doesn't like when others speak for him or make policy decisions for him. >> real tension there certainly. also we should note again that once trump took over the rnc they ousted about 60 staffers there again. some believed not sufficiently loyal. as far as 2025 goes, so many democrats point out saying, look, think about the stakes of the next election. with that would change in our country. if trump. to win again. we will certainly keep an eye on it and appreciate the reporting this morning from laura davison, politics editor from "bloomberg." appreciate it. thanks to all of you for getting up "way too early" on this friday and all week long. "morning joe" starts right now. take time to write. i need to make sure i say exactly what i want to and i plan to get everyone. >> this week? >> should be out tomorrow. >> so -- the message i always want to convey, no ruling of mine is ever based on politics. i'm going to follow the law best i understand it.

>> judge scott mcafee saying he will release a decision today on whether fulton county district attorney fani willis can continue to prosecute the election interference case against donald trump. >> and the we're expecting that, maybe around 8:45, eastern time today. >> sometime during our show. one of the legal developments we're following this morning involving the former president. he was in court yesterday as his legal team tried to get the classified documents case dismissed. plus, we'll get a live report from moscow where polls are open for russia's first presidential election in six years, but vladimir putin's total control over the country leaves no doubt what the results will be, and the highest ranking jewish elected official in the united states is calling for changes in israel. now five months into its war with hamas. we'll play for you what senate majority leader chuck schumer said about prime minister

benjamin netanyahu. >> and, my gosh. >> it's something. >> if you heard the reaction from the far right, from the trump right, you would have forgotten for a second that benjamin netanyahu was the guy that led israel's defenses down, was the guy that knew in 2018 where all of the illicit funding was for the hamas terror organization, the guy who gave hamas money through qatar with a couple of weeks left to go, and had the attack plans a year before, from hamas, did absolutely nothing. actually had evidence that morning. >> yeah. >> what was happening. again, did absolutely nothing, but, my god. benjamin netanyahu, you would think he was, think he was george washington, the attacks just absolutely unbelievable. benjamin netanyahu should have resigned the day after when it took five, six, seven, ten hours to bring aid to children who had seen their parents shoot to death in front of their eyes, or

babies shot -- i could go on and on, but seriously, the outrage, the foe outrage is such garbage, it's why americans hate politics. really, it is. no doubt. netanyahu has damaged israel in a way no prime minister has damaged israel since 1948! and they -- know -- it. so -- willie, really, i mean, god, reading some of the editorials, reading some tweets, some of the garbage from the far right really is nauseating as somebody who supported israel my entire life. a guy who's spoken before apac my entire life. my god. how much do they want to politicize this, some of us, i know this is radical. some of us actually want what's best for israel and not what's best for benjamin netanyahu and donald trump. some of us actually give a damn about the safety and security of israel, not just now, but five

years from now, 50 years from now. >> yeah. all of that is true, but no less an extraordinary moment to hear chuck schumer, democrat, who represents the largest jewish population in the world outside of israel, in the state of new york to say explicitly time for a change of leadership. something a lot of people have been thinking, as you said, but something we're not accustomed to hearing from a leader, such a high-ranking leader in american politics. that it's time for a change. leader schumer put out a statement later saying this is up to the people of israel, this is how i view this. the people are israel need to decide that. you're right. a huge reaction from the right. a huge reaction from inside israel, from the netanyahu government as well. just a fascinating dynamic here as we see our own president, president biden, not just chuck schumer, stepping up his criticism of netanyahu and the way he's conducted this war as well. >> you know, it's a sad dynamic. a sad dynamic, because some people in america on the far right more interested in helping

benjamin netanyahu than israel. i mean, i guess that's just the sad reality. i mean, there are a lot of us that a lot more concerned about the israeli people, and israel's security, and israel's -- >> the hostages. >> the hostages. israel's long-term support. >> 135 days. >> support, which just continues to erode in the united states, and across the globe. so some of us that have always supported israel, yeah. we're concerned about what's going on more than a little concerned about what's going on in israel. what went on october 7th. what's been going on on college campus ace cross this country. the anti-semitism that's been sweeping the world now for -- oh, i don't know. 2000 years or so. but, again, this is a disastrous path that netanyahu's on, and they know, the far right extremists defending netanyahu right now know. he's doing everything he were do to stay in office. it's not for the best interests

of the israeli people. it's in the best interests of benjamin netanyahu. they -- know -- that, and yet they spew lies. they know that's the reality and yet they continue to defend him. speaking of spewing lies, jonathan lemire, on this friday morning, potpourri, the dirtbag conspiracy theory. >> happy friday! >> that the sandy hook parents were -- were actually actors and there were no kids, but this was an inside government job. i find it absolutely remarkable that aaron rodgers had to come out yesterday and clean up comments he made to a cnn reporter earlier, that he thought that sandy hook didn't happen. he thought that it was an inside job, that the government did it to take guns away from americans. that according to a cnn anchor who heard him say that in 2013, i believe it was. so yesterday he had to come out and try to clean that up. by the way, these are the type

of people that rfk jr. are associating himself with and actually talked about this conspiracy theorist being a possible vice presidential candidate. >> yeah. one note briefly on netanyahu. the white house was given a heads-up what he was going to say, didn't object. what netanyahu said publicly, the white house said privately. much more on the show on that. as far as aaron rodgers. the most loathsome conspiracy any america. the idea what happened in sandy hook was either completely made up or some sort of government false flag operation to take away the nation's guns. aaron rodgers, distinguished himself on the football field the last 15 years or so apparently believes this and said it publicly to a cnn reporter about a decade back and someone robert f. kennedy jr. yesterday was asked about rodgers, beliefs about sandy hook and all kennedy had to say, he praised rodgers at a

"critical thinker." didn't denounce his comments or distance himself from rodgers. instead of two talk frequently. rodgers put out a statement later tried to clean it up. vague in wording and wasn't a full-throated denial and we should note, this is not rodgers' only conspiracy theory he endorses. he questioned september 11th, believing an inside job. former packers teammates rodgers would talk in the locker room. we know his stance on vaccines, brought him and kennedy together in the first place and now rodgers floated as a potential vp candidate despite the fact they think he'lly that quarterback for the jets this fall if he recovers from his injury. kennedy will name his running mate in a couple weeks. aaron rodgers, a pretty loathsome human being. >> one conspiracy theory after

another. we here at "morning joe" try to unwind conspiracy theories and why we have the bbc's katty kay. i would like to tell you mika and i last night were sporting through the intricacies of middle east peace. >> i know. >> and just what was going to be required for a two-state solution. >> by the way, everyone should watch "turning point." that's the other issue with were discussing. really good. amazing, but i know what you're getting to. we spent about an hour talking about it. an hour. >> not about a tennis match but nuclear war. kids will love it. katty! katty, and i, i'm serious. when i ask it this way. why -- >> couldn't sleep. >> why in the hell is, what in the hell is going on with kate middleton. >> he couldn't sleep. >> and how could -- how could a group of people as obsessed with

their image allow something -- >> protective. >> to spin out of control. >> not obsessed, protected. >> -- as badly as this. everybody in britain is talking about it, too. don't start by saying, "you americans." tell us what's going on. you know! >> i seriously thought a moment go down the path what it would take to get the saudis to recognize israel a two-state solution. >> that's next. >> okay. do that next. kate middleton. so the royal family's in this really weird position at the moment where they're trying to be more open. you had the king come out and say that he had a problem with his prostate. then suddenly amazingly good news on friday morning. lots of british men went to the doctor to get their prostates checked. tick for the royal family and they're openness. great public service campaign. then kate, who has had this operation in january. we still don't know what for.

i promise you i am texting our royal reporters. people who cover this day in day not, which i do not, every day and they still don't know what they was in hospital for. tons of conspiracy theories. talk about conspiraciville. what she went in the hospital first place. then not told until april then british mother's day decided to put out a photograph turned out to be edited and all anyone is talking about. what's wrong with her? why did they edit the photograph? was it actually taken at this time of year, because it's suspiciously green and sunny of course, this is england in march. it's not suspiciously green and sunny yet, and did they mash up the -- was it because louis was scowling. they had to kind of put together lots of different photographs to get the one where louis is smiling? anyway, own goal for the royal family in terms of openness, and it plays into a moment we're in when no one trusts anything. right? we don't trust anything we read.

we don't trust anything we see. we're all worried about a.i. how it will deceive us and then this from the royal family, meant to be something we can trust, shows she is doing well, and guess what? we can't trust that either. >> but, katty, it's so easily fixable in so many different ways and they don't. i think that's why everybody's worried. >> yeah. worried that -- >> they could fix this. >> she could take a picture of herself. >> or instagram live or -- there's a million things. >> right. and x of, oh, well -- we were talking about this the other day. was it yesterday, joe? i can't remember. the week's been, like, so wrong. come out apologize. i'm really sorry i confused everybody. this is the original photo, but, look. louis is scowling. we tried to make him look for cheerful. whatever. but come out and at least -- transparency. but it's not the story. >> all right. pulitzer prize winning columnist -- now -- no. i'm not satisfied at all.

>> because, gene, because gene was -- >> he'll tell you. gene's got it. >> gene was the london bureau chief and knows this sort of thing. he has deep contacts there. >> something is wrong. >> gene, something's up, seriously, we're worried about it and you are, too. what is it? >> i am worried about it actually. look, the royal family has always been opaque, deliberately opaque and they're allergic to sharing. right? that's the way they were during queen elizabeth's entire reign and so now they've decided to be transparent except not really. you can't have it sort of half way. so, you know, charles announced that he has, you know, prostate issues. that was very good. really helped. then said he has cancer and being treated. won't say what kind, nobody knows how serious or how he's doing, and if you're going to

say you have an illness, you should, you should be more open about it, and then this thing with the photograph. again, as katty said, a huge own goal, the kind of own goal they're going to keep making because that's who they are. they simply haven't internalized what transparency means and it's going to hurt the institution going forward, and also just to backtrack a second. aaron rodgers is an idiot. face it. just an idiot, and what chuck schumer said about benjamin netanyahu is what i have been hearing from some of the most influential and fervent american jews who support israel and been saying exactly the same thing privately. so i think it's a great thing that chuck schumer said it publicly. >> yeah, guys, i think we've covered everything. call it a weekend. get out of here?

that was a great show. all-in. to your point. the fact after this photograph scandal that the next morning kate didn't come out and wave at a window or step out on the balcony tells you, sincerely makes you worry about her. we hoe she's okay. >> i'm worried. >> diving into more news. a decision joe mentioned at the top will come today whether fulton county district attorney fani willis will be disqualified from the trump election interference case. accused willis of misconduct and financially benefitting from a romantic relationship she had with prosecutor nathan wade whom she hired on the case. in a hearing last month they acknowledged that relationship but insisted it started after wade was hired. meanwhile in florida, the judge in donald trump's classified documents case has denied one of the ex-president's requests to have the charges dismissed. trump's legal team tried to argue the law on national security secrets is too vague, but judge aileen cannon ruled

hours after the hearing a dismissal over vagueness right now would be "premature" and better suited addressed later "in connection with jury-instructed briefing" not ruling on the other motion from trump's team believing he was allows to keep the documents as personal records because of the presidential records act we have said ad nauseam does not apply here. difficult to see how this gets you to dismissal of indictment and in new york days before donald trump faces a criminal trial, hush money case brought by the manhattan district attorney's office likely will be postponed. trump's lawyers want to push the trial back by 90 days. in a new court filing yesterday the d.a.'s office does not oppose a brief delay but asked if not exceed 30 days. at issue, about 31,000 pages of additional reports the manhattan

d.a.'s office received this week. trump's lawyer requested more time to review the material and d.a.'s office would not object. the judge presiding has not yet ruled on a delay. the trial set to begin currently march 25th. a week from monday. all right. with all that, let's bring in former litigator and msnbc legal correspondent lisa rubin. lisa, looks like another day, another pop quiz for you. so much to cover here. back to the beginning with this announcement expecting sometime in the next few hours whether or not fani willis will be disqualified as the prosecutor in the case down in georgia. what do you expect to hear? >> willie, i really don't know, and i think a lot turns on two things. one what is the legal standard that judge mcafee applies to whether fani willis should disqualified. that's contested. telling him the standard whether

there's an actual conflict of interest that prejudices the defendants in their capacity at criminal defendants here and not, for example, as voters in fulton county who helped elect fani willis. the other standard, though, the one advanced by steve and mike lawyer merchan it's about appearance of impropriety. oral argument ton this one of the things the d.a.'s oft drilled into, telling mcafae there is case law frois for disqualification of elected officials on the basis of that appearance of impropriety, never held to disqualify a prosecutor. you have to find an actual conflict to disqualify a prosecutor. let's see whether he buys the d.a.'s argument or the folk on the other side. if he buys the defendant's argument i think odds are that fani willis would be disqualified, but the other big issue here is how much additional evidence scott mcafee decides is relevant to his decision?

remember that sort of at the last hour everybody piled on with cell phone records and purported expert declarations, new declarations from the guy at the winery who remembered willis and wade, and from another prosecutor who had been in a conversation with terrence bradley alleged fani willis called on the phone essentially said to bradley, they're snooping. don't talk. whether mcafee takes any of that into consideration remains an open question. he hasn't publicly ruled on the admissibility or whether or not he thinks that that's relevant here. i think it could go either way. my sense is that fani willis holds on, but barely, and that whatever mcafee does in that respect, if he allows her to stay on the case comes with a bunch of criticism for her and her special ada, nathan wade. >> and lisa, break this down actually to what actually is relevant to this case, and what

is not relevant to this case. first of all, fani willis, i mean, the judgment she used is just absolutely atrocious. if there are ethical ramifications, you know, perhaps there should be. especially if she's lying definitely should be. she has to answer to the voters. again, the most important case, probably, ever tried in georgia, and she is just turned it into an absolute clown show. i wanted to use another word, but it's early in the morning and some kids are eating breakfast. we can all agree. everybody can agree she has really, really messed this up. one side of the ledger. the other side of the ledger is, does it in anyway prejudice the defendant? and does it get in the way of donald trump having a fair trial? these other defendants having a fair trial? i don't see how it gets to that line. there are a lot of things a judge can do. the judge can say, ms. willis,

just, i cannot even believe the hoar risk judgment you've shown, and bradley, i mean, you point this guy -- what are you doing? know what? we're going to have to delay the trial. find somebody else to run your case, and i hope you don't have a personal relationship with them as well. i don't know if you can do that, mr. willis. >> nathan wade. >> nathan wade. >> but, push it to that side. seems to me these are two totally separate things. >> yes. >> so i really don't understand why she would be disqualified. ethics charges? yes. but just have her appoint somebody else to run the case. >> look, you know, we talked -- you guys talked in the earlier segment about the easiest ways to correct for the conspiracy theories going on over at kensington palace. this was a situation could have been easily corrected too. when the allegations were first floated once fani willis and nathan wade admitted they had an

relationship, the right and maybe the helpful thing to do at that point 230 nathan wade to step away from the case and them to say, okay. we recognize that this was an error of judgment on the d.a.'s part. but we're going to cure that now and nathan wade will no longer take part in the case. that's not what they did. putting that aside, judge mcafee made clear, it doesn't matter if nathan wade was the worst lawyer in the world. she is entitled to appoint whoever she wants so long as they have a bar card, a legal education and are basically competent to stand up. you know? one step beyond "weekend at bernie's" who she's allowed to appoint. the conflict here, generous to defendants. their allegation is by appointing someone with whom she was in a personal relationship she financially benefitted from that because in her payments to him she knew it was going to co back to her. that's what trump has said in an interview recently. they almost tried to inflate the size of the case, the number of defendants, the number of

allegations all to enlarge the size and pamt payments to wade. the problem fani willis makes a decent salary on her own and the number of dollars able to tie back to her in terms of nathan wade's expenditures while lavish in terms how ordinary americans spend vacation money isn't substantial enough to have a normal person, would you really concoct this whole, big scheme, this reek rico conspiracy to ge yourself vacation benefits? i don't think so. >> and note judge mcafee dismissed, lisa, six of the charges in the case. certainly still very damaging ones exist for former president trump. turn to florida now. judge cannon to this point sympathetic to the trump cause. she was, the trump team brought her two reasons yesterday they that believe to dismiss the case. threw one out, described top of the show. the other remains pending.

give your analysis. surprised what you heard yesterday? >> no. surprised there was a hearing yesterday and it took as long as it did. last night in disposing one of those issued not even a two-page order. to be clear about something, jon, she denied the motion to dismiss on this unconstitutional vagueness of the espionage argument but in doing so she took a bunch of swipes at the special counsel. language in that order that basically says, i'm not deciding this now, but she was saying to them, i'm going to read from it right now. that there are still fluctuating definitions of statutory terms and phrases along with disputed factual issues. rather than prematurely decide now whether this is unsalvageably vague despite the judicial glosses, some loaded accusations against the special counsel in that. in other words, you are telling me how other courts interpreted this but those are asserted

judicial glosses. telling me what the terms mean but still fluctuating definitions. yes, kicked the can down the road. didn't give donald trump what he wanted. on the other hand, she made it difficult for anyone to appeal this, and just sort of held it in abeyance. i don't think it's a victory for the special counsel's office. in terms of the president's records act, the other hand. finally aileen cannon seen an argument from donald trump she recognized as ridiculous and many breathed a sigh of relief on that one. >> lisa, finally news also about the hush money case. the sex with the porn star cover it up, by a payoff and alvin bragg's team submitted 30,000 pages, documents? >> 31,000 new documents. >> even more than that, folks. even more. it's obviously going cause delay. >> do we know what's in the documents? is this a problem? >> we don't know exactly what's

in the documents. let me step back, because when you guys described it, you said alvin bragg's office belatedly produced. that's the accusation trump is making. somehow alvin bragg's office is responsible for this belated production of documents that actually comes from the u.s. department of justice and the southern district of new york the u.s. attorney's office here in manhattan. they said in response we started prosecutes thinking case and asked the department of justice to extensive files on michael cohen campaign finance charges. those, mika and joe, relate to sort of the underlying core of this case. the concoction of a settlement with stormy daniels and then the papering of that in a way that looked as if michael cohen was being paid for legal fees but really reimbursed for settling with her with his own cash. what alvin brag's office is saying now, we asked for those things got a subset of them and gave you, donald trump and your lawyers, everything we got.

what trump did is sat on that for months. then issued a subpoena to the department of justice on his own accord this last january. it's in response to that subpoena that now we have seen a production of 104,000 pages of new documents, and with more to come next week. that's why the d.a.'s office given that this relates to the most important witness in the case, the d.a.'s office saying, look, we'll concede that in ajunment of 30 days is appropriate we need to read this stuff, to. figure out what's in, clear trump is responsible sitting what he got many months not issue as subpoena until january. what's not said here, my expectation is alvin bragg is livid right now were you the southern district of new york. there's no explanation why he didn't give this stuff to bragg's team when they asked for it outset of the case.

