♪♪ good to be with you. i'm katy tur. if you woke up this morning, opened your news feed and thought, what is happening, you are not alone. we have got some breaking news right now. nbc news is just projecting that republicans will control the house. along with the senate as we knew, which as of this afternoon has a new majority leader north dakota's john thune and the presidency with donald trump. does this trifecta mean it donald trump's administration picks more easily sail through congress, the senate specifically. he has been fleshing out his desire team, choosing surprising folks to run some very serious agencies. most notably a fox news host to be defense secretary. you heard that right.

who is pete hegseth? how did donald trump come to like him so much? and can he even get confirmed to lead the military, which has a functionally bottomless budget, and nearly 3 million military and civilian employees. well, if you were a republican senator watching fox news last night, the answer to that last question was, yes, or else. >> i think he will get easily confirmed. i dare any republican senator vote against him. that is not in their best interest. and we need to get him in place as soon as possible. >> so, is that what donald trump himself conveyed to republican lawmakers today as he made his so-called triumphant return to washington? that's how his team is describing it. if so, hegseth joins a telling set of foreign policy picks. john ratcliffe as cia director, mike waltz as national security advisor, senator marco rubio as secretary of state.

former governor mike huckabee as ambassador to israel, and trump golf buddy and real estate mogul steve witkoff as middle east envoy. men who all share donald trump's view of america's role in the world, at least they do now. what exactly is that view? what will it mean for conflicts in ukraine and israel? aggression from iran and its proxies? saber-rattling from north korea? and our own hostility towards china and the territorial desires of xi jinping? the world in 2025 is not the same as the world in 2017. not just that. the world now knows who donald trump is. as a daniel dresser in writes, both great powers and smaller states know by now that the best way to deal with trump is to shower him with pomp and circumstance, abstain from fact-checking him in public, make token concessions, and remain secure that by and large

their core interests will be preserved. is that true? and if so, what should we expect here at home? joining us now nbc news correspondent vaughn hillyard, nbc news national security correspondent courtney kube, and msnbc political contributor jake sherman. vaughn, start us off. who is pete hegseth? >> pete hegseth is somebody who every weekend is the co-host of "fox & friends." he is somebody who has former hi worked as part of a veterans advocacy organization and before that a decorated veteran who served tours in iraq and afghanistan as a marriage ter in the army national guard. he held a leadership role at the department of defense. over the last year, now sort of a right wing provocateur, suggesting that the military needs to get rid of its, quote, wokification and that should many getting rid of generals and admirals who embody that.

that is how pete hegseth is risen to prom minutes in the right wing ecosystem and to the doorsteps of mar-a-lago and now potentially the pentagon. >> courtney, he is a veteran, yes, but not the typical person incoming presidents choose as their secretary of defense. he is not a four-star general. how is the pentagon reacting to this? >> the same credentials and basic qualifications we have seen in most senate -- secretaries of defense in recent years. we have seen a departure from what the secretaries were. we didn't see for years many generals, retired generals or admirals who took that job. secretary of defense jim mattis under trump's first term in office, he came back in, secretary austin, the current secretary of defense under pro bowl, retired generals. that wasn't the norm. what was the norm here were people who had experience running large institutions or

bureaucracy or any leadership experience and why that's so critical for this building is we're talking about 1.3 million active duty service members, 1.5 roughly million national guard and reserve and d.o.d. civilians and an 800 billion plus dollar budget. this is an enormous bureaucracy here. he will be coming in, if confirmed, at a time of a tremendous amount of difficult issues that he will be facing. number one, as you mentioned, ukraine. the war in ukraine with russia. it is virtually a stalemate at this point. but what will happen when president trump comes in and what will his advice and counsel be to president trump about that war? we also have the ongoing conflict with israel and lebanon and israel and gaza, and then of course there are the continuing attacks by proxy groups against the u.s. and u.s. allies in iraq, in syria, in the region by the houthis in yemen. we learned moments ago that the u.s. conducted a series of

strikes against the houthis in yem-over the weekend three days, essentially, of extensive and continued strikes. there is a lot going on with the u.s. military right now. and the reality is pete hegseth doesn't have the kind of leadership experience that we normally see out of a secretary of defense. what he does have, he a close ally of president trump and he has already talked about the importance of an america first agenda. >> there are a lot of career officials, career service members in the pentagon. what are they expecting as donald trump comes into office and potentially does get pete hegseth to lead the agency? >> so, officials are concerned about some of the comments that he made. one is centered around women in combat. he spoke openly around the fact that he doesn't think they should serve in combat, women are simply not qualified or should not be in these dangerous roles. the reality, katy, just not opinion here, the fact is combat

roles were open up to women in 2016 by secretary defense ash carter and president obama and since then women have continued to excel in more and more of these combat roles. and we are talking about some of the most elite roles in the u.s. military. now they have women filling many of them and excelling in them. i don't know how that could change. but there is concern that not only that a secretary of defense pete hegseth could try to restrict women's roles in combat, but if he is heading up the pentagon, the chief of the pentagon, what does that say to women in uniform? do they see themselves as less value? does it hurt recruiting of women who may want to come into the military when recruiting has been an issue for several years? these are things we are hearing about, there seems to be concern about. the next, he openly spoke about the need to fire generals and admirals who he says are woke.

