[ laughter ] >> allow me to describe that answer in one word. what the hell are you talking about? let me get this straight. new york is the greatest city on the globe because sometimes stores open, but also you never know when there might a terrorist attack? it reminds me of that alicia keys song. ♪ ♪ somehow she's got it. she's got the pipes. >> wow, good morning. welcome to "morning joe." >> there's nothing like a new panera store. >> i'm so confused by that sound

byte is and that answer. with us this morning we have mike barnacle, mara gay, georgeway and staff writer david from. a lot going on this morning. we start with that historic decision. the colorado supreme court has ruled donald trump is disqualify ed from holding office again after determining he engaged in insurrection on january 6th, 2021. the fourth ruling keeps the former president off the state's presidential primary lot next year. the court stayed its decision until january 4th to allow for any further appeals, and the trump team is already vowing they will be doing just that. but the fourth is just one day before the deadline for the state to print its presidential primary ballots. colorado secretary of state discussed the tight timeline in

an interview last night on msnbc. >> if they take the case, we will make clear to the court that the deadlines and the timelines. the bigger thing is if the court does not take the case, as of january 5th, if the u.s. supreme court does not take the case or intervene, donald trump will not be on the presidential primary ballot. >> the lawsuit was brought by six colorado rt voters backed by a group called citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington. the complaint cites section 3 of the 14th amendment to the constitution which states, any officer of the united states who engages in an insurrection cannot hold office again. adopted in 1868, the measure was meant to keep former confederates from returning to power after the war. the lower court ruling agreed,

trump was involved in an insurrection, but said the statute did not apply to presidents. at least five states have seen similar challenges, but the colorado one is the first one that was successful. in their ruling, the judges note the gravy their decision. we do not reach these conclusions lightl we are mindful of the magnitude and the weight of e questions now before us. we are like wise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, wiout fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach. the trump campaign plans to immediately appeal. the decision to the u.s. supreme court. in a statement trump's lawyer said the ruling, quote, attacks the very heart of this nation's democracy. >> so it's important to remember, just as we back up, we're going to be talking about

whether this goes forward or not, whether it's going to be successful or not, it's important to remember this theory was first brought forward by a couple members of the federalist society, strict constructionists, to conservative legal scholars who are respected among conservatives. so it's fascinating. speaking of conservatives and conservative's reactions to this, a couple notable, "new york times" columnist david french posted this, quote, this decision is absolutely correct. it's a bold, courageous decision, but it's a correct decision. one cannot ignore the constitution simply because applying its clear terms creates political anger. meanwhile, retired judge jay ludig, who serve issed on the court of appeals, this is a

very, very important. section 3 disqualifies one who is engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the constitution of the united states, not an insurrection or rebellion against the united states or the authority of the united states. so there are a couple of view points from the right. this theory was first put forward by two conservative members of the federalist society. i'm curious your thoughts, your reaction, and where we go from here. >> i have to say, i have been a little skeptical of this theory until last night. now i'm completely sold. i was sold by the dissents. i have been skeptical not buzz i found anything that the professors said was wrong.

i read their article and said, wow, that makes a lot of sense. i read what the judge said in the atlantic and the judge has been talking my ear off about it. i just thought, well, it's a little too good to be true. i really do want to see donald trump beaten at the polls. so i have been a little skeptical. then i read the dissents. they are so unbelievably weak that i'm now convinced there really isn't an argument against what the supreme court did. and let me unpack that a little. there were three separate dissents, i don't know anything about the judges, but they are competent lawyers -- >> george, let's do this. let's go to david really quickly. we have to fix your mic alex, if

you can help fix your mic. you wrote about this. we'll get back to george. it's fascinating talking abts the weakness and what that may have on the supreme cour ruling. your latest article is titled "the colorado supreme court just gave republicans a chance to save themselves." >> i it you write this, the u.s. supreme court now has the opportunity to offer republicans an exit from their trump predicament, in time to let the some non-insurrectionist candidate win the republican nomination and contest the presidency. the colorado court has invited the u.s. political system away from authoritarian disaster, back to normal politics, back to a race where the biden/harris ticket faces more or less normal opponents rather than an ex-president who openly yearns to be a dictator. until now, trump support irs have been protecting biden from his own weaknesses by insising on nominating an even weaker alternative.

if upheld by the supreme court, the decision might yet save the gop from itself. will the gop consent to be rescued? this reminds me of what liz cheney was saying on fox news on monday night, where she was saying there are other candidates who can stand up for this party and bring it back to its roots. and a good fight. >> david, the question is as we look forward to what the supreme court does here, obviously, you have a roberts court that, yes, is conservative in many ways, but also roberts himself is conservative with a small c, an institutionalist. one of his most famous rulings was upholding obamacare. don't us to do from the bench what you all can do from your voting booths next year. i'm wondering if that -- despite the fact that this is a strong legal argument, according to

most conservative jurorists, despite that fact, the institutionalists in the roberts court will say, we're going to let the voters decide this. >> that's why the remarks from republican candidates over the past 12 hours or so have been so important. because this court is highly ideological. it's highly political. it's attune to what republicans want. if republicans, like haley and desantis, give the supreme court this very pro republican supreme court a permission, they may act. if not, they won't. like george conway, i was president of the federal society the same year he was president of the yale school federal society. i was skeptical of this approach. but one reason i was skeptical, i wrote an article warning that the courts would never do it, but one reason i was so worried about it, i thought this case would arise in the summer when

it would be trump vs. biden. but it's arising at the end of the 2023. it's trump vs. haley and desantis. if the supreme court says, you know what, they are right in colorado. trump is an insurrectionist, the candidates they are boosting is not democrats. they are fellow republicans. if only the republicans will accept the lifelin the courts could throw them. >> i think we have george conway back now. you were talking prior to your microphone problems about the dissent in this decision. read the decision last night and like you, i was struck by the language and that it seemed to me non-ideological, not threatening about the opinion. let's continue with your view of what you read. >> i agree with that assessment, but it goes more than that. the dissents were logically

weak. even if you don't have a lot of rhetoric in a dissent, you often have just this logic that slices and dices the majority opinion to bits. and there was none of that. there was nothing in this opinion -- in fact, the opinion doesn't really talk about the real issues in the case. they don't say, they don't dispute that donald trump engaged in insurrection or that section 3 of the 14th amendment bars people who engage in insurrection from running for president or anything else. what they talked about mostly was state law and state law doesn't matter anymore because the supreme court of the united states cannot overturn findings of state law made by the highest court. not only that, even the things that the dissentses were saying about state law seemed kind of trivial and weak. they were saying things like, oh, this is too complicated for our electoral litigation system, which is ludicrous.

you remember the litigation? that can get very complicated. and these systems are designed to are solve that rather quickly. people can go to jail in criminal cases on five-day bench trials. the other thing, they said our colorado law only deals with qualifications, not disqualifications. that's just nonsense. logically, every qualification is a disqualification and vice versa. the constitution says you have to be 35 to serve as president of the united states. that means, there's a diskwufgs. if you're 34 years and 9 months, forget it. and the closest ta they come to talking about the nertss of the case was a legal discussion in one of the dissents about whether section 3 of the 14th amendment is self-executing. and that argument is that you can't just take section 3, which

say what is it says, and just apply it. they need congress to tell them how to do it. that's ridiculous too. because there are other provisions in the 14th amendment, most noticeably section 1. nobody says there's no text yule basis for saying that provision is not self-executing. because if it were, that means you don't need a law from congress to say you can't discriminate against the base. the same thing here. the weakness of the dissents, when there's an i appellate court decision that could go to the supreme court, i red the dissent to see what the battle lines are. and if trump going to win in the

supreme court, he has to come up with better arguments. and those justices need to come up with better arguments. >> wow. donald trump's republican rivals are backing him against the colorado court decision posting on social media, ron desantis called the ruling wrote skotuc should reverse. here's nikki haley and chris christie. >> we don't need to have judges making decisions. we need voters to make these decisions. i want to see this in the hands of the voters. we're going to win this the right way. we're going to do what we need to do, butt last thing we want is judging telling us who can and can't be on the ballot. >> i do not believe donald trump should be prevented from being president of the united states by any court.

i think it should be prevented from being president of of the united states by the voters of this country. >> the only candidate who didn't immediately condemn the ruling was asa hutchinson. so. >> i think his statement is interesting. >> go ahead and put it up there. >> the factual finding that he supported insurrection will haunt his candidacy. >> what do you say to the republican candidates argument that this should be -- the voters should have the say and not the courts? >> why are you standing with confederates who betrayed this had country? this is what they are standing with is the spirit of those confederates rather than the americans who came together after a long and brutal civil war that was fought to keep the union together.

and clearly saw a threat in ex-confederates running for office, so much so that they amended the constitution to prevent those traders from running for office. that send a message that our election system, our electoral system can be used for nefarious purposes against the democracy itself. it's clear as day. >> david, so the question is, who is the finder of fact that donald trump committed insurrection? we all believe it. i said you don't have to dart your eyes around. i said on january 7th donald trump should be arrested and

tried and sent to jail, but the question is, due process ushd the law, do judges randomly decide he's an inyou are ur recollectionists or people on cable news decide or does he have to be convicted of insurrection by federal prosecutors? >> these republican candidates are willing to fight for the silver medal. they are willing to fight each other. they will not stand up to donald trump. they are too scared to fight and too weak to win. the reason their words matter now, i think probably what's going through nikki haley's head is she's hoping the supreme court will deliver for her, but she doesn't want to be the person to i say so. the problem they have is the supreme court is looking to these candidates for suggestals about what republicans expect. if nikki haley is trying to be artfully insincere, and maybe ron desantis the same, to say please don't do this. i beg you not to do this.

but that's too complicated. the courts need to hear from republicans. we respect your authority. if you do this, you'll be supported. and that will give the preem supreme court what it needs. had this case come up in the summer, we would be talking about biden beneficiary. as it does at the end of 2023, the beneficiaries here are trump's fellow and better republicans. >> george, let me ask you. 14th amendment talks, constitution, who is the finder of fact of that? people on cable news? judges in colorado. or does it need to be a jury in washington, d.c. that is hearing a case on whether donald trump committed insurrection against the constitution?

>> had had to look at the text of the constitutional provision. the constitutional provision says nothing about convictions. it could easily when they wrote that provision said someone convicted of insurrection cannot hold public office. it does not say that. so that means the courts are free to determine on their own, based upon the valid judicial processes what is an insurrection and whether the facts meet that. and what happened here was there was a five-day trial where he got to participate and the judge made extensive findings. a judge that ruled for him on a bogus ground found that he engaged in insurrection, found this by not just a preponderance of the evidence, which lowers your civil court standard, but by clear and convincing evidence, which means it's way

more than not. it's strong evidence. you don't see the dissents challenging those findings a at all. and in fact, there's no basis to challenge the finds. when you go to the majority opinion and read the 30 or 40 pages on what happened on january 6th and what donald trump did before and during january 6th, there's no dispute. we saw it on television. and we saw -- we know what happened. he engaged in an insurrection. he wanted this to happen. and not only that, he gave -- there's another provision that talks about giving aid and comfort to enemies of the constitution. he did that, he was an enemy of the constitution. if this decision gets overturned, it's not going to be on the basis of the factual findings. and i'll say this about a jury

trial. there's no basis for demanding a jury trial here. any first year law student will tell you that. this is not the civil case for damages where you do get a 7th amendment right to a jury trial. this is an election litigation. election litigation is always more equitable. it's always more of something that a court of equity does. there's never jury trials in election cases because they have to be resolved quickly. and that's exactly the same thing. there were no juries there. >> everybody, stay with us. in one minute, we're going to be right back. we're going to talk about how donald trump is doubling down on his dehumanizing language. it's actually fascist language. you can stack it up with what hitler was saying about jews and about others that he wanted to exterminate. it's dehumanizing fascist

language, and he's doubling down on it. >> we're going to play it for you next. "morning joe" is back in 60 seconds. you next "morning joe" is back in 60 seconds.

welcome back. former president trump continues to use fascist language that dehumanizes immigrants. here's what he said last night in iowa. >> we have no idea who any of them are. they come from africa. they come from asia. they come from south america. it's true. they are destroying the blood of our country. that's what they are doing. destroying our country. they said, hitler said that in a much different way. they are coming from all over the world. people all over the world. we have no idea. they could be healthy, they could be very unhealthy. they could bring in disease that's going to catch on in our

country, but they do bring in crime. they have them coming from all over the world. and they are destroying the blood of our country. they are destroying the fabric of our country. we're going to have to get them out. >> mike barnacle, i have always found it just surprising whenever you bring up comparisons, with what donald trump said and what fascist leaders in the past have said, everybody with their white gloves trying to play by a different set of rules saying you can't talk about that. you can't bring up the fact that donald trump talks like a fascist or mussolini or hitler. when you go back and see what hitler said about vermin and

need to destroy vermin or what hitler said about poisoning the blood of our country. the comparisons are -- the parallels are shocking. they are just shocking. and by the way, when a guy says, i have never read that, it brings me back and a lot of people back to i-van na trump's interview with vanity fair, where she said that her husband kept collected speeches of adolph hitler by his bedside. that's an awfully random thing to say. you'd say, joe will keep

sometimes devotional, biographies of paul mccartney, churchill books, randomly, donald trump kept a collection of hitler speeches by his bedside. and so maybe he did read it, but he kept a collection of hitler speeches by his bed, according to to his first wife. you can hear it in his words. you can see it at his rallies. that's exactly the direction he's going. he's doubling, tripling down on facist hitler-like rhetoric. >> as you were speaking a few moments ago and referencing his bedside, mika sighed.