>> saying, donald trump's lawyers have a right to have all relevant documents. i don't understand why the u.s. attorney's office for the southern district didn't give alvin bragg these documents at the beginning, and i'm a little surprised that they got the request in january, that they would wait this long before giving them to alvin bragg. everybody has to be looking at the u.s. attorney's office here saying, what gives? >> do we know what's in them? >> why the dely? >> you know, joe i can partially explain that and still have a bunch of questions. so in the papers that donald trump's people put in asking for an adjournment or dismissal. a point getting lost. they attach a bunch of correspondence between todd blanche, one of the co-lead lawyers for donald trump, and a lawyer at the department of justice in the southern district of new york. the doj goes through a process when they are subpoenaed for documents relating to one of its investigations, and there is a

bunch of correspondence back and forth between them whether the request trump was making were actually relevant and whether the doj had to accommodate them or not. so you can see that part of the delay here is taken up by that negotiation process, and the d.a. is involved in that negotiation too, saying some of the things trump is asking you for, in this subpoena, have nothing to do with what he needs to realistically and credibly defend himself in this case. that having been said, the big unanswered question is, there is some category of documents that the doj legitimately decided belonged to trump in his defense now that overlap with the d.a.'s requests last spring and summer that were never fulfilled vis-a-vis alvin bragg and now fulfilled. i think they say in "i love lucy" somebody's got splaining to do. >> ricky. >> lisa rubin, thank you very much. talking to you again very soon about all of this. still ahead on "morning joe," we'll get to senate

majority leader chuck schumer's harsh words for israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. plus, the war that israel could have fought. richard haass joins us with his new piece for the "wall street journal." but first, it's election day in russia. we'll get a live report from moscow as vladimir putin looks to secure a fifth term at president. you're watching "morning joe." we will be right back. the future is not just going to happen. you have to make it. and if you want a successful business, all it takes is an idea, and now becomes the future where you grew a dream into a reality.

the all new godaddy airo. put your business online in minutes with the power of ai. ♪ i am, i cried ♪ put your business online in minutes [ laughing ] ♪ i am, said i ♪ ♪ and i am lost and i can't ♪ punch buggy red. ♪ even say why ♪ ♪ i am, i said ♪ ♪ ♪

♪(sung) limu emu and doug.♪ hello, ghostbusters. it's doug... ...of doug and limu. we help people customize and save hundreds on car insurance with liberty mutual. anyway, we got a bit of a situation here. uh-huh. uh-huh. mm-hmm. sure, i can hold. only pay for what you need. ♪(sung) liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty.♪ ghostbusters: frozen empire. in theaters march 22. why choose a sleep number smart bed? ♪(sucan it keep me warmy. liwhen i'm cold?.♪ wait, no, i'm always hot. sleep number does that. can i make my side softer? i like my side firmer. sleep number does that. can it help us sleep better and better? please? sleep number does that. 94 percent of smart sleepers report better sleep. and now, the queen sleep number c4 smart bed is only $1,599, save $300.

shop now at sleepnumber.com i suffer with psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis. i was on a journey for a really long time to find some relief. cosentyx works for me. cosentyx helps real people get real relief from the symptoms of psoriatic arthritis or psoriasis. serious allergic reactions, severe skin reactions that look like eczema, and an increased risk of infections, some fatal, have occurred. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine or plan to or if ibd symptoms develop or worsen. i move so much better because of cosentyx. ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx. we're here today to set the record straight about dupuytren's contracture. surgery is not your only treatment option. people may think their contracture has to be severe to be treated, but it doesn't.

visit findahandspecialist.com today to get started. nothing brings us together like eggland's best eggs. always so fresh and delicious. plus, superior nutrition. for us, it's eggs any style. as long as they're the best. eggland's best. this is our future, ma. godaddy airo. creates a logo, website, even social posts... in minutes! -how? -a.i. (impressed) ay i like it! who wants to come see the future?! get your business online in minutes with godaddy airo russia first election since 2018

set to run through sunday. vladimir putin will secure a fifth term at president extending his rule by six more years. joining us from inside a polling station in moscow, nbc news chief international correspondent keir simmons. keir what are you seeing there? >> reporter: willie, a middle school in central moscow turned into a polling station for three days. in a sense this is less of an election. more of a referendum on president putin and his so-called military operation in ukraine. the first national vote since the illegal invasion of ukraine. you can see people registering to vote and voting across here, willie. let me show you the motif for this election. you'll recognize it as a russian war symbol. that v in russian colors, maybe a v for victory. maybe a v for vladimir putin because, of course, there are lots of people questioning the authenticity of this vote.

not at least alexei navalny wife yulia who this week called on the west not to accept this vote. we know, of course, that president putin will be re-elected sunday night. another six years after 24 years in office, and in many ways what he's looking to do here and there is voting even in the illegally-occupied territories of ukraine, what he's looking to do here is to prove, if you like, that russia supports him. so it's not just the vote result but the turnout that will matter. in 2018 if was 67.5%. the kremlin is looking for that or more. i mentioned voting across here. the traditional voting. you see the polling booth there, but then further over, that's electronic voting. first time a three-day vote, it's the first time they've had

electronic voting in a presidential vote like this and observers here told us that they are not able honestly to know exactly what's going on there. so i think you can be confident that no matter what happens across this enormous country of 11 time zones there will be an outcome that has a turnout that is as much as or if not more than what was seen in 2018. that being said, willie, president putin is popular in russia. a woman in her 90s saw stalin's funeral and said president putin is the only person that i trust now. >> wow. carry on that legacy. nbc's keir simmons. great reporting from inside of moscow at a polling station hope hopes to get a higher percentage than years ago. not much opposition because

they're either in jail or like alexei navalny, dead. >> yeah. bring in richard haass author of weekly newsletter "home and away" available on sub stack. a side note. vladimir putin does to his political opponents what donald trump says he wants to do to his political opponents and generals and others insufficiently loyal to him, and if he's given a second term, he promises that he will do just that. so, richard, the soviet union was, of course, in complete political and economic and cultural and military control of their empire until the moment that they weren't. i'm curious your thoughts about where vladimir putin is two years after this invasion. there have been some ups. some downs, but as keir said, a

lot of russians, a lot of russians see him in a favorable light, and one suspects even if the election were fair he would most likely win. what's your thought on where he is right now? his standing with the russian people? >> i think unfortunately you've got it right. russia's worked its way around the sanctions. it's able to sell its oil and gas. it's able to import all sorts of things. the situation on the battlefield is gradually, slowly, moving in its favor. putin controls the domestic political narrative because he controls media. you know, he's jailed or killed his opponents. the biggest challenge, the prigozhin challenge a demonstration what happens if you take on vladimir putin. i actually think two years into the war, joe, he is stronger than he wa before and this is a

hollowed out russia. there you had institutions a communist party. this is a truly deinstitutionalized country, almost a politics what a personalization rather than institutions or systems. right now this is vladimir putin's russia. >> and you know, richard, what viewers who may not have, maybe are younger viewers, others who haven't followed russian history over the past 50, 60, 70 years what i think is important to understand here is that we all hear what vladimir putin said about the greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century. collapse of the soviet union. that is a shame. that is shame -- that shame drives him every day. i think what a lot of americans may not understand is that's a shame that drives a lot of older russians who remember the soviet

union, who were raised in the cold war, like you and i and mika were raised in the cold war and, of course, we left that twilight, you know, war -- victorious. but putin promises them this renaissance, this resurgence, and this belief that they will never settle for the status quo post-1989, post-1991. that has to be a big driver of his support. doesn't it? >> absolutely. think about it. the soviet union when it broke up and now russia, it lost two empires. it lost the external empire that was eastern europe. then it also lost the internal empire that was the soviet union. so russia is a much reduced, bitter, bitter humiliated entity and putin effectively plays on that and think even now. his whole packaging of the war with ukraine is rather than russia as aggressive, it's

russia as victim. it's russia the victim of nato. the victim of the west. standing up. he is very clever at framing, if you will, and controlling, again, the political narrative at home. so even if this election, as you say, were somewhat more open, my guess is he would still come out way on top. >> again, like trump, plays the victim card endlessly ceaselessly, the conspiracy theories about what the west is doing. again, as you say, richard, a hollowed-out power. why i almost remind our viewers, this is not the soviet union of 1975. this is, this is the russia of 2024 whose lost over one-third of their military, over the past two years, and as a gdp, again, about the size of texas. let's talk about what chuck schumer said yesterday. calling for new leadership in israel at a very pointed speech

criticized netanyahu's actions amid the war in gaza and his refusal to actually talk about, even talk about a two-state solution. watch this. >> the u.s. government should demand that israel conduct itself with a future two-state solution in mind. we should not be forced into a position of unequivocally supporting the actions of an israeli government that includes bigots who reject the idea of a palestinian state. israel is a democracy. five months in to this conflict it is clear that israelis need to take stock of the situation and ask, must we change course? at this critical juncture, i believe a new election is the only way to allow for a healthy and open decision-making process about the future of israel.

>> as a lifelong supporter of israel, it has become clear to me that netanyahu coalition no longer fits the needs of israel after october 7th. the world has changed radically since then. and the israeli people are being stifled right now by a governing vision that is stuck in the past. >> wow. richard haass, you have a piece out in the "wall street journal" entitled "the war that israel could have fought." take us inside your argument. >> well, mika, israel had the right and the necessity to respond to what happened on october 7th to the horrific, brutal attacks, but how exactly it responded that was a matter of great discretion and latitude. my argument is almost every choice israel made beginning on october 7th has been wrong. it's been counterproductive for itself, for its relationship with us and that's where the chuck schumer speech is such an

interesting development, for the palestinians. israel, first of all, could have waited a few days or weeks. allowed it to sink in. imagine if the world had two or three weeks just to focus on hamas and its backer iran? imagine if that had been the only conversation for the first few weeks? second of all when israel did start to use military force and it was right to, it could have been far more measured and calibrated and targeted on the leadership rather than something big and in a hurry it could have taken place over months or years. go after leadership. age should have been very generously provided. fourth and last most important, there needed to be a political dimension. there still does. you can't beat something with nothing. if your argument is that hamas is going down a dead end, that violence is not the answer. well, then what is the answer? how are palestinianing meant to realize their legitimate aspirations if violence isn't

the way, what is the political path? why isn't articulating that, what conditions palestinians have to meet. that is totally absent here. so, again, israel had every right to respond, needed to respond but every way its done it has been costly and counterproductive. >> a couple thoughts, mika. first of all, richard is right. there's so many wars this war could have been fought. >> uh-huh. >> could have been a longer pause to focus on the horrors. the absolute horrors of what happened on october the 7th. and also so they could get into focus, targets what they needed to do. that's the first part of it. the second part of it is, this -- this false, like, argument. >> right. >> that you had to either do it benjamin netanyahu's way, hamas was going to get away with it. no. it's just the opposite. hamas played this out. >> right. >> they knew what a benjamin netanyahu would do.

they knew all of, all of what we're talking about right now, they knew this was going to happen. >> yeah. >> and netanyahu has played into their hands and, again, these people that are, are -- you know -- falling -- you know -- using their fainting couches this morning over what chuck schumer said on the floor yesterday. there are a lot less interested in israel's security than they are benjamin netanyahu's security, because he's misplayed everything over the past ten years. >> two things. >> and allowed hamas continued funding. >> hamas knew what he would do, because this leader much like one we talk about here in america a lot is impaired, and is running from indictments, trying to hold on to power any way he can. so in a way, he doesn't have just the israeli people on his mind. he has his own survival on his mind. that's an important point. i want to take it to gene, he

can take it back to richard. but richard talked about, gene, that israel had the right to respond to october 7th. i think nobody would disagree with that. but it's, they didn't. i mean -- >> yeah. >> many who were there would argue i didn't see a response for seven hours as my family in my village was being decimated. so if israel had a right to respond, where the heck were you? those answers still -- non-existent. i wonder where we are in terms of benjamin netanyahu's relationship with the israeli people? is it like hamas needs to be eradicated and then there are the innocent civilians and palestinian innocents that need to be worried about it? is it a situation where there's benjamin netanyahu and then there's israel, are they losing trust by the day? >> yeah, yeah. absolutely. >> it's a disaster across the west.

for israel support. >> absolutely. you see that israel is very frankly losing support around the world, and this is -- this is an awful thing for the state of israel. you know, what netanyahu has done and then just done on steroids with this war is, it seems to me, it tends to lock israel into a one-state solution rather than a two-state solution. he has bragged about having prevented a two-state solution for the palestinians. and that -- that means, seems to me, fundamental change in the nature of israel. it can -- it is a jewish democracy, a jewish state in a democracy, but i don't see how it can remain both, unless there is a two-state solution. one-state solution either ceases being a jewish state or ceases being a democracy. both of which i think would be

disastrous for the nation of israel, and that's what i'm hearing from a lot of people. so my question for richard is -- is there still a way back? is there still -- let's, you know, netanyahu's not going away tomorrow, but assume he did. is there a way back to the -- the two-state solution framework that i see and that so many people see as the only realistic way forward for israel? >> look, a couple things, gene. first of all, you're right. bibi netanyahu has no interest in a two-state solution. his approach one-state non-solution. favors drift. favors continued occupation of gaza in the west bank. he continued occupation in the west bank and settlement and that kind of occupation is incompatible with israel remaining a democratic jewish state. either these people all become citizens, at which point it

ceases to a jewish state, so i think the course bibi netanyahu has committed them to is not in its own long-term interest and bad for the u.s./israeli relationship and the chuck schumer thing is interesting. is it too late? no. i think we can't go directly from where we are to a two-state solution. israel's not a partner with this government. the palestinians aren't a partner. what you can do and what u.s. policy should focus on is keeping open the possibility, that means among other things stopping settlement expansion. ultimately there needs to be some territory to work with. what we have to push back against israeli settlement activity. we've got to talk about what is it that israel needs to do in order to get palestinians to step forward as an alternative to hamas? what about where is the economic help? what about politically, what do they have to be willing to do? that's the conversation the

united states has to have and introduce into the israeli body politic. we can't go from where we are given october 7th, given the lack of leadership and so forth to a two-state solution. what we can do is begin the conversation and stop actions that preclude the possibility several years down the road. >> richard, i'm curious for your reaction to chuck schumer's compleptss and the impact they might have on the relationship with israel, which is as joe pointed out you have democrats, you had mitch mcconnell saying comments from schumer were grotesque and disrespectful. you had lindsey graham take it with a grain of salt saying they were bad and hurt the relationship. then you had some democrats saying, supporting what he said on the grounds that, of course, we support israel, of course, they're one of our close safety allies and always will be but we don't just blindly follow. we can object to the expanded settlements in the west bank. we can object to the way the war is being prosecuted and not funded with a blank check. what is your sense of how

schumer's comments may change things here? >> actually think it opens up the conversation a little bit, willie, and i think there needs to be a difference or a distinction between being pro-israel and pro-the policy of israel's government. we all disagree with what the united states does at times. doesn't mean we're not patriotic but governments make mistakes. governments make choices and they're not always the wisest choices made for the best reasons. i would think that applies to bibi netanyahu and israel. i think chuck schumer, what he's done is opened up the conversation in part because for decades he has been such a staunch supporter of israel and has legitimized it. what is interesting, he is of a generation, not that different from joe biden. i expect this from younger americans but, you know, the fact that he's doing this is really interesting and, yes, the republicans are ganging up on it and bibi netanyahu, but the

israelis are making a big, mig mistake if they reject this. you can't have a u.s./israeli relationship without essentially americans across the political spectrum supporting israel. and i worry that the shortsightedness of israel's policy and long after joe biden and chuck schumer are gone from the political scene, i worry about the 20 and 30-year-olds today who are going to be the 40 and 50-year-olds who are going to be making american foreign policy, if they grow up unsympathetic to israel, if they see israel as essentially bibi netanyahu's israel, that will be a very different american relationship with israel and that's not in either country's interest. >> well, and -- >> 100%. it's happening. >> you look at what's happening, you look -- there is a massive generational gulf in the united states now on the issue of israel, so, yeah, for those of us that actually support israel,

and aren't just blindly dedicated to supporting bibi netanyahu, yeah, very concerned and, mika, this idea that somehow you have to support bibi netanyahu and not israel is asinine. here is a guy that had the terrorist attack plans a year before they happened. they did nothing on it. they were warned repeatedly that the hamas attack was coming. they did nothing about it. in 2018, donald trump and bibi netanyahu uncovered, had people come to them and say, this is how hamas is illicitly getting money to fund their war operations, they did nothing about it. you had hamas actually getting funded by qatar three weeks before the attack, but only after netanyahu and his government said, yeah, yeah, yeah, keep sending upon to hamas. did you hear what i just said? bibi netanyahu continued funding hamas through qatar three weeks

before the attack. and really, this guy is the guy that all americans have to support if we love israel? bs. you know it's bs. it's garbage. and then when the attacks came, he did nothing, his government did nothing for hour after hour after hour after hour. it is mind-boggling. >> yeah. >> the mistakes, the errors and just the horrible judgment. including the funding of hamas. >> right. >> he supported the funding of hamas right up to the attack, so, please, this idea that you can't support israel unless you support bibi netanyahu. >> no. >> please. i would say it's just the opposite. >> spot on and it's a dialectical. i support the israelis. i support the israeli people.