you know, i hesitate to use that term. what he seems to mean when he has spoken about it, people who have prioritized or emphasized dei initiatives, diversity initiatives within the military. he has spoken openly about the need to get rid of those leaders in the pentagon and, frankly, in the military throughout the world. >> jake, can a person like this who said these things get confirmed who has this experience or lack of experience heading up a giant bureaucracy like the defense department? >> 53 seats is what senate republicans have as they med into the next congress. 53 seats is on most issues a pretty healthy not an extraordinarily healthy, but pretty healthy margin. i mean, you could get marco rubio will have no problem getting confirmed. kristi noem will be able to get confirmed. these are people -- donald trump

has picked people that will have no problem getting confirmed. but remember, 53 is not that much of a tough nomination because you have two eternal free agents, susan collins and lisa murkowski, important swings votes for donald trump not only this issue, this nomination, but any nomination. joni ernst, an iowa republican who is a veteran herself who has been outspoken on women serving in some of these roles that were opened up to women in 2016. will she vote to confirm pete hegseth who has spoken out against this. and then other people like todd young, a veteran himself as well, republican of indiana. you have jim banks, a newly elected senate republican, also a veteran. so there is a bunch of people who i will be watching out for the next couple of days and weeks to see how they fall on

this nomination. but roger whitaker, the chair of the armed services committee and republican majority said he is for hegseth. mike johnson said yesterday, i asked him about this, and he said pete hegseth is reform minded and is perfectly suited, something like that, for the role. i don't know how he knows about pete hegseth's view on reforms to the pentagon, but, alas, that's what mike johnson said. remember, one other issue, katy. senate republicans have said they are going to be confirming a lot of these roles early on in january, perhaps before donald trump takes office. so a lot of the background checks, the legwork that traditionally done on nominations will be underway quite soon. but, you know, the republicans say, elections have consequences. they will be with tromp -- troy nehls, republican in the house, he said if trump says to jump

three feet high while itching your head, we will do that. >> just got news, jake, that tulsi gabbard will be the choice for d and i. i want you to weigh in. vaughn, give us the reporting. >> yeah, sorry. go ahead, courtney. >> vaughn? >> no. this was a name that we had had sources that had been telling us that tulsi gabbard, former democratic congresswoman turned republican, would be tapped for the director of national intelligence role. in the last moments that's what happened. donald trump announcing that tulsi gabbard will take the reins in confirmed of the office of the director of national intelligence. tulsi gabbard of course is somebody who rose to prominence in 2017 when she took a secret trip to syria to meet with president bashir al saud. at the time he was alleged to have ordered the killings of hundreds of thousands of syrian

civilians. it was a trip that was repudiated by democrats and republicans alike at the time that ultimately the u.s. was determining how it would engage and beyond to the killings of civilians. and in the aftermath of that, she was hesitant to call him a dictator and was hesitant to condemn him for the actions taking place in syria. she ran for president in 2019 as a democrat. she was somebody that irked a great many other democrats on that stage, taking on memorably then-senator kamala harris. ultimately in the aftermath of the 2020 election she ended up going and making mer presence on fox news before becoming a close ally of tucker carlson and somebody who closely aligned herself with robert f. kennedy jr. before a couple weeks ago, at a campaign rally i was alt in michigan going up and declaring she was officially a member of

the republican party because of donald trump and sought to play a key role in his administration. she was i am told an honoree chair on the transition team and now donald trump clearly trusting tulsi gabbard and placing her in this critical national intelligence position. >> so, courtney, her in the role, she is the air traffic controller, if you will, of intelligence, which is going to come from the pentagon, come from the cia, the fbi. also from the national security team within the white house. tell me a little bit about what it means to have her in a role like this. >> yeah. i mean, i think the huge question here is what is this going to mean for courier intelligence officers, how do they see someone as we heard vaughn say met with bashar al assad and said he is not the enemy of the people. at the time there was a tremendous amount of outcry about the fact that she was

defending someone who had slaughtered his own people and was in an ongoing campaign of killing civilians in his country, and virtually allowing isis to build up, who were also tormenting the civilians in his country, while at the same time allowing russia to move into the country and also terrorize the population. so it's a surprising development that she would be put in charge of the intelligence community because, as you mentioned, katy, air traffic controller is an interesting way to put this. the other intelligence agencies all essentially troot through the director of national intelligence. a it's a very powerful position. it's almost like, as you said, a gatherer, and aggregator of that intelligence. we all know donald trump has been very outspoken and many people around him about their feelings that they don't trust the u.s. intelligence agencies and they don't trust their products. so the huge question now, how could that manifest with a tulsi

