, there are professors like myself who hold their view, that the state of israel's position vis-a-vis palestinians is wrong, and i can give an account for it because i hold a view consistent with the tradition out of which i come that every human being as a creature of god, deserves dignity and standing. should be treated with respect. >> right. we agree. we agree on these points. >> that's the source of critique. now this has happened in the context of the explosion of the war in gaza, and all of a sudden, everything is coming out and then we're painting with these very broad brushes, my friend, and what i'm trying to suggest very honestly and lovingly is what is being described -- how what's happening on campuses is being

described isn't correct in my view. it's too broad of a brush. >> eddie, there are jewish parents that would say you are living on another planet. their children stay in their dorm rooms. they are scared to go to classes. their parents call them and tell them, stay inside today. >> yeah. >> it is happening, eddie, and i'm surprised that you don't know that that is happening when you are -- i love you. i just can't -- i can't let you say that this is not happening on college campuses because i know it is. >> joe, i'm saying that it's happening in spaces. i said painting with a broad brush. painting with a broad brush because what's happening is that we're linking -- we're linking these discussions as a way of critiquing colleges and universities as these hotbed spaces of liberalism, that that's the problem, that wokism is the problem, that liberalism

is the problem, so we need to disentangle what are rightfully genuinely fears on the part of students, walking around on campus, but we cannot it seems to me, let this bleed into a criticism of these -- of colleges and universities as these illiberal spaces overrun -- >> they are illiberal, eddie. they are illiberal. there have been speech codes on college campuses, kids who have been bubble wrapped for five, six, seven, eight, nine years. bubble wrapped. they need their own safe spaces. you're not allowed to say this. eddie, if you don't think that your students aren't afraid to raise their hands and say something that's unpopular that will get them canceled on social media, then you don't know what's going on in your own campuses. kids who are conservative, kids

who are liberal, kids who identify themselves as progressive, they are horrified of being canceled on college campuses because the illiberalism that has continued to rise on college campuses for the past seven years now suddenly -- suddenly, it's jews who are getting harassed and people are going, we have to have free speech. no safe spaces. please, let's not bubble wrap these jewish kids. let's just -- we can have the debate. come on, eddie. where have you been, my friend? >> but joe, let me say this. i think we often say two things can be right at the same time. >> amen. >> first of all, i think that the fear of many jewish students are real fear. >> that's genuine. genuine. >> i think if somebody's running around campus talking about kill the jews -- >> i don't think that's happening. >> there are reports that are credible that say that. just like when they say kill the

blacks, but it happens in a context where i think your point is right where we saw people marching in charlottesville saying, we will not be replaced, and when you have somebody like congresswoman stefanik saying, this person shouldn't be a president of the university because they tolerate anti-semitism or tolerate any of this, but she should be the president of a university, but donald trump who's a bigot should be the president of the united states. the same congresswoman. i think those we can't step over the fear because when i hear someone say, well, let's not worry about a student in a space. >> of course. >> it's like somebody saying to me, well, what happened with george floyd was just one guy, and then there's not a problem with policing. there's a problem of policing. there's a problem of anti-semitism. it's a problem of racism, and we've got to deal with people at their pain, and use that for the broader argument. >> i think you're absolutely right and we don't want to lose sight of the dignity and standing of every human being of every student. >> right. >> but there's something we keep

forgetting and i think we have to keep it on the table. as we have this debate, there are folk who are defending a position whether you agree with it or not, that palestinians are, in fact, bearing the brunt of oppression. there's an argument -- >> no one doubts that. >> we agree with that. i think we all agree with that. >> okay, joe, and i know sister susan, i'm sorry. in the midst of these arguments on campus, it's not just simply one side being an argument -- directed at jews. it's an argument in defense of palestinians, and sometimes the defense of palestinians is being read as an anti-semitic claim, and if we can't distinguish it, then we're going to paint the whole place with a brush. >> many of us were accused of supporting rioters when we were there saying we're marching against injustice. >> mm-hmm.