i support israel. i have deep concerns about benjamin netanyahu. two things can be true at the same time. richard haass, thank you very much for being on this morning and coming up, donald trump's latest comments on funding for ukraine. not denying what viktor orban said. a contrast we expect to see more of, trump was in a courtroom yesterday while president biden was on the campaign trail talking to people to voters. we'll show you the president's message. >> i don't think trump has the upon to go on the campaign trial. >> in other key battleground state all ahead on "morning joe." here's to getting better with age. here's to beating these two every thursday.

help fuel today with boost high protein, complete nutrition you need... ...without the stuff you don't. so, here's to now. boost. my name is marie. i'm 49 years old and i'm a business owner. i own a lemonade and ice cream shop in florida, so i can feel and see that my lines have gotten deeper just from a year out in the sun. i'm still marie and i got botox® cosmetic. i did not want a dramatic change. i wanted something subtle. and i'm really, really happy with the results. it's still me, but with fewer lines. botox® cosmetic is fda approved to temporarily make frown lines, crow's feet, and forehead lines look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection,

causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping, and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications, including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. see for yourself at botoxcosmetic.com. what causes a curve down there? who can treat this? stop typing, and start talking. it could be a medical condition called peyronie's disease, or pd. you're not alone, there is hope. find a specialized urologist who can diagnose and treat pd. visit makeapdplan.com today.

my name is oluseyi find a specialized urologist who can diagnose and treat pd. and some of my favorite moments throughout my life are watching sports with my dad. now, i work at comcast as part of the team that created our ai highlights technology, which uses ai to detect the major plays in a sports game. giving millions of fans, like my dad and me, new ways of catching up on their favorite sport. this is an historic case, not only is it the first time a former president has been charged with illegally removing and withholding classified documents, it's also the first time a former president used classified documents to decorate his bathroom.

[ laughter ] trump, as you know, claims the documents were his to do with as he pleased, but his claim is complicated by the fact that they were not. they were not his. what's still a mystery why a bunch of top secret documents were taken by a president by all accounts who does not read. >> all right, earlier this week we told you how viktor orban said that former president donald trump told him he would cut off u.s. military aid to ukraine if he is elected again in november. he will not give a penny in the ukraine/russia war, orban told hungarian media. he was asked about orban's claims and did not deny. >> them viktor orban said you told him you wanted to cut funding for ukraine as soon as you get there, words to that effect. >> yeah. >> is he correct?

is that the plan. >> first of all, he is a fantastic guy, and he's taken in no illegal immigrants, he takes in -- he runs his country very tough and a lot of people don't like it but he runs it very tough and it does very well and there's no crime. what i told him is europe is spending a tiny fraction of what we're spending and the european nations, they should be paying the same. their economies are approximately the same size if you add them all up, it's close to ours and they're in a lot more danger than we are. we have a thing called an ocean between us, right, and they don't. so, they're spending -- they have $100 billion, probably more than that less spending on ukraine than we do. they should be spending money. i had the same thing with nato. they weren't spending on nato. i said you got to spend on nato and they did once i said it. i said i won't protect you. i would not protect you if you're not spending and paid up. >> of course, the follow-up question, so, did you say it or

not? obviously he said it. in this case, he who does not deny admits, katty, and, again, just the absolute stupidity. we have a thing called an ocean between us. yes, that will stop kim jong-un's nuclear missiles from reaching the west coast. that thing called an ocean. and will stop vladimir putin's missiles from reaching us, as well. i mean, donald trump clueless as usual, but the takeaway there is orban was a better reporter than we saw right there because orban actually told us what donald trump said. >> yeah, i mean, compare what donald trump said right there to what president macron of france was saying on television last night to the french people. if vladimir putin is allowed to win in ukraine, life will change for the french. the security of europe cannot be guaranteed. a much more sober realistic assessment than the one that

donald trump is giving and this idea that he's going to pull america straight out of that war and stop american funding for ukraine, i hear this from trump supporters. what are we doing there? we're just going to get call up in another unending war and like afghanistan and we'll never get out of there. america is not in ukraine. this is the best, cheapest deal that america could ever get in terms of defense and its ability to take on its adversary. no americans dying, it's less than 5% of america's defense budget that is going to the ukrainians in order to seriously harm the russian military apparatus, and by the way, the europeans are financing the war as much as the americans are. i mean, we could do the fact-checking again, but it's hard not to make the case that this is a good deal for the united states and if all vladimir putin has to do is wait

until the november election and assume he would be able to take ukraine on his term, but listen to president macron, who thinks that vladimir putin is going to stop there? if vladimir putin is allowed to take ukraine or large chunks of ukraine, potentially the whole of ukraine, why stop there? he knows the west won't have the spine to stick it out. >> putin has an obsession with the baltics. he has an obsession with poland. >> oh, my gosh. >> he said as much. poland -- >> that's next if ukraine falls. >> in line of sight next after ukraine falls and he's really said as much. and you are so right, katty, we actually have for less than 5% of our defense budget, we have the ukrainians fighting russia, they destroyed well over a third of their military. set them back a generation. and i talk about how russia economically is weak. if you look at ratings of the

most powerful militaries in the world we are obviously number one. there's not a close second, but russia is second in that list ahead of china, and it's really remarkable what the ukrainians are able to do with the support of europe and with the support of america, and for the life of me i cannot figure out why there are republicans running committees in the house that sit back meekly and are willing to do, you know, basically a neville chamberlain approach with vladimir putin hoping for some sort of munich moment like it's 1938, by the way, dan henninger with "the wall street journal" said it's up to the republicans, to donald trump to explain why this isn't munich 1938 and why they aren't appeasing vladimir putin because that's exactly what lindsey graham is doing. that's exactly what the republicans in the house are doing. that's exactly what mike johnson is doing.

that's exactly what donald trump is doing. >> the potential explanations that come to mind are frightening. katty kay, thank you very much for being on this morning. have a great weekend. president biden is back in washington this morning after campaigning in michigan yesterday mobilizing volunteers in his election fight against former president donald trump. biden visited the city of saginaw, a diverse area with a plurality of black and latino voters in an effort to reach out to minority groups in the state according to the campaign. the president, however, did not officially meet with any of the state's arab or muslim community leaders despite the state's large arab american community. this also comes after 13% of voters in last month's primary chose uncommitted protesting the president's handling of the war in gaza. white house officials did, however, meet privately with arab and muslim leaders in chicago while biden was in

michigan. those leaders also expressed concerns over the president's handling of the war. joining the conversation we have the host of the podcast on brand with donny deutsch, donny deutsch, president of the national action network and host of msnbc's "politics nation" refrjd al sharpton and special correspondent at "vanity fair" and host of the fast politics podcast molly jong-fast, an msnbc political analyst and jonathan lemire and eugene robinson are back. >> any explanation why they didn't visit arab american leaders in michigan? >> the short answer is that they don't have anything yet to tell them that would be received as good news. there's no -- they were not able to have a deliverable like, look, we have a cease-fire or we're on the brink of one or we've made significant progress with humanitarian aid. those are happen. the president will have to meet with those leaders at some point

in the weeks and months ahead but recall that top sop biden campaign officials were rebuffed and denied audiences with leaders in michigan a few weeks ago, so yesterday the president focused on other group, black and latino voters and try to make a pitch toward young voters. now some did meet in chicago with muslim leaders there, there was a meeting discussing some of the topics at hand but told the biden campaign staff didn't feel the moment was quite right when there is such palpable anger but that is going to have to come. as much as the campaign thinks they have other ways of victory in michigan they know this is an issue. not these voters are going to vote for trump but might find a third party candidate or stay home. they hope they can do it when they have better news to report from gaza. >> and, reverend al, it appears that from our communication yesterday and also this event, our communication offline

yesterday and this event, that the biden/harris campaign is really leaning in to people of color, whether it's focusing their message to certain neighborhoods or what we saw happen yesterday in saginaw. >> there's no question they're focusing and they're really focusing by trying to say that here are the facts, they've released a comparison between president biden and president trump when trump was in office. this is what you gain from president biden. we have closed the wealth gap between blacks and whites by 60%. you gained jobs, unemployment is lower than it's been for blacks in decades. under trump, unemployment was double blacks what it is now, under trump you lost thousands of people with health insurance, so i think the comparison that

they are trying to make is very effective because for the first time since we can probably remember, certainly since '56 we have two candidates facing each other who ran before and ad -- if you're arab-american and you have four years to compare that or three years now to joe biden it is almost a joke when donald trump would say, you are better off than you were four years ago under me when you look at the data and the facts and that's what they're bringing to our communities. >> it's a small electoral map and to the reverend's point, plaque voters in cities like milwaukee, pittsburgh, philadelphia, detroit are going to be so vital this time around. it's hard to imagine the president winning a second term if he can't capture those

states. talk to us about that dynamic but also i think it's important to highlight what the vice president was doing yesterday, as well. >> yeah, i mean, it's so interesting because she gets so much anger towards her, so much, you know, so much press that's really kind of pejorative and mean and i think quite racist. she did this historic thing where she went to a planned parenthood in minnesota. the first time a president or vice president has ever gone to an abortion clinic but it's also sti treatment, cancer screening, for some it's primary care. this is really a crucial, you know, clinic for a lot of people to get health care and she went there to highlight this freedom tour, that she is going around trying to protect freedoms, because as you know, roe was not

just about abortion, now we're seeing, you know, this iowa has a personhood bill, we're seeing an attack on ivf. we're seeing this embryonic personhood so i think roe was not about roe, it was about a war on women's reproductive health. >> you know, going back to the arab american vote and biden not connecting with them, i think the democrats have got to be grown up and understand they may have lost that vote no matter what they do. it doesn't mean trump is -- trump obviously wants to set up a registry for muslims but my way of saying they'll have to find votes. you can't lose michigan. whatever side you stand on conflict i don't know how he gets that vote back. i think -- i'm only sayings that a warning signal to say you got to find votes somewhere else. those might be lost for the time being. >> nope, nope, nope. you don't give up a vote and let

me tell you something, joe biden has been working tirelessly behind the scenes and jonathan is right. he doesn't have deliverables but working endlessly behind the scenes. he had tony blinken flying around the middle east nonstop over the last three or four months, big burns, cia chief, doing the same thing, nonstop. you have national security adviser jake sullivan doing the same thing, they have been working around the clock trying to defuse this situation, and i actually think that it will end up in the end being their strength, because -- >> i hope you're right, joe. >> they're doing a lot of things at the same time, donny. they're doing something that has not happened before in the middle of this conflict where you have benjamin netanyahu, who

is just despised throughout the region. you actually have the biden administration holding everybody together including jordan, the uae. >> yeah. >> the saudis, saying, hold on, hold on, hold on. making sure that that deal that israel and the saudis had can still be stitched back together. they understand and their arab partners are telling them, telling joe biden and the team that time is running out, that they need to do something to keep this going. but, no, listen, it's, you know, it's darkest before the dawn as they say. >> yeah. >> and things look pretty bleak right now but i'm telling you they have been -- the diplomacy that his entire team has been doing behind the scenes over the past three, four months has been heroic, and i do think they will

and the other side of this actually have a two-state solution idea that at least is alive that we can see over the horizon and keeping arab states involved in this. >> if i could just add, joe biden -- >> by the way, to rebuild gaza. >> yeah. >> to provide gaza the relief that the gazans desperately need. >> joe biden's often underestimated while he's doing the work and -- >> always. >> when this happened, he went to israel, he sat in on a cabinet meeting. he has been engaged in the get-go so that when he speaks and when he acts on this and when he makes moves, it's not like he's been detached and he's randomly making decisions, he is completely engaged and so is his team as you point out. >> i agree with everything you said whole heartedly. being a bit of a realist, if we -- if the democrats don't take michigan we have trump in office, that there needs to be

an aggressive push to take a worst case scenario and say we've lost a lot of those votes and i hope everything you say is true. >> i don't think that -- >> go ahead. >> i think there's still a lot of time before november, and i think that this -- sorry, i think what mika has said is true. this administration is constantly doing stuff behind the scenes that's actually really smart. remember when we thought we would have a recession? do we have a recession? no. >> nobody is a bigger supporter than me. i'm just saying we can't lose michigan. let's make sure we find some votes there. >> i think, donny, as one who has been a civil rights activist, the leaders in the arab community, in the palestinian community, muslim community have to also gauge on how far did we go before we lose an opportunity because -- and i think what they're doing is right for their constituency, but you can push an envelope too

far. what happens if trump gets in who wanted to ban all muslims? so i think they put pressure to the degree they can, but at some point they have to say, wait a minute, with schumer jumping out like that where do we say, okay, this is where we come in? otherwise, they end up with their own people turning on them because they brought them too far. >> really? >> gene robinson to the rev's point exactly there, i was going to say majority leader schumer, that's a big moment yesterday when he comes out on the floor of the united states senate and says it's time for new leadership. the israeli people have to do it but it's time for new leadership in israel and let's be clear that president biden in recent weeks and months has been tougher on benjamin netanyahu than any american president has been on an israeli leader in a very long time. suggesting that he's prosecuting the war in a way that's detrimental to israel's future, the way it is viewed in the world so we know it's not enough yet for many voters, the voters donny is talking about in michigan and across the country,

but chuck schumer opened a big door yesterday and we saw a lot of democrats follow behind saying, yes, we support israel. we always will support israel, but we don't have to go along for the ride with everything that prime minister netanyahu is doing right now. >> right, and i certainly think that that's the right direction for the administration, and administration policy, to go in because as i just think what netanyahu is doing is -- but i think we all should not rush past what donny is saying. there are very, very deep feelings in those arab american communities in michigan, and the impact of the images that we're seeing from gaza, the impact of what people are hearing from their neighbors and their friends who have relatives in

gaza who are suffering right now, that's a scar that is going to take some healing, and the administration needs to get about healing that scar if it's going to win michigan in the traditional way that a democrat wins michigan which is to rack up huge numbers in wayne county, detroit, and dearborn, center of the arab american population in michigan. because i am not convinced even though we have a lot of time, i'm not convinced that all those votes are going to be there and so just have in the back of your mind a plan b in case you can't move events on the ground in the positive direction you want to move them in. >> all right, gene robinson, reverend al sharpton and molly jong-fast, thank you all for a great conversation. still ahead on "morning joe," our next guest says

israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu is making israel radioactive. "the new york times" columnist and pulitzer prizewinning author thomas treatman joins us to explain, plus we learn to expect whether fulton county district attorney fani willis will be removed from the trump election interference case in georgia. we'll bring in our legal panel ahead. and before we go to break, jackie is so excited. he needs to know he's had a tough week. he needs to be cheered up. what's going on there, willie. >> i'm going to cheer jack right up with academy award winner kate winslet. he loves the entire catalog and loved "mayor of easttown" talking about "the regime." >> "revolutionary road." >> exactly, her new series is called "the regime" dark comedy

where she plays a european dictator losing her grip on reality and power. it's hilarious, dark, a little reflective of what we talk about on the show every morning and talks about the whirlwind with some distance around "titanic" and what her life was like after that, not so great actually. a great conversation with kate winslet coming up over on nbc sunday today and we'll be right back here on "morning joe." . ...with a perfect name, a great logo, and a beautiful website. just start with a domain, a few clicks, and you're in business. make now the future at godaddy.com/airo

okay everyone, our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy. yay - woo hoo! ensure, with 27 vitamins and minerals, nutrients for immune health. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. (♪♪) j.p. morgan wealth management knows it's easy to get lost in investment research. get help with j.p morgan personal advisors. hey, david! ready to get started? work with advisors who create a plan with you, and help you find the right investments. so great getting to know you, let's take a look at your new investment plan. ok, great! this should have you moving in the right direction. thanks jen. get ongoing advice; and manage your investments in the chase mobile app. i have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. and manage your investments thanks to skyrizi, i'm on my way with clearer skin. 3 out of 4 people achieved 90%

clearer skin at 4 months. and skyrizi is just 4 doses a year after 2 starter doses. 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. nothing on my skin means everything! ♪ nothing is everything ♪ ask your dermatologist about skyrizi. learn how abbvie could help you save.