and that's the sigh, i think, of the country. this country is on overload. the volatility of the electorate in this country is if everyone of eligible voting age are in a clothes drier tumbling around. the problem with what we just heard donald trump speaking as he spoke saying what he said is nobody ever leaves. they stay there and they will listen to him. and the infection has spread coast to coast. nobody leaves a trump rally. >> i think one of the things we forget is that fascism has traditionally had enormous appeal. that's hard to talk about because we know it's scary and dangerous, it's wrong. it led in the 20th century to

the murder of 6 million jews and many others. and yet fascism continues to have athe peel. that was also true in this country where we saw fascism take a different form. so we have to be on guard. we have to call it by itself name when we see it. and i think that there are some other things that can be done as well, which is somebody has got to stand up and say, no, that's wrong. immigrants are the life blood of this country. immigrants helped build this country. immigrants are humans, just like you and me. and by the way, the hypocrisy is is stunning. if i'm not mistaken, i don't believe that donald trump's family has been here alongside the native americans since the founding of the country. he himself is the descendant of immigrants. but this is what fascism does. it lies, it dehumanizes, it

turns americans and people against one another. it has to be called out, uprooted, and we have to create some off ramps to just help the american people understand how to recognize fascism. i think that's what scares me. how many voters really listen to donald trump and understand how dangerous these lies are. and where is the effort to help americans understand in an historic way, help them contextualize that language. americans deserve better. immigrants deserve better. it's shameful. >> david, it's shameful that so many people and members of our former party are going along for the ride. and in 2020 after all the things

that he had said, including accusing me of being a murder 12 times, i'm just putting that to the side because this was a good friend of mine when asked him, i'm curious, this is not about us, but why did you vote for donald trump? he said, regulations. i wonder how you have someone channelling adolph hitler how you have someone saying this about immigrants, which is what ronald reagan said about immigrants, someone who promises to assassinate disloyal generals, jail his opponents, could go down the list. ban networks that he doesn't like. how do our former party members, how do they go, i really like

donald trump's view of regulatory reform more than joe biden's. >> there's a very specific warning in those words to donald trump. the things you hear from a lot of republicans, the grudging trump camp is maybe what happened on january 6th was unfortunate and treason like, but he certainly learned his lesson and won't repeat his mistake. that's been a promise that they have made over and over again. he won't repeat his mistake. the important thing about this poisoning the blood remark. this was the second time he said it. he said it once before. a number of people around him had said that's disgusting and people even around him said maybe that's inadvisable. how does donald trump respond to any check, any correction, which is to say they said this about

me. people told me not to say it. i'm doing it again precisely because i was told not to do it. that's why i'm doing it. everything else that the people around him are a saying is inadvisable to try to overthrow the government. it's about executing generals. the more you tell them not to do it, the more he will do it. everything had he has done, you're not voting for the things he hasn't done, you're not voting for the deregulatory fantasy, you're voting to repeat the things he has done because the essence of his personality, he also has this huge operational defiance order where you adopt tell him lick your finger and put it in the electric socket, but he will do it just to spite you and also blow out the house. >> so george, respond to what david said and also to the fact

that you have people that will say, oh, i like how he handles foreign policy better or i like his view on regulations and somehow claim to look past the channelling of adolph hitler in his rhetoric saying he's going to execute disloyal generals. he's going ban media outlets that he doesn't like. he's going to jail opponents and former lawyers who were disloyal to him. how do they look past that fact and how does this republic survive if 50% of americans are fine with a guy that is lifting notes from adolph hitler in his speeches? >> i couldn't agree more with what david just said. it's just quite an amazing tell. you have donald trump, who is a profoundly ignorant man, and he's particularly ignorant about

history. and yet he names hut letter's book in the german title and nails it perfectly. somehow he knows that. it's just mind boggling. it's not surprising, and i agree with david that he just doubles down when he's criticized, but it's more than that. the people in 2016 who were the loudest in warning us about the dangers of donald trump, and i confess i wasn't listening. were the psychologists and historians or the people who understoods history, the people who understood psychology, because they are completely interrelated. his kind of personality, he's a narcissistic psychopath, is exactly the kind of personality

that you see in the world's historical dictators. and that's why he can't stop it. what's scary about it is exactly what you point out. that some segment of the population innately desires this. they pretend that something else is tax cuts or regulation, but they are absorbing this, and it's scary. >> mara, final thought? >> i think we need to think about that. what is that appeal? how do we combat that? this is a wort of ideas, and we should start acting like it. >> i'm so grateful you said when you just said because the way trump thrives, we all know this, is by him saying outrageous things and people pulling their hair out and being shocked and stunned and deeply saddened.

the proper response is hearing it and saying, how do we stop that? how do we defeat that? how do we shove the words of hitler back into his throat, shove it down his throat and make him pay politically for this every day for the rest of his life. how do we take the fact that he grags about terminating roe v. wade and tries to go back on that. that's just not fair. i have to say, mara is exactly right. it's just like tiktok. i hear tiktok is destroying america. young people are watching tiktok. they are going to vote for donald trump. get on tiktok. figure out how to confront it, how to overcome it and how to beat it. >> the problem, i agree with everything you just said and what mara said, but the problem here is that this conversation somehow in certain circles, and

i would say among the republican presidential candidates, republican leaders in congress, and our networks, it's so partisan. no, this is american. we're all trying to talk about the same facts. we're trying to adhere to the constitution. we're trying to follow the law. no, we don't like insurrections or adolph hitler. it's pretty basic. >> and screen, if you will. if you watch this show, and i have noticed this several times, and i haven't said anything, but if you look at that screen, i can identify three people who before donald trump probably never voted for a democratic presidential candidate. don't want to speak for you all, but certainly voted for more republicans than democrats. so this is not about republican vs. democrat. this is not about liberal vs. conservative. this is about people who love

democracy vs. people who i guess just don't give a damn about american democracy. so this lie this on other networks it this is partisan and this is left wing vs. right wing, this is progressive -- it's just a lie. mike barnacle, this is a fight. this is a fight in the next 11 months regardless of your views on certain issues or your political stands on certain issues, this is a fight for the heart and soul of american democracy. not when it goes over the next four years, but whether american democracy survives. i do wonder if everybody in the biden white house and every democrat on capitol hill understands this.

this is about the very survival of american democracy. >> i think the quick answer to the question that you just posed is no. they don't fully understand it. i don't know whether the country is up for this fight. the country is exhausted, wearied of everything they get every day by the hour on american politics. a dysfunctional congress, a nut case running for president again, a nut case who was president of the united states. people are grappling with that as they are trying to grapple with their ordinary daily lives, paying the rent, paying the mortgage, hoping that their kids will do well in school, better than they did. all of those things, the combustion factor, you get more warnings about internet scams on your credit card than you do about what's going on in american politics. the threat to democracy posed by

donald trump. we get more warnings about your financial security, your refrigerator is broken, call this number and we'll fix it. give us your credit card number. millions have been lost like that to scams. we get no warnings about what is about to happen again, perhaps. ukraine is on the edge of a defeat. vladimir putin is on the edge of defeating ukraine. that means he will be at the border of a nato country. all of these republicans who say we're going to stay out of it, what are they going to do when vladimir putin's next step is to invade poland, a nato country, america's ally, america's ally would require that we inject troupes into that fight. all of this is weighted on the average american every day, whose basic job is to get through the day, pay for gas prices and rent and pay for food, and it's just exhausting.

that's the reason i don't think we might not be up for the fight as a nation. >> so george conway, what do you say to that voter that's exhausted that says inflation has gone up? en don't talk to me about american democracy, i'm angry, joe biden didn't cancel my student debt. joe biden didn't codify roe v. wade. joe biden department stop my gas prices from going up. so i don't care what donald trump is saying whether he's quoting hitler or not. i just want my prices to go down. what do you say to that person? >> none of that matters compared to what's at stake at n this election. and more to your point, i'm 60 years old. first voted in a presidential election in 1984. i voted in 10 presidential elections. 2020 was the first time i ever voted for somebody other than the republican. first time i ever voted for a democrat. and the reason is because our

entire system is threatened by this one man and his supporters. none of these things that you talk about, none of these matter if a president can declare himself president for life and call out the army under the insurrection act and arrest whoever he wants, shut down the media. this is exactly what he wants to do. if he's elected in 2024, i don't know he will be able to do all those things, but he will try. and the fact that he ties will cause great damage to this country. it will paralyze the government and will cause civil unrest. we will lose our democracy in the way that other countries have lost their democracies by disorder and chaos. and we can't allow that to happen. >> george conway, thank you very much for coming on this morning. coming up on "morning joe,"

a deal on immigration reform and additional aid for cain will have to wait until next year. we'll go over where senate negotiators left things as lawmakers head home for the holidays. plus "the washington post"'s david ignatius joins us to discuss an inflection point in the gaza war. "morning joe" is coming right back. "morning joe" is coming ri back y discouraging. but golo's so easy, the weight just falls off.

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. ah, these bills are crazy. she has no idea she's sitting on a goldmine. well she doesn't know that if she owns a life insurance policy of $100,000 or more she can sell all or part of it to coventry for cash. even a term policy. even a term policy? even a term policy! find out if you're sitting on a goldmine. call coventry direct today at the number on your screen, or visit coventrydirect.com.

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. 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.

vo: illegal immigrants rush our border in record numbers. more get away than are detained. 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. 46 past the hour. a live look at reagan national airport in washington, d.c. it took awhile, but the senate officially ended republican senator tommy tuberville's 10-month hold on military promotions. >> and that hold on the men and women who are responsible for

protecting our country, their families, tommy tuberville being painful and causing extraordinary pain for family members, for children, uprooted for spouses, for separating those famiies, some had to move on to new schools and new jobs expecting to move on with their father or mother. it really is shocking that he just did this. while doing this, the republicans stood by while he said this was a weakness military in american history, which is the biggest lie ever. it's the strongest military. you can look at any ranking of militaries across the globe and we're more powerful by a long shot than any other country. and more powerful than we have been relative to any other

country since 1945, but tommy tuberville and other republicans continued their war against the armed services, continued to say our troops are weak, continued to saw our troops are woke, continued to say they would rather be more like russian troops, which just such a joke. i wish these people that hate the united states military if they hate the united states military so much, don't serve our country because you're doing this a grave disservice. >> hope it was worth it for him. how many military bases in his state? five, they are not going to not be happy with him. the upper chamber confirmed the 11 four star generals tuberville had been blocking as part of a protest against a pentagon policy that reimbursed service members who had to the travel out of state for abortion health care. a policy which remains

unchanged. the generals were approved jed yesterday by a voice vote, which means no one, including tuberville, objected. >> the people of alabama were against this as well. even when the majority of people in alabama were against what tuberville was doing, he was still insulting men and women in uniform, still insulting the leaders of our military, still insulting america's service members saying they are the weakest ever. it's a lie. it's a damned lie that people like vladimir putin and xi love to hear. >> otherwise, the senate has wrapped up its work for the year without coming to an agreement on immigration and border policy. meaning additional funding for ukraine and israel will have to wait until at least next month. majority leader chuck schumer and minority leader mitch mcconnell issued a rare joint statement expressing the importance of the negotiations

saying talks will continue as issues are ironed out. leader schumer also vowed to take swift action on the funding supplemental for ukraine and israel early in the new year. joining us now, nbc news capitol hill correspondent. i think it was yesterday you were telling us really didn't want to put this off because it was going to be a messy start to the new year. now it's going to be messier. >> reporter: yeah, which this congress, i guess that should be no surprise to us because it's been one mess from the other back in january. this does tee up another tenuous battle for democrats and republicans on capitol hill not only because they are negotiating on this increasingly and always thorny issue of immigration but they're now not doing it in a vacuum, and negotiators in the room will cop to that. they know as they're hammering out border restrictions they are going up against someone on the republican side who is likely going to be the nominee in former president donald trump.

they are hearing those comments that he's making about immigrants. they are being asked about what he's saying about immigrants somehow poisoning the blood of this country. and i think what i'm continually struck by is the ways republicans are trying to portend that immigration policy in 2023 and 2024 can somehow be divorced from the comments that trump is making on the campaign trail which are only going to be increasingly in the spotlight as he inches closer and closer to taking this nomination. it impacts what's happening in the room there because democrats are now trying in some ways to trump proof this legislation if it actually gets to a point they can write it down on paper and end up on the floor to have a vote on it. they're still far away from that. this framework is still coming together. when you think about the ways that they're talking about how presidents can have leverage, for example, over asylum and the way asylum is claimed or adjudicated or the ways in which deportations happen on an expedited basis, republicans might want those policies on the

table, and certainly democrats are now willing to entertain them, but they are doing so in a way they're trying to make it that future presidents, a future president trump if it comes to that, cannot make this system or exploit this system in a way democrats and republicans could be uncomfortable with. certainly all of this is swirling in the pot. it's messy now, these issues were messy anyway, but the trump factor, once again, makes them increasingly messier. >> nbc's ali vitali, thank you for your reporting and great job on "way too early this morning." david, you have a piece in "the atlantic" on what's behind the gop's excuses for abandoning ukraine. what are they? >> republicans would never say we can't have tax cuts until we solve the border problem, but they have said we can't help ukraine until we solve the border problem.