>> we can't excuse the rioting. >> i'm not excusing it. >> i'm saying that we have to have the moral courage to say we disagree with that, but this is our position. i'm as anti-netanyahu as anybody in our country. >> i agree. >> that does not mean i don't support a two-state of solution, and calling for the killing of either side, either people is not a two-state solution. that is feeding into the survival of the fittest. >> the killing of innocents is never justified, ever, ever, period. i agree with you wholeheartedly. >> let's be very clear here. you can be critical of netanyahu's policies which we are here every morning and still condemn the anti-semitism on college campuses, and let me say one more time this did not start with this war. there has been anti-semitism on college campuses for years and anti-semitism across the united states has been growing for years. >> right. >> it has found a safe haven on the far right and on the far

left for years. so -- >> my friend. >> more to come with this conversation, eddie. it's so good to have you here, man. it's so good to have you here. love you, and we'll -- by the way, eddie, i just have to say and alex is yelling at me to move on, but -- >> sorry, alex. >> do me this favor, and i'll do a favor for you in return so we'll both have a better understanding of each other's sides. try to find some college students on your campus who are afraid to speak out and raise their hand because they're awe -- afraid if they say something unpopular they'll be canceled. i've heard from that so many kids who are so -- who are progressives, who are liberals, who are moderates. of course, conservatives feel

that way too, but it's far more prevalent on college campuses than perhaps you think. >> okay. i'll ask my colleague robbie george to have this conversation with me since we're very different folks on the same campus. i promise. >> that sounds great, and you give me a challenge by the end of the show and i'll do that too. >> you got it. >> we're going to -- i promise we're going to get susan page in. >> sorry, susan. >> on this next story. sorry, susan. i'm so sorry. the biden campaign says wednesday's impeachment inquiry was a big boost and kamala harris pitched donors supporters saying, they're going to throw everything they have at joe because they know they can't run against our record, and by the way, they don't have a record to run on, and if you don't believe me, just ask chip roy who screamed in an empty chamber, we've done nothing. we've done nothing, he said of the house republicans.

the biden campaign called this the best fund-raising pitch. let's bring in michael tomasky. he joins us with his new piece "this impeachment will do more to re-elect biden than anything biden could do himself," and michael, i could tell him that. i could tell him that. we impeached bill clinton back in the 1990s, and his approval rating spiked into the 60s, and impeachment always backfires. it backfires when the republicans don't even know why they're impeaching him. >> there's no evidence. i mean, let's stipulate that maybe they're sitting on something they haven't told us about yet. okay. just to say that and get to that out of the way, but joe, there's no evidence. we have been watching them for nearly a year now since they have had control of the house of representatives, try to hold these hearings, comer and

jordan. it's been like a marx brothers movie. their own witnesses contradicting their claims and so on and so forth, so, you know, it's been ridiculous so far, and yeah. i'm not surprised at that spike in fund-raising, and this is why i argue that it's going to help biden and i'm in the the only one. a lot of people are saying this. it will energize the base in a lot of ways that isn't very energized right now very obviously, and we say, this will come down to fewer than a hundred thousand swing voters in states. if they end up shooting blanks like many of us expect they will, are those swing voters going to be persuaded? they think they wasted all this money and all this time? and meanwhile a congress that has only enacted 12 bills into law and has done nothing, and this is their priority, it's christmas for biden. >> i have a question for you,

but first i wanted to say one short thing about the previous discussion which i listened to with great interest, and that is eddie said we have forgotten how to disagree. we have forgotten to have a conversation about things in which we did, and that's often true in washington, but i have to say the discussion that eddie and joe had was an example of the reverse. this is an issue about which they both feel strongly. it's complicated and inflammatory and you managed to say what you had to say, and have a little affect on the other. to go to your piece, do you think the house republicans inevitably will approve articles of impeachment when this inquiry is over? >> not clear, susan. as i point out in the piece, there are 17 republicans in the house. there used to be 18, but now mr. santos is gone. there are 17 republicans in the district who represent districts

where joe biden beat donald trump by 12 or 13 points. they did vote for this vote the other day to begin the proceeding, but will they vote articles through? that's a really good question, you know, and if that -- if they don't even do that, if speaker johnson can't get that done, then boy, that's really embarrassing for the republicans and here comes another motion to vacate, probably. >> michael, sharpton here. when you look at the energizing of the base voters that president biden needs, do you feel that they are not only trying to impeach him, but the fact they seem to be painting with a broad brush his son's indictment implying or in some cases outright saying that biden was involved? do you see -- i remember we saw this when they went after bill clinton, and it really drove a lot of people to bill clinton's

side that they felt the unfairness was there. are you seeing this impossible current if the democrats use this in a way to go to the base and talk about this? it's not just going to happen on its own. >> yeah. they do have to use it. they have to exploit it and talk about it and make a big deal of it. you know, we have to see how it plays out, al. i mean, as susan's question suggested, they might not even advance articles and send them over to the senate, but if they do and there's a senate trial, and it drags out into next fall and joe biden is acquitted handily as he certainly will be in the senate -- i can't picture -- i mean, it's just impossible that there will be 67 votes to remove him from office. >> yeah. i think it could be -- the timing of it could be just great for the biden campaign. >> you know, michael, stack that up with a strong economy. >> yeah.