the all new godaddy airo helps you get your business online in minutes with the power of ai... ...with a perfect name, a great logo, and a beautiful website. just start with a domain, a few clicks, and you're in business. make now the future at godaddy.com/airo welcome back. in the days after donald trump's allies took over the republican national committee, the organization has seen mass layoffs and restructuring. senior leadership has been almost entirely replaced and many lower ranking officials have either been fired or told to reapply for their jobs. several teams have also been asked to relocate to palm beach. we also learned this week that christina bobb, a lawyer who

pushed conspiracy theories about the 2020 election has been hired as senior counsel for election integrity. >> if you're a member of the rnc, as i was, our next guest says, what are you doing? your silence and inaction is scandalous and you'reequally to blame. al cardenas, there's a "simpsons" had the republican and democratic convention and democrats held up a banner that said, we love chaos and that's a time when chaos used to find democrats. no longer. al, what happened to our party? >> joe, i think like i'm talking like that was my obituary, i think i'm talking like at a

funeral with you, you know, 1854, the birth of the republican party, 2024, the demise of the republican party. you know, we've always had during presidential years a combination between the two parties, but, look, the rnc, people need to understand what it does. you know, it recruits candidates. it works on voter registration, it works on turnout. it works on all the basics that a presidential campaign doesn't have the time, the resources to get involved with. if you're a candidate for public office in lower strata state legislature, school board, et cetera, who are you going to call? frankly, the answer is nobody. they have -- you know, they fired over 90 people. they're moving a small squad to integrate with a presidential campaign by name only. they're concentrating on lawyers and election fraud. we did that in florida. we created a very same mechanism they're trying to do nationally. you know what we did, we ended

up with three arrest, all republicans in the small village of the villages, a retirement community. this is nonsense, i mean, it's only spending millions to perpetuate the fallacy that there was election fraud in 2020. that's all. that's all it is, but, you know, replacing the rnc and what it does, to me, i've given it 40 years of my life. it breaks my heart. it takes away a major component of getting your communities involved in the political process, and now it's all going to be dictated from the top, and you wonder what our future will be down the ballot. >> now the rnc is run by lara trump, donald trump's daughter-in-law and christina bobb, irony and shame officially died when she was hired as the head of election integrity. one of the chief conspiracy theorists about the 2020 election, in fact, was in that

infamous war room on the eve of january 6th at the willard hotel with rudy giuliani and steve bannon. larger question to you, what are republicans like you and joe and the ones i've known my whole life growing up to do at this moment? reagan republicans, george w. bush, h.w. bush, mccain, romney, go all the way up the line, small government, low tax conservatives, where is the home for them in american politics right now? >> boy, that's the ultimate question, some have left. some have stayed. you know, we're doing something for liz cheney soon. my wife is going to be introducing her at a book event here just to bring back if nothing else the memory of a sane party and my -- look, michael steele with your msnbc team, he and i served together at the rnc. he shares the same, you know, concerns that i do, this is a

very sad time for us. it's a very sad time for what i consider to be, you know, a two-party system in america. it's a very sad time for democracy at its best. it's a very sad time for getting rid of -- i for one am not leaving. i'm here to stay and try to consider this a cycle that will leave us eventually, but in my opinion, it does us no service. >> political strategist al cardenas, thank you very much for coming on the show this morning. >> thanks, al. >> we appreciate it. thank you. all right, this morning we've been discussing the speech majority leader chuck schumer gave on the senate floor yesterday calling for new elections in israel while criticizing prime minister benjamin netanyahu's leadership. >> i have known prime minister netanyahu for a very long time.

while we have vehemently disagreed on many occasions, i will always respect his extraordinary bravery for israel on the battlefield as a younger man, i believe in his heart he has his highest priority is the security of israel, however, i also believe prime minister netanyahu has lost his way by allowing his political survival to take the precedence over the best interests of israel. >> joining us now columnist for "the new york times," thomas friedman. his latest piece, "netanyahu is making israel radioactive." what do you make, tom, of leader schumer's comments? >> well, i thought that senator schumer's comments were important. i think they were courageous, and i think they were right on. i think that friends don't let

friends drive drunk, and -- >> that's right. >> israel embarked on a war against hamas and gaza that was a war of survival. it was extremely important. it was justified in terms of israel's self-defense, but it had to be done in a way, mika, where it was framed in a kind of legitimacy framework that would enable israel to sustain the war and sustain both arab and western allies, and i believe prime minister netanyahu didn't do -- has not fought the war that way and i think what senator schumer has done has really opened the space for a real discussion here within the democratic party, but also within american politics at large where we could have a frank conversation with israel without it being one of hostility of where are you going here because where you're going is, we think, going to not only

undermine your interests but also the whole diplomatic security structure that the united states has built in the middle east since camp david. >> tom, what is israel's best way forward at this point? >> well, you know, joe, on october 19th, i wrote a column, the headline was "israel is about to make a terrible mistake." the first paragraph, i believe if israel rushes headlong into gaza now to destroy hamas and does so without expressing a clear commitment to a two-state solution with the palestinian authority and end settlements deep in the west bank it will be making a grave mistake devastating to american and israeli interests. why? because israel is fighting a three-front war. first of all, this is the first war israel's fought in the age of tiktok, okay, where so many people around the world could follow this war on their

smartphone. and because of that, narrative was very important. and the second unique feature about this war, because hamas had dug 350 to 400 miles of tunnels underneath gaza and then started this war, it was inevitable they were going to be a lot of civilian casualties for israel to get at hamas. therefore, you needed to have a legitimacy framework to say, we are going there to destroy hamas which was a fundamental threat to us, which killed and raped and killed kids in front of their parents and parents in front of their kids. we are going to get them not just as an end in itself but to create a context for a different kind of israeli-palestinian relationship more broadly and between israel and gaza, number one, so israel was fighting this war in the age of tiktok and it was a war that was going to have a lot of civilian casualties, you needed to wrap it in a

wrapping of legitimacy, second, this war you had to have an end game, israel had fought four wars with hamas before this but none were wars of dismantlement. this was the first time israel was trying to dismantle hamas and if you're trying to dismantle hamas you need to have a vision of what is going to replace hamas so you're not saying to the world, we're not only just going to occupy the west bank indefinitely, we're going to occupy gaza indefinitely and thirdly, this is a regional war, besides israel's war with hamas it is facing a threat from iran and its proxies throughout the region. hezbollah, the houthi, shia militias in iraq and to confront that regional alliance, joe and mika, you needed another alliance. you needed america to be able to leverage our arab allies, our european allies to confront the

iranian network threat. the cement, the necessary cement for such a regional alliance was that israel had a vision long term, not for tomorrow but long term for a different relationship with the palestinians based on two states or two people so for all three of those reasons given the unique nature of this war, israel needed to go into it with a vision and we have -- israel has a prime minister now who is incapable, unwilling and in many ways politically unable to articulate a vision because he's a captive of the far right coalition which he has built. >> as the president of the united states has upped his criticism publicly of benjamin netanyahu, netanyahu has pushed back even harder saying, we appreciate the alliance with the united states, we appreciate all the support we get but effectively i'm going to do what i'm going to do regard also of what joe biden says, so what is the president of the united states to do with an ally like that? with a prime minister like that

who isn't listening to what he's saying and isn't listening to the fact that you've written about many times that he's walked right into the trap set by hamas with its unprecedented savagery on october 7th that it now walks into this trap of killing civilians and for hamas as you've said it's a death cult, that a dead gazan to them is a victory because it makes israel look bad so what does president biden do with benjamin netanyahu. >> i give the president a lot of credit for how he's handled it. he understands that hamas is not out for a two-state solution. in fact, hamas is so much more a threat to palestinians than israelis. it has done everything it could since its founding in 2006/2007 to destroy the two-state solution so let's just remember that. go back really to the arab peace initiative. march 2002, the arab world is

meeting at a summit for the first time to endorse a two-state solution, the entire arab league, full normalization and full peace for full israeli withdrawal. on the first night of that summit, hamas launched a suicide attack on an israeli passover seder. so we can never lose sight of that. but it can't defeat hamas without having a better answer on the other side. i think what the line the president's been walking is that he understands for israel's interests, palestinian interest and the arab world's interest, hamas needs to be dismantled but it's got to be done in a way not only that minimizes as much possible civilian casualties but

is framed in a larger political context so it doesn't just look like we're killing hamas just to kill hamas from an israeli point of view and not to advance a kind of different relationship between israelis and palestinians. it's super difficult. i think the president's handled it as well as anyone could. but we're just going to have to keep this conversation going along those lines. >> thomas, good morning. i reported earlier this week that president biden will be willing to consider putting conditions on aid to israel if there was an all-out ground assault into rafah. we don't know if that will happen or when. want to get your take on that. the idea of conditioning or even withholding military aid and i know some of the pushback from israel has been, well, it's not just about hamas but the threat from hezbollah still looms too. >> yeah, that's why i say it's so difficult, because you've got a threat from iran. directly. you have a threat from the houthis and hezbollah and the same missiles you need to

confront them and many of the same armaments, not all. you're using in gaza, and i don't have an answer for it. it's a hugely difficult problem, but the beginning, the necessary but not sufficient answer is that israel needs to understand that if it does not embed this war in a larger political process, it's going to lose america. it's going to lose chuck schumer. it's going to lose joe biden because it's just not sustainable. and so there's no simple answer for it. no one has had to fight this kind of enemy before. >> columnist for "the new york times," thomas friedman, it's great to have you on as always, thank you so much for coming on this morning. >> thank you. did president biden energize voters with his state of the union address? that's the question put before a group of voters featured in a new focus group conducted by the wide world of news. take a look. >> raise your hand if you feel

better about his chances of winning after the state of the union. raise your hand if you feel -- all right. what did he do at the state of the union that made you feel more confident. >> he was forceful. he challenged people. he talked to people. he was on topic on everything. >> narrative about joe biden going into the state of the union is that he's decrepit, he is slow, he's feeble. he's shown energy and command of subjects and a little fight and shut down a few people. >> the group of democrats were also asked to describe president biden's state of the union in one or two words. take a look. >> good and also i know they said that he was political and he needed to be. >> okay, so good and political. >> alton. >> he did an excellent job, forceful and kind of kicked off the 2024 election.

>> forceful. sandy, one or two words to describe his performance. >> knowledgeable and in command. >> okay. brandy. >> i would go with the forceful and in command. >> okay. >> leslie. >> good, inconclusive. >> okay. stan? >> the bedwetting ceased. >> bedwetting ceased. deb. >> i'd say capable and strong. >> okay, and john. >> outstanding. outstanding and forceful. >> all right. >> so, donny, we watched this. >> there's one on kamala harris which was extremely positive. these focus groups are fascinating. >> it's fascinating of these core democrats who obviously for good reason for democrats were energized by the state of the union, still concerned, one of

them said let scranton joe be scranton joe, they want him out there fighting. i'm curious about your thoughts. >> i thought the state of the union was a brilliant reset and i think if i take some of the words that came out of the focus groups, strong, forceful, yes, there were issues to talk about but he had to answer one question, is he too old? does he have the stamina? does he have the strength? does he have the vigor? and you saw it on display for over an hour. so i think everything else is such subtext to that and he's got to continue. it's got to be a reset and launch and not a one-off. every time you talk to any -- you know, anti-biden person, they're not talking about the economy, they're not talking about inflation, and they're not talking about health care and not talking about abortion because they can't talk about those things so all they say is one, one, one issue so that's -- it's so much is about style as

well as the substance at this point and stylistically blew it off the map. >> we're going to play another portion of the focus group about kamala harris, how people feel about how she's doing in the fourth hour of "morning joe," but overall, what i love about these wide world of news focus groups is that you get kind of like the pulse of the moment in realtime. sometimes there's 50 people up. they're fascinating and they're all really smart, interesting people, diverse, it's incredible. so, more on that in the fourth hour. coming up, quote, the sky is falling. that is a startling warning from a new york doctor about covid-19 published in "the times" almost exactly four years ago today. now dr. cornelia griggs is out with a new memoir detailing her experience working on the front lines of the pandemic and she joins us to talk about that straight ahead on "morning joe."

( ♪ ♪ ) start your day with nature made. the #1 pharmacist recommended vitamin and supplement brand. here's to getting better with age. here's to beating these two every thursday. help fuel today with boost high protein, complete nutrition you need... ...without the stuff you don't. so, here's to now. boost.

at bombas, we're obsessed with socks. tees. and underwear. because your basic things should be your best things. one purchased equals one donated. visit bombas.com and get 20% off your first order. what if you could go from this to this. with just one step tresemmé silk serum. time for the ultimate humidity test. weightlessly smooth hair your turn. new tresemmé keratin smooth collection. morikawa on 18. he is really boxed in here. -not a good spot. off the comcast business van. into the vending area. oh, not the fries! where's the ball? -anybody see it? oh wait, there it is! -back into play and... aw no, it's in the water. wait a minute... are you kidding me? you got to be kidding me. rolling towards the cup, and it's in the hole! what an impossible shot brought to you by comcast business.

america's hospitals are already straining. in hard-hit washington state, providence regional medical center everett has seen double-digit cases of coronavirus. the medical director worries about what's coming. >> what do we do if we have a limited number of ventilators and more patients than ventilators available? what do we do if we have more patients than beds available? >> boy. >> can you believe it was, like, four years ago this week? >> everything changed. yeah. in 2020, the world changed forever. when covid-19 spread across the globe, the pandemic pushed america's health care system to the brink presenting first responders with a crisis unlike anything they had ever seen before. pediatric surgeon dr. cornelia briggs kept a diary of her experience during the peak of

the pandemic and that diary is the basis of her new memoir entitled "the sky was falling: a young surgeon's story of bravery, survival, and hope." dr. griggs joins us now. this book has been recommended to us in so many different ways. tell us why you decided -- first of all, i know why you decided to write it all down, but to publish this book. what do you hope people will learn from it and tell us some of the of the stories that you share in it. >> absolutely. thank you so much for having me. this book was absolutely a labor of love, and the most meaningful reception this week has come from other health care workers and people who suffered during the covid-19 pandemic, especially in that first wave who found a piece of their story in my writing. for me, writing it all down down -- during that crisis was extremely therapeutic.

it was how i processed all the tragedy and trauma that i was living and working through, and i wrote this book because it's ultimately a story of redemption, and i hope people will find a piece of how they were brave and how they fought to survive during that time. >> i mean, the health care workers were on the front lines in so many ways. >> often not equipped. >> and none of us were equipped. nobody was equipped for this. >> yeah. >> that's why i love, 40 years later, all the second guessing that continues, oh, they should have done this. they should have done that. the story changed so many times when, in fact, just about everybody was flying blind. this was something -- this was something unlike any other pandemic since 1919. how frightening was it for you and other health care providers early on? >> absolutely. this was like living through a very long, drawn out horror movie in ways that a lot of us had never anticipated we would

see in our lifetimes, and it was a huge, huge strain on our health care systems. i remember walking to work and just seeing the lines of people growing and growing outside of our emergency rooms which began to look like a war zone. the refrigerated trucks. even when i went back to do edits and record the audiobook, there were memories and moments that i had fought to repress and forget about, and like so many people, i'm sure we're sick of thinking about covid. we're sick of talking about covid, but i think we've really only begun to scratch the surface of the collective trauma that we all experienced not only in the hospital, but at home, and we're still reckoning with the consequences of covid as we struggle to figure out how to get people back into the workplace. hospitals are still reeling and rebuilding, and there's still so much we haven't talked about or addressed. >> dr. griggs, good morning.

thanks so much for being with us. i think a lot of people may remember the tweet you put out that was so moving and so spoke to what you and what everyone in the hospitals across the country put on the line. in the thick of it, you wrote, my babies are too young to read this now and they'd barely recognize me in my gear, but if they lose me to covid, i want them to know mommy tried really hard to do her job with the hashtag, get me ppe. can you talk about on a personal level what you were feeling? you were a doctor trying to save other people, but thinking about your own family as well. >> absolutely. it still makes me emotional even hearing that tweet or thinking about it because it was the first time in my life at the end of nearly a decade of surgical training where i was showing up to work every day and really felt acutely, the threat to my own life, and that was what was really scary for so many health care workers especially in that

first wave, especially in new york city, and this is why i wrote this book, as a testament to all the incredibly brave essential workers that kept showing up day after day, and the main message of the book is that sometimes doing something brave feels incredibly scary in the moment, and you don't feel brave while you're doing it, but the bravest thing we did in that moment that i wrote about in this book was just continuing to show up for our patients. >> yeah. >> and your book is titled "the sky was falling." dr. cornelia griggs -- >> incredible. >> thank you so much. >> thank you for what you have done too, and all the first responders. >> thank you so much, and willie, i've got to say also something that was new in this was unfortunately the politicalization of health care. you had people lying. oh, there are only three people. there's no problem. then it moved onto, oh, this is just the flu. this is no worse than the flu,

and a lot of people stuck to that for a very long time, that this was some government conspiracy. it was lie after lie after lie after lie, and here we are four years later. they look back and they concoct new lies. it's just really outrageous, and it was a lot of times health care workers on the front line that were getting the brunt of just this savagery. >> i know. i was just thinking about that too. those lies continue by the way, but more than a million people, a million of our fellow americans died of covid, and i remember at the beginning, we were hearing about thousands, maybe 10,000, and that felt shocking and then there was an announcement from the white house there could be a projection of 200,000, which took our breath away, rightfully so. it ended up being more than a million people, and a lot of that has gotten lost in the politics and the conspiracy theories that you are talking about, and the demonization, my god, of doctors and nurses. it was an ugly time in so many ways, but the political side of

it was as well. there were other things we've talked about on this show. kids should have gone back to school sooner. we know that now. in the fog of war, that was a more difficult decision, but to ever question the commitment and the job that were done by these doctors like dr. griggs and the health care workers across our health care spectrum, truly, truly heroic work. >> there are a lot of things we know now we didn't know than -- then that we couldn't have known then. 1919 preyed on younger americans. we talked about american schools, that this was a breeding ground for past epidemics and pandemics. that was a concern, and we could go back and say, man. they sure were idiots for thinking that, for looking at the last pandemic, but we can name a thousand things. we didn't know how the vaccine was going to react. we didn't know if this was going to, you know, give you immunity for a year or five years, or ten years or 15 years, or for life.