gabbard at the head of that agency. >> we have richard haass standing by. he is going to have to have a lot to weigh in on here. but, jake, i want to ask you first, confirmation tulsi gabbard, would she meet resistance? >> this will be the most difficult nomination to get through the united states congress, period, hard stop. pete hegseth, right, i don't know that tulsi gabbard gets confirmed by the senate. put it that way. again, he has chosen a lot of people with easy paths to confirmation. john ratcliffe at the cia, marco rubio, kristi noem, all of those folks will get confirmed. marco rubio could probably almost get confirmed on voice vote. he won't, but probably could get close. tulsi gabbard is going to be extraordinarily difficult. and it's just a tough pill to swallow because senators are, as we just saw, katy in the senate leadership race earlier today,

the right trump twittersphere went crazy over rick scott and all of that and said he should be the leader. and senators didn't really care. so i think you could see a lot of that when it comes to these nominations. mitch mcconnell was another free agent when it comes to the nominations. he has two years left in his senate term. he is no longer in senate republican leadership. he has been very critical of trump in the new biography that came out, he thinks trump is an unserious person, and i think he will share the opinion that some of these nominees are not serious people. sol, tulsi gabbard, pete hegseth are going to be two incredibly difficult nomination processes. >> we will watch and see. we will learn a lot about what congress is going to be like and what they are going to rubber-stamp with donald trump in the confirmation processes coming up in january. all right. vaughn hillyard, courtney, jake, thank you very much. joining us now president emeritus of the council on foreign relations and senior

counselor at center view partners, richard haass. great to have you, my friend. thank you for joining us. i was going to get you to start with pete hegseth, but i want you to start with tulsi gabbard as d and i. what is your reaction? >> this is a tough job bureaucratically because you have to coordinate, i think 17 separate intelligence agencies. someone who doesn't have a background working in one or more of them to be thrust in the position where you have to oversee all of them, tough, tough. so, you know, legitimate questions. ambition, you know, sorts of things you were talking about with jake about what she said after she visited syria. >> let's go to pete hegseth. i want to play a little bit from a podcast that he did just last week. this is regarding the war in ukraine and how he saw that war and vladimir putin. let's play it. >> from the beginning, a couple days in, this feels like putin

is giving me my [ bleep ] back war. kind of feels like i feel like you have been pushing pretty hard and we used to have the former soviet union and we were proud of that and ukraine was part of it. i want my [ bleep ] back. this idea i hear all the time, i have friends who would probably agree with us, if you don't stop them in ukraine, he is going to go to poland. i don't think he's -- maybe in a perfect world where he had unlimited capabilities and could crown himself king of europe, he would. i think he is probably -- knows enough to know that probably not going much further than ukraine. >> what do you make of his confidence that vladimir putin just wants a piece of ukraine or all of ukraine and doesn't want to rebuild the ussr or extend further into europe? >> well, even if he is right, i would say that's unacceptable. the idea that we would simply roll out the carpet for vladimir

putin to invade and ultimately take territory from another country, a country such as ukraine, which, by the way, is a democracy, part of the west, i think is unacceptable. the real question from this administration beyond any individual is what are they going to do? we know president-elect trump wants to promote diplomacy with ukraine:question is, what is the substance of diplomacy? does he try to impose peace on ukraine? i think he will fail is he prepared to pressure vladimir putin? the only way to get lasting peace is if we are supportive of ukraine and say you have to narrow your goals, got to be willing to allow the russians to hold on to some of the territory they have temporarily and we have to go to russia. you shouldn't -- if you don't agree to a compromise, we are going to support ukraine and this war is going to get increasingly costly to you. the administration i think can get to peace -- a temporary armistice, a peace agreement in

ukraine only if it puts pressure on both sides. it's a one-sided approach is doomed to fail. >> i mentioned daniel dresser in writing in foreign affairs magazine that world leaders big and small now know who donald trump is. they have had experience with him. they understand that you can flatter him and, you know, not get sideways of him and generally he is transactional, you can get what you want out of him if you maybe project something show which, some sort of showy concession that he can promote here at home. that being said, donald trump has always had nato in his sights and he was held back from disengaging with nato, pulling out of the nato by the people he had in his last administration. he is not surrounding himself with those types of people. pete hegseth not a big believer in nato. he said so on the record. what are our nato allies expecting and what are they doing to prepare themselves for the possibility if they are

preparing for it of the united states either poulg out or disengaging? >> i don't think we pull out or disengage. what the president-elect has already done is introduce a degree of uncertainty about whether we are going to honor our so-called article 5 commitments to come to the aid of other nato countries. that's a fact of live. the question for the europeans is do they spend more on defense, do they build up defense industries of their own, do they coordinate what spending they now have. the problem in europe, not so much how much the europeans spend, but how they spend it. each country has its own defense budget. the whole is less than the sum of its parts. we need a european defense effort. we are not seeing it. and that's true. let me make the argument, donald trump may excel ate that. i have been watching this for a long time. i think the era of american foreign policy where europe and nato are at the center of things, we are more concerned with china sand the