>> three rate cuts, three rate cuts next year. >> yeah. >> the fact that you have a radical -- a radical house speaker who's professing himself to be everything from moses to jesus' called speaker to you name it, and then the house republicans doing absolutely nothing. as chip roy said, i mean, this is lining up -- i'm sorry. i know democrats like to be negative. i think this is lining up extraordinarily well for joe biden next year. >> it's hard for a lot of democrats and liberals to come around to that point of view right now, but i see what you are saying and of the things you ticked off, joe, the most important things so far was your mention of the fed and the rate reductions next year, and what jerome powell said the other day that was a momentous piece of news this week i think, and if we really do get back down to 2%

inflation without hitting recession and memories of the bad inflation fade in voters' minds, then i think we'll start to see finally some of the good attach to biden. i was watching your segment with donny deutsche earlier today where everything bad sticks to biden and everything good sticks to trump. >> yeah. >> we may see that flip. >> and michael, you'll remember 1983 as well. ronald reagan, horrible economy, 35% approval rating. the next year, he wins with 49 states. michael tomasky as always, thank you so much. appreciate it. >> thank you. all right. happening this hour in fulton county, georgia is a hearing of former trump white house chief of staff mark meadows and his attempt to get his rico case moved to federal court. let's go to blayne alexander live in front of the courthouse.

what's the latest there? >> reporter: right now we're listening to the arguments. we're listening to it via a livestream, and what's happening inside this building behind me is each side has basically 15 minutes to argue before a panel of judges. right now we are hearing from the attorney for mark meadows here in georgia. he's giving his rebuttal, but basically he's making the case that everything that mark meadows did as the white house chief of staff falls under his duties, therefore they fall under his federal duties and his actions should be moved to federal court. what we have been hearing is interesting. it's been harkening back in many occasions to meadows' testimony he gave several months ago before a federal judge here in georgia basically saying he was on the stand for about three hours or so, saying everything he did fell under the pale of his white house chief of staff. it's worth reminding our viewers what he's being charged with here in fulton county, and they stem from that now infamous phone call he helped set up between then-president donald trump and secretary of state

here in georgia, brad raffensperger, in which trump asked the secretary of state to find enough votes to overturn his election victory in georgia. he says that and anything else he did fell under his duties as chief of staff, but the state here of the fulton county da's office is arguing that's not the case. there's a number of things as established by the district judge who said that this can't be removed, that make it clear that this did not fall under the pale of his duties as chief of staff. it's interesting when we look at what the judge ruled in the first place, he said that his actions there actually had more to do with campaign issues. he was acting more behalf of the trump campaign than he was as the president's chief of staff. what we've heard for the past 30 minutes or so, joe, is this back and forth argument. the judge challenging both meadows' team and the da's team. it's interesting why he's trying to move to federal court. if he does, he can claim federal

immunity. if he is successful, he will be put to a more friendly jury pool, drawing from citizens not just of fulton county, but the entire northern district of georgia which includes red counties as well. >> blayne alexander, as always, thank you so much. we greatly appreciate it. >> you got it. all right. with us now, let's bring in andrew weissmann. he's the head of "prosecuting donald trump." you can't blame him for trying to get a better jury pool, but this question's already been answered and it seems obvious, doesn't it? it's all about politics. this was all about the campaign. this wasn't about any chief of staff duty in the white house, was it? >> well, that is exactly what the judges are grilling the counsel for mark meadows about

right now saying it cannot be the case just because you worked in the white house that everything you do is within the office of the presidency. they say, i think correctly, that if you are campaigning for office, that is something that is not part of your official duties just as if you were not in the white house and campaigning to be president. the d.c. circuit recently issued a ruling saying just that. so so far, although, you know, you never can tell from oral arguments, so far the oral argument seems to be suggesting exactly what i say, joe, which is this is a very uphill battle. the other thing the chief judge is asking, does this really even apply to somebody who was a former official? the concern about interference with the administration, that sort of white house administration doesn't exist when you're talking about a

former official as chief judge pryor said. there's nothing about this prosecution of mark meadows that's going to interfere with the current administration of president biden. so the need for removal to federal court is not existent. at least those are the questions that chief judge breyer is asking right now. >> even if he loses -- even if mark meadows loses, which, you know, i think we would probably expect, is there an advantage to him just in the delay of the process in the fact that the judge panel has to come back and consider it? does it muck up the works in some way that's potentially helpful to mark meadows? >> i don't think so just because right now there's no trial date. you know, right now it's in a different posture than we're seeing in the d.c. federal case where it's causing a stay of