these are things we learned along the way. it's actually -- it's just -- it's called science. >> yeah. >> it actually takes a while to figure out what the realities are. coming up, we're going to go through the new developments in the legal cases tied to former president donald trump as we await a judge's decision today on whether fulton county district attorney fani willis can stay on the georgia election interference case. plus, nbc's keir simmons joins us from moscow where russians are voting in a presidential election that will give vladimir putin his fifth term. we're back in just 90 sexds. -- -- 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 power e*trade's easy-to-use tools make complex trading less complicated.

custom scans help you find new trading opportunities, while an earnings tool helps you plan your trades and stay on top of the market. e*trade from morgan stanley

i need to make sure i say exactly what i want to, and i plan to stick to the timeline we gave everyone. >> this week? >> it should be out tomorrow. >> so the message i always want to convey that no vote will be based on politics. i will be following the law as best i understand. >> judge scott mcafee saying he'll release a decision today on whether fulton county district attorney fani willis can continue to prosecute the election interference case against donald trump. that's just one of the legal developments we're following this morning involving the former president. he was in court yesterday as his legal team tried to get the classified documents case dismissed. plus, we'll get a live report from moscow where polls

are open for russia's first presidential election in six years, but vladimir putin's total control over the country leaves no doubt what the results will be. and the highest ranking jewish-elected official in the united states is calling for changes in israel. now five months into its war with hamas, we'll play for you what senate majority leader chuck schumer said about prime minister benjamin netanyahu. it's quite something. >> my gosh. if you heard the reaction from the far right, from the trump right, you would have forgotten for a second that benjamin netanyahu was the guy that led israel's defenses down, was the guy that knew in 2018 where all the illicit funding was for the hamas terror organization, was the guy that gave hamas money through qatar with a couple of weeks left to go, and had the attack plans a year before from hamas, did absolutely nothing.

actually had evidence that morning -- >> yeah. >> -- of what was happening. he did absolutely nothing, but my god, benjamin netanyahu, you would think he was george washington. the attacks just absolutely unbelievable. benjamin netanyahu should have resigned the day after when it took five, six, seven, ten hours to bring aid to children who had seen their parents shot to death in front of their eyes, or babies shot in their -- i could go on and on, but seriously, the outrage. the faux outrage is such garbage. it's why americans hate politics. it really is. there's no doubt netanyahu has damaged israel in a way no prime minister has damaged israel since 1948, and they know it. so willie, really, i mean, god. reading some of the editorials, reading some of the tweets, reading some of the garbage from the far right really is

nauseating as somebody who has supported israel my entire life. a guy who's spoken before apac, my entire life. how much do they want to politicize this? some of us, i know this is radical, but some of us actually want what's best for israel and not what's best for benjamin netanyahu and donald trump. some of us actually give a damn about the safety and security of israel, not just now, but five years from now, 50 years from now. >> yeah. all of that is true, but no less an extraordinary moment to hear chuck schumer, a democrat who represents the largest jewish population in the world outside of israel in the state of new york to say, it's time for a change of leadership. it's something a lot of people have been thinking as you said, and it's something we're not accustomed to hearing from a leader, such a high-ranking leader in american politics saying it's time for a change. leader schumer did put out a statement saying, this is up to the people of israel. this is how i view this. the people of israel need to

decide that. >> mm-hmm. >> you're right. there was a huge reaction from the right, a huge reaction from inside israel from the netanyahu government as well. just a fascinating dynamic here. >> yeah. >> as we see our own president, president biden, not just chuck schumer, stepping up his criticism of netanyahu and the way he's conducted this war as well. >> well, you know, it's a sad dynamic. it's a sad dynamic because there's some people in america on the far right who are more interested in helping benjamin netanyahu than israel. i mean, i guess that's just the sad reality. i mean, there are a lot of us that are a lot more concerned about the israeli people and israel's security, and israel's -- >> the hostages. >> the hostages. israel's long-term support. >> 135 days. >> the support which just continues to erode in the united states and across the globe. so some of us have always supported israel, but yeah. we're concerned about what's going on, more than a little concerned about what's going on in israel, what went on october

7th, what's been going on on college campuses across this country, the anti-semitism that's been sweeping the world now for oh, i don't know. 2,000 years or so, but again, this is a disastrous path that netanyahu is on, and they know. the far-right extremists who are defending netanyahu right now know he's doing everything he can do to stay in office. it's not for the best interest of the israeli people. >> for him. >> it's in the best interest of benjamin netanyahu. they know that, and yet they spew lies. they know that's the reality, and yet they continue to defend him. speaking of spewing lies, jonathan lemire on this friday morning potpourri, the dirtbag conspiracy theory that the sandy hook parents were actually actors and there were no kids, but this was an inside government job? i find it absolutely remarkable that aaron rodgers had to come

out yesterday and clean up comments he made to a cnn reporter early that he thought that sandy hook didn't happen. he thought that it was an inside job, that the government did it to take guns away from americans. that according to a cnn anchor who heard him say that in 2013, i believe it was. so yesterday he had to come out and try to clean that up. by the way, these are the type of people that rfk jr. are associating himself with, and actually talked about this conspiracy theorist being a possible vice presidential candidate. >> yeah. one note briefly on netanyahu, the white house was given a heads-up what he was going to say. didn't object. what netanyahu said publicly, a lot in the white house said privately. we'll have a lot more on that later in the show. as far as aaron rodgers goes, this is perhaps the most loathsome conspiracy theory in america. the idea that what happened in sandy hook was either completely

made up or a false flag operation to take away the nation's guns, and aaron rodgers who has distinguished himself on the football field over the last 15 years or so, apparently believes this, and said it publicly to the cnn reporter about a decade back, and he is someone who robert f. kennedy jr. yesterday was asked about rodgers, his beliefs about sandy hook and all kennedy had to say was that he praised rodgers as a quote, critical thinker. didn't denounce his comments or distance himself. they talk frequentfrequently. rodgers tried to clean it up. it was vague and it wasn't a full-throated denial. this is not rodgers' only conspiracy theory. he has questioned september 11th questioning it was an inside job. saying the packers were talking in the locker room. we know his stance on vaccines. what's the brought him and kennedy together in the first

place and now rodgers is being floated as a potential vp candidate despite the fact we think he's going to play quarterback for the jets in the fall if he can recover from his injury. kennedy said he'll name his running mate in a couple of weeks. aaron rodgers though by the day reveals himself to be a pretty loathsome human being. >> one jeffrey epstein conspiracy theory after another. all right. we here at "morning joe" -- >> starting of on a really depressing note. >> we try to unwind conspiracy theories and that's why we have the bbc's katty kay. >> the great katty kay. >> i would like to tell you last night that mika and i were sorting through the intricacies of middle east peace. >> i know. >> and just what was going to be required for a two-state solution. >> and by the way, everyone should watch "turning point." that's the other issue we were discussing. that was really good. that was amazing, but i know what you are getting to.

we spent about an hour talking about it, an hour. >> "turning point" is not about a tennis match. it's nuclear war. the kids will love it. katty, and i'm serious when i ask it this way. >> we couldn't sleep. >> what in the hell is going on with kate middleton? >> we couldn't sleep. >> how could a group of people as obsessed with their image allow something -- >> or protective -- >> to spin out of control as badly as this? >> not obsessed. >> don't give me this, whatever. everybody in britain is talking about it too. >> i'm just worried. >> tell us what's going on. you know. >> i seriously thought we were going to have a moment where we could go down the path of what it would take to get the saudis to recognize israel in exchange for a two-state solution and that's all going off the table. >> that's next. >> we'll do that next. okay.

kate middleton. the royal family's in this really weird position at the moment where they're trying to be more open. you had the king come out and say he had a problem with his prostate, and then suddenly, amazingly, good news on friday morning, lots of british men went to the doctor to get their prostates checked. tick for the royal family and their openness, and their public service campaign, and then kate who has had this operation in january. we still don't know what for. i promise you i am texting our royal reporters, people who cover this day in and day out, which i do not. every day, and they still don't note what she was in hospital for. i mean, tons of conspiracy theories about what she went into hospital for in the first place, and then she's not going to be seen we were told until april, but for some reason on mother's day, british mother's day, they decided to put out this photograph which turns out to have been edited. people put out, what's wrong with her? was this photo taken? it's suspiciously green and

sunny and this is england in march. it's not suspiciously green and sunny yet. >> right. >> did they mash out the -- was it because louis was scowling and they had to kind of put together lots of different photographs to get the one where louis was smiling? one goal in terms of the royal family for openness and it plays into this moment we're in where no one trusts anything. we don't trust anything we read. we don't trust anything we see. we're all worried about ai and how it will be deceiving us and we get this from the royal family which is meant to be something we can trust, and shows us she is doing well, and guess what? we can't trust that either. >> but katty, it's so easily fixable in so many different ways and they don't, and i think that's why everybody's worried. they could fix this. >> she can take a picture of herself. >> or instagram live, or -- there's a million things. >> they do nothing. >> i mean -- we were talking about this the other day.

was it yesterday, joe? i can't remember. this week has been, like, so long. come out and apologize. i'm really sorry i confused everybody. this is the original photo, but louis is scowling and we tried to make him look for cheerful or whatever, but come out and at least have transparency. it's not the story. >> pulitzer prize-winning columnist. >> satisfied? >> i'm not satisfied at all. >> because gene's got it. >> gene was a bureau chief. hoe knows this sort of thing. he has deep contacts there. >> something is wrong. >> people seem worried about it. i know you are too. what is it? >> i am worried about it, actually. look. the royal family has always been opaque, deliberately opaque, and they're allergic to sharing, right? that's the way they were during queen elizabeth's entire reign, and so now they've decided to be

transparent except not really, and you can't have it sort of halfway. so, you know, charles announced that he has, you know, prostate issues. that was very good. it really helped and then he said he has cancer, and he's being treated. he won't say what kind of cancer. nobody knows how serious this is or how he's doing, and if you're going to say you have an illness, you should -- you should be more open about it, and then this thing with the photograph again as katty said. a huge goal, but it's the kind of own goal they're going to keep making because that's who they are. they just simply haven't internalized what transparency means, and it's going to hurt the institution going forward, and also just to backtrack for a second, aaron rodgers is an idiot, and let's just face it. he's just an idiot, and what chuck schumer said about

benjamin netanyahu is what i have been hearing from some of the most influential and fervent american jews who support israel, and they have been saying exactly the same thing privately. so i think it's a great thing that chuck schumer said it publicly. >> yeah. >> guys, i think we've covered everything. should we just call it a weekend and get out of here? that was a great show. all in. by the way to your point, the fact that after this photograph scandal that the next morning kate didn't come out and wave at a window or step out on the balcony tells you -- it does sincerely make you worry and we hope she's okay. we'll dive into more new this is morning. the decision will come today over whether fulton county district attorney fani willis will be disqualified for the trump election interference case. trump and several of his codefendants have accused willis of misconduct and financially benefitting from a romantic

relationship she had with prosecutor nathan wade whom she hired on the case. in a hearing last month, both willis and wade acknowledged that relationship, but insisted it started after wade was hired. meanwhile in florida, the judge in the classified documents case, the judge has denied to have the charges against him dismissed. trump's legal team tried to argue the law on national security secrets saying it's too vague, but judge aileen cannon ruled hours after the hearing a dismissal over vagueness right now would be, quote, premature and better suited to be addressed later, quote, in connection with jury-instructed briefing. she did not rule yet on the other motion from trump's team which claimed the former president believed he was allowed to keep the documents as his personal records because of the presidential records act which we have said at nauseam does not apply here. judge cannon appeared skeptical saying at one point, it's difficult to see how this gets you to the dismissal of an indictment. and in new york just days

before donald trump was set to face his first criminal trial, we've learned the hush money case brought by the manhattan district attorney's office likely now will be postponed. trump's lawyers want to push the trial back by 90 days in a new court filing yesterday. the d.a.'s office says it does not oppose a brief delay, but asks that it does not receive 30 days. at issue was about 31,000 pages of additional records the manhattan d.a.'s office received this week from federal prosecutors in new york. trump's legal team requested more time to review the material, and the d.a.'s office responded saying it would not oppose an adjournment. the judge presiding over the case has not yet ruled on a delay. the trial currently set to begin march 25th. that's a week from monday. all right. with all that, let's bring in msnbc legal correspondent, lisa rubin. lisa, looks like another day, another pop quiz for you. so much to cover here. let's go back to the beginning with this announcement we're expecting some time in the next few hours about whether or not

fani willis will be disqualified as the prosecutor in the case down in georgia. what do you expect to hear? >> willie, i really don't know, and i think a lot turns on two things. one, what is the legal standard that judge mcafee applies to whether fani willis should be disqualified? that is contested. you have the d.a.'s office saying the standard is whether there is an actual conflict of interest that prejudices the defendants in their capacity as criminal defendants here and not for example, as voters in fulton county who helped elect fani willis. the other standard though, the one advanced by mike roman's lawyer, ashley merchant is it's about the appearance of impropriety. when there was oral argument on this, one of the things that the d.a.'s office drilled down into was telling mcafee was that while there is some case law

that provides for the disqualification of elected officials on that appearance of impropriety, that's never been held to disqualify a prosecutor. there has to be an actual conflict. let's see whether he buys the d.a.'s argument or the folks on the other side. if he buys the defendant's argument, i think that odds are fani willis would be disqualified, but the other big issue here is how much additional evidence scott mcafee decides is relevant to his decision. you'll remember here at the last hour, everybody piled on with cell phone records and purported expert declarations, new declarations from the guy at the winery who remembered willis and wade, and from another prosecutor who had been in the conversation with terrence bradley where she alleged fani willis said, they're snooping, don't talk. whether mcafee takes any of that into consideration remains an open question. he hasn't publicly ruled on the admissibility or whether or not he thinks that that's relevant

here. i think it could go either way. my sense is that fani willis holds on, but barely, and that whatever mcafee does in that respect, if he does allow her to stay on the case, still comes with a bunch of criticism for her and her special ada nathan wade. >> so lisa, let's break this down actually, to what actually is relevant to this case and what is not relevant to this case. first of all, fani willis, i mean, the judgment she used is just absolutely atrocious. if there are ethical ramifications, you know, perhaps there should be especially if she's lying. there definitely should be. she's going to have to answer to the voters, but just this. again, the most important case probably that's ever been tried in georgia, and she has just turned it into an absolute clown show. i wanted to use another word, but it's early in the morning and some kids are eating their breakfast. all right. so we can all agree on that.

i think everybody can agree that she has really, really messed this up. that's on side of the ledger, but the other side of the ledger is does it in any way prejudice the defendant? and does it get in the way of donald trump having a fair trial and these other defendants having a fair trail? i don't see how it gets to that line. there are a lot of things a judge can do. the judge can say, ms. willis, i cannot even believe the horrific judgment you've shown, and bradley, i mean, you point this guy -- what are you doing? you know what? we're going to have to delay this now. you're going to have to find somebody else to run your case and i hope you don't have a personal relationship with them as well. i don't know if you can do that. >> nathan wade. >> nathan wade, but push it to that side, and it seems like these are two totally separate things. >> yes. >> i don't understand why she

would be disqualified. ethics charges, yes, but just have her appoint somebody else to run the case. >> well, look. when we talked, you guys were talking in the earlier segment about the easiest ways to correct for the conspiracy theories going on over at kensington palace. this was a situation that could have been easily corrected too. when these allegations were first floated, once fani willis and nathan wade admitted that they had a relationship, the right and maybe the helpful thing to do at that point would have been for nathan wade to step away from the case, and for them to say, okay. we recognize this was an error of judgment on the d.a.'s part, but we're going to cure that now. nathan wade will no longer take part in the case. that's not what they did. >> yeah. >> putting that aside, judge mcafee has made clear, it doesn't matter if nathan wade was the worst lawyer in the world. she is entitled to appoint whoever she wants so long as they have a bar card, a legal education, and are basically competent to stand up, you know,

it's like one step beyond "weekend at bernie's" in terms of who she's allowed to appoint. >> yeah. >> the conflict issue here, and i'll be generous to the defendants. their allegation is by appointmenting someone with whom she was in a personal relationship, she benefitted because in her payments to him, she knew it would come back to her. they said she tried to inflate the size of the case, the number of defendants, all to enlarge the size of the payments to wade. the only problem with that is fani willis makes a decent salary on her own, and the number of dollars that they were able to tie back to her in terms of nathan wade's expenditures while lavish in terms of how ordinary americans spend their vacation money isn't substantial enough to have, you know, a normal person says to themselves. would really concoct this whole big thing, this rico conspiracy in other words to get yourself $10,000 of vacation benefits?