asia-pacific. so i think the europeans have to become somewhat more selfish, sufficient. trump will accelerate that. >> what about the middle east? it's not the same place as it was when donald trump was in office. it's full of conflict now, tensions are very high. he made his first trip to saudi arabia last time around, which was a surprise, maybe not a bad move on the part of the trump administration as he tried to accelerate relations between saudi arabia and israel. how does donald trump's approach to israel look to you or what do you expect it to be now that things are so much more volatile? >> well, you are going to be surprised at what i am saying, but donald trump has some real opportunity in the middle east. israel has militarily changed the situation fundamentally in gaza and lebanon. there is possibilities for diplomatic breakthroughs if the israeli government will act, you know, go towards them if they will harvest what they have sown and if the united states pushes israel to do it. i think there is a chance we

could have a cease-fire in gaza, we could have the entry of an arab stabilization force, a cease-fire in the north between israel and hezbollah. israel at 60,000 israelis could return to their homes. israel and iran could essentially stand down. all those things are possible. but what it will require is for president trump to push his good friend bibi netanyahu to do things he resisted doing. we will see if he is willing to do that. if he is prepared to do that, he actually could be the peace president in the middle east that he likes to describe himself as. >> does that involve pressuring him settlements? already the far right minister in particular says that 2025 with donald trump in the white house is the year that israel will get to an exmore of the west bank. judea and ue mayor yeah. >> there are those views in israel. i think that's bad for the future of israel if it wants to

remain a democratic jewish state. i don't think the united states does any favor to israel by essentially giving them the green light to do that. we looked the other way for decades. yes, that will be another chase for donald trump. what does it mean to be a real friend of israel? and i would argue that's not necessarily good for israel. it's not good for our bilateral recommend. that's problem play an issue will come to a president trump, powerful forces in israel that want to go ahead with more setments with an eggsation. it's possible some of the new usgs ambassador to israel, mike huckabee, if he gets confirmed, would want to greenlight that. i think that's unacceptable. it would poison israel's relations with the arab world and i think ultimately threaten israel's viability as a democratic jewish country. you want to think twice. >> it would certainly inflame the arab street if nothing else. richard haass, thank you vor

joining us. >> thank you. and still ahead, what are democrats going to do now that republicans control all of washington? and why some moderates are saying the party should take bernie sanders a little more seriously. and special counsel jack smith will step down before the inauguration. rules mandate he submit a report on his findings to the a.g. what would that look like and would we see it? first, though, he campaigned on mass deportations. what donald trump's team is preparing to put in place to get it done. we are back in 90 seconds. swiffer sweeper dry* traps 2x more dust and hair for a clean even mom approves of. nice reach! brooms can just push stuff around, but swiffer grabs dirt and even traps the hair. swiffer. the mother of all cleans. love it or your money back! at humana, we believe your healthcare should evolve with you, and part of that evolution means choosing the right medicare plan for you. humana can help.

with original medicare you're covered for hospital stays and doctor office visits, but you'll have to pay a deductible for each. a medicare supplement plan pays for some or all of your original medicare deductibles, but they may have higher monthly premiums and no prescription drug coverage. humana medicare advantage prescription drug plans include medical coverage. plus, prescription drug coverage with $0 copays on hundreds of prescriptions. most plans include coverage for dental, vision, even hearing. and there's a cap on your out-of-pocket costs! so, call or go online today to see if there's a humana plan in your area and to get our free decision guide. the medicare annual enrollment period ends on december 7th, so call now. humana - a more human way to healthcare. you founded your kayak company because you love the ocean. not spreadsheets... you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. our matching platform lets you spend less time

searching and more time connecting with candidates. visit indeed.com/hire president-elect trump is making plans for new immigration detention centers across the united states. two sources familiar with the plans tell nbc news the transition team is speaking with private prison companies about major expansions. right now there are 41,000 immigration and custom enforcement detention beds, excuse me, allocated by congress. trump's team wants to double that number. joining us now nbc news political and national correspondent jacob soboroff. 80,000 beds they want. and they want to put up detention centers around major cities. does that mean when donald trump campaigned on mass deportations now, they are thinking of doing or looking at doing roundups in major cities?

>> i think it's going to look like what it looks like around major cities if that's what they want to do. there is a facility outside of los angeles and i have been inside that facility. it's the only time i met a separated father inside that facility. and in that facility there were nooses. a report inspector general report from the department of homeland security found it. there were men in fetal positions on the floor in solitary confinement. these are facilities that have been harshly criticized and rightly so when you look at the independent intergovernmental reports about them. what you are hearing now from this administration is that they want to expand who is going to be inside them. i think that's worth thinking about. they are saying now felons, not families, which is sort of the obama line in 2014 and 2015. if they institute the largest mass deportation program in the history of the country, they can't stop with felons and criminals and people with

existing records to go into places like that. >> what sort of authority do they need from congress? do they need authority from address to get this sort of stuff done, or is this an executive order? >> you have to pay for it. keep in mind most of these facilities are run by private prison companies. they are not operated by the federal government itself, which is why i think oftentimes advocates say there is a lack of oversight and ability to get inside them and so to see what's going on. i remember being on -- and it's not just within i.c.e. health and human services, i remember being on the air with you during the family separation crisis, the news about the tent city broke, hhs was going to prop up a tent city down in southern texas, in west texas because they didn't have enough space in health and human services facilities for children separated from families. you could very well be seeing a mass deportation situation, a repeat of sort of that chapter of american history that you and