ukraine ask includes $14 billion for the border and the reason that money is so important is because we have a breakdown of the asylum system. you need to hear cases more quickly under american law and treaty to remove people from the country. most asylum cases are rejected if they're heard. it costs money to hear them. republicans have demonstrated, and that's the thesis of my article, as they have moved step-by-step away from ukraine, that they're doing it in order to honor trump. there's only a handful of republicans in the house and senate who share the kind of pro-putin ideology from the noisier voices in social media and on broadcast media, but there are a lot of republicans who want to demonstrate they're loyal to trump and trump hates ukraine, wants to see ukraine lose, and they're loyal to him. there's one more factor here and it's a concept i call under

news. if you are a regular consumer of fox news, fox isn't the only way you're getting your messaging. you're part of a system of social media where they circulate stuff that's too crazy for fox news, but when you watch fox news, the fox news hosts allude to this crazy stuff. they know you know it, they know you know it, they wink at it, they nod at it, and it's participate of the whole information environment. while fox news may cover ukraine if it's about the border, if you're experiencing fox news, you're experiencing an immersion system it's linglinked to insan ideas. ukraine's role in pos particulars, the connection to the biden family, the poison people are absorbing from many different sources and is focused by republican leaders against ukraine. >> it's really shocking what you see trump supporters saying about ukraine, about vladimir

putin, about -- they literally pair it russian talking points. they've heard it, as david said, online and the far right has taken to embracing authoritarians like vladimir putin. >> and they don't see anything wrong with it. >> no. >> it's totally backwards. and, also, republicans in everything that they're doing, are not being actual republicans including the candidates, by not calling out donald trump, by not saying what they see. "the atlantic's" david frum, thank you very much. we move to israel, pausing for one week as part of a new deal to get hamas to release more than 3 dozen hostages the terror group is holding. two israeli officials and another source with knowledge of the situation tell this to

axios. the offer is the first from israel since the collapse of the seven-day ceasefire last month. >> let's bring in associated editor for "the washington post," david ignatius. i wonder how much of this is due to pressure coming from the israeli people after three hostages with their shirts off to show that they didn't have explosives, waving a white flag, were gunned down and killed by israeli troops. >> joe, i think that's a big reason the hostage release issue has come back. this was agonizing for israelis. it was agonizing. a horrific moment. it happened in an area, i'm told, there had been ambushes. they're young soldiers, not that experienced. they made a nightmarish mistake but made every israeli think, what can we do to get the hostages out? i think we will see a new effort

to resume mediated negotiations with hamas through qatar. i'm told the ceasefire this time could actually last a couple of weeks, be accompanied by more humanitarian assistance into gaza, more relief for the palestinians there who have been suffering so badly. there has been concern about terrible outbreaks of disease, cholera among them, the cholera threat has receded for the moment, but it's a severe humanitarian problem. i'm told what's happening on the ground is in northern gaza israel believes that hamas' command and control is basically broken, it's not possible for hamas leaders in the south to communicate with the north anymore. you have roving bands of hamas fighters who are still doing a lot of damage to the israelis in the north, but it's not well coordinated. the concern is in the south

where the head of hamas is located. he's said to have surrounded himself with hostages to try to protect himself. that's going to be the focus of the fighting. i think there's a hope that perhaps after this period of ceasefire and additional humanitarian assistance, some israelis troops in the north might be able to pull back so that they were in a standoff position. that would be the kind of, as i said my piece this morning, inflection point the u.s. hoped would come in this war soon. i don't think we're there yet. there's still an awful lot of hamas fighters out there killing israelis. this is still a real hot war, but i think we are moving towards something different. >> david, what's your sense of what might happen when there are over 100 hostages being held right now when the world and the state of israel finds out that several, perhaps more than

several, hostages dd during caivy? >> well, mike, i think that's almost a certainty when you look at hostage numbers, you have to be very careful to talk about living hostagesithin the total. some were carried out dead or almost dead on october 7. some have died in captivity. some died as a result of trying to get their captors. how that math works out is hard to say. how do you go aggressively after hamas and not at the same time kill your hostages? and this process of humanitarian ceasefires, negotiations with qatar to free the women and children and foreign hostages, that was significant, in part, because it removed that worry from the time those negotiations were going on. a desire to go back to

negotiations, get as many people as possible out so that you can then do the kind of end game, which will take months. i think nobody should -- it's not going to be an on/off switch. there will be long-running cleanup operations. they won't be as bloody. civilians, i hope, won't be targeted. there will be a long period the israelis try to consolidate what they began after october 7th. >> david, can you tell us a little bit more about the view from the white house in washington on this? we know they were trying to apply pressure for another pause in the fighting and sending the message to focus on hostages, can you talk about that dynamic especially as polls are showing that president biden is just

under water on this issue with american voters? >> so the white house feels they are paying more of a cost the longer the images of civilian suffering continues, but maybe more to the point, israel is paying a cost. it's more and more difficult to sustain support. you have the u.n. lined up now against israel. so the united states, the white house has been saying it's in your interest to have more of a humanitarian face for this conflict to preserve support for it because it's going to continue for a while and because you're going to need help in rebuilding some new secure order in gaza. what i think has happened is after a period of jostling where president biden or one of his aides would say this to netanyahu or his government, the

israelis think that's probably right, and there's more support -- i hear more support about this idea of a pause, a return to negotiations, a move in to phase three, as they like to call it, in the conflict. >> david, i'm going to be a broken record here, forgive me, but you said -- you talked about the united states paying a high price, and we are across the globe. israel is paying a high price across the globe and i just have to ask again the question i'm asking every day, how much longer will the united states continue to pay the price, not for israel, but for a leader who knew of hamas' funding sources, massive funding sources in 2018,

close to do nothing, was asked in doha by qatar, asked does the netanyahu government want to continue funneling and netanyahu, yes. how much longer do we pay the cost and israelis pay the cost for a leader who was responsible for the greatest intelligence failure in the history of israel, who let hostages be taken, let women be raped, let israelis be killed for eight, nine, ten, in some cases 12 hours before they organized a rescue to go down and save them? the greatest operational failure in israeli history. and, as we see on the screen, they knew for a year.

the government had hamas' attack plans for a year. and so i ask again, curious what you're hearing, how much longer will the united states be willing to pay the price, how much longer will israel pay the worst price they've paid since the holocaust for a leader whose operational failures to cut off funding forces to this terror group, the encouragement of funding, how much longer does this last? >> joe, as i've said often in our conversations, netanyahu is unpopular in israel, polls show that. i would be remained he remains as prime minister. there's been a desire to keep the coalition intact.

it is tragically the case there's a lot of fingerprints on the mistakes you were describing. israeli military intelligence missed the warnings, many parts of the israeli establishment signed off on the funding from qatar. if that was a bebe mistake it would be different. he is the prime minister, and what's infuriated israelis as other senior leaders in the military have accepted responsibility, he generally has not, and that's really made people mad, issuing a statement of a denial of responsibility that he had to withdraw the next day because it infuriated the israelis so much. the idea that the white house has is that over the next months

as the war begins to move into a different phase, saudi arabia and other arab countries, can be encouraged to make an offer of normalization and movement to a palestinian state that bebe and this coalition, this right-wing coalition, cannot accept, which means that that coalition probably will fall and you'll have new elections, and that's the way bebe will be out as prime minister, somebody new who might be able to take up this very attractive offer would replace him. i think that's the most likely scenario. but he is a symbol of all the mistakes that were made that led to the tragedy. just, unfortunately, the mistakes were widely shared, and he's the prime minister.

he's the figure head but he's not the only one. >> if you get a chance today, please read david ignatius' new column talking about what happens the day after the war, the possibility of saudi arabia, the uae, other middle eastern powers, other gulf region powers stepping in and figuring out a way to help gaza, a way to help the palestinians move forward. thank you. go back and read "the new york times" editorial pages path forward for peace. it is an extraordinarily important blueprint, in a day when people are saying, there can be no peace in israel -- between israel and the palestinians, go back and look for that piece in "the new york times," the editorial board, what they road. mara gay, we appreciate it.

we'll turn back to the historic decision from the colorado supreme court which ruled donald trump is disqualified from holding office again after determining he had engaged in insurrection on january 6th, 2021. the 4-3 ruling reverse as lower court decision and effectively keeps the former president off the state's presidential primary ballot next year. the court stayed its decision until january 4th to allow for any further appeals and the trump team plans to immediately appeal the decision to the u.s. supreme court, but the 4th is one day before the deadline for the state to print its presidential primary ballot, some complications there. it was brought by six colorado voters.

the complaint cites section 3 which states any officer of the united states who engages in an insurrection cannot hold office again. the lower court ruling agreed trump was involved in an insurrection but the statue did not apply to presidts, at least five ste have seen similar challenges b the colorado one is the first that wa successful. in the ruling the judges note theraty of their decision. quot we do not reach these conclusions lightly. we are mindful ofhe magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. we are likewise mdful of our kol emdutyo apply the law without fear or favor and

without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach. let's bring in professor of history at tulane university, walter isaacson, president of the national action network and host of msnbc's "politics nation" reverend al sharpton, former secretary of homeland security under president obama, jay johnson joins us, and legal analyst joyce vance, co-host of the sisters in law podcast and, of course, mike barnicle is still with us as well. >> joyce, let's start with you. we had george conway on last hour who said he was struck by the weakness of the dissents, that the arguments were so legally weak for the first time he thought that the conservative theory that came from federalist society members for the first

time he said it may have a chance of surviving a supreme court challenge. >> yeah, i heard george's comments with great interest, because i think there's a tension in this decision that we're all fighting. there's this foundational notion we have that americans should decide elections at the ballot box. but people like george increasingly are looking at the 14th amendment and reading its language, the clear language of the law the supreme court of colorado has decided that he should not be in the ballot in colorado. we don't have one national election. we have a series in the state. each state gets to decide who is qualified to be on their ballot, and the colorado court reached a decision that is different from other states that have looked at this issue. minnesota looked at it on the same time line and reached a different conclusion.

in colorado we see a courageous decision. they acknowledge this and say we're setting aside politics. we're looking only at the law. and no one here, not own the dissents, are challenging the factual finding that the trial judge in colorado made. she heard evidence for five days, found that trump engaged in insurrection, in the supreme court it will be on the law. there's a nonstarter of a legal issue, is trump an officer of the united states, and the colorado supreme court disagreed with the lower court judge who said trump engaged in insurrection but is not a qualifying official. that argument i think the they have taken care of. was he entitled to more than he

got? ballot challenges are proceedings in equity, a species of law where you don't have a right to a jury trial and the procedure looks pretty good but maybe they will decide there are other impediments and there weren't laws in place to make a decision. if we set aside this tension, this distaste we all innately have about removing this decision from the hands of the voters, as a legal matter, this colorado decision is awfully strong. >> and david french and other very conservative jurists said for those who were talking about that tension and saying this ruling would be anti-democratic, walter isaacson, david french's response, well, yes, section 3 of the 14th amendment is anti-democratic in that if

somebody is deemed an insurrectionist, the entire idea is to take him off the ballot or take her off the ballot in 1868, so a former slave holding southerner could not vote for the insurrectionist. >> yes, but i will be a dissenter. i'm sure joyce is right about the law and the judges are right about the law. but from history, there's a problem if we let different states go around taking people off the ballot and taking it away from the voters to decide. i think the supreme court will have a tough decision to make. it's going to be decided by the supreme court. i'll be surprised if trump is taken off all the ballots, whether or not you feel he should, you have to do the counter positive of certain states deciding to take other people off the ballot. this is a type of road we don't want to go down and taking it

away from the voters to decide who they want to vote for. >> walter, when you look at the supreme court's makeup, you look at the chief justice's disposition, he is an institutionalist. he's an institutionalist when that breaks against republicans. as we saw in the affordable care act. he said don't ask us to overturn something that you can overturn at the ballot box next year. i do think, and you look at the law here and i agree with you and agree with joyce and david french, it is legally a very strong argument that you could probably win in any moot course competition in any law school across america. you look at john roberts, at

this supreme court, the fact he is such an institutionalist, i think it's going to be next to impossible to get five votes to keep him off the colorado ballot. >> i wouldn't be surprised if it's unanimous, something the supreme court has to do clearly in this case. our democracy is deeply threatened. whatever we might all want, i feel the precedent here could be a problem using the 14th amendment. the senate had the right to vote in the impeachment trial a couple of times. that was the issue in front of that trial. my own personal feelings don't have much to do with it. i suspect my opinion here won't prevail at this table. >> you might be wrong, walter,

you don't know. where do you stand on this? what walter is pointing out has rumbled through my mind and the minds of others. who are the voters who would be deprived? there are different kinds of people who are attracted to trump for various reasons. we know who he is. he's a bad guy. where do you stand on this? >> i hate to disagree with my good friend and former neighbor walter isaacson, but section 3 of the 14th amendment is an eligibility requirement just like you have to be 35, just like you have to have been born in the united states. so assuming the supreme court takes this case, and i think they have to take this case. you have conflicting decisions of the state's highest courts across the country on a matter of the interpretation of the united states constitution but it's an eligibility requirement.

i cannot vote for arnold schwarzenegger for president. when henry kissinger and madeleine albright were alive, i could not have voted for them because they were not born in the united states. in that sense there is a limiting effect to eligibility requirements and this is an amendment to the u.s. constitution that remains on the books. it has not been repealed and judges are sworn to uphold the u.s. constitution and that's what the supreme court in colorado did here. i read the decision. i thought it was a very well read, thoughtful decision point by point by point, and it is a plain reading of the u.s. constitution, and you can't get around that. >> i think the eligibility question is what they're going to have to face, and i agree with you. when you look at the language in

section 3 of the 14th amendment, it doesn't given you any room other than to say if the courts are going to take it that, well, what we saw january 6th was not an insurrection and etches not involved. how do you say that? and if it was an insurrection and you have all these people indicted and some going to jail for itincite is, how is he eligible to be on the ballot? you can't have it both ways. i raised the racial implications which the 14th amendment came out of dealing with an insurrection over slaf slavery they pinpointed certain states with a major black populace that just voted, a defamation case that rudy giuliani lost. there were racial implications here. i think the court has to take it and they have a tough decision because if they go one way,

three of them would have to face the fact this guy put them on there. if they go another way, then are we redefining what is an insurrection in this country? >> that's what i wonder here. if you're setting a precedent, it should be that insurrectionists should not be able to run for president. it makes a lot of sense. i don't know where else something like this could be spelled out. the effort was made during the january 6 committee hearings, joyce, where we saw the runup to what happened on january 6th, and it was horrendous. what other states are dealing with this? what are the implications of this ruling, do you think? >> it's a great question, mika, because there are numerous states. minnesota, i think, is the best parallel because they held a

similarly serious proceeding they decided they would permit donald trump to stay on their ballot. to secretary johnson's point about this as a qualification issue, that's precisely what it is, one for every state, and whether we think it's politically feasible and desirable, that's how our system is set up to work. and as students of history, i think we have to appreciate donald trump pushed the lie, the myth that barack obama was not a natural born american citizen and he did that because had he been successful that would have meant president obama would not be qualified to be on state ballots, an effort by donald trump to keep obama off the ballot because of a qualification decision. it is rich we're at this point

with trump where under a different provision, the 14th amendment, his ability to qualify for the ballot is being considered. but this is what it is, a legal decision, not a political decision, and as far as the law goes for strict constructionists like conservatives on the supreme court who read the law, and if the law is unambiguous and clear believe they should follow that law this is a straightforward decision. but as so many folks have pointed out this morning, it cannot be a straightforward decision because it involves donald trump, who, on so many occasions, have gotten benefits of protection of the laws, of safe harbor, due process that lets him delay. here when the law is squarely applied to him, he doesn't like that outcome quite as much. >> it doesn't worker. joyce vance, thank you. jeh johnson, i wanted to play for you and the rest of the group here, a sound bite of donald trump we found ominous

and disturbing just as former homeland security secretary, public servant, a lawyer, i want to nope what comes to mind when you see what trump said last night in iowa. take a look. >> we have no idea who any of them are. they come from africa, they come from asia, they come from south america, and, it's true, they're destroying the blood of our country. that's what they're doing. they're destroying our country. they don't like it when i said that. and they said oh, hitler said that in a much different way. they're coming from all over the world, people all over the world. we have no idea. they could be healthy. they could be very unhealthy. they could bring in disease that will catch on in our country, but they do bring in crime, but they have them coming from all over the world, and they're destroying the blood of our country. they're destroying the fabric of our country, and we're going to have to get them out.