i don't think so. >> lisa rubin, we want to discuss that decision from florida where a judge just denied one of donald trump's efforts to derail the classified documents case. "morning joe" is coming right back. nts case "morning joe" is coming right back

♪ ♪ ♪ hi, i'm jason. i've lost 228 pounds on golo. ♪ i don't ever want to go back to wearing a 4xl shirt or not being able to climb up stairs without taking a break. so i'm committed to golo for life. ♪3, 4♪ ♪ ♪hey♪ ♪ ♪are you ready for me♪ ♪are you ready♪ ♪are you ready♪

how did i ever miss this? before you were preventing migraine with qulipta? you'll never truly forget migraine, but zero-migraine days are possible. don't take if allergic to qulipta. most common side effects are nausea, constipation and sleepiness. qulipta. the forget-you-get-migraine medicine.

hey, dad. i got an a on my book report. -and i scored a goal on ashley. -that's cool. and i went for a walk in the woods and i didn't get a single flea or tick on me. you are just the best. probably because of that flea and tick medicine you've been ordering from chewy. we are very proud of you. you never stop surprising us, bailey. right? i'm great. you are great. i wonder if bailey's ever done a book report. be nice to your sister. what flea bit him? pets aren't just pets. they're more. this flea and tick season, get 20% off your first pharmacy order at chewy. business. qulipta. it's not a nine-to-five proposition. it's all day and into the night. it's all the things that keep this world turning. the go-tos that keep us going. the places we cheer. and check in. they all choose the advanced network solutions and round the clock partnership from comcast business. see why comcast business powers more small businesses than anyone else. get started for $49.99 a month plus ask how to get up to an $800 prepaid card.

don't wait- call today. lerts turn to florida now. judge cannon to this point has been pretty sympathetic to the trump cause. she was -- the trump team brought her two reasons yesterday that they believe to dismiss the case. she threw one of them out and said, no. that's not accurate as mika described at the top of the show. the other remains pending. were you surprised by anything

you heard yesterday? >> no. if anything, i was surprised there was a hearing yesterday and it took as long as it did. last night in disposing of one of those, she issued a not even two-page order. i want to be clear about something. she denied the motion to dismiss on this unconstitutional vagueness of the espionage act argument, but in doing so, she took a bunch of swipes at the special counsel. there's language in there that says, i'm not deciding this now, but i'm going to read from it right now. there are still fluctuating definitions of statutory terms and phrases along with some disputed factual issues. so rather than prematurely decide now whether this is unsalvageably vague, there are loaded accusations against the special counsel in that in other words, you are telling me how other courts have interpreted this, but those are asserted judicial glosses. you are telling me what these

terms mean, but they are still fluctuating definitions. so yes she kicked the can down the road. she didn't give donald trump what he wanted. on the other hand, she made it difficult for anyone to appeal this and just sort of help it. i don't think it's a victory for the special counsel's office. in terms of the presidential records act on the other hand, finally aileen cannon has seen an argument from donald trump she recognizes as ridiculous, and many of us breathe a sigh of relief on that. coming up, russians are voting in a presidential election today, and spoiler alert, vladimir putin is almost certain to win. nbc's keir simmons is in moscow this morning and joins our conversation straight ahead. ornr conversation straight ahead. godaddy airo. creates a logo, website, even social posts... in minutes! -how? -a.i. (impressed) ay i like it! who wants to come see the future?! get your business online in minutes with godaddy airo

hey! asthma's got you going through it? grab nucala for fewer asthma attacks. nucala is a once-monthly add-on injection

for severe eosinophilic asthma. not for sudden breathing problems. allergic reactions can occur. get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. infections that can cause shingles have occurred. don't stop steroids unless told by your doctor. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. may cause headache, injection site reactions, back pain, and fatigue. ask an asthma specialist if nucala is right for you.

the all new godaddy airo helps you get your business online in minutes with the power of ai... ...with a perfect name, a great logo, and a beautiful website. just start with a domain, a few clicks, and you're in business. make now the future at godaddy.com/airo

the polls are open this morning in russia with the nation's first presidential election since 2018 now set to run through sunday. vladimir putin will secure a fifth term as president, extending his rule by six more years. joining us from inside a polling station in moscow, is our chief

international correspondent, keir simmons. keir, what are you seeing there? >> reporter: well, willie, this is a middle school in moscow been turned into a polling station for three days. in a sense, this is less of an election, more of a referendum on president putin, on his so-called special military operation in ukraine. this is the first vote since that international invasion of ukraine. you can see people registering to vote and voting across here, willie, and let me just show you the motif for this election. you'll recognize it as a russian war symbol. that v in russian colors. maybe a v for victory, or vladimir putin because of course, there are lots of people questioning the authenticity of this vote, not at least alexei navalny's wife yulia who this week called on the west not to -- not to accept this vote.

we know, of course, that president putin will be re-elected on sunday night. another six years after 24 years in office, and in many ways what he's looking to do here, and there was voting even in the illegally occupied territories of ukraine. what he's looking to do here is to prove, if you like that russia supports him. so it's not just the vote result, but the turnout that will matter. in 2018, it was 67.5%. the kremlin will be looking for that or more. i mentioned the voting across here. that is the traditional voting. you can see the see-through polling booth there, but then further over, that's electronic voting. so it's the first time it's been a three-day vote. it's the first time they've had electronic vote here, and observers have told us, they are not able honestly to know what's going on there.

you can be confident that no matter what happens across this enormous country of 11 time zones there will be an outcome that has a turnout that is as much as or if not, more than what was seen in 2018. that being said though, willie, president putin is popular in russia. a woman if her 90s told us she saw starling's funeral and she said president putin is the only person they trust now. >> carrying on that legacy. keir simmons, great reporting from inside of moscow, and a polling station there where vladimir putin hopes to get a higher percentage of the vote even than he did six years ago. keir, thank you so much. joe, obviously vladimir putin will win this election. not much opposition. why? because his opponents are either in jail or in the case of alexei navalny, now dead. >> yeah. kills his opponents, always has. let's bring in right now the president emeritus of the foreign relations richard haass. he's the author of "home and

away," available on sub stack. just a side note, vladimir putin does to his political opponents what donald trump says he wants to do to his political opponents and generals and others that are insufficiently loyal to him, and if he's given a second term, he promises that he will do just that. so richard, the soviet union was, of course, in complete political and economic and cultural and military control of their empire until the moment that they weren't. i'm curious your thoughts about where vladimir putin is two years after this invasion. there have been some ups. there have been some downs, but as keir said, a lot of russians see him in a favorable light, and one suspects that even if the election were fair, he would most likely win.

what's your thought on where he is right now, his standing with the russian people? >> i think he unfortunately, you've got it right. russia's worked its way around the sanctions. it's able to sell its oil and gas. it's able to import all sorts of things. the situation on the battlefield has gradually, slowly moving in its favor. putin controls the domestic political narrative because he controls media. he's jailed or killed his opponents. the biggest challenge, you know, the prigozhin challenge, that was a demonstration effect of what happens if you take on vladimir putin, and i think two years into the war, joe, he is stronger than he was before, and this is a hollowed out russia. you mention the soviet union. there you had institutions. there you had a communist party. you don't have any of that now. >> right. >> this is a truly de-institutionalized country. this is almost the politics of

personalization rather than institutions or systems. so right now this is -- this is vladimir putin's russia. coming up, my conversation with personal finance expert, the great suzie ormond from last week's jam-packed 35th summit in abu dhabi. her advice for knowing your value, is next on "morning joe." >> she's incredible. >> you'll love this. orning joe." >> she's incredible. >> you'll love this. (♪♪) with wet amd, i worry i'm not only losing my sight, but my time to enjoy it. but now, i can open up my world with vabysmo. (♪♪) vabysmo is the first fda-approved treatment for people with wet amd that improves vision and delivers a chance for up to 4 months between treatments, so i can do more of what i love. (♪♪) (♪♪)

vabysmo works differently, it's the only treatment designed to block 2 causes of wet amd. vabysmo is an eye injection. don't take it if you have an infection, active eye swelling, or are allergic to it. treatments like vabysmo can cause an eye infection or retinal detachment. vabysmo may cause a temporary increase in eye pressure after receiving the injection. there is an uncommon risk of heart attack or stroke associated with blood clots. severe swelling of blood vessels in the eye can occur. most common eye side effects were cataract and broken blood vessels. a chance for up to 4 months between treatments with vabysmo. ask your doctor.

♪i'm hearing different ways for me to screen for colon cancer.♪ ♪it's time to use my voice,♪ ♪i've got a choice, more than one answer.♪ ♪i sat down with my doc.♪ we had a talk. ♪knew just what to say.♪ ♪i asked for cologuard and did it my way.♪ cologuard is a one-of-a kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45 plus at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪i did it my way!♪ diabetes can serve up a lot of questions, like... what is your glucose, and can you have more carbs? before you decide... with the freestyle libre 3 system... know your glucose and where it's headed. no fingersticks needed. now the world's smallest and thinnest sensor... sends your glucose levels directly to your smartphone. manage your diabetes with more confidence, and lower your a1c. the number one cgm prescribed in the us. try it for free at freestylelibre.us. ♪♪

for moderate to severe crohn's disease skyrizi is the first il-23 inhibitor that can deliver remission and visibly improve damage of the intestinal lining. 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. control of crohn's means everything to me. ask your gastroenterologist about skyrizi. ♪ control is everything to me ♪ learn how abbvie could help you save.

last week, i interviewed financial powerhouse suzie ormond at the "forbes" know your value 3050 summit in abu dhabi. she captivated the audience of over 400 women from 46 different countries detailing her journey of making just $400 a month to becoming one of the world's most

influential personal finance experts. she also shared her best advice for women wanting to secure a brighter financial future. after our on-stage interview, we sat down to talk about the state of the u.s. economy and the financial worries that keep her up at night. also why she thinks i need to kick my daily starbucks habit. take a look. >> suze orman, thank you so much for being with us. let's get right to it. at the beginning of the year, were you concerned about the economy, a financial pandemic so to speak, and are you now? >> i'm always concerned about those, mika, that don't have money because inflation, even though they say it's kind of come down, people still don't have the money they need to afford the things that they need. not their wants, but just their needs. so the rents people are paying, the prices they're paying for real estate, their homes, that concerns me, but overall, and i

don't know how this has happened, it seems like we're doing all right. >> right. >> which means unemployment's all right. the markets are over-the-top great, and it's kind of settled in. so we'll just have to see the moves they make and how it goes. >> i don't know if i'm using the right terminology, but leading indicators look good. >> yes. >> but it is expensive at the grocery store, and it is hard to get a home. so it's kind of like -- >> you're talking about the overall economy. >> yeah. >> the gdp, all of that. >> right. >> versus people's individual economy. on an individual level, i think people are not doing okay. i do not. over 50% of the people in the united states don't have $400 for an emergency savings account, or if their car breaks down so they have to go and put it on a credit card and pay the

minimum payment due and the cycle of debt begins. >> mm-hmm. >> when you look at the overall which i'm not sure means a lot, it looks pretty good, but when you look at people's individual situation in my opinion, they're still struggling. >> so cost of housing and this individual struggle that you're noting, is that the economic financial concerns that keep you up at night or is there something looming that we need to worry about? >> i don't have anything looming. >> okay. >> you know, in terms of finance. >> mm-hmm. >> what keeps me up at night are the wars. what's happening in israel and with gaza and ukraine and russia. we are now a global economy. we're no longer where it's just america and it's this and it's that. everything is imported, exported, manufactured there, imported here, whatever it may be. so when you break down and all of a sudden, money starts to be focused on war and combatting one another, it affects

everything in the economy. >> do your worries actually pour into your advice? do you think people should be watching and listening to what's happening with these wars and, you know, thinking about it on more? because a lot of people are really busy, and that's, like, what washington worries about. is it something they should worry about too, and -- >> i think they should absolutely be knowledgeable about it, and i think if you are just not worried because you don't want to know about it, now you're asking for trouble on a personal level as well. >> biggest financial mistakes you see women in their 50s and 60s and beyond making? >> not really knowing where their money is, especially the 50s, the 60s, the 70s, you know, i have a podcast, "women and money." >> mm-hmm. >> everyone's smart enough to listen, and it's certainly geared towards women who are 60, 70, and 80 years of age. >> because we have arrived. >> we have arrived, but sometimes we arrive in a

different way than we thought. we thought we were in the perfect relationship, and now we're not in relationships. we thought our perfect partner was going to live forever, and then they died, and here we are, and we don't know what to do with what we have. we don't know what to do with that which we needed, but we don't have, and it's all because in our 50s, we didn't want to get involved with our money. we didn't want to take a realistic approach to, oh, of course, we're going to get older. of course, there's going to come a day that retire. we'll always be able to work for money, so i don't have to save it. i don't think to think about it. i'll still take care of my kids, but women still give more to others than we give to ourselves, and that is a really big mistake. >> that. you recently told "the wall street journal" that you believe dining out is a waste of money.

>> mm-hmm. >> and that you would drop dead before you bought yourself a cup of coffee. >> yes. >> i love my starbucks. >> why can't you make that at home and just bring it? >> i know. it tastes different, suze. >> here's what would happen when i would go on "the oprah show." >> okay. >> she asked a very similar. what are people wasting their money on? i said, starbucks. >> yes. yes. it's, like, $5 and $8 now. >> back then it was $3. it was $3.75. i said, oprah, do you know if you are 25 years of age and you bought a starbucks every single day and rather than doing that every day, you put $100 a month into a roth ira, a retirement account and you every single day until you were 65. you average 12% on your money over all those years. do you know at the age of 65,

you'd have $1 million. so all of you are paying $1 million down the drain. i've never bought a starbucks in my life. >> not even the "morning joe" blend? >> not even the "morning joe" blend. >> fine. it's my guilty pleasure. thank you so much. >> any time. >> check out her podcast "women and money." it's incredible. read more about her appearance at the 30/50 summit at knowyourvalue.com and forbes.com. this week "morning mika" is all about 30/50, featuring advice from powerful women across the globe who joined us in abu dhabi. huma abedin joins me this week available on peacock and

youtube. we're going to turn to breaking news. we've been waiting for word on the georgia election case and whether fani willis can continue. lisa rubin has breaking news. >> we have a decision from judge scott mcafee of the fulton county superior court. he finds there is not an actual conflict of interest that was proven by the defendants here, but he also finds that there is significant appearance of impropriety that infects the entire current structure of the prosecution team. therefore, he gives fani willis a choice. she can either choose to remove herself and her entire office from the prosecution of this case, or she can determine that nathan wade, the special assistant district attorney, who has been helming the leadership of this case, can himself be removed from the case, which would allow her and the remainder of the fulton county district attorney's office to go

forward. that's a victory for fani willis here. that having been said, despite the fact that she has been given an easy choice here, notwithstanding that, there is plenty here for the trump folks to exploit. in particular, he finds that there was a failure to be as completely honest with the tribunal as these folks should have been. the quote that is really sticking in my mind right now is when he talks about the testimony of nathan wade and fani willis. he basically says they did not put concerns raised by the defendants to rest, that while the defendants did not prove there was an actual conflict of interest, an odor of mendacity remains. that's a direct quote from page 16 of this opinion. he says he's not under obligation to ferret out every instance of potential dishonesty from the defendants in open court, but reasonable questions

about whether the district attorney and her hand-selected lead special assistant district attorney testified untruthfully about the timing of their relationship, further underpinning the finding of an appearance of impropriety and the need to make efforts to clear it. he's saying, look, disqualification isn't necessary when there is a less drastic remedial situation available. he gives fani willis the choice. you can either remove yourself and your office, or you can say boy bye, you're gone, nathan wade. notwithstanding the fact that fani willis gets to remain on this case, the trump team and codefendants succeeded in one other key respect. the mow m.o. of the trump world

delay, delay, delay. mike roman was the director of operations for the trump campaign. she made that motion on january 8th, 2024. we are now at march 15th. it took us more than two months to complete all of the briefing and evidentiary hearings and closing arguments and now the decision on this. in the meantime, nothing on this case moved forward. >> blayne alexander is outside the courthouse. how long does fani willis have to make this decision? >> reporter: one would expect she would make it very quickly. keep in mind i want to give you the larger context. for the past 2 1/2 months this has been all we've been talking about. we haven't been talking about the facts of the case against donald trump. this has eclipsed that totally. this can be taken as a win for the d.a.'s office, but the judge

is saying get rid of nathan wade and then we can move on. i do know in speaking with a source close to the judge that this order has been written since early last week. of course, everything is tied to politics. the judge is running for reelection. this was written before he drew any opposing opponents in this race. this other thing, though, because he has received threats, he waited until today to allow proper security to be in place for him and his family. he has two young children. that's another reason we're getting this on friday as a deadline, but certainly a big decision in this case. >> blayne alexander outside the courthouse. lisa rubin, page 23 summing up the problem here moving forward, after consideration of the record established on these

motions, the court finds the allegations and evidence legally insufficient to support a finding of an actual conflict of interest. however, the appearance of impropriety remains and must be handled as previously outlined before the prosecution can proceed. the defendants motions are therefore granted in part and denied in part. the trump campaign can feast on the words inside these decisions. this is a team defending man whose words were heard on "access hollywood" saying he can grab women by the genitals, a man who has been accused of rape multiple times and found liable in a civil court of sexual assault. the judge defining the actions, though, essentially tantamount to rape. there were reportedly hush money payments to many other women.