i and our audience -- >> but that did put some limitations on donald trump continuing it. once it got out there, once there was such an uproar, donald trump himself tried to distance himself from it. >> remember he said on june 20, 2018, i didn't like the sight and the feeling of the families being separated. >> i wonder if that -- if it's reasonable to expect that the bad press that could come out of another version of that might limit him. >> i think it's a consideration that the -- president-elect trump and the incoming administration have on their plate to make. family separation, mass deportation is just family separation by another name. children are being -- parents are taken way from children instead of children being take take /-en away from their parents. it was not bipartisan condemnation. it was a universal condemnation. the pope spoke out against that policy. it was a rare policy reversal in

the first trump administration the likes we didn't see over the four years. i think they will remember they do remember, that's why they didn't talk about it during the campaign. >> jacob soboroff, thank you. a little bit of breaking news. matt gaetz as attorney general. that's who donald trump is nominating or trying to nominate for attorney general. matt gaetz. you thought pete hegseth was surprising. matt gaetz. now symone sanders. i know we want to talk to you about the democrats and i still do. but let's get your first reaction to matt gaetz. you're laughing. tell me. >> you knocked the earring out of my ear. let me say when we heard the first nominations put forward by president-elect trump, i heard from a number of democrats and even some republicans, particularly people work on the

hill, you know, proxies for their ranking officials who say he could have nominated worse people. these don't seem bad, these are career individuals. i disagree with the -- the democrats saying i disagree with their ideology but we can work with them. then you heard the nomination of pete hegseth for secretary of defense. many said i want to take my comments back or, we don't know if this is true then you saw at the press release from the president-elect talking about this was his nomination. matt gaetz is interesting. what are the qualifications, if you will? and can he get through a senate confirmation process. tulsi gabbard. i know tulsi gabbard. notably in 2016 a supporter of senator senator sanders campaign. i traveled with her. the tulsi gabbard i knew in 2015, 2016 has done a transformation to the person we see before us today. i think this is a test, frankly.

it's a test for senate republicans to see if senate republicans are going to, you know, what is their their posture in this, you know, new washington, d.c., world order as it relates to donald trump. are these folks and others going to push back probably privately to the president-elect and his allies about some of these individuals so that they can have their names quietly withdrawn? and if the private pushback doesn't work, if they decide to do that, will they publicly be willing to buff the president-elect or is there any pushback at all and do these folks just sail through in confirmation? these are the questions that i definitely have. matt gaetz is under investigation. he was under investigation for, i believe, it had to do with sexual relations with people who were not -- young women not yet 18. >> yeah. and an ethics investigation in the house. that's part of the reason matt

gaetz went after kevin mccarthy. i think you are right to ask, symone, about this being a test for senate republicans, how far are they willing to go. i am going to imagine that matt gaetz would be in the same vain as tulsi gabbard. difficult to confirm given matt gaetz's profile within the party. certainly a very big ally of donald trump. but in terms of the fringe of the republican party, even as it stands now, matt gaetz is on that fringe. not somebody that would -- i mean, i don't see him as somebody who would sail through. then again this is a republican party that has seen donald trump win and win and win and win even when they didn't expect him to keep on winning. i mean, there was first the "access hollywood" tape, winning the 2016 election, sailing through and not having a problem with impeachments and then

january 6th. he has proven to be unsinkable, and i wonder if the republican party has a stomach to push back against him any longer or if they might be worried that donald trump would go after them. you heard jason chaffetz, former congressman on fox news giving a warn to senate republicans to confirm pete hegseth, saying, you are not going to like what's going to happen to you if you don't fall in line on this. i'm paraphrasing. >> yeah, i mean -- >> hold on. i want to bring in msnbc legal correspondent lisa rubin to on this. i want the legal -- is matt gaetz a lawyer? >> he is a lawyer. and he was briefly in private practice before congress. sorry, before he was elected to the florida house where he served time before he joined -- >> do you need to be a lawyer to be a.g.? >> i believe you should be. but, katy, this is a stunning announcement because when i think about various people in trump world who are floated as possible attorneys general, all

of them are people who had serious legal credentials as well as fidelity to donald trump. and i want to be clear about that because when we talk about the mike davises or todd blanche, served as donald trump's personal attorney, all had experience if not in the executive branch itself, or around the department of justice, the supreme court, and in congress that would have allowed them to serve that role. great great was only briefly in private practice. he has been one of the fiercest defenders that donald trump has had throughout his original presidency and on through the future notwithstanding the fact that he has been under investigation by the department of justice as well as the house ethics committee, as you noted. that's a probe he is no longer cooperating in. earlier this year his own deposition was sought in a