>> jeh johnson, where to begin? >> yeah, where do i begin? we all need to look at ourselves in the mirror as americans. this is who we are as americans. joe alluded to this earlier. ronald reagan gave a speech in 1988 just as he was leaving the presidency. you can go to germany and never be german, go to japan and not be japanese but come to america and be american. i'm a black man. my dna, however, says i'm 48% african and 52% european. one thing we know donald trump is not a historian. he does not read. i do believe there is a subconscious parallelism to some of his fascist instincts, some of his autocratic instincts, which are very dangerous.

the blood of america is inherently diverse. that's the founding principle of this nation. we can't forget that. >> and, walter, wouldn't up think when you hear these comments from a man whose family, his forefathers came here from another country. his present wife's parents were naturalized coming from another country, he very methodically named non-white countries that he says are poisoning americans' blood. >> right. >> south america, central america, africa. he was specific. so even if we're saying that he was not explicitly saying something, he implicitly said it strongly. >> it was a deeply racist call and it is something as secretary

johnson said goes against the essence of america, which is whether you came across on the mayflower, you came across the rio grande, you came to be an american and that's who we are as a nation. this is the great founding principle is people of all religions and backgrounds and races came either voluntarily or involuntarily to this country, but we make them into americans. and that's the odious -- odious -- stench of what he said is it's deeply un-american. >> former homeland security secretary jeh johnson, thank you for coming in this morning. we appreciate . and still ahead, multiple government agencies are warning of a heightened threat of violence this holiday season. we'll talk to the nypd's commissioner for terrorism and

how they are responding. israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu yesterday met with families of israeli hostages. we'll talk to a family member who informs that meeting. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. these underwear are period-proof. and sneeze-proof. and sweat-proof. they're leakproof underwear, from knix. comfy & confident protection that feel just like normal. with so many styles and colors to choose from, switching is easy at knix.com new emergen-c crystals pop and fizz when you throw them back. and who doesn't love a good throwback? [sfx: video game] emergen-c crystals.

vo: illegal immigrants rush our border in record numbers. more get away than are detained.

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.

are you still struggling with your bra? it's time for you to try knix. makers of the world's comfiest wireless bras. for revolutionary support without underwires, and sizes up to a g-cup, find your new favorite bra today at knix.com it's 31 past the hour. that is a beautiful shot of the sunrise over the nation's capitol. the fbi the department of homeland security, and the national counterterrorism center have issued a warning this holiday season noting that the israel/hamas war may, quote, heighten the threat of lone

actor violence targeting large public gatherings including holiday related, faith-based, new year's eve and first amountment protected events related to the conflict. joining us now, nypd deputy commissioner for counsellor terrorism and intelligence, rebecca, thank you for coming on the show. how much of a rise in threats is new york city seeing? >> we have been warning about this heightened threat environment that the bulletin you described lays out for some time. we are going to be grappling with for some time to come and what this bulletin outlines is a

backdrop of a lot of propaganda warnings from across the spectrum. al qaeda has issued dozens since october 7th across its affiliates. isis as well. iran-backed groups, yemeni, houthi, are galvanized by what happened on october 7th as well as a broad range of more domestic extremist groups. so all of those forces are the backdrop for the threat we're looking for, the lone actor threat. the investigators, the officers, the analysts who work in our department, in our bureau and partner agencies, we do this for a living. we've had heightened threat environments before and we will going forward. so we are well trained and ready to deal with this environment.

>> the nypd is the largest police force in the country. you only have so many people you can put on the street for shifts and things like that, since october 7th there's been a huge and growing throat to the jewish population in new york city which has a substantial jewish population. what specifically is being done to protect and guard synagogues? >> i think we have a multipronged approach and the one part you will see is deployment of additional officers. our critical response commands who deploy around the city based on intel, based on need, and officers on patrol, counterterrorism officers and day-to-day police officers, and they're fanning out across the city. that's for deterrence and it's to help harden softer targets.

and then the intelligence resources, and those are the parts you don't see that are part of our apparatus. those include investigating, evaluating threats and leads as they're coming in, whether that's from the digital world, online world, or in 3d. so those intelligence resources are also being deployed in ways the public is less, obviously, aware of. and we do extensive engagement, clearly not something we're doing alone as the nypd. there's a whole ecosystem of partner agencies, federal, international. we have officers around the world including our liaison post who is giving us information what is happening there but particularly focusing on how it might impact new york city since the very beginning moments. >> where are the other foreign officers? >> we have them around the world for just this reason to be able

to respond. we had an officer in sydney respond to the christchurch mosque attacks. our officer in paris was able to respond and help us in november of 2015 is and the attacks in paris. in mumbai. ask the new york question what would that incident look like if it happened in new york and how can we better help protect new york city? and we engage extensively with religious leaders, with community leaders to help make everybody understand it's a shared responsibility. we are doing everything we can and will on this issue but we also expect our partners to do the same. >> i've been participate of some of those faith-based meetings, and the question i want to raise to you, deputy commissioner, is

how do you deal with the fact with new york such a magnet for tourists, just coming in this building with the tree, thousands of people. you have, as mike raised the question of the israel/hamas war, a lot of demonstrations, pro-palestinian, pro-israeli. how do you deal with people that would infiltrate, are passionate but not violent stir up or cover the violence they want to do that have nothing to do with the march organizers but will jump into a crowd? how do you detect that? >> so two points, and that's a really important question. we are well versed in protecting large public gatherings. we've been doing that for, really since the dawn of time. we have a large presence, a lot of repetitions in that area. we know how to do that. the protests, and there have been almost 500 protests related

to the conflict, thousands of people participating, in large numbers. they've been large and in some cases contentious, but overwhelmingly nonviolent. our leadership has made it clear though tensions are high and rising and emotions are strong, we aren't going to tolerate violence and will make sure we have the manpower and womanpower of our officers who can help keep things under control. >> deputy commissioner for counterterrorism and intelligence with the nypd, rebecca weiner, thank you so much for joining thus morning. we appreciate it. >> thanks for having me. and coming up, we're going to go through the legal loss for a trump ally in congress connected to efforts to overturn the 2020 election result plus a live report from the southern border following a record day for migrants crossing into the

united states. "morning joe" is coming right back.

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.

43 past the hour. yesterday in tel aviv, family members of hostages taken by hamas on october 7th met with israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. among them was our next guest, the father of american israeli hostage who is a soldier taken captive while on active duty in israel on october 7th. and we thank you so much for coming on the show to talk with

us. again, we want to know, first of all, how the meeting yesterday went with the prime minister. can you share anything about that? >> yes, there were 75 of us. i came with no expectations. it's been 75 days, this fear that can creep in and take over the soul is always in the background and meet be the prime minister in an intimate forum was much more productive than previous attempts to talk to the government of israeli so it was possible to have a discussion, q&a, and we were looking for hope that you would be able to reconfirm his commitment and the government to the release of the

hostages as the agenda by our government . it's complicated because there are two goals that sometimes conflict with one another. one is the destruction of hamas and the other the release of the hostages. we reminded the prime minister that it happened on his shift. the people that were abducted, kidnapped, happened 75 days ago and it's his responsibility to bring them back alive and that is the expectations. >> itay, we have been looking at pictures of your handsome son on and off the screen here, and i'm wondering, your life on october 6th compared to your life this

morning. obviously there's been a huge change in it. how do you cope with it as a parent on a daily basis? how do you get through a day thinking about your son being held captive? >> i think we could all write a book on that one but think if you've been transformed to another universe, when that universe acts differently, time is a different concept as well as your routine and what you do. you wake up in the morning and you understand that you're still in this alternative reality and you get that slap in the face that reality basically tells you you're still in this nightmare. and then you node to say, okay, what do i need to do? and that's one of the most difficult questions. there are so many things to do you don't know where to spend

the next hour. should i be on the media, should i be here in israel going to the parliament? should be in the united states senate or congress? after you finish 18, 19 hours of working and you feel exhausted, have i been able to move an inch? an inch, the release of my son that is a u.s. citizen? >> ruby -- >> and you don't have a good answer. >> this is walter isaacson, and our hearts are with you. i say that has to be the focus getting the hostages out. what do you think is the best way to do that? >> so i'm not a strategist, but when i walk around in the senate on israel, you see what i got. there are things that are important and things that are urgent.

hostages getting out alive is urgent. they are being tortured. they have not received any visitation of the international red cross which is a topic, how has that not happened? u.s. citizens. think of someone in montana, louisiana, anyone, a u.s. citizen being held captive and has been abducted in a terrorist organization and the international red cross does not feel obligated to go and meet that individual and see what is his medical condition? i have no proof of life. let's put that on the table. isn't that something basic? the international red cross has a mandate. why are they not doing that? i also look at the u.s. ally, qatar. qatar claims to be a really good friend of the united states and we've asked them, the families,

can you please provide sign of life that i believe anyone in the united states will show to qatar to provide that sign of life and it's been 75 days. 75 days. >> ruby chen, the father of israeli american itay chen taken hostage by hamas, thank you -- >> if i could just say one more sentence if it's possible. >> absolutely. >> we are getting near to christmas and we just finished the jewish hanukkah, the time of miracles of the jewish people and now christmas is coming up h is also a miracle on its own. we ask people that are listening to us please pray, and for the safety of all hostages, they need to get out immediately. when you have christmas dinner

and enjoy being with your family, please leave an empty chair for the hostages, that include eight citizens. remember, we are having our dinner with an empty chair and would like to be whole as soon as possible and we need that miracle, so please pray with us. >> we will, ruby. thank you very much for sharing your thoughts with us on the show this morning. thank you. >> we will do that. thank you so much. again, important to note, eight americans still held and many americans killed on the october 7th attack, and i think sometimes we just -- certainly mark is always reminding us that the media is not paying enough attention to the americans killed that day as well, and that the americans who are still being held hostage.

walter isaacson, eight americans among the remaining hostages. walter, a couple quick questions before you go. i am curious where you see the united states right now and its support for israel, the uproar across the world against netanyahu's campaign, and hamas, and many are concerned about the number of civilians being killed. what -- how does the biden administration balance that move into the new year? how much pressure does the biden administration put on netanyahu's specifically? >> i think david ignatius was very good earlier in the show today. it's clear it's going into the next phase, and that phase will be much more targeted.

i think that netanyahu probably should not and will not survive politically as this moves into the next phase. i think that that's probably in the biden administration's interests that there be a fresh leadership in israel that can then keep focus on hamas' atrocities and terrorism around the world and take up french president macron's offer to have an international coalition to oppose hamas. in some ways go back to the idea of keeping the focus on hamas, and rallying the world against it without some of the humanitarian horrors that we have had with the blanket way of conducting the war. i'm hoping that the next phase

relieves some of these problems, i think, in some ways the first phase happened too quickly without rallying the international support that could have been rallied against hamas. >> finally, i want to circle back to a column yesterday that we discussed on the show by gerard baker, "the wall street journal" editor at large, and he listed the winners of 2023 as the u.s. economy, vladimir putin, and elon musk. you have taken quite a journey with elon musk yourself in 2023. where has that brought you? what you have learned new? what should we expect from the world's richest man in 2024? >> well, he has always been impulsive and material, which is why it's so controversial, and

putting x in his hands now is not a pretty sight. on the other hand, he's shooting up rockets that can land up right and be refused which no other nation or company can do, and likewise moving us into the electric vehicles, and we are holding contrary thoughts in our mind, and we say somebody is a hero and seems to be binary, and this is one of the most complex person in the world and understanding him is the reason why i wrote that book. >> thank you so much. still ahead on "morning joe," more legal analyses on yesterday's court ruling that former president trump is disqualified from the 2024 ballot in colorado for violating the constitution. we'll speak with retired

coervative federal judge j. michael luttig that is calling that decision masterful. "morning joe" will be right back.

