Morning Joe - Morning Joe 11/13/24

Episode Date: November 13, 2024

Trump picks Fox News host Pete Hegseth for Defense Secretary

I confess I did not know who Pete Haixess was until about 20 minutes ago. He does not seem to have much of a detailed background in DOD policy. To the extent he's worked on any of that stuff, it has been on veterans policy, not on DOD issues. So the lack of experience is concerning. Now I have not heard what his plans are, so we will see what his plans are. But it was surprising and it is concerning just given that lack of experience. You know, the Pentagon, biggest bureaucracy in the world, it's a hard thing to run.

So I think it's going to be a challenge. That was the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, Democratic Congressman Adam Smith of Washington state reacting to Donald Trump's pick for defense secretary. Even some Republicans on Capitol Hill were caught off guard by the selection of the Fox News host, Pete Hegseth, admitting they don't know much about him at all. We'll play for you their reactions and go through Trump's other cabinet picks. Also ahead, we'll preview the White House meeting later this morning between President Biden

and President-elect Trump, part of Biden's commitment to a peaceful transfer of power. Meanwhile, the incoming administration appears to be taking the first steps to follow through on Trump's promised mass deportation plan. NBC's Julia Ainsley joins us with new reporting on that. Good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Wednesday, November 13th.

Along with Joe, Willie and me, we have the host of Way Too Early, White House bureau chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire. Managing editor at The Bulwark, Sam Stein is with us, and Congressional Investigations reporter for The Washington Post, Jackie Alamany. So let's get right into it. We'll start this morning with Donald Trump's pick for Secretary of Defense. He has chosen Fox News host Pete Hegseth as the next leader of the Pentagon. Hegseth is a military veteran

who served with the Army National Guard. In a statement Trump described Hegseth as quote tough, smart, and a true believer in America first. During an interview on a podcast just last week, Hegseth criticized what he called woke policies in the military and said that women should not be allowed to serve in combat. There's a chance to course correct it, but it would take the new administration, Trump administration going after it really hard. How would they correct it?

Well, first of all, you got to fire, you know, you got to fire the chairman and joint chiefs and you got to fire this, I mean, obviously, you're going to bring in a new secretary of defense, but any general that was involved, general admiral, whatever that was involved in any of the DEI, whoa, it's gotta go. Either you're in for war fighting, and that's it,

and that's the only litmus test we care about. You gotta get DEI and CRT out of military academies so you're not training young officers to be baptized in this type of thinking. And then, whatever the standards, whatever the combat standards were, say, and I don't know, 1995, let's just make those the standards. I think a huge one is is women in combat in quotas. I think the way they pushed that under Obama in a way that had nothing zero to do with

efficacy, zero to do with lethality and capability. You don't like women in combat. No. Why not? I love women service members who contribute amazingly because everything about men and women serving together makes the situation more complicated and complication in combat

means casualties are worse. So Willie, obviously a lot of concern among Democrats, among some Republicans, but this obviously is going to be, I think I saw Jake Sherman say yesterday, this might be the biggest challenge of any pick so far to get through, only because obviously, as Adam Smith said before, the Pentagon is a massive bureaucracy. I served four terms on the Armed Services Committee,

and I can tell you that even the most experienced general admiral, CEO that went into the Pentagon on the Armed Services Committee, and I can tell you that even the most experienced general, admiral, CEO that went into the Pentagon got spun around in circles. It's a lot easier to say what you're going to do on a podcast than it is when you're actually over at the Pentagon. And people that think that generals and admirals that have given their entire life to this country are going to just roll over is a serious misreading of the Pentagon. But we'll see what happens.

I mean, people will see what he says when he's in front of the Senate. We'll see what we hear in the coming days and weeks. And as Adam Smith said, judge him by what he says then. Yeah, we heard some Republicans, not critical of the pick openly, but wondering about the pick, saying, some Republicans now saying, I don't even know who he is, but I think it's very telling

that they're not coming out publicly and criticizing it. That's the power of Trump. These men and women in the Senate, these men and women in the House don't want to cross him. They believe he has swept in with a mandate and whatever he does, we'll see how they vote. We'll see the questions they pose, as you say, when it comes down to confirmation time.