defamation case arising from that same nuke rouse of facts that symone referred to, alleged involvement by congressman gaetz in a sex trafficking ring involving a minor. >> this is donald trump landing back in west palm beach. we are told that matt gaetz is on that plane. tweeting out or x'ing out, it will be an honor to serve as trump's attorney general, he is doing that while on the plane with donald trump. matt gaetz history in the house going after democrats, should we expect if he does get appointed that there will be a priority put on prosecuting donald trump's political opponents? >> i think with matt gaetz at the medical am of the department of justice you have to take those threats seriously. there are things that someone like mark pay let a, overseeing the policy development at the department of justice for the transition team has already said is on the table. he has tweeted that. people at the department of justice serving as career

prosecutors not prepared to execute on president trump's agenda should get out of the way and leave it to those who will. that's a warning sign that the kinds of prosecutions that someone like nick davis has talked about, prosecuting jack smith and others, where we're talking about, for example, obstruction of justice prosecutions against liz cheney, something that davis also threatened. these are the sorts of things that someone like matt gaetz would relish and would be prepared to implement attorney general. whether or not he is comfortable within or knows enough about the apparatus of the department of justice to make that happen is another story. but flanked by people who do, do i doubt that matt gaetz could make that happen? i don't. >> andrew weissmann. what would be the reaction within doj to matt gaetz as a.g.? >> well, you have to remember that the people at the department of justice are used to transitions, and they are used to policy differences.

so, you can go from bush presidency to, you know, the obama presidency to a biden presidency, and there are policy differences, and, obviously, if you are within the department and you cannot abide those policy differences, then you do have an option. you can leave. but you're obligated otherwise to carry them out so long as they are legal and within the policies set by the -- the guidance set by the department of justice. i think with this announcement, if it were to go through, and that's still a big if, i think that it is a real signaling with matt gaetz being pree proposed for the head of the department of justice with tulsi gabbard being proposed as the head of the intelligence community,

connotes a lack of seriousness and it also connotes a real disregard for facts and law, and that is really what is -- governs the department of justice is an adherence to facts, not ignoring bad facts, to look at the case dispassionately and to follow the law. and, you know, so far i would say that the track record for miss gabbard and for mr. gaetz is one that would, i think, cause most people at the department, whether they are, you know, agreeing or disagreeing with the policy positions of the incoming administration, real concern that there won't be that that adherence to following the rule of law. and that's quite serious. >> there was a lot of question or a lot of turmoil around january 6th, the lead up to january 6th in 2021. donald trump's refusal to accept

the results of the election. the desire to get his doj to stop things or gum up the works. and his desire to put people in who would do it regardless of the law. within the department, andrew, there was an uproar and a lot of very serious people said we are going to walk if you do this. you will have another, you know, what is the term? saturday night massacre if you want to -- if you want to put somebody -- i am forgetting. who was it? who did everyone -- anyway. donald trump wanted to put unserious people in charge to carry out his wishes back to -- back in 2020 and 2021. is this the kind of person, matt gaetz, jeffrey clark, thank you. is this the kind of person gaetz that would result in a number of important people, the people that make the place run at doj, saying, no, i can't be a part of this, i'm gonna walk?

>> well, that issue of whether you stay or whether you walk is a complicated one. it's certainly, i think, for people who are serious people, who, as i said, are used to the idea that they, you know, elections have consequences and policy positions can change. it will cause concern though that this is somebody who is going to ask them to do things that either are just so extreme that they can't agree as a policy matter, then it's their choice to leave, or ask them to do things that are simply unsupported by the facts. so that -- your example of january 6th is a really good one because you had people who were trump appointees saying we cannot do this. you had the acting attorney general, you had the acting deputy attorney general, you had the head of the office of legal counsel, sort of three of the most prominent people at the

department of justice all selected by donald trump saying they cannot do this. and so what i see with these announcements is a real blow to the independence of the department of justice, the independence of the intelligence community, and that is, you know, to put a fine point on it, if this were to come about, that is a blow to any check that they could post to the president, and an undermining of the rule of law in this country that is so fundamental that it really takes us one step closer to countries that we heretofore have viewed as enemies of a democracy. >> let's bring in ken dilanian, our intelligence and justice correspondent. ken, what's the reaction inside the doj? >> katy, i have gotten two texts from different penal at the justice department who used the

word insane. they responded and react today this potential appointment. also questioning whether matt gaetz can be confirmed. one person asked me to research whether anyone had been nominated for the post of attorney general who had been investigated by the justice department. we will have to look into that. my initial red a is that i can't think of any time that happened in american history. not only was gaetz investigated and not charged, we should point out, in a sex trafficking investigation, but he is perhaps the top five vociferous critics of the fbi and justice department, accusing them of being corrupt and weaponized and unethical at every single congressional hearing, anytime -- he is on the judiciary committee. any time chris wray, the fbi director, merrick garland, attorney general, lower officials went before the committee, you could count on matt gaetz taking aim at them in very extreme language and accusing them of unethical and

corrupt behavior. i was at the justice department earlier today doing reporting on this question of how are career officials responding to this election result, what do they plan to do. there is no plan for a mass exodus among career officials. as andrew said, they are used to serving republicans and democrats. they are used to changing policies on a diep and going from, you know, aggressively pursuing civil rights investigation in the police departments, for example, at not doing that depending who is in office. this kind of appointment is really striking fear and trepidation in the hearts of the career civil servants over there because what they revere above all is respect for the law and procedure and norms. we can't prejudge. matt gaetz may become a different person if he gets confirmed as attorney general. but what he has shown so far as a member of congress is disdain for the department of justice. >> and donald trump was going to become a different person when he got the white house in 2016.