this team will be defending this man as they go after fani willis' improper behavior and they will run with that. >> another issue addressed in this opinion, you'll recall there were motions to disqualify fani willis on two different grounds. one was based on her relationship with nathan wade and the financial conflict of interest that might have arisen. the other was on the grounds of forensic misconduct. after the allegations aired, fani willis went to a church in the atlanta area and gave a speech saying the allegations were being raised against nathan wade because he was a black man of achievement. the other two assistants are anna croft and john floyd.

they are notably white. he said she is calling us guilty. she is calling us racist. that is inappropriate for a district attorney in a case that has not yet gone to trial. for her to try and infect the jury pool with allegations like this against us, saying there's something improper about our airing what are justifiable concerns about her potential conflict of interest. the judge takes some real umbrage at that as well. he says, look, there may come a point in time at which i have to gag folks and restrict what the district attorney can say here. that time is not now, but i am concerned about that as well. you can count on the defendants' lawyers to feast on that too. >> it does seem like a fairly obvious choice for fani willis as to how to proceed.

first and foremost, yet another delay. this case was going to be difficult to bring to court before the election considering how sprawling it is. there are so many different defendants involved. these delays seemingly all guarantee that would not happen before voters go to the polls. we know there are delays in other cases too. we're still waiting on the supreme court on presidential immunity. we've had delays that affect the january 6th case. we've had delayed about the classified document case. and now the case in new york city pushed back at least 30 days. for the first time, legal voices are wondering if even that case can happen before the election. so trump versus biden, this general election is not going to be decided in a courtroom. that is clear. it's going to be decided by the voters. this is yet another moment where someone in the legal system simply doing their job has to take added precautions for their own security because of the political violence that permeates our nation,

particularly since january 6th. >> great points, jonathan lemire. also, i will say it seems the civil suits are the ones having the most impact and coming around in time for people to actually see what's happening with donald trump. these delays are brutal for anybody who wants to see the former president see a consequence for what they believe he did. lisa rubin, stay with us. let's bring in katie phang, charles coleman and dave aronberg. katie phang, your take-aways? i know everyone is just reading the lengthy documents. what's your first take-away? >> having had the chance to review this order, a lot of us predicted there was no actual conflict of interest, because based on the law, the evidence that was submitted during the course of this hearing made it clear that didn't exist.

the question of what legal standard judge mcafee was going to apply was the biggest question that got answered. he kind of did a hybrid. he said no actual conflict, however, the appearance of a conflict is found here. it's a little bit of a solomon's choice. do you keep fani willis or nathan wade? i think it's a no-brainer. you get rid of nathan wade. remember nathan wade's role in there. he started before the special grand jury was even put together. he kind of spearheaded this investigation. he took this investigation, fed it into the special purpose grand jury, got those results. you have to think about the historical knowledge nathan wade has. all of that being said, if the solution here is to move forward with d.a. fani willis and the rest of her team, including the

other skilled and incredibly competent special prosecutors in anna croft and john floyd, who is the professor of rico in georgia, again, it's a no-brainer. that's what you do. >> your first gut reaction to this order? >> i think this is a victory for fani willis. she gets to stay on the case, and the case will continue, even though it's been delayed. i thought the judge would try to split hairs here, remove nathan wade and keep fani willis. how do you do that? if you don't believe nathan wade, how do you believe fani willis because she adopted wade's affidavit? the judge decided to try to walk that tightrope. the standard is indeed whether there is an actual conflict, not the perception of one. there was no actual conflict

here, but there is the appearance of impropriety. >> charles, at minimum, poor judgment shown by the district attorney. it does seem like the choice ahead of her is pretty clear. what is your first thought as to what we're reading? >> katie was the first of our colleagues to point out the actual standard of georgia law when it came to the removal of a prosecutor. i have been thinking about that since she pointed that out way at the beginning of all these hearings. there was really only one way the judge was going to go if he was going to follow the law. that is, if there is not evidence of an actual conflict, fani willis had to remain as the d.a. now, he did carve out some things with respect to the removal of nathan wade. i did anticipate there would be a rebuke of fani willis's behavior. the judge wrote, the court does

not condone the lapse in judgment. that is very strong language. it's something i expected you would hear from the judge in this case. all of that being said, i think this conversation about the notion of polluting the jury pool is really interesting when you start to think about now you're talking about what all of these cases, both civil and criminal, the jury pool, the entire electorate is contaminated and cross-contaminated wherever you look. it will be interesting not only in the legal realm but also in the political realm to see how all this shakes out given the fact at this point you would have to have been living under a rock not to have been exposed at some level to everything that's been going on. >> there are other ways for fani

willis to face the music because of this terrible lapse in judgment, whether it's ethics charges, whether it's the voters who decide not to vote her in. the question is, how does it impact the defendants? it looks like the judge pretty much got to what we were saying three hours ago, which was, remove wade, she can continue as prosecutor and then she faces whatever judgment he faces from the voters or ethics panels on her own. >> there's a lot for people to chew on the they are opponents of fani willis here, in particularly her testimony and that speech she gave to that atlanta church. it's brutal. he said, she didn't cross the line into forensic misconduct when she gave that speech, but it's still legally improper. that phrase "legally improper"

is one i'm sure we'll hear again and again from the defense side and also the one on page 16, that an odor of mendacity remains. judge mcafee took us through his thinking about the evidence. he tells us that terrance bradley -- and this should be no surprise to anybody who watched the hearing -- essentially was not a credible witness, that he had too brittle a foundation for anybody to really rest the case on him. he also talked about the fact that fani willis's former friend, an employee of the district attorney's office who claimed that the relationship began in 2019 or 2020, that her testimony similarly lacked context and detail that allowed him to put very much faith in what she had to say. but he did consider, he says, the proffered cell phone testimony. that's essentially this

affidavit from an expert who was trying to interpret the cell phone data that trump tried to put in at the last minute. he said what he characterizes as an unethical act by fani willis to -- but at the end of the day, it was the defendant's burden to establish a conflict of interest. even though that conflict of interest need not be one, according to judge mcafee, that prejudices the defendant, he says they just fell short of establishing conclusively that there was an actual conflict of interest that justified her disqualification. nonetheless, he was so troubled by the other stuff that went on, including this odor of mendacity, that in the end he gives this choice to fani willis. i think we'll see people on the

trump side and the defense side writing letters to the state bar asking them to further investigate fani willis, nathan wade and terrance bradley and asking them to take disciplinary action against one or all of them with respect to what they said to the judge. >> that certainly seems to be in line with what would happen if this happened in your jurisdiction or this happened in any jurisdiction, the lack of judgment of fani willis in this matter, extraordinary, and the decision she made and the testimony. the odor of mendacity, that stings. and the judge is right, it remains. i'm curious, as an active prosecutor, what are your thoughts? >> it's interesting, because

this was a self-inflicted wound here. she could have come clean and just removed nathan wade from the beginning, and none of this would have happened, because there's not an actual conflict. what you have is an issue where you have a relationship between two prosecutors, not between a witness and the judge or defense lawyers. in the end, that was the standard. the judge said he didn't believe terrance bradley all together, didn't believe nathan wade, and thus, he didn't believe fani willis all together. but because the standard is actual conflict, he came up with a creative choice. the creative choice was to split hairs here, remove one, not the other. this is a victory for fani

willis. they're not going to crow about what the judge said about fani willis. they're going to crow and be angry that she wasn't removed and this is an example of a corrupted system. that's what they thrive on. but in the end, this case will continue, although the trial will happen after the election. >> again, though, the bottom line is the case needs to continue. fani willis has made some terrible mistakes. again that's for the state bar to sort through. that's for ethics panels to sort through. all of those things can be true at the same time. you have charges against donald trump that are independent of her breech. if she had hidden evidence regarding the alleged crimes, if she had done something that touched on the actual

prosecution of the case, that would be one thing. really she hired a guy that she was involved with in a personal relationship who was ill-quipped to handle a rico case. it actually cuts the other direction. >> i think you're right, joe. i think in this instance it's important to understand that ultimately, big picture-wise, this is a side show, because it does not have anything to do with the guilty of innocence of donald trump and his codefendants with respect to the election interference case and the charges they are facing on that indictment in fulton county. i understand that people are looking at this, and some people may say it's a win for trump in the court of public opinion from the standpoint that it allows for further delay. but i also think you have to keep your eye on the ball, so to speak. in this case, that is really about the prosecution of this indictment and these

codefendants. that is going to happen. we're going to see nathan wade removed. we're going to see fani willis ultimately move forward. i do believe we're ultimately going to see a conviction here. when that occurs, i do not know. but you're absolutely right this has become a side show. it's a self-inflicted wound by fani willis. it did not have to come to here, but now that this decision is out, expect that fani willis is going to try to press the gas as expeditiously as possible and move forward with this prosecution. >> let's go back to the courthouse. blayne alexander standing by there. anything new to report? a lot of questions about the timeline moving forward. >> reporter: those are exactly the questions that i'm asking. i reached out to the d.a.'s office to see if they have any community on this. we haven't heard back yet. i reached out to the lead

attorney for donald trump. i'm told a comment is forthcoming from the trump camp here in georgia. and ashley merchant, the one who filed that motion back on january 8th, asking for the d.a. to be removed and kind of uncovering this relationship. we're waiting to see if she has any comment on this ruling as well. we've been talking about nathan wade being removed from the case. certainly that would be the course of action to take. but i just want to underscore kind of the crucial role he has played in this case so far. remember, he was the one who was initially brought onto spearhead and lead the special purpose grand jury process. that means that he was intimately involved in that eight months of testimony that the special grand jurors heard from all of the officials here in georgia, all of the people in the trump circle. he was there. he was helping lead the questioning. this is something, you could

argue, has kind of the bulk of the knowledge of this case, or at least his longevity certainly stands out. the fact that he is going to be removed is certainly notable. >> one thing that's worth underscoring here, why it's so important if this case is going to continue, whether nathan wade is involved or not, is that this is a state case. even if donald trump were to win the presidency, he could not make it go away. it's a state case. he could not tell his attorney general to get rid of it. considering this and all the questions about the d.a. and some of the charges tossed out by the judge a few days ago, there's a sense of messiness that comes with this case. is this going to be helpful to trump if he were to be convicted? would this be helpful for a potential future appeal? >> that's a great question. any type of decision that's made along the way that is adverse to any side becomes an issue for purposes of appeal.

the bigger question is, how messy is it? does it directly impact the quality of the prosecution? we don't have a trial date yet. fani willis has been seeking a quick trial date. the fact that you don't have a trial date, means you're not on the eve of trial. you do have a case that is now intact for the exception of six counts that got dismissed, six counts for which re-indictment can be sought for the grand jury, the timing of that being an open-ended question. the question that got answered that the defense is not going to be relied upon, no matter how much hay they want to make about the fact that their motion got granted in part is the following. the court found that the financial gain flowing from

willis's relationship with wade was not a motivating factor on the part of the d.a. to indict and prosecute this case. the defense wanted to suggest that the whole reason this case came to fruition is because wade and willis had this grand scheme to make money off the backs of defendant trump and others. the judge has found conclusively there's no evidence of that. the judge has also found that d.a. fani willis has tried to push this case to resolution. if she wanted to make money with wade, she would have continued to delay this. there's a lot of key decisions reached in this decision that the defense is not going to be able to refute. at the end of the day, you kind of want to take a breath and focus on what charles talked about, which is, what happened here. i know the judge said d.a. fani willis and her appearance of how she was on the witness stand was reproachable, at the end of the day fani willis said i'm not on trial here. those people tried to steal this

election. they're on trial. >> yeah. but she kind of put herself on trial. i suspect she will have to answer to the bar at some point for some of the testimony, if in fact, it's found to be misleading. there's talk of the state legislature possibly censuring her. there's talk about the governor getting involved. what other ramifications might she face because of this? >> reporter: the legal aspect of this has kind of been tied up, but this saga we've been watching play out for the past 2 1/2 months is bleeding into other aspects. one, as you mentioned, the republican-led georgia state senate, they are currently

investigating fani willis in a committee. in fact, they have a committee that was mounted and created specifically to look into these allegations because they corresponded with the start of session. the chairman of that committee tells me he has every intention of calling fani willis to testify. if she doesn't do it willingly, he may issue a subpoena for her to come and testify before lawmakers. just this week governor brian kemp signed into law a bill that state lawmakers have oversight over state prosecutors here in georgia. a number of democrats fear that would be used as another tool to go after fani willis. for the past 2 1/2 months this is all that has been talked about. the timeline is now completely off. certainly those concerns in combination with what is happening at the statehouse will

not be going away. >> can the trump side appeal this? i'm envisioning so many delays, although this one survives an election were he to win. he can't pardon himself in this one. when do you think this trial has a chance of starting? can there be an appeal by the trump side? >> that's an interesting question. i think there could be an appeal, but whether it gets to appeal before there is a trial or afterwards is a question. traditionally speaking, motions like this are not eligible for what lawyers call an interlocutory appeal. that's an appeal that takes place in the middle of a trial. i'm not familiar with what georgia law says if it can be appealed. if it can be, steve say dough will make that immediate step. judge mcafee doesn't say

anything about that in his opinion. in contrast, when he dismissed six of those charges, he dropped a footnote saying that the d.a. was not without remedies. not only could they choose to reindict on this count by more sufficiently pleading them, but they also have the option to appeal that ruling. here you have no guidance from him whatsoever about an appeal. my guess is that when you look at yesterday's decision where he dismissed those six counts -- and it's a whole lot less consequential than some folks were making it out to be -- he did say there's an abundance of allegations about wrongful conduct. i have to think that was on his mind as well, that where there are allegations as robust and detailed as the ones in this case, is justice served by requiring this case to be reassigned to the prosecuting counsel of georgia, to then find another district attorney among

the 50 in georgia state to continue with this prosecution? we all know judge robert mcbernie didn't disqualify fani willis from continuing to investigate burt jones, the now lieutenant governor, who played a role in the fake elector scheme. in doing that, jones hasn't been investigated since. 18 months have passed and no other prosecutor has been appointed to take up the issue of investigating burt jones. if judge mcafee had disqualiied fani willis and not given her another option, i know he knew it would be killing the case for all time, irrespective of what might happen in the georgia legislative with respect to ethical investigations of the lawyers involved here, just putting it in the hands of prosecuting counsel of georgia would kill this case. it's not because those folk

folks have ill motive, it's because it's difficult to find a district attorney in eorgia that is sufficiently well staffed. the person they assign it to has to be willing to take the case with the staff they have. it's not clear the case went anywhere. that had to way on judge mcafee's mind as well. and he took the two competing legal standards being argued by both sides and meshed them into one that may find no precedent in georgia case law other than his own decision today. >> let's get some final thoughts today either about the future of this case or any of the other constellation of legal charges facing donald trump right now. >> i actually do expect that we will see challenges in front of the georgia state bar sooner than later from donald trump's defense attorneys to try and talk about an attac on the

ethics of fani willis. under georgia statute, that would be the place to pursue these conversations. the other thing is that fulton county is the case that donald trump needs to be most concerned about from a criminal conviction standpoint, because it's the case he can do the least about regardless of the outcome in november. i still believe that remains the case. all in all, the landscape remains the same. there is a delay. nathan wade will likely be removed. this is still a very serious matter that donald trump has to contend with. i do believe it is the most likely that he will ultimately be convicted on of all the cases. the cases that jack smith is bringing are very strong. should he be victorious in november, those are things he can and will likely do something about.

>> dave aronberg, what would be your professional counsel to d.a. willis? how can she push this case forward with all of this stuff swirling ar >> i think she has to realize that this case was never going to be heard before the election. there were too many defendants and all these rico counts. each rico case takes months. just keep moving forward, planning it will happen after the election. if trump is not president, it is game on. if trump is president, it becomes a constitutional crisis. he's going to surround himself with secret service and say come at me. then who knows what will happen? all in all, this is a win for fani willis. she needs to move on from the criticisms of her and her behavior. that's in the past. just keep looking forward.

>> katie phang, what will you looking for in the days to come? >> the immediate removal of nathan wade. the common denominator is the fact that scott mcafee will remain the judge on this case. i think there has to be a recalibration by d.a. willis when it comes to how we move forward. he's been making decisions since day one in this. with nathan wade gone, the rest of the team remains intact. she has to bring these issues again in front of the judge. there's a lot left to be done in terms of discovery and motions. i'd look how quickly the state bar receives referrals. they could have received them by now. it's kept considerable if the referral has been done, but the person that's the subject of the referral is notified

confidentially. it may be bucketing the defendants to try to get a trial date sooner than later before november of 2024. >> wow. great analysis. katie phang, lisa rubin, charles coleman and dave aronberg, thank you all so much for helping us through this. we continue to follow the breaking legal news out of georgia surrounding district attorney fani willis and the racketeering case against donald trump. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be right back.