that case, and so at the federal level, former president trump has really managed to gum up the works, but i think with mark meadows, i don't expect that this will change the trial date. remember, this is sort of small potatoes in terms of whether he wins or doesn't on this. he may change the judge or the jury pool as blayne said, but other than that, the biggest change is that there are no cameras in the courtroom if there were to be a federal trial, but the prosecutors stay the same. the law stays the same. it's still going to be governed by state law. the ability for him to claim immunity which i think is also a long shot is the same. so there isn't a lot at stake here, i think other than i think for the public, it will obviously be much more preferable to be able to see the trial, and that will happen if it remains in state court. >> all right, andrew, stay with

us for the next segment featuring the new amazon documentary "silver dollar road." it tells a story of the reals family and their fight to keep their land in north carolina. take look. >> their property was so valuable, and not from a monetary standpoint, but valuable because of the history. >> the first owner of the property, he was born in slavery times. >> my great-grandfather died without a living will. >> before he died, he said, and whatever you do, don't let the white man have my land. >> there's word of a part of the property being sold so someone else that the family had no knowledge of. >> we was getting threats. it came down and put eviction notice on the houses. >> my uncle melvin told me, i need your help. if they're saying we have to sign our rights away or go to jail, i'm going to jail. it was heartbreaking to see them

chained. >> i went in at 52, and come out at 61. >> the film is based off a 2019 article co-published by the propublica and "the new yorker," how people stripped land ownership of black families such as the reels family. we have the director of that film with us. thank you so much for being with us, mr. peck. >> thank you for having me. >> tell us about this story and why it was so important for you to make this documentary. >> well, i had read "the new yorker" article from lizzie presser and i'm a part of viola davis' company, and they rt to produce and eventually direct the film, and of course, it's such an incredible story of not

only two men being imprisoned for eight years for basically contempt, something that is unheard of in the legal history of this country, but also it's a way to tell the story of america through its minorities through different eyes, you know? you know, land had been at the center of the history of this country. >> andrew? >> well, raul, i was wondering if you could talk to us about the nature of the problem. this film is sort of extraordinary in the way it tells the story through one family, but what's the bigger issue with the heir's property legal structure that you were trying to shine a light on? >> well, his property is a way to handle land that an owner

leaves to his family. he doesn't register it with a title, but it's basically he said the whole rest of the family will inherit it. meaning for generations, you can have land that is owned by 300, 400 members, and those members go throughout the land. so they thought because black families usually don't trust the justice system for the reasons we know, they basically thought that the land was more secure because there was not a specific owner, but, in fact, it's the contrary because there are a number of laws that exist, you know, like adverse provision, the torrence law, et cetera, that enables promoters or speculators to have access to this land that is, in fact, legally fragile. >> mr. peck -- >> this is a problem throughout the, you know, throughout the

whole belt -- what's called the black belt of the u.s. from texas to the north carolinas. >> mr. peck, this is eddie glaude. i'm a huge fan. i want to ask you this question about how do you capture visually the injustice, right? you do it so well in the other films. what do you want -- how are you training our eyes to see in this film? >> first of all, i took some decision artistically and politically to say, i want this family to be able to tell their story themselves. i didn't want to include talking heads, explaining to us the legal conundrum, where no one else could understand how the kids got to that worst situation. so i wanted to introduce the

reel family history embedded in the history of this country, you know? the displacement of them in these nations and the lack of ownership of the black population on land when we know that land is the core element, you know, that built that land even the beginning of the capitalism to what the united states had. it was land and free labor. that made the difference. so when one part of the population don't have access to land, you can imagine what the consequences are in terms of roots, identity, the capacity to accumulate wealth, and even worse, to transfer wealth over multiple generations. so that brings us to today in what, you know, every social situation that we're encountering today including gentrification all linked to

story since the beginning, you know, from, you know, lift yourself by your own boot straps but with what? >> all right, raul pecks, silver dollar road is streaming now on amazon prime. mr. peck, a great honor to have you here with us today. thank you so much. and nbc news legal analyst andrew weissmann, thank you as well. and coming up on "morning joe," our next guest says there are actually some good news out of our national division. we're back in two minutes. n. we're back in two minutes. (vo) don't worry. skip the hassels and sell directly to opendoor. (woman) bingo. (vo) get your competitive offer at opendoor dot com. switch to shopify and sell smarter at every stage of your business. take full control of your brand with your own custom store. scale faster with tools that let you manage every sale from every channel.

and sell more with the best converting checkout on the planet. a lot more. take your business to the next stage when you switch to shopify.