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. ♪ today, my friend you did it, you did it, you did it... ♪ centrum silver is now clinically shown to support cognitive health in older adults. it's one more step towards taking charge of your health.

so every day, you can say, ♪ youuu did it! ♪ with centrum silver.

you wake up, and you can experience a plane crash into the trade center, this is a very, very complicated city and that's why it's the greatest city on the globe. [ laughter ] >> allow me to describe that

answer in one word. what are you talking about? let me get this straight. new york is the greatest city on the globe because sometimes stores open, and you never know when there's going to be a terrorists attack. it remains me of that alicia keys song -- >> she's got the pipes. >> who doesn't like a new panera store? >> i have nothing -- i am so confused by that sound bite and that answer. >> bizarre. with us this morning we have msnbc contributor, mike barnicle, and staff writer from

the atlantic. we start with the historic decision. the colorado supreme court ruled donald trump is disqualified from holding office again after determining he engaged in insurrection on january 6th, 2021. the 4-3 ruling effectively keeps the former president off the state's presidential primary ballot next year. the court stayed its decision to allow for further appeals, and the trump team is already vowing they will be doing just that. the fourth is one day before the deadline before colorado prints its ballots. they discussed the timeline last night on msnbc. >> if they take the case we will make clear to the court that the deadlines and the timelines -- you know, the bigger thing is if the court does not take the

case. as of january 5th, if the u.s. supreme court does not take the case or intervene, then donald trump will not be on the presidential primary ballot. >> the lawsuit was brought by six colorado voters backed by a group called citizens for responsibility in washington. it cites that states any officer of the united states that engages in an insurrection cannot hold office again. adopted in 1868, the measure was meant to keep former confederates from returning to power after the civil war. the lower court ruling agreed. trump was involved in an insurrection, but said the statute did not apply to presidents. at least five states have been similar challenges, but the colorado one is the first one that is successful. in their ruling the judges note

the gravity of their decision. we do not reach these conclusions lightly, and we are mindful of the magnitude of the weight of the questions before us, and we are likewise mindful of our column duty to apply the law. the trump campaign plans to immediately appeal. in a statement trump lawyer said the ruling court attacks the very heart of this nation's democracy. >> so it's important to remember just as we back up, again, what we are going to be talking about, whether this goes forward or not, whether it's going to be successful or not, it's important to remember this theory was first brought forward by a couple members of the federalists society, strict

constructionists to conservative legal scholars who imminently are respected among conservatives, and so it's fascinating, a couple notable reactions to the colorado ruling. "new york times" columnist stated this decision something absolutely correct, and it's a bold and courageous decision, but it's a correct decision. meanwhile, retired conservative judge, j. michael luttig said this is very, very important. section 3 disqualifies one who is engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the constitution of the united states, and not an insurrection

against the united states and not the authority of the united states. and the colorado supreme court just gave the republicans a chance to save themselves. >> and they said it offers republicans an exit in time to let some a non-sir recollectionists candidate. back to normal politics, back to a race where the biden/harris ticket faces more or less normal opponents rather than an expresident that yearns. if upheld by the supreme court the colorado court's decision

might save the gop from its self. will the gop consent to be rescued. this reminds me what liz cheney was saying on monday night that there are other candidates that can stand up for this party and bring it back to its roots, and actually wage a good fight. >> yeah. >> for the presidency. >> david, the question is, we look forward to what the supreme court does, and obviously you have a roberts court that, yes, is conservative in many ways, but also roberts himself is conservative with an institutionalist, and he upheld obamacare and said don't ask us to do from the bench what you can do from the voting booth next year. this is a strong legal argument, and despite that fact the

institutionalists in roberts and the roberts court will say we are going to let the voters decide this. >> that's why the remarks from republican candidates over the past 12 hours or so have been so important, because this court is highly idealogical and political and very attuned to what republicans want. if republicans like haley and desantis and others give the supreme court a permission, they may act. if not, they won't. like george conway, i was president of the harvard law school of the federal society the same year he was president of the yale federal society, and i was skeptical of the approach, and i wrote an article saying the courts would never do it, and one reason i was so worried about it, i thought this case would probably arise in the summer when it would be trump versus biden, and it's arising

out of 2023. and it's trump versus haley and desantis. if the supreme court says, you know, they are right in colorado and trump is an insurrectionists, the candidates they are boosting are not democrats but fellow republicans, if only they will accept the lifeline the supreme court could throw them. >> i was struck by the language of the dissent and it seemed nonthreatening and nonangry about the majority opinion, and so let's continue with your view of what you read. >> yeah, i agree with that assessment, mike, but it goes more than that, the descents were weak, and you have a logic that slices and tkaoeusz the majority opinion to bits. there was none of that. there was nothing in this opinion -- in fact, the opinion doesn't really talk about the

real issues in the case. they don't say -- they don't dispute that donald trump engaged in insurrection, and they don't -- what they talked about mostly was state law, and state law doesn't matter anymore because the supreme court of the united states cannot overturn findings of state law made by the state's highest court, and not only that, even the things that the dissents were saying about state law seemed trivial and weak. they were saying things like, oh, this is too complicated for our electoral education system, which is ludicrous. remember the bush v gore and litigation about the chads, and that could get complicated.

people could go to jail in criminal cases on five-day bench trials. the other thing they said is oh, well, our colorado law only deals with qualifications not disqualifications, and that's nonsense because the constitution says you have to be 35 to serve as president of the united states, and that means there's a disqualification. if you are 34 years and 9 months, for get it. the closest they come to talking about the merits of the case was a legal discussion in one of the dissents if the article is self executing, and they said you can't just take section 3 of the 14th amendment and apply that because they need congress to tell them how to do it, and that's ridiculous, too. there are other provisions in

the 14th amendment, especially one that protects us all from race discrimination. nobody says, and there's no text will basis for saying that provision is not self executing. if it were, that means -- you don't need a law from congress to say that you can't discriminate against anybody on the basis of racism, and i always read the dissents first, because i look for what is the weakness of the majority opinion, and i look at that one when there's a state supreme court decision, and i read the dissents to see what the battle lines are. i have to tell you if trump is going to win in the supreme court he has to come up with better arguments than that, and if the supreme court is going to overturn the decision of the justices, they need to come up with better arguments. >> wow. donald trump's 2024 republican rivals are backing him against

the colorado court decision, posting on social media florida governor ron desantis called the rule ten tau mount of abusing power. >> we don't need to have judges making these decisions, and we need voters to make these decisions. i want to see this in the hands of the voters and we want to win this the right way. >> i do not believe donald trump should be prevented from being president of the united states by any court. i think he should be prevented by the voters of the country. >> it was former arkansas governor, asa hutchison. >> i think his statement is very

interesting. he says -- >> go ahead and put it up there. >> here is asa hutchison's statement. the factual finding that he supported insurrection will haunt his candidacy. >> what do you say to the republican candidates' argument that this should be -- the voters should have the say and not the courts? >> why are you standing with confederates who betrayed this country? and this is what they are standing with, is the spirit of those confederates rather than the americans who came together after a long and brutal civil war that was fought to keep the union together, and saw clearly -- clearly saw a threat in ex-confederates running for office, and so much so they

amended the constitution to prevent those traitors from running for office, and that should send a message that our electoral system can be used for nefarious purposes against democracy itself. >> right. >> it's clear as day. >> yeah. >> david, so the question is, who is the finder of fact that donald trump committed insurrection? we, of course, all believe it, and i said you don't have to dart your eyes around -- >> i was, like -- >> you don't have to dart your eyes around. i said on january 7th donald trump should be arrested and tried and sent to jail, but the question is under the law due process under the law, do judges randomly decide he is a insurrectionists, or the people

on cable news shows decide that, or does he have to be convicted by federal prosecutors? >> these republican candidates are all willing to fight for the silver medal, and they are too scared to fight and too weak to win. probably what is going through nikki haley's head, she probably wants the supreme court to deliver for her but doesn't want to say so. the problem they have is the supreme court is looking to these candidates for signals on what republicans expect. if nikki haley and ron desantis are saying please don't do this, while thinking please do this, please do this, but that's too complicated. the court needs to hear from republicans, we respect your authority and if you do this you will be supported, and it's a

very commit kul court to act in a way to save the republican party from itself. as i keep stressing, had this case come up in the summer, we would be talking about biden as the beneficiary, and coming up at the end of 2023, the beneficiaries are trump's fellow republicans. >> sure. correct. >> and then somebody that committed insurrection against the united states, the constitution, and who is the finder of fact of that? people on cable news? judges in colorado? does it need to be a jury in washington, d.c. that is hearing a case on whether donald trump committed insurrection against the united states constitution? >> well, as a good long-time member of the federal society you have to look at the text of the constitution provision, and that provision says nothing about convictions. they could have easily, when

they wrote that conviction, they could have said somebody convicted of insurrection cannot hold public office, and it does not say that. what that means is the courts are free to determine on their own based upon the valid judicial processes what is an insurrection and whether the facts meet that. what happened here was there was a five-day trial where donald trump and his lawyers got to participate and the judge made extensive findings, a judge that ruled for him on a bogus ground found that he engaged in insurrection and found it not only by a preponderance of the evidence, but by clear and convincing evidence which means it's way more likely than not and it's very, very strong evidence. you don't see the dissents challenging those findings at all. there's no basis to challenge that, and you go to the majority

opinion and you read the 30 or 40 pages -- i don't know how many there are, on what happened on january 6th and what donald trump did before and during january 6th, there's no dispute. we saw it on television. we know what happened. he engaged in an insurrection. he wanted this to happen. not only that -- there's another provision in section 3 of the 14th amendment that talks about giving aid and comfort to enemies of the constitution. well, he did that. he was an enemy of the constitution. if this case -- if this decision gets overturned, it's not going to be on the basis of the factual findings. i will say this about a jury trial. there's no basis for demanding a jury trial here. any first year law student will tell you that because this is not the kind of case, like a civil case for damages where you do get a seventh amendment right to a jury trial, this is

election litigation. election litigation is always more equitable and it's always something that a court of equity does. there's never jury trials in election cases because they have to be resolved quickly, such as bush v gore. >> we will go to ali vitali in washington and how two issues are now being linked as one. that conversation is just ahead on "morning joe." power e*trade's award-winning trading app makes trading easier. with its customizable options chain, easy-to-use tools and paper trading to help sharpen your skills, you can stay on top of the market from wherever you are. e*trade from morgan stanley.

he hits his mark —center stage—and is crushed by a baby grand piano. you're replacing me? customize and save with liberty bibberty. he doesn't even have a mustache. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ 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.

i'm a little anxious, i'm a little excited. get kardiamobile for yourself or a loved one i'm gonna be emotional, she's gonna be emotional, but it's gonna be so worth it. i love that i can give back to one of our customers. i hope you enjoy these amazing gifts. oh my goodness. oh, you guys. i know you like wrestling, so we got you some vip tickets.

you have made an impact. so have you. for you guys to be out here doing something like this, it restores a lot of faith in humanity. ♪ ♪ former president trump trump

continues to use fascist language that dehumanizes immigrants. this is what he said last night in iowa. >> we have no idea who any of them are. they come from africa, they come from asia and south america. it's true. they are destroying the blood of our country. that's what they are doing, destroying our country. they don't like it when i said that, and they said, oh, hitler said that in a much different way. they are coming from all over the world. people all over the world. we have no idea. they could be healthy and they could be very unhealthy and they could bring in disease, and they are coming from all over the world and destroying the blood of our country and the fabric of our country, and we will have to get them out.

>> mike barnicle, just -- it's always -- i always found it just absolutely surprising that whenever you would bring up comparisons -- not you, when i would bring up or other people bring up with what donald trump said and what fascists leaders in the past have said, you know, everybody with their white gloves are trying to -- i don't know, they are trying to play by a different set of rules. oh, you can't talk about that. you can't bring up the fact that donald trump talks like a fascist or mussolini or hitler, and you talk about what hitler said about vermin, or what hitler said about poisoning the blood of our country. the comparisons are -- the parallels are shocking. they are just shocking.

by the way, when a guy says, by the way, i -- mine comp -- when he says that while he's speaking as if he read that, it brings me back to ivana trump's 1990 interview with "vanity fair" where she said her husband kept speeches of hitler by his bedside, and if you ask mika, she will say, joe will keep sometimes -- you know, faulkner, and biographies of paul mccartney, and churchill books and et cetera, and et cetera --

>> not my calm of -- >> so maybe he didn't read it, but he kept a collection of hitler speeches by his bed, according to his first wife in a "vanity fair" article, and you can hear it in his words and see it at his rallies. that's exactly the direction he's going. he's going doubling, tripling down on fascist-like rhetoric. >> as you were speaking and referencing his bedside and hitler's manuscripts or whatever, and mika sighed, and she went, ohhh, and that's the sigh of this country. this country is on overload. the volatility of the electorate in this country, and everybody

of voting age and younger people are in a clothes dryer tumbling around, and donald trump speaking what he spoke and saying what he said is nobody ever leaves and they stay there and listen to him, and the infection has spread coast-to-coast. nobody leaves a trump rally. >> you know, i think one of the things we forget is that fascism historically had a tremendous appeal, and it's hard to talk about because we know it's scary, dangerous and it's wrong. it led in the 20th century to the murder of 6 million jews and many others, and yet fascism continues to have appeal. that was also true in this country where we saw fascism take a different form, just as racist in the u.s. south.

we have to be on constant guard for it. we have to call it by its name when we see it. i think there are some other things that can be done as well, which is, you know, somebody has got to stand up and say, no, that's wrong, immigrants are the life blood of this country, and immigrants helped to build this country, and immigrants are humans like and you me. of course the hypocrisy is stunning. if i am not mistaken, i don't believe donald trump's family has been here alongside the native americans since the founding of the country, and he, himself, is a decedent, and this has to be called out and uprooted and we have to create some off-ramps, too, to just help the american people understand how to recognize fascism. i think that's what scares me, how many voters really listen to

donald trump and understand how dangerous these lies are, and where is the effort to help americans understand, not in a partisan way, but in a historic way, help them contextulize that. >> yeah, it's shameful. it's shameful members of our party are just going along for the ride. you know, in 2020 after all of the things he said, including accusing me of being a murderer 12 times, and i am just putting that to the side, because this was a good friend of mine when i asked him, wait, i am curious, i'm -- this is not about us, but

why did you vote for donald trump? he said regulations. i just -- i wonder how you have somebody channeling adolph hitler, and how you have somebody saying this about immigrants, which is office of what ronald reagan said about immigrants. somebody who promises to assassinate disloyal generals, jail his opponents, i could go down the list, ban networks that he doesn't like, how do our former party members -- how do they look at all of this and go, you know, i really like donald trump's view of regulatory reform more than joe biden's? i think i will vote for the guy channeling hitler. >> there's a specific warning in

those words to republicans about donald trump, because one of the things you hear from a lot of republicans in the kind of grudging trump camp is maybe what happened on january 6th was unfortunate and treason like but he learned his lesson and won't repeat his mistake, and that's a promise people like susan collins made again and again, he learned his lesson, and the poisoning remark, he said it once before and a number of people in the country said that's disgusting, and people around him said maybe that's inadvisable. how does donald trump respond to any check or correction, which is to say in the clip you show, he said i said this before and people said not to say it, and i am doing it again precisely because i was told not to do it, that's why i am doing it. you have to think everything else the people around him are

saying, and maybe it's inadvisable to try and overthrow the vehicle and it's inadvisable to talk about executing generals, and the more you tell him not to do it, the more he will do it. you are not voting for the things he has not done, you are not voting for the deregulatory fantasy. george conway has written about trump's narcissim, and you tell him not to lick his finger and put it in the electric socket, and he will do it just to spite you and, by the way, to blow out the house. coming up next, our guests says the gaza war may be reaching a turning point. david ignatius joins us about his new column on what happens after the guns so silent. that conversation is next on "morning joe." is next on "morning joe." and discoveringt my family come from farmers, for generations.