-dad, what's with your toenail? -oh, that...? i'm not sure... -it's a nail fungus infection. -...that's gross! -it's nothing, really... -it's contagious. you can even spread it to other people. -mom, come here! -don't worry about it. it'll go away on its own! -no, it won't go away on its own. it's an infection. you need a prescription. nail fungus is a contagious infection. at the first signs, show it to your doctor... ... and ask if jublia is right for you. jublia is a prescription medicine used to treat toenail fungus. its most common side effects include ingrown toenail, application site redness... ... itching, swelling, burning or stinging, blisters and pain. jublia is recognized by the apma. most commercially insured patients may pay as little as $0 copay. go to jubliarx.com now to get started. nice to meet ya. my name is david. i've been a pharmacist for 44 years. when i have customers come in and ask for something for memory,

i recommend prevagen. number one, because it's effective. does not require a prescription. and i've been taking it quite a while myself and i know it works. and i love it when the customers come back in and tell me, "david, that really works so good for me." makes my day. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. betmgm is for everyone that loves sports betting. makes my day. everyone, but tom brady. wait what?! you've won too much, tommy. let others play. so i'm in if i'm not tom brady?

you're in. now dog me. what if i used to babysit tom brady and he was a little troublemaker? no one likes a snitch, but you're in. what if i'm the tom brady of spreadsheets? you're in. what if i'm tim birdie, seven-time pool champion? the dress-up's not helping tom. it's still a no. hey tom! hi, wayne gretzky. i thought it would be bigger. download betmgm. except you, tom.

i need someone from some other jurisdiction in some other state to tell me how to do a job i've been doing almost 30 years. [ applause ] why don't they look at themselves and just be honest? >> that's fani willis back in january, a speech that she made right before mlk day. in that speech, the judge in his order criticized, among other things, in terms of how she conducted herself and this relationship, questions it raised. in the end in this order, the judge concludes he will be keeping her on the georgia election case. with us is dannycevallos and andrew weissman. there is a trump statement on the breaking news.

>> danny, what are your thoughts on the judge's decision? seriously, i don't want to read fascist propaganda. >> all right. >> danny, fani willis can say whatever she wants to say in churches. she can say whatever she wants to say in press conferences. fani willis stepped over one line after another after another. it looks like the judge called her out on it, but said she can still continue in this case. >> both sides win and both sides lose at the same time in the sense that the defense motion is granted, but only technically. the d.a.'s office will stay on the case. they will offer up nathan wade as a sacrifice to the gods of justice. the d.a.'s office will stay. nathan wade will almost certainly be out. that's the choice. and it's really not a choice that was handed to the d.a.'s office. in that sense, the defense motion was granted. it will have a procedural impact

on the team itself, because they have lost a major prosecutor. but overall, it's barely a win for the defense, but it's also barely a win for the d.a.'s office. while the judge allows them to stay on the case, he hardly considered this a glowing endorsement of the d.a.'s conduct. he used such words as the odor of mendacity or the appearance of impropriety, lots of language that was very harsh. he concluded that she was willing to conceal the relationship. that, to me, is stopping just short of saying she committed perjury. in fact, he called her testimony concerning at times. both sides win and both sides lose. in a sense, judge mcafee may have signalled this was the direction he was going to go, because during the hearing he pointed out that even though he could consider the text messages from ashley merchant, the defense attorney, to terrance

bradley he can say what's in this is the evidence, not what terrance bradley doesn't remember or is speculating about. ultimately he concluded, well, even though terrance bradley is saying he absolutely knows it, he's not saying the source of that information. therefore, even the text messages are a zero. as i thought he might do, he concluded that terrance bradley's testimony was a zero, because he couldn't really remember anything, and the text messages did not meet the defense's burden. they too were a zero. interestingly enough, he devoted no more than a sentence to the witness, finding her testimony inconclusive. as i said, everybody wins and everybody kind of loses too. >> andrew, here we have the most

important case brought in the history of the state of georgia, i would guess maybe since after the civil war, let's just say the most important case in georgia history. i think that's pretty safe to say. yet, the lack of judgment shown here is absolutely stunning. i'm curious what your thought is. the odor of mendacity remains, do you agree with that? and if that is the case, how does she move forward effectively as the prosecutor of this case? >> i think the last question is key, what to do now. i think there's no question that there's no prejudice to the defendants. the judge goes out of his way to say this has nothing to do with it. that's what makes this so absolutely infuriating, because

the judge, i think, is clearly saying i'm not buying for one minute or one new york minute the testimony that was given. >> andrew, could i ask you to clarify for anybody that's watching this? so we're saying, i think correctly, that this lack of judgment, these terrible mistakes made by the d.a. do not impact the defendants. >> right. >> give some examples of what are some of the things that would have required her disqualification. >> sure. for instance, if she were having a relationship with a witness in the case, if she were having a relationship with the defense counsel on a case, those were things that would actually deal with the evidence. the judge goes out of his way to say there's nothing about even if there were some financial gain to her, the idea that she's

prolonging this case -- and the judge goes out of his way to say the state has been trying to get to trial. he goes out of his way to say the defendants are not prejudiced one iota about this. the key is how to go forward. clearly wade is off. i think this is such a huge body blow, almost a fatal blow to fani willis. i think the way forward is she has to voluntarily recuse herself. i don't know if she has it in her, but i think she has to say i'm going to appoint a chief assistant to oversee this case. she clearly has no credibility with this judge. the judge invites these issues to be taken up by all sorts of georgia regulators, including the georgia assembly, the state ethics commission. i mean, he lists that. if your first interest is the

sanctity of this case, which is the most important case in georgia and of the four trump cases this may be the most important, because it's one that will last regardless of whether donald trump wins the presidency or not. if your first interest is this case, i think she needs to remove herself voluntarily and say someone else is going to oversee this case in georgia. so whatever happens to her in terms of ethics, it doesn't taint this case. >> danny, again, we're talking about things she could have done that would have prejudiced the defendants in a way that these actions did not. for instance, withholding evidence in the discovery process, lying to defense counsel about what she had or what she didn't have. of course, none of that was done, so the judge allows her to move forward. i'm curious, what's your answer

to that question how does she move forward when the judge says the odor of mendacity remains? >> i've said this is a hobson's choice. it's no choice at all. the choice is either disqualify the entire d.a.'s office or nathan wade goes. there's no question that's what is going to happen. i agree with andrew that fani willis should consider recusing herself as well as the case moves forward to allow it to do so cleanly. i can't help but wonder if going back, what if the state had simply come forward when this motion was first filed and just said, you got us. the law is on our side, there is no actual conflict. andrew weissman just gave you examples of what constitute an actual conflict. those cases andrew cited are literally in this opinion. so there was no actual conflict and no effect on the rights or

due process. >> lawyers do this all the time, by the way. if this had happened, she could have easily said, listen, we're not going to argue that, but even if for argument's sak you're right, that wouldn't disqualify us from the case. we're going to go ahead and give you that and move forward. she could have very easily done this. that would have been resolved a long time ago, wouldn't it? >> that's exactly what i've been saying. most of the problems for the d.a. and nathan wade and terrance bradley in the coming months and years will have come not before the motion was filed, but because of what they did after the motion was filed. i can't help but wonder if in five years there's going to be a tell-all book by the prosecutors in the fulton county d.a.'s office who must be hopping angry. there may be a situation where, hey, we need you to get off the

raffensperger call and you're going to be looking at the napa valley case to show that d.a. fani willis did or didn't pay cash to nathan wade. imagine you're in the case of your life, a career-making case and now you're put on this task. they must be infuriated. we don't know that now, but i can't imagine you're in the case of your career and your boss is doing this. this doesn't happen in federal prosecutions. this is only state court. >> andrew, it's so fascinating what danny just said. it's not what happened before, the conduct before, that's going to ensnarl them down the road if they get further ensnarled by ethics claims and other things. it's what happened after the investigation into this began.

the georgia bar and people on both sides of the aisle are going to be shaking their head as they go through all the testimony line by line. i couldn't agree with danny more, it's what they did once the investigation started and not before that's going to cause them problems in the future. >> what prosecutor does not know it's the coverup, not the underlying conduct that's going to get you in trouble? this is exactly what happened with donald trump in the mar-a-lago classified documents case. if he had simply said, i'm returning those, as mike pence did and joe biden did, there wouldn't have been a case there. it was the coverup and the obstruction over and over again in that case that's the problem. here, if they had simply said, absolutely, we had a relationship, we tried to split money, but maybe we weren't

perfect, none of that would have been an issue. none of that excuses you cannot take the stand and give anything less than candid testimony. the fact that they did not understand that the coverup was going to be the problem, that is why the judge here had such harsh words for what happened. he was not troubled by what actually happened in terms of their relationship. that is not what he's focusing on. he is focusing on the conduct in terms of what happened at the hearing. you know, as rightly he should be, and the reason it is so infuriating is because it damages this case. that's why i really think it's not just wade who obviously is going to be removed, but i think fani willis, for this case to be protected, really needs to remove herself voluntarily so this doesn't linger and this case can go forward in the strongest possible way. the judge has found there is no

prejudice to the defendants here. >> andrew weissman, thank you very much for your analysis. we'll be watching your special coverage along with melissa murray of the trump indictments tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern right here on msnbc. dannycevallos, thank you as well. anand, mika and i were having conversations in between breaks, and she disagrees with me. >> i do. >> but alex reminds me that my argument sort of goes parallel with what you're saying anyway. my argument is this, trump always gets away with it. anybody else that did what he

did on january 6th would be in jail by now, anybody else. we can go case by case by case. we can talk about nuclear secrets, stealing the nuclear secrets, telling your i.t. guy destroy the nuclear secrets, when he wouldn't do it, telling your maintenance guy flood the i.t. room. and all of this and yet i think he's going to get away with it, because the law does not apply to donald trump. i don't know why. it doesn't. a lot of times, in this case, there's self-inflicted wounds, but somehow he always gets away with it, which leads to your point. folks, we have to beat him at the ballot box. if we're going to destroy the radicalism of trumpism, we've got to do it at the ballot box. don't expect a magical judgment to come from a courtroom. >> i think that's right.

this has now happened enough times in enough different cases in different jurisdictions that it's not a coincidence or circumstantial. everyone else is playing white shoe law and this guy is playing mafia law, and it works. i don't want to disagree with the lawyers who came before. i'm sure they're right about the law. it is infuriating that people have personal foibles that mess up such an important case. but two doses of perspective here for a second. this is a case about racketeering, and not racketeering to make some money behind a laundromat. this is a case about racketeering to end american democracy. yes, there are people in that d.a.'s office who, as flawed human beings, got into a loving relationship and took some trips. by the way, one thing i take about this is more americans

should keep the flame alive the way they did, restaurants, nice trips, cruises. but these are people who are normal human beings who made mistakes who are up against someone who tried to end american democracy, which is the substance of the case. doesn't mean what they did is right, but let's just remember what this is about. >> as you read through this, the judge isn't worried about that personal relationship. the judge is worried about what they did after there was an investigation into the personal relationship. >> i agree. >> i would argue if this is a racketeering case to end democracy, which i believe it is, then you've got to take extra care, right? >> i agree with that. i just want to put it in perspective. this is a mistake around a loving, consensual relationship in a case against the guy who

has been found liable for rape and who has been credibly accused in many circumstances of non-consensual relations with women. >> also a guy, as you said, who is trying to end american democracy. >> correct. >> let's just say trying to end american democracy, period. >> yes. >> trying to steal an election. to be clear, that is what they did. they tried to steal an election. there is a case in georgia because they tried to steal an election. and then to try to get rid of that case, they tried to distract us with salacious gossip that we all watched, because it's very compelling daytime television. the judge then says, it does not rise to the level of disqualification. they thought that fani willis and this case was going to be an easy target. they thought they could take her out. they thought that the system was not going to side with her.

they thought because he has the audacity to seek accountability, she has to be silenced. fani willis is still here. the georgia election meddling case is still ongoing. at this point, it is the only case where anyone has pled out guilty. >> it also is the only case, if you talk to legal experts away from the tv set, if you talk to them off camera and you say, okay, break these four cases down, what is the most likely to get people that were engaged in this conspiracy justice finally? the people on january 6th that beat the hell out of cops, started a riot to still american democracy, they're in jail. what's the most likely to get trump and the people around him moving in that direction? they also say it's this georgia case. >> and there's a reason for that, which is that, you know,

these issues are very complex, look at the 90-some indictments, these are complicated cases with lots of facts, lots of legal questions. when you have, as you do in the georgia case, a phone call that everyone can hear, and many, many, many people have heard, it reminds people of things they watched on television. it's accessible. in a way, it's a case, as simone was rightly saying, about stealing an election that's very legible to people, and it was a crime conducted in the light of day and now recordable for everybody to hear. that's been very, very helpful. it's a case that at one level is very simply factual about what events that happened, but is about the highest level of crime you can commit in this country, which is to terminate the ongoing functioning of the republic. >> yeah. you know, simone, it's so funny you talked about it, it makes compelling daytime tv. i don't like compelling daytime tv because i actually didn't want to ask you guys questions

about this case. i wanted to ask you about kamala harris, only because i -- you know, the legal people handled it. i think if you want to ask me what's compelling right now, and trump extremists don't want to admit it, people on other networks don't want to admit it, i think what's compelling, and we're going to -- we were going to play second half of a focus group by world news focus group that had democrats talking about how kamala harris has so changed in their minds, and they're becoming more competent in her leadership abilities, more confident in the things she's doing. especially the women in these focus groups were talking about what she's doing defending women's health care. it's pretty remarkable what she did yesterday, isn't it? >> it's extremely remarkable. i mean, to be clear, prior to yesterday no vice president, no president had ever set foot in a facility that provides abortion

care. she went to a planned parenthood facility in st. paul, minnesota, i think it's important to underscore that planned parenthood facilities, they do more than administer abortions. there are people that go to planned parenthood for their primary care and to have the vice president of the united states of america in that facility yesterday visiting with patients, her team has reported, has said to our colleagues at nbc news the vice president wanted to be clear she didn't want to disrupt any operations but she wanted to go there herself and see and hear is and shine a spotlight on women and families in this country. and one of the things that she said, she spoke, i believe, for about 20 minutes at that facility, is she talked about the fear that women and young girls have across this country because politicians want to tell them what they can do with their bodies. politicians across this country feel like they know better than

women do. and, you know, there are a few things that the -- few things more important from the white house perspective that the white house can do than use their bully pulpit, and to -- and her presence is extremely important, and frankly has been key to elevating this issue, in the midterm elections there was a red wave, remember, got my red jacket on today. the red wave did not materialize, large part, due to the concerns that folks had about the overturning of the dobbs decision, the dobbs decision of overturning roe versus wade. the elevation of that issue was, in fact, the vice president. i'm not surprised that the folks in that focus group are seeing that because she has been just a dedicated champion. >> this is another week where donald trump has been consumed with courtrooms while president biden and vice president harris have been on the campaign trail talking about issues for real americans. anand, you argued in a piece that rural america is caught

between quote with love with no help, and help with no love. explain this dynamic, if you will, and why you say changing it is vital to beating back would be authoritarians? >> i think one of the things we've tried to do this year is step back and look at the bigger forces behind this election we're having, why are we having this crisis on the border, why do we have fascism as a popular offering in america right now, maybe not a majority, but what are the deeper forces? i think a lot of evidence points to people not coping well with change, not change from last year to this year, but the changes of an era, of technological change, of trade with china that took a lot of jobs away, of changes in gender norms that have left a lot of men not sure of their new identity in a changing country, racial change has left a lot of white americans unsteady in their sense of will i be okay in an equal future? the dynamic that has resulted is

the right has stepped in to that sense of dislocation, a lot of backgrounds have, not just white people, not just men, and a piece we called love with no help. i see you, abate your outrage, sorry for you. i'm not going to help you at all. i'm going today policy for billionaires, that's trump, that's maga. the left has made an equal and opposite approach, which is all help, and less love, and what i mean by that is, policies to help, real, concerted policies to help, policy-centric approach. president biden proposed many things, has passed many things, but less of a kind of emotional sense of understanding of why people are so scared of the future. this is an era of fear. you see it on the border crisis, you see it on the debates about our cities, even when statistics don't bear the fears out this is an age of extraordinary fear and i think it's very, very central for the pro-democracy movement to figure out how to speak to fear, even more compellingly than a far right.

>> all right, anand, thank you very much as always, simone, thank you as well. we'll be watching the weekend, saturday and sunday mornings, beginning at 8:00 a.m. eastern, right here on msnbc. i love it. thanks for being on, everyone. we will see you all first thing monday morning, 6:00 a.m. >> thank you for your patience. >> i'm going to pack my patience. ana cabrera picks up the coverage after a quick, final break. i suffer with psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis. i was on a journey for a really long time to find some relief. cosentyx works for me. cosentyx helps real people get real relief from the symptoms of psoriatic arthritis or psoriasis. serious allergic reactions, severe skin reactions that look like eczema, and an increased risk of infections,

some fatal, have occurred. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine or plan to or if ibd symptoms develop or worsen. i move so much better because of cosentyx. ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx.

(♪♪) some people just know that the best rate for you is a rate based on you. not paul. you don't want to ride with paul. get a rate based on you with drivewise in the allstate app. when you put in the effort, but it starts to frizz... you skipped a step. tresemmé silk serum. use before styling for three days of weightlessly smooth hair that frizz can't beat. new tresemmé keratin smooth collection. hello on this friday, i'm ana cabrera, reporting from new york, right to the breaking news out of georgia, nbc news first to report judge scott mcafee has