a new poll that shows that very few americans are excited about a possible rematch between biden and trump. people are not excited, the poll was pretty crazy. the poll also showed that people are -- what they're actually more excited for. >> really? >> people are more excited for an old fashioned wide awake

colonoscopy. >> as we head into another election year, one of the only things americans seem to be able to agree on is that the country feels more divided than at any time in recent memory. let's bring in the cofounder of cnbc tom rogers, patricia duff, her group has new polling out today examining just how split americans are, and let's go to reverend al for the first question, rev. >> when you, patricia, when you talk about how divided americans are and i think that we've been talking about that the last three hours today, i think that some of the data that you can give us talks about how it is underground because i think there's so much screaming at each other on all sides that people don't understand that this division is real and how can we reconcile it if we don't first recognize there is a division. so what have you found? >> well, we found that it is extremely important problem for

our country because it stymies political governance. that's one of the big takeaways from our poll and our survey that we do annually, so people are very concerned about whether we can get anything done, and one of the most -- i would say one of the good stories out of this is that most of our respondents would prefer compromise. they want to see their elected officials willing to work with the other side, willing to debate these issues in a productive way and get things done, rather than just operate on principle and wait for everything that they want. so that's really important. >> so tom, this idea of compromise is so important, it means our politics have really broken given this data, right? what about young folk? in terms of the data, what does the young demographic suggest? >> it's really stark here because what you have going is

substantial majority of people as patricia said wanting compromise. 71% overall, and that's not just among centrists, that's republicans, that's independents, that's democrats. the number's pretty close across the entire spectrum. older people are more in favor of compromise. what fell out in terms of far less interest in compromise was younger demographics. far less concerned about divisiveness and polarization. far less concerned about the role social media plays in that, which given the amount of time younger demographics spend on social media, maybe that's not all that surprising. but what underlies us here is that three-quarters of people believe politicians foster divisiveness for self-interest. and what's hopeful is that there actually is a ground swell of support for compromise. >> so people say, tom and

patricia, that they want compromise. as you just said, a majority of moderates and liberals and conservatives and republicans and democrats believe that. why don't they get that? we occasionally have compromise here in washington, the defense authorization act passed the house yesterday, that was a good thing, but by and large, the government is pretty much frozen into inaction because of an unwillingness on the parts particularly of the most conservative republicans to compromise. why do they get that when voters say they want something else? >> well, it's a great question, susan, and i think there's no loss of concern among voters in terms of what polarization does. it threatens democracy is the view overwhelmingly. it makes government ineffective is the view overwhelmingly. what drives this is the one-quarter of people who are at the extremes that given gerrymandered congressional districts make it very expedient

to play to the polls as opposed to play to the majority when it comes to preserving as the poll results show, self-interest of politicians wanting to preserve their role in gerrymandered districts. i think this is going to get very important to watch, though, as we deal with the ultimate big issues of compromise. ukraine is real, the border where we know that the senate is involved in a compromise process, the house looks like it's about to reject even the notion of engaging in compromise and when representatives are home in their districts, especially the 18 or now 17 that are in biden districts that are republicans, are they going to get an earful about, hey, we care much more about compromise than you staking out a position that avoids getting anything done. >> patricia, what tom just said, isn't that really the answer? is that the majority, the people that you polled that want compromise has to stand up to the extremes on both sides and

say we need to go forward? >> absolutely. in fact, our poll shows that there is concern with the parties themselves. 48% of our respondents believe that republicans are -- move towards the extremes more than the moderate part of their party. same thing with democrats is 41% of democrats think that there's too much of the extremes on the democratic side instead of the moderates. so there is a tremendous appetite for a moderation of viewpoints, and the other thing that we found in our poll is that americans want to hear about shared values. at the top of our -- of those things that americans feel will unite us, they think that national crises could unite us, a tornado, a natural disaster or a war, but top of that is shared

values and americans overwhelmingly want to see american history and principles taught in civics education. >> all right, news week's tom rogers and founder of the common good, patricia duff, thank you both so much. and speaking of compromising and everybody coming to the, first of all, susan page, thank you so much for your kind, moving words, greatly appreciate it. and for people that are watching and are uninitiated and they don't know, eddie and i love each other, respect each other, and we've even gotten each other out of jams before on -- i forget what that app was called, eddie, but we shouldn't have been talking on that app. but love and respect to you, eddie, same with reverend al. >> i try to bring us together. i try to bring us together. i'm pastoring both of you this morning. >> you always do and all the people said -- >> amen. >> amen. >> and eddie, i'm