this life is in our blood. and we ain't stopping no time soon. give the gift of family heritage with ancestry. (♪♪) entresto is the #1 heart failure brand prescribed by cardiologists. it was proven superior at helping people stay alive and out of the hospital. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto for heart failure. 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. at bombas, we're obsessed with comfort.

quality. movement. because your basic things should be your best things. one purchased equals one donated. visit bombas.com and get 20% off your first order. new emergen-c crystals pop and fizz when you throw them back. and who doesn't love a good throwback? [sfx: video game] emergen-c crystals.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

>> that's a hold on the men and women responsible for, you know, protecting our country on -- >> they sacrifice, their families sacrifice. >> yeah, tommy tuberville, causing extraordinary pain for family members. >> yep. >> for children uprooted -- >> separating them. >> for spouses. for separating those families. some had to move on to new schools and new jobs expecting to move on with -- with their father or mother -- it's just shocking. he just did this -- while doing this, other republicans stood by

while he said this was the weakest military in american history, which is the biggest lie ever. it's the strongest military. you can look at any ranking of militaries across the globe, and we are more powerful by a long shot than any other country. more powerful than we have been relative to any other country since 1945, but tommy tuberville and other republicans continued their war against the armed services, and continued to say our troops are weak and woke and continued to say they are more like russian troops, which is such a joke. such a joke. i wish these people that hate the united states' military, if they hate the united states military so much, you know, don't serve our country because you are doing us a grave disservice. >> well, i hope it was worth it for him. how many military bases in his state, they will not be happy

with him. the 11 four-star generals tuberville was blocking because of a protest against a pentagon policy that reimbursed service members that had to travel out of state for abortion health care, and, they were approved. >> even when the majority of the people in alabama were against what he was doing, he was still insulting men and women in uniform. still insulting the leaders of our military. still insulting america's service members, and saying they are the weakest ever, and it's a lie, and putin and xi love to hear that lie. >> and the senate wrapped up the

year without coming to an agreement with border funding and aid for israel and ukraine. there was a rare joint statement expressing the importance of the negotiations saying talks will continue as issues are ironed out. leader schumer also vowed to take swift action on the funding supplemental for ukraine and israel early in the new year. joining us, ali vitali. i think it was yesterday you were telling us that they didn't want to put this off because it would be a messy start to the new year, and now it will be messier. >> yeah, and this congress, and it should be no surprise to us, because it has been one mess after another starting back in january. this tees up not only the

negotiation on the increasing and always thorny issue on immigration, but now they are not doing it in a vacuum. negotiators in the room will cop to that. they know as they are handing outboarder restrictions, they are going up against somebody that could be the nominee against donald trump, and they are being asked about what he's saying about immigrants poisoning the blood of this country. what i am continually struck by is the ways in which republicans are trying to portend that immigration policy in 2024, it impacts what is happening in the room there because democrats are now trying in some ways to trump-proof this legislation if it gets to a point where they can write it down on paper and end up on the floor to have a vote on it.

they are still far away from that. this framework is still actually coming together. when you think about the ways they are talking about how presidents can have leverage, for example, over asylum and how it's claimed or adjudicated, or the ways deportations happen on an expedited basis, and democrats are willing to entertain them, and they are doing so in a way where they are trying to make it like future presidents cannot make this system or exploit the system in a way that democrats and republicans can be uncomfortable with. all of this is swirling in the pot. it's messy now, these issues were messy anyway, and the trump factor, once again, makes them increasingly messier. >> nbc's ali vitali, thank you so much for your reporting. great job on "way too early" this morning. coming up, we will go live to the southern border in texas where thousands of migrants are

crossing from mexico. the very latest on the building pressure there, when "morning joe" comes right back.

♪ ♪ david, you have a recent piece in the "the atlantic" about the excuses of abandoning ukraine. what are they? >> republicans would never say we can't mail social security checks until we solve the border problem, but they said we can't help ukraine until we solved the border problem. ukraine asked the $106 billion president biden asked for includes $14 billion for the border, and the reason that money is so important is because we have the breakdown of the

asylum system, and you need to break down systems quickly to remove people from the country. most asylum cases are rejected if they are heard, but it costs money to hear them, and president biden put that forward. republicans have demonstrated, and that's the thesis of my article, as they moved step by step away from ukraine, they are doing it in order to honor trump. there are only a handful of republicans in the house and senate that share the kind of pro-putin ideology and hear the same voices in social media and broadcast media, and there are a lot of republicans that want to show they are loyal to trump, and they know trump wants to see ukraine lose and they are loyal fox news fox isn't the only way you're getting make sure messages, you're part of a system of social media where they circulate stuff that's too crazy for fox news. but when you watch fox news, the fox news hosts allude to this crazy stuff, they know you know it, you know they know it and they wink at it, they nod at it

and it's part of the whole information environment. so the thing -- while fox news may cover corinthian as if it's about the border if you're experiencing fox news, what you're experiencing is an immersion system in which it's linked to a bunch of truly insane ideas. corinthian's role in american, ukraine's role in connection to the biden family, and that's part of what people are absorbing from many different sources and being focused been republican leaders against ukraine. >> it's really shocking what you -- >> well put. >> -- trump supporters saying about ukraine, about vladimir putin, about -- they literally parrot russian talking points because they've heard it, as david said, online, and somehow this -- somehow the far right has taken to embracing

authoritarians like vladimir putin. >> yeah, no, and they don't see anything wrong with it, it's totally backwards. and also, republicans, in everything that they're doing, are not being actual republicans, including the candidates, by not calling out donald trump, by not saying what they see. the atlantic's david frum, thank you very much, we move now to israel. offering to pause the fighting in gaza for at least one week as part of a new deal to get hoims -- hamas to release three dozen hostages. two israeli officials and another source with knowledge of the situation tells this to axios, the offer is the first from israel following the collapse of the seven-day cease-fire. >> let's go to david ignatius. i wonder how much of this is due to pressure coming from the israeli people after three

hostages, with their shirts off, to show that they didn't have explosives, waving a white flag, speaking in hebrew, were gunned down and killed by israeli troops. >> joe, i think that's a big reason that the hostage release issue has come back, this was agonizing for israelis, it was agonizing, i think, for everybody in the idf's horrific moment. it happened in an area, i'm told, where there had been ambushes. these are young soldiers, they're not that experienced. they made a night marrish mistake and it made every israeli think, what can we do to get the hostages out? we will see resumed mediated negotiations with hamas through qatar, i'm told the cease-fire this time could actually last a couple of weeks, be accompanied by more humanitarian assistance into gaza, more relief for the palestinians there who have been

suffering so badly. there has been concern about terrible outbreaks of disease, cholera among them, cholera threat for the moment, apparently, has receded, but it's, you know, a severe humanitarian problem. i'm told that what's happening on the ground is that in northern gaza, israel believes that hamas's command and control is basically broken, that it's not possible for hamas leaders in the south to communicate with the north anymore. you have roving bands of hamas fighters still doing a lot of damage to the israelis in the north, but it's not well coordinated. the concern is in the south, where sinwar, the head of hamas is located, he's said to have surrounded himself with hostages to try to protect himself. that's going to be the focus of the fighting, and i think there is a hope that perhaps after this period of cease-fire, and additional humanitarian

assistance, some israeli troops in the north might be able to pull back, so that they were in a standoff position, that would be the kind of, as i said in my piece this morning, inflection point that the u.s. has hoped would come in this war soon. i don't think we're there yet. there's still an awful lot of hamas fighters out there, killing israelis, this is still a real hot war. but i think we are moving towards something different. >> coming up, are public schools teaching anti-semitism? one of our next guests says that by the time kids reach kindergarten they're learning that jews are the enemy. that conversation is just ahead on "morning joe."

he hits his mark —center stage—and is crushed by a baby grand piano. you're replacing me? customize and save with liberty bibberty. he doesn't even have a mustache. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ i have moderate to severe crohn's disease. now, there's skyrizi. ♪ things are looking up, i've got symptom relief. ♪ ♪ control of my crohn's means everything to me. ♪ ♪ control is everything to me. ♪ feel significant symptom relief at 4 weeks with skyrizi, including less abdominal pain and fewer bowel movements. skyrizi is the first il-23 inhibitor that can deliver remission and visibly improve damage of the intestinal lining.

and the majority of people experienced long-lasting remission at one year. serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine or plan to. liver problems may occur in crohn's disease. ♪ now's the time to ask your gastroenterologist how you can take control of your crohn's with skyrizi. ♪ ♪ control is everything to me. ♪ ♪ learn how abbvie could help you save.

christmas is just a few days away, a lot of people are out there sending out holiday cards, i've already seen some pretty interesting ones this year,

here's one from apple. it says, happy shakakan, and it says sorry, hanukkah, ducking auto correct. here's from george santos, on the first day of christmas my true love gave to me, their credit card number and the three digit cvv, one from eric adams, it says it's beginning to look a lot like -- open it up, and it says i'm not getting reelected. >> okay, welcome to the fourth hour of morning joe, it's 6:00 a.m. on the west coast, 9:00 a.m. on the east, and we've got a lot to get to this hour, including the senate leaving washington without a deal on funding for foreign aid and border security. it means ukraine will not receive desperately needed assistance in the fight against russian forces until early next

year. meanwhile, a record number of migrants yesterday crossed into the u.s. at the southern border. we'll get a live report from texas in just a moment. but we start this hour with the historic decision from the colorado supreme court. donald trump is ineligible for that state's republican primary ballot for his role in the january 6th insurrection. nbc news capitol hill correspondent garrett haake has the latest. >> reporter: former president donald trump campaigning in iowa overnight, making no mention of a bombshell decision by the colorado supreme court, ruling that he engaged in insurrection when he tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election. the decision also making him ineligible to hold office under the 14th amendment, and disqualifying him from colorado's march 5th primary ballot. the court repeatedly citing mr. trump's own words on january 6th as evidence of insurrection when he urged supporters to march on

the capitol and fight certification of the 2020 election for joe biden. >> we're going to walk down to the capitol. we fight like hell, and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. >> reporter: mr. trump's campaign calling the court's decision, quote, completely flawed and vowing to appeal to the u.s. supreme court. the political backlash to the ruling, instant, with the former president's allies rushing to his defense. house speaker mike johnson calling it, quote, nothing but a thinly vailed partisan attack, his rivals also attacking the decision, ron desantis calling it an abuse of judicial power. the ruling is on hold for now with the trump campaign already vowing to appeal, and legal efforts over the same issue have failed across the country, including lawsuits dismissed in minnesota and new hampshire, and a michigan appeals court rejecting challenges to his candidacy just this month. mr. trump has been unaffected by his legal issues in primary polls. already fund-raising off the colorado decision, he is still

the republican front runner, and still defending his most controversial rhetoric on the campaign trail. after his comments that immigrants are, quote, poisoning the blood of america, critics pointing out adolf hitler used similar wording this his writings. trump doubling down last night. >> and it's true, they're destroying the blood of of our country. they don't like it when i said that, and i never read meinkampf, they said, oh, hitler said that, in a much different way. >> he said that -- >> he actually said mein kampf correctly. >> yes, we heard earlier about his ignorance of history, that he had to be taught about pearl harbor and the implications of it by general kelly. but it is fascinating that he does borrow so much from adolf hitler when he talks about vermin, which hitler, of course,

talked about, and in the lead-up to the holocaust he talks about poisoning the blood of the country. and he said he's never read mein kampf -- his first wife ivana told haven't fair in 1990 that he kept a book of adolf hitler's speeches by his bedside. so that's fascinating. now, getting to -- and by fascinating, i mean absolutely horrifying because he is now channelling adolf hitler running for president, and most republicans not only don't care, they like it. they like the -- they like him, they want to vote for him, regardless of january 6th, regardless of his channelling adolf hitler, regardless of him praising vladimir putin, of him praising communist tyrants across the globe.

it's really fascinating, one word for it. one of the lead stories in the "new york times" today talks about how most americans believe that donald trump committed serious crimes, and most republicans do not care. let me say it again. most americans believe donald trump committed serious crimes, you look at the story, most republicans, they just don't care. we will let you sit with that for a while, and also sit with the fact, something that most people watching this show know, that republicans like him more, the more he gets indicted, that his numbers have actually gone up and that's one thing that the poll shows, that his numbers have gone up as evidence has come out that he stole nuclear secrets, evidence came out that he revealed secret war plans on how the united states would

attack iran, that he stole secrets talking about america's weaknesses, all of this. and it just makes republicans -- primary voters like him even more. >> joining us now, to discuss the colorado decision, retired judge jay michael ludic who served on the united states court of appeals for the fourth circuit. justice department reporter for the "new york times," katy benner, and former litigator, and msnbc legal analyst lisa reuben. mike barnicle and reverend al sharpton are back with us as well. >> judge, there are of course screams and screeches from the trump right talking about how this is a left wing assault on a conservative presidential candidate. this is, of course, a federalist -- two federalist society scholars, highly

respected, who have -- who have said -- written this theory, and you, yourself, see, again -- you see this as this court ruling is a legitimate court ruling, walk us through it, and talk about why you think it was a brilliant court ruling. >> thank you, joe, and mika for having me on with you this morning, as our country's preeminent constitutional scholar laurence tribe and i said in our august 2023 article in the atlantic about the 14th amendment, this is the most pressing constitutional question of our times, and it will be a test of america's commitment to its democracy, to its constitution, and to the rule of

law for all the reasons that are coming to the forefront this morning, joe and mika. yesterday's decision, as mika said, was an historic constitutional decision, arguably when it's decided by the supreme court it will be the single most important constitutional decision in all of our history. yesterday's decision by the colorado supreme court was masterful. it was brilliant. and it is an unassailable interpretation of the 14th amendment, section 3's disqualification clause, and an unassailable decision that the former president is disqualified from the presidency of -- because he conducted, engaged

in, or aided or supported an insurrection or rebellion against the united states constitution. in the courts upholding what it did, it reversed the lower court decision on whether section 3 of the 14th amendment applied to presidents of the united states. the lower court had held that it did not. but, the court yesterday affirmed the central holding of the lower court, that the former president had, in fact, engaged in an insurrection or rebellion against the constitution of the united states. on that former point, this court held correctly, and

unquestionably correctly that the presidency is an office under the united states, that the president is an officer of the united states, and that he takes an oath to support the constitution of the united states when he takes the presidential oath prescribed by the constitution. >> so, judge, walter isaacson, who is concerned about the precedent that this ruling might set, what would you say to other americans, who may not be supportive of donald trump's candidacy, that are concerned that this takes -- takes something out of the voters' hands, and places it in the hands of unelected judges to decide who's fit to run for office, and who is not?