sorry. let me bring in jake sherman now. and when we're talking about the doj, schedule f, you know, that's what donald trump wanted to do. he was going to implement it if he won in 2020 and get rid of the career officials within the government who doesn't agree with him, who weren't loyal to to him. i wonder if you put pem like matt gaetz up for a.g. your deploying schedule f without having to deploy it because you are getting people who say i don't want to be involved in this and are going to walk and those people by their nature are not going to be the ones that are as loyal to donald trump, so you hollow it out by vir u of people saying i can't be a part of this on their own voluntarily. i know you are nodding at me on that. jake sherman, i want to ask about kaigs. thom tillis was on the record saying that he is a vote counter, all about counting votes. but on gaetz, the republicans or donald trump will have hois work cut out for him because they are not going to get a single democrat.

>> matt gaetz, katy, i was on ten minutes ago saying that tulsa thai national would be the most difficult confirmation that donald trump had. matt gaetz, the tulsi gabbard -- that will make -- matt gaetz will make tulsi gabbard seem like child's play. matt gaetz is going to have a tremendously difficult time -- i can't even say this with a straight face. a tremendously difficult time being confirmed as attorney general. he is under ethics investigations. i wrote a story several years ago with my colleague john brez any han at politico about his misspending taxpayer and campaign money. matt gaetz is not going to be -- i can't imagine a situation in which matt gaetz gets 50 votes in the united states senate, period, hard stop. >> why would donald trump nominate him? he has to have an idea of that. why would he nominate him? >> because maybe -- i don't know the to that. i can't tell you.

most normal presidents come to capitol hill at least call capitol hill and say, i'm thinking about nominating this person. is this one you think you could confirm? again, marco rubio you could confirm. kristi noem you could confirm. i don't think there is any outreach on this choice considering senators are laughing at the prospect of confirming matt gaetz to be attorney general. are i will be shocked if matt gaetz is confirmed as attorney general. . i will leave it at that. i will be absolutely shocked if 50 senators vote for matt gaetz for attorney general. >> what about the majority? you are looking at stefanik, waltz, looking at gaetz right now. they have a two-seat or one-seat majority. they are potentially going to get more seats in these coming race it is that have yet to be called. you keep nominating republican members of the house, you could be in a position to risk the majority.

>> he is going to nominate the house republicans into the minority, period, if he keeps doing this. that's just clear. steve scalise and mike johnson told me yesterday, i talked to both of them at length about this yesterday, he reached his limit on nominating and getting people into the administration from the house of representatives. you doesn't have much cushion, which to me at this point means he at least maybe understands that matt gaetz is not going to get confirmed. remember, it's not just the floor vote. he has to get out of the judiciary committee, which i think will be probably a challenge. before that he has to get through a confirmation hearing. matt gaetz, other people could talk about this with more knowledge than i ask, he was under federal investigation. the biden justice department didn't bring any charges against him, but he was under federal investigation in the last couple of years. he will have to answer -- we will be faced -- he might not have to answer, but he will be faced with questions from democrats and republicans about

his federal criminal investigations. so this will not be pretty for matt gaetz. i don't know if he cares. knowing him, i assume he doesn't care. but i am -- i mean, i am getting calls and texts from republicans and democrats just completely flabbergasted by nominating matt gaetz for anything that requires confirmation. >> steve scalise just said, please, no more house republicans, oak heing what i asked you about the majority. if you want somebody who is going to be your retribution, wouldn't be matt gaetz the guy you pick for a.g.? >> sure. yes, of course. he would be. but, again, there is a math problem here in that he needs to get 50 votes in the united states senate and i don't know -- >> let me push back on that because i know we were talking about a few more moderate names. murkowski, we were talking about collins, maybe joni ernst of iowa potentially.

do they still have the appetite to push back against donald trump now that he has come back once again? he has been -- he has proven unsinkable over and over again. he has been proven adds somebody who can, you know, direct a lot of anger towards you. potentially scary anger towards you. is the desire among republicans to continue to push back on him, or are we potentially going to be seeing a different style of republican senate than we have seen in the past? >> that's a question that he is testing it that proposition, katy. he is certainly testing it that proposition. again, famous last words. if you're asking for my analysis, which you are, i cannot see lisa murkowski or susan collins or tom sill tillis voting for him. i don't know how any of these

people vote for kbaets gaetz. they will give trump wide berth. they say generally speaking, senators say the president deserves the advisors that he wants. but -- and the people in his administration that he wants. i just think matt gaetz might be a bridge too pharrell. i thought that about tulsi gabbard. if i had to guess pete hegseth gets confirmed, tulsi gabbard is probably going to be very difficult. i just don't know how matt gaetz gets confirmed in any senate configuration that is short of 65 votes. i mean, i am flabbergasted by this. >> i wonder what tucker carlson is going to be named to, whether we will hear his name in the coming minutes or house or days. lisa rubin, talk to me more about matt gaetz in the doj position. you heard me ask andrew whether you might see resignations in the doj. suspect that a crazy thing to ask? >> no, because it's more than