>> joe, i understand that first instinct, if you will, but what i would say to all americans is that the constitution itself has determined that the disqualification of the former president is not what is anti democratic. rather, the constitution tells us that it is the conduct that can give rise to disqualification under the 14th amendment that is anti-democratic. so, in other words, the people of america, through their constitution, and the 14th amendment in particular, have decided that disqualification is not anti-democratic. so, the 14th amendment, section

3 disqualification clause, it is probably the most democratic provision in our entire constitution. >> katie, having covered this for so long, what is your sense? what did you feel when you heard about the decision being rendered by the colorado supreme court? and what's your sense as it goes up the ladder toward the supreme court, a court that has had more than a whiff of politics to it. >> yeah, so when the decision came out what was so interesting about it is that, again, it does not rely on the question of whether or not donald trump is going to be prosecuted for insurrection, whether or not he's charged with insurrection. it really goes back to a reading of the 14th amendment that, you know, historically was after the civil war, during the reconstruction, what do we do about people who rose up against the united states who are not going to be prosecuted? it was to ban them from office. so, when you think about what could happen when this goes to the supreme court, you have a

series of justices, many of them conservative, many of them who would take a very literal reading of something like the 14th amendment, and it becomes -- it becomes an interesting challenge for this court. on the one hand, i think many of the justices would not be inclined to rule on this question. they might want to rule on something narrow and technical. but at the same time the supreme court is tasked with deciding the most consequential and most important legal questions and this is one that squarely falls within an originalist reading that conservative justices would be inclined to take up in that manner. so i think it's going to be fascinating, very -- i could never predict what they will do but it's hard for me to believe that they won't take this up. >> having understood that, when you look at the context of the 14th amendment, and the fact that it came into being because of the civil war and the racial overturn -- overtone, and that they had split and now in terms

of the confederates. that's one complexity this court has to deal with. but the other is the january 6th case of jack smith, which you covered a lot, and talked about a lot, and wouldn't -- if they take a broader, rather than the narrow view of deciding this, wouldn't they even taking this on help determine that donald trump is guilty of an insurrection? and how will that impact the case? >> well, what's interesting about the case, rev, that you were referring to, the federal election interference case is that there are no charges for insurrection or seditious conspiracy involved there, the conduct is largely the same, but the charges there are three conspiracy charges and one straight up obstruction of an official proceeding charge. secrecy depending on whether the supreme court takes the case as katie was discussing, but also how they decided what factual findings they affirm, it could or could not have some impact on the future of that january 6th

case. but the bigger picture is that we may be going into a holiday season where our supreme court is not going to be asked to review one question relating to donald trump's future, but now two, because jack smith has asked the court to prioritize and leapfrog the d.c. circuit court of appeals and kick on directly the question of whether president trump is entitled to immunity in a criminal prosecution, now based on what the trump campaign has said last night, we could be facing a second question to the supreme court. this colorado supreme court ruling is appealable only to the u.s. supreme court, and the first 69-plus pages of this decision are not what's appealable. that's where they're discussing sort of preliminary questions of colorado election law, what is appealable to the supreme court, though, is what judge luttig was describing, which is the holding that section 3 applies to presidents, and that it is self-executing, meaning it doesn't need legislation passed by congress to disqualify someone, and in that, this court

is sort of mimicking judge chutkan and her immunity decision, appealing to the justices with a straight up, this is what the plain text says, this is what the structure of the constitution, other provisions tell us, and this is what our history tells us at the time of the ratification, this is what people said during the debate in the floor of congress on ratification. i think all of those things show the colorado supreme court just like tanya chutkan was very much thinking about these justices and how they will encounter these questions. >> so, a couple of questions, if the supreme court can't get to a decision for some reason, does this ruling hold? and katie, in terms of timing, what are some of the issues here, and also, are there any other states that still have to rule on this? what are the implications of this? >> yeah, you know, so in terms of timing, i think starting there is important, so, this -- the colorado supreme court has given the trump campaign basically until the new year to file an appeal. of course they will. they're going to appeal this to

the supreme court. at that time, i think it's the next day, lisa, that the colorado supreme court has to decide who goes on their ballot. so, my guess is that that ruling will be filed quickly, the appeal will be filed quickly and then we'll see colorado act as soon as possible. but what this is all leading up to is whether or not we're going to see trials begin in the trump cases by march, so one of the reasons why jack smith, as lisa has said, has leapfrogged the d.c. circuit and brought questions of immunity before the supreme court, is he would really like to see these things settled so that case can begin in the spring, as close to the date that the federal government has planned as possible. so what's so interesting is we're seeing cases, legal cases, collide with the campaign. and we're seeing important dates in the campaign, when we're going to decide who the republican nominee is, when we're going to decide, you know, what voters will be given as choices, directly at odds with

all of these questions now before the supreme court. my guess is that the court is very cognizant of how political this is and how important it is and will want to say whether or not they're going to take up these cases as soon as possible. >> you know, judge luttig, what's so fascinating about all of this is earlier you had george conway on, talking about how he first read the dissents, and he was struck by the weakness of intellectual argument of the dissents and for the first time thought this actually could actually could be validated by the supreme court. what i find so curious is that the fact question of whether donald trump committed insurrection against the united states constitution really wasn't a question of fact open to debate, the lower court even determined that he had committed insurrection. >> engaged in, courted.

>> engaged in, right, insurrection as you said, insurrection against the constitution of the united states. is this a question that the supreme court can pick up itself even though the state courts all seem to agree, even the dissenters all seem to agree that he did, in fact, commit insurrection. >> joe, let me touch on two things first. one, this is not a political question, and the decision of the colorado supreme court is not a political decision. this is a question and a profoundly important question of constitutional law. second, as to the discussion about the implications of yesterday's holding for jack smith's prosecution, these matters are entirely separate. if the supreme court decides to

take this case, or another under the 14th amendment question, it's the court's resolution of that decision that will have nothing whatsoever to do with jack smith's prosecution of the former president because as one of your panelists said, jack smith did not charge the former president under 18 usc section 2383 which is the criminal statute that prohibits insurrection or rebellion against the united states. now, joe, as to your questions about the decision and the implications, you know, george conway is a brilliant lawyer in his own right, and so i don't need to comment on his comments to you earlier this morning. but yes, george was surprised but i was not surprised at all.

based upon the objective law in this instance, the 14th amendment, and section 3, i never had any doubt in the world that when the first court to address the issue, and that is this court yesterday in colorado, that court would hold that the former president had engaged in an insurrection or rebellion against the constitution of the united states. to the court's decision yesterday, affirming the lower court decision it was methodical, it was meticulous, and it was comprehensive. there is no question whatsoever that the supreme court of the united states ought to affirm that conclusion, that the former

president engaged in an insurrection or rebellion against the constitution of the united states. >> lisa, if you're donald trump, and his legal team, the next six months you're looking at a blizzard of legal action against you. spell out what they're looking at over the next six months. >> they are looking at, as you just said, an avalanche, a cavalcade of filings, and in particular legal moments of real consequence that literally abut political moments of real significance, michael, think about two right now, one is the iowa caucuses are on january 15th, the next day donald trump goes to trial for a second time and the second defamation case brought by e. jean carroll here in federal court in new york, that's her defamation case relating to comments he made while he was president, for which he's not entitled to immunity, and the department of

justice declined to defend him. the other thing is super tuesday, and colorado is one of the super tuesday states, i should mention, that's why january 5th is statutorily the deadline for certifying a ballot in colorado, it's 60 days before super tuesday. well, the chutkan trial is supposed to open on march 4th. that's the day before super tuesday when most people believe that donald trump will have that nomination locked up by then. so, if i am the trump legal team, and by the way there's not one trump legal team, there are multiple trump legal teams, it's a massive venn diagram at this point, i'm going to need a quarterback who is both politically astute, but also legally sophisticated enough to understand all of these interlocking parts. sometimes the position you take in one case is not advantageous in another. donald trump, for example, didn't ask for removal of the fulton county rico case to

federal court? why? because he would have had to argue he was an officer of the united states, a position that would have put him squarely at the disadvantage in the case we're discussing now, right, where disqualification is dependent on being an officer of the united states. had donald trump argued in georgia he is an officer that would have come back to haunt him, and any of these 14th amendment cases that went all the way up through litigation. so, if i'm donald trump, you know, i don't just want my roy cohn right now, i want a michael luttig, those are hard to come by and certainly not available to him. >> yeah, former litigator lisa reuben, thank you very much, "new york times" justice department reporter katie benner, and retired judge jay michael luttig, thank you all very much for your analysis and reporting this morning. we appreciate it. one more legal development pertaining to january 6th, a judge has ordered republican congressman scott perry to turn over nearly 1,700 cell phone records as part of the investigation into efforts to

overturn the 2020 election results. the pennsylvania republican and ally of former president trump is accused of using his cell phone in communications that the government believes could be relevant to its january 6th probe. the fbi sized the congressman's phone last year as part of the investigation before jack smith was appointed special counsel. congressman perry claimed his cell phone records were protected by the speech or debate clause of the constitution, but a d.c. district judge ruled a majority of those communications were not protected by that clause, a spokesperson for perry did not immediately respond to a request for comment. and as congress leaves washington with no deal on immigration reform, dhs officials are telling nbc news that the southern border had its busiest crossing day ever on monday, with over 12,000 migrants. this, as texas governor greg

abbott signed a new law making illegal immigration a state crime, giving more power to state law enforcement, but opens up a slew of questions about its legality. joining us now from eagle pass, texas yes crossings have spiked, nbc news correspondent guad venegas, what is the scene on the ground there? >> reporter: mika, good morning, thousands of migrants arriving, you can see behind me in a field that customs and border protection is using as a holding area this morning as the run rose we were able to count the groups trying to calculate, there could be as many as 2,000, or maybe even more. i'll step out of the way so that you can see these crowds, migrants arriving every day, as border officials process them as fast as possible. this, as u.s. officials tell nbc news that the number seen at the southern border are breaking new records. this morning the crisis at the border unrelenting, with thousands arriving daily from

california to arizona, and texas. on tuesday, this field in eagle pass packed with thousands of migrants waiting to be processed, men, women and children overwhelming border officials. on monday customs and border protection seeing a new record number of daily crossings, apprehending over 12,000 migrants at the southern border, with more than 26,000 already in custody, pushing processing centers to their limit. in arizona, the overwhelmed port of entry in lukeville still closed, while in texas, international rail operations halted in el paso, and eagle pass, leaving shipments ranging from consumer goods to food and beverages stuck at the border. but the problem is far more than just numbers. it's also a national security crisis. this week, texas governor greg abbott signing a controversial new law, allowing state and local authorities to arrest undocumented immigrants and even deport them.

>> so we anticipate, with sb-4, that cracks down on illegal entry, that that should reduce the number of people coming across the border. >> reporter: almost immediately the city of el paso and the aclu taking action calling it unconstitutional. >> it's going to open the door to racial profiling. >> reporter: the white house also opposed. >> the law is incredibly extreme and it does not make, it does not make communities in texas safer. it just does not. >> reporter: with thousands more arriving every day, it's a crisis with no end in sight. and, you can see the numbers still arriving, we're showing you an image of migrants that appear to have just crossed into the u.s., you can see behind where the river's located, and then down at the far end of the screen is the mexican side of the riversh just to show you how the flow continues, and of course over on the other side where you see the mesh, that's where the migrants have been waiting, many of them overnight,

using those aluminum mylar blankets to stay warm and other on the other side we can see hundreds, groups of hundreds being processed, being loaded up to these buses. we've seen this crowd for the last few days, but it's not the same migrants. we see migrants arrive, migrants get processed and of course the crowds continue here in this field in eagle pass. joe? >> all right. >> nbc's guad venegas, thank you so much for that reporting this morning. and coming up on "morning joe" billions of dollars in cargo diverted in shipping routes in the red sea over fear of attacks by iranian-backed rebels. we'll talk to andrew ross sorkin about the economic impacts, including on the price of gas. plus, what a foreign takeover of u.s. steel means for american jobs. you're watching "morning joe," we'll be right back.

liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. with the money i saved, i started a dog walking business. oh. [dog barks] no it's just a bunny! only pay for what you need. ♪liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ when moderate to severe ulcerative colitis takes you off course. put it in check with rinvoq, a once-daily pill. when i wanted to see results fast, rinvoq delivered rapid symptom relief and helped leave bathroom urgency behind. check. when uc tried to slow me down... i got lasting, steroid-free remission with rinvoq. check. and when uc caused damage rinvoq came through by visibly repairing my colon lining. check. rapid symptom relief... lasting steroid-free remission... ...and the chance to visibly repair the colon lining. check, check, and check. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal;

cancers, including lymphoma and skin cancer; death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least 1 heart disease risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. put uc in check and keep it there with rinvoq. ask your gastroenterologist about rinvoq and learn how abbvie can help you save. in the u.s. we see millions of cyber threats each year. ask your gastroenterologist about rinvoq 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.

it's that time of year when a lot of companies release their sappy sentimental commercials, you know what i'm talking about, those ads that for the holidays tug at the heart strings, some of these feel a little forced. take a look at this one i saw. >> the holidays are special. it's the time of the year we enjoy spending evenings with family, friends and loved ones, and we're here to ruin it all. monopoly, for this holiday season. >> tugs at the heart strings, but still, this last one i saw too, last night, look at this right here. >> there's no better way to spend this season than curled up with your loved ones, snuggled up close by a roaring fire only we can start, tesla.