just a policy difference when coming to matt gaetz. inmates e matt gaetz has been under investigation by the public integrity section of the department of justice. were i one of the prosecutors involved in that, and now thought matt gaetz, who knows who was involved in the investigation, who was served theoretically with process during that investigation, who knows the ins and outs of that investigation better than we, the public, do, would i fear my own career retribution? sure. some of those people may resign and noisily so. they can't confess what they know about the investigation because they have a attorney client privilege with the department. could they say it was unacceptable to them to have a subject of one of their investigations become their boss? absolutely. and i expect that you might see people particularly from that public integrity section resign if matt gaetz were to become the attorney general. but i don't think it will come to that because it strikes me matt gaetz is being proposed

here because he makes the eventual nominee seem less crazy by comparison. >> jake, what do you think? >> this is the trump 4-d chess lesson. i get that. and maybe that's the case. but, you know, i will say this. this takes up a lot of time and this is the question that we have been going back and forth about on capitol hill for the last couple of days. trump, you remember well, in the first 100 days -- >> exit the plane right now, by the way, for what it's worth. he was on the plane -- i think we saw him on the plane with donald trump going back to west palm beach from washington. we are still waiting to see donald trump come down that stairway. maybe he is going to be walking with trump. we're gonna watch. sorry, jake, go ahead. >> yeah, i mean, in 2017, trump wasted 100 days for a variety of reasons on repealing obamacare,

which didn't happen, waste 100 days on that. republicans told me they have no time to waste. if they do this, it's wasting time in the judiciary committee and senate floor. nominations takes time. everything takes time on capitol hill. always belt the over on capitol hill. but, yeah, i mean, that's a good point. maybe he just did this to ensure the confirmation of whoever he is going to nominate next. i think he would -- he clearly wants matt gaetz as his attorney general, and is going to test the proposition and put a lot of senators in a tough spot. maybe it won't be a tough spot. maybe they just vote against him on move on with their life. maybe they vote nor them. tough to say. but the early indications is that it's going to be very difficult to confirm matt gaetz to the attorney general is slot. >> let me read from trump's announcements on gaetz. it tells us where he wants to go with the doj even if it's not gaetz and ends up being something else. few issues are more important

than ending the partisan weaponization of our justice system. he will weaponize government, dismantling criminal organizations, restore americans' confidence. on the house judiciary committee, matt played a key role in defeating the russia, russia, russia hoax. he says it three times. and exposing alarming andisticic government corruption and weapontation. he is a champion for the constitution and the rule of law. matt will root out systemic corruption at the doj. symone sanders is back with us. symone. >> if it you're a democrat right now, what are you preparing for? >> that donald trump is going to do everything he said he would do. look, i think it was quite -- it was very reasonable for, in 2016 for people to say, but the

president will rein him in. the raemts of the office are different. we have lived through a donald trump presidency and a donald trump, you know, not participating in a peaceful transfer of power in 2020 and what he has done since then. i think donald trump emboldened. when i talked to my friends who are republican strategists, people i know who work on the hill, who are republicans, they say they are all repeating the language, he has a mandate. the democrats can say that he doesn't or not, but we believe he has mandate. and if you truly believe you have a mandate, if you truly believe that there has been a massive realign- i do not and a number of the democrats i spoke to do not. if that's what they believe, they believe you can do things like this. i was very struck by the congressman who participated in a gavel earlier today that said donald trump asked us to jump, you know, three feet off the ground, we'll do that. so that is -- to is a test as i noted and i absolutely agree

with jake. it's a test. i know the staff members of these members are saying my boss will never do that, but i don't know. is your boss okay with being primary? is your boss okay with not potentially having a future in the republican party apparatus? mitt romney is all right. mitt romney won't have a need for donald trump's mess here. he has been quite clear about how he feels about matt gaetz and others. but i don't know about the rest of the republicans sitting in the united states senate. so the democrats though, what is your posture going to be here? senate democrats, some people believe, you know, this is -- let the people fight their mess on their own. i don't think right now is the time for democrats to come out and have a press conference. but i think the democrats need to be on the record here. what is present? you have jack reed, democrat, serves on the senate intelligence committee, right. jack reed prior to matt gaetz being announced and asked the question about pete hegseth on -- as a secretary of defense and if he would vote to confirm

him, senator reed said, well, we should wait to hear from the nominees they should have before passing judgment on their performance. the nominee should have the ability to speak for themselves. that's what senators believe. these are not regular times. senate democrats ready to operate in this new political world order in washington, d.c. the comments from senator reed lead me to believe not yet. >> steve bannon said president trump will hit the justice department with a blowtorch and matt gaetz is that torch. it's a great day to tune into "deadline: white house," which starts right now. ow hi, everyone. washington, d.c., today bracing