>> that's great. >> okay. >> i don't know. >> welcome back, four of the world's five largest container shipping companies have paused or rerouted movements through the red sea in the last several days. after attacks on container ships, and oil tankers in the area by houthi rebels scared off both shipping and oil giants. so for about $35 billion in cargo has been diverted. >> co-anchor of cnbc's "squawk box," andrew ross sorkin, i'm curious, what's going to be the impact on oil prices, gas prices, and the supply chain in general? >> supply chain. >> well, really, it's everything. you know, just when we thought that inflation was under control, this is one of those items, one of those things that can go wrong, that can impact everything. and that's the real question, 30%, some-odd 30% of the -- goes through the red sea, one way or the other. a lot of these ships are now

having to go down below africa. it takes an extra week to do that. you already had this unique drought taking place in the panama canal, actually, that was limiting the number of ships that were going through there. so all of this is going to complicate things. you've seen the price of oil go up, spike just in the past 48 hours, either already -- you know, it had been down under about $68 a barrel, and now we're up to close to $75 a barrel and this is in the past five weeks in total. we're going to be seeing this. the question is, how quickly does this get under control? what does it cost? terms of just the governments and the like, there's obviously a whole bunch of governments that are going to come together. but, this is -- this is one of those things at the federal reserve and again, as we walk into an election year, we might see it, we might see it when we go to the supermarket. it hasn't -- it's not there yet, but if this continues. >> yeah. may get there. you know, andrew, it's so

interesting as we talk about what the fed's going to do, where inflation's going, we talked about how good news is bad news, bad news is good news. >> right. >> all in all, pretty impossible if you're the fed chair jay powell to keep up with it all. i love -- just because of the insanity of it all, i love the lead in the "wall street journal" today, basically saying that now jay powell is pulling his hair out because, after making the announcement last week that, you know, rates were going to be going down, investors are going crazy, going, oh, my god, rates are going down, now the market's going to explode. and here come even more inflationary pressures because of news from the fed that we actually have less inflationary pressures. >> right, this was always the danger with jay powell coming out and being as explicit as he was last week. i told you just how surprising that was and we're all trying to

read the tea leaves. the most interesting thing that's happened, and you've seen it the past couple of days, a number of members of the board of the fed have come out and done separate interviews, and are almost walking back some of the comments that jay powell has made, saying, look, we're thinking about this, we're not even thinking about it, and we might do it. i mean, really sort of shifting the dialogue. there's always been a question, when you see those fed governors out there on tv, giving interviews and the like, how coordinated it is. meaning, did jay powell talk to them in advance? did they say, look, i want to get out there and reel this back? the truth is, those comments push the stock market higher and by the way, we talked about this, this last week, if the stock market goes higher unto itself the wealth effect is inflationary to some degree, working against what the fed chair is trying to do as he brings down inflation. >> let's talk about u.s. steel, what would happen if it were

bought for $15 billion by a japanese steel company. it's going to be something that causes concern in congress. >> well, look, it's almost become a bipartisan issue, you have democrats, republicans, i mean, whoever said that the u.s. doesn't have an industrial policy, i don't know what they're thinking. there is a protectionist view about this as well, and there's a question about jobs, but, you know, if you believe that steel is a unique and national strategic asset, defense asset to some degree, maybe you don't want foreigners to own it. having said that, japan is an ally of ours. if you start telling allies that they can't buy things and invest in the u.s., what are you saying? so i think that's really the dynamic at plays, on one side saying we need to have the resilience, we want to own things we think are strategic assets to ourselves and on the other side we're saying we want lots of foreigners, and others, allies especially to invest in our country, but in this case maybe we're saying we don't want that, and so, what do you do?

>> cnbc's andrew ross sorkin, thank you very much. >> great question. >> it is a good question. >> what do you do? do you have a thought? >> what do you do? >> i don't know. >> what do you do? >> well, it is, you know, there is just something so highly symbolic about u.s. steel, and it has been for decades, you know, there's the old saying, what was it, what's good for ge is good for america, used to be sort of the feeling about u.s. steel. but you're right, we don't have an industrial policy, and it's going to be hard to justify the blocking of this -- this deal. i mean, what is your good friend, the real morning joe, joe kernan think about it. >> this goes back to your free

marketeer on one end, but national security on the other. they sort of converng in this strange way that maybe is not -- i don't know. i don't want to speak for him. >> what do you do? >> that is the issue that i think a lot of folks are confronting. >> all right. andrew, thank you. >> i just wanted to name drop the real morning joe. >> coming up, thank you, andrew, with anti-semitism on the rise in the u.s., we are increasingly seeing some of the hateful rhetoric being targeted at children. our next guest says the problem is anti-semitism is actually being taught in some public schools across the country. we'll find out why she says that next on "morning joe"." deep deep

♪ today, my friend you did it, you did it, you did it... ♪ centrum silver is now clinically shown to support cognitive health in older adults. it's one more step towards taking charge of your health. so every day, you can say, ♪ youuu did it! ♪ with centrum silver.

♪ i'm gonna hold you forever... ♪ ♪ i'll be there... ♪ ♪ you don't... ♪ ♪ you don't have to worry... ♪

. a connecticut father is speaking out about the anti-semitic harassment he says forced his son to change schools in a new op-ed for news week

documentary film maker andrew goldberg writes that starting last year classmates began harassing his 11-year-old son in the westport public school district. goldberg wrote, one student whom he considered to be arid invited my son to sign up for his camp, which had great showers, camp auschwitz. later on that same student allegedly started telling his son, quote, we must exterminate the jews on a regular basis. eventually, after goldberg enrolled his son in a private school for his safety, he said the old school district offered to pay the new tuition, but only if the family agreed to never speak publicly about wha happened. last week in response to the allegations, thewestport school superintendent wrote t parents, quote, let me be clear, anti-semitism is vile, and is never tolerated in our schools.

when we receive reports of anti-semitism we always respond and take action to keep our students safe, and issue appropriate consequences, including line he added that he had met with local jewish leaders to, quote, talk about what we can do moving forward. joining us now, reporter for the free press, francesca block, writes about that incident and many others happening around the country. in a new piece entitled how u.s. public schools teach anti-semitism, francesca, thank you for coming on with your reporting, tell us what else is happening and how it's, in a sense, being taught. >> thank you for having me on today. in my reporting i found anti-semitism is rampant in u.s. public schools. there's curriculum from the choices program for example that actually accepts funding from

qatar for middle east curriculum and it's being taught to over 1 million students around the world, in all 50 states. in addition tohat, we have stories of andrew goldberg and his family. i spoke to many parents, parents who told me about anti-semitism their kids face that i never could have imagined, one student, for example, who would walk the halls of his public middle school in the bronx, and his friends and his classmates would give him a nazi salute. and in another instance they made a snapchat group where they would send him some of the most horrific anti-semitic memes i've ever seen, one including a picture of adolf hitler and the quote, when you see your gas bill. this is rampant. the teachers i spoke to say they see swastikas in the bathroom on the desks all the time, where it's become normalized. >> in the westport case, mr. goldberg's son, do we know if

the parents of that boy said what he's alleged to have said, were the parents dealt with? >> unfortunately i don't know that information. i spoke to andrew goldberg for my story as well in the free press, he told me that he felt a constant frustration with dealing with the school board, feeling like the school district didn't take the -- its situation seriously, what his son was going through, seriously, and it felt like, in his mind, victim blaming, that the school brought his son in, and told his son, try to sit at a new lunch table than dealing with the root of the problem. >> also in that piece you have a story, an example of a midtown manhattan public school where the teacher at the head of the class has a series of noses portrayed, and she asks her students, her pupils, was it sixth grade? >> it's pre-k. >> pre-k, even worse. what does it mean to have a nose like that? and go ahead, tell the story. >> yeah, so this is from ps-59

here in new york city, and this teacher put out this poster asking her 4 and 5-year-old students to essentially, she said she was teaching them about the human body but she asked them the question, why do people have different noses, and the image has a picture of a hooked nose, two small noses, and one nose with a nose ring, and then at the bottom she wrote, i think people have different noses based on their ethnic identity. now, when i spoke to another member of the school who's jewish, she said this was clearly anti-semitic it reminded her of nazi comics the anti-semitic tropes of jews with big noses. >> pre-k. >> in pre-k, anti-semitic tropes of jews having big noses. >> pre-k. >> in pre-k. >> we had a big hate summit last year in the white house. to hear what you refer to brown university and this teacher here

in manhattan, aside from what students do, what you've laid out, what is being done to penalize those in the school system, teachers, et cetera, all the way up, that actually teach or enable this as part of what students are getting? because it's one thing for another student to be anti-semitic, homophobic, islamic or whatever the race is. it's another if it is inherent as you inferred in terms of brown university in the actual teaching of students because now you're getting it from someone of influence that you feel is given fact. >> exactly. the problem is many parents feel there is no accountability. even teachers feel they don't have accountability for their fellow colleagues. i'll give you an example, here in new york city on november 9th there was a student walkout. hundreds of students walked out of school, and they were

attending a pro-palestine protest in bryant park. ahead of the walkout, the chancellor of new york city schools told teachers and reminded them of their contract stating you cannot express and espouse political beliefs during school hours on school grounds. despite that warning, many teachers joined that protest holding signs saying teachers for palestine. they walked out of school with their students, and as far as i know, and as far as my sources know, none of them have faced any consequences. in fact, when i reached out to the department of education for comment for this story, the spokesperson told me that they were unaware that teachers had even attended the protest. >> reporter for the free press, francesca block, thank you so much for your reporting this morning, and thanks for coming on. we appreciate it. >> thanks. >> thank you. and we'll be right back with more "morning joe." xpand 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. - [narrator] power outages are unpredictable, inconvenient, and disruptive to your life. posing a real threat to your comfort and safety. when the power goes out, you have no lights, no refrigeration, no heating or air conditioning. your well or sump pump won't work. your modern daily electronics are rendered useless. and what if the power's out for days or weeks? are you prepared? you can be with a generac home standby generator. - with the generac, it powers our well or refrigerator, and my cpap machine, which are all things that we need to survive on a day-to-day basis - [narrator] when a power outage occurs, your generac home standby generator automatically powers up so your life goes on without disruption. you and your family are comfortable, safe, and secure.

generac generators run on your home's existing natural gas or propane and generac's mobile link remote monitoring system keeps you posted on operating status, maintenance updates, and more. generac generators are designed, engineered, and purpose-built in the usa. generac is the number-one manufacturer of home standby generators in the world. eight out of 10 home generators are generac with thousands of satisfied customers. - we chose generac because we see 'em everywhere. after the hurricane, i looked at my wife and said, "thank god we have a generac." we were safe. - [narrator] and owning a generator is easier than ever. special financing is available with low monthly payment options. act now and you will also receive a free seven-year warranty valued at $735. call or go online now to request your free quote with one of generac's 8,000 nationwide dealers. the call is free, the quote is free, and there's no obligation to buy. call or go online now

so the next time there's a power outage, your home powers up. power your life with generac. call or go online to request your free quote today.

we have no idea who any of them are. they come from africa.

they come from asia. they come from south america, and it's true that destroying the blood of our country, that's what they're doing. they're destroying our country. they don't like it when i said that, and i never read mein kampf, they said, oh, hitler said that in a much different way. they're coming from all over the world, people from all over the world. we have no idea, they could be healthy. they could be very unhealthy. they could bring in disease that's going to catch on in our country, but they do bring on crime, but they have them coming from all over the world, and they're destroying the blood of our country. they're destroying the fabric of our country, and we're going to have to get them out. >> he's doing it on purpose. he's channelling adolf hitler on purpose, says he's never read mein kampf, his wife told "vanity fair" in 1990 that he

did, in fact, have hitler speeches in a book by his bedside. and you can tell because he is channelling hitler. he did it, reverend al, before talking about vermin, using -- picking up that language from hitler, what hitler said to justify the holocaust and now this. i guess my question is, rev, with american democracy on the line and a guy channelling adolf hitler, how do we -- how do we impress upon americans just what is at stake over the next 11 months? >> i think we have to be redundant, repetitious. we've got to keep drilling on this. we are not talking about do you want to vote for one guy who you think is maybe too old, another guy who's only two or three years younger. this is about what the country stands for. for a man to stand up there and

really give legitimacy to what hitler stood for, killed 6 million jews, that was anti-black, anti those that would be lgbtq, are you voting for that? your vote describes who you are, not who the candidate is. if he can say this in plain english out loud, things like this, and you vote for him, then you support that kind of racism, anti-semitism and homophobia. that's who you are. your vote describes who you are. >> joe, mika, reverend al, all i can tell you is that six or even years ago if you had told me the extent of damage that would be done to this country by one individual, just one individual i would not have believed it, and yet the damage has been done, continues and now it's almost on a daily basis. >> yeah, i wouldn't have believed it. i would not have believed seven, eight years ago, we would have

gotten this far. i was shocked on election night 2020 that 77 million americans voted for a man who had already shown us the worst side of him and who had already, mika, been pressing his attorney general to arrest his political opponent and his entire family two weeks before the election. 77 million americans voted for him. >> and here we are. >> "the new york times" shows today that the majority of americans, the overwhelming majority of americans believe donald trump has committed serious crimes, and the majority of republicans overwhelming majority of republicans don't care. that's the battle we're fighting. >> it's important to listen to what he says. >> it's a tough political battle. >> and believe him. that does it for us this morning, ana cabrera picks up the coverage right now. right now on "ana cabrera reports," donalum