But at least publicly, we're not hearing Republicans critical of this choice, which just put it mildly surprised a lot of people, not just in Washington, but across the country. Let's bring in NBC News national security editor David Rowe. David, good morning. What reaction are you hearing to this at least nomination to be Secretary of Defense? It is a surprise and I think is the clips like the one that you played come out it's gonna raise major issues. There are women in combat, women who engage in ground combat, have to take physical tests. Can they pick up and carry another soldier who wounded is one of them? And most of all, there are very large numbers of women

who are combat pilots, very experienced ones. And so, again, it's I think, you know, he should have his hearings and he should, you know, talk through these ideas. But they're more, I guess, talking points, political talking points versus the concrete realities of these policies. So it is a surprise that there's been good, I think, picks that are more centrist, like Marco Rubio, that have been, I think, seen in a positive light by national security experts. But this one is definitely a surprise.

And this pick comes, and we should note, it comes just hours after an important reporting from the Wall Street Journal that says the Trump transition team is considering a draft executive order to establish a warrior board, in their words, of retired senior military personnel with the power to review three and four star officers and recommend that they be deemed unfit for leadership, mostly over their support for DEI and woke policies. Per this reporting, this would allow Trump, who can fire anyone he wants as commander in chief, but this allows him this advisory board to give him cover to do so and potentially

remake senior levels of the Pentagon. And Jackie, Pete Hicks' deployment would be a part of that if he does indeed lead the DOD. He is someone, as we just rolled through some of his comments about women in the combat, just now we played a clip there. He spoke at CPAC. I mean, he's a very political figure here, a partisan figure in his Fox News perch. So let's talk about the possibility that this might be the pick that Republicans do have some questions about Republicans in the Senate

Likely a rubber stamp for most of Trump's nominations, but this one might be different. How do you see it play out? Yeah, I mean historically we've seen Congress we give a lot of deference to presidents when it comes to confirming their cabinet There have been some blowout and dramatic fights though, and I think that Pete Hegseth could be that rare fight for Senate Republicans. But as we've talked about the past few months, the lack of dissenters in Senate is perhaps troubling

for any sort of pushback to someone like Hex-Seth, who, as you noted, has 20 years of service in the military, two Bronze Stars, but has zero experience when it comes to actually navigating a bureaucracy or serving in the Defense Department and overseeing the world's most powerful and largest military. I think that this is going to be the first test of who ultimately stands up to Trump. We were just talking about how Trump has gotten involved in all of these battles that traditionally president-elects have not gotten involved in, such as picking the Senate majority leader, weighing in and essentially ushering and facilitating this media campaign and the Make America Great campaign

to try to tap someone like Rick Scott, who would then be expected to implement something like recess appointments, which would allow Trump to take this expansive approach to executive authority and presidential power and allow him to usurp the Senate in order to make someone what they would call a recess appointee.

Essentially, they would serve in the job for a year without formal Senate confirmation, where it only takes a simple majority to push someone through like Pete Hegseth. But if you have people like, you know, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, there are a few people left who are going to put up a fight. People who are not isolationists are, I don't know if I'd necessarily call them interventionists, but people who certainly wouldn't support comments Pete Hegseth has made in the past, and positions he's taken, such as being one of the leading forces,

we shouldn't forget this, who lobbied Trump to pardon war criminals. So, David Rhoade, let's expand this out, just, and this will be the last question, because we have so many picks to get to. It was quite a very busy day yesterday in Mar-a-Lago. So for people out there saying, well, you know, Donald Trump will be able to get whoever he wants through the Senate, and then they can go and have what Republicans would call the witch hunt and go around and pick generals that they

want to fire and just get rid of them. Again, I curious your thought. I think it's a dangerous misreading of the Pentagon because if you start going through and firing generals for political reasons, there is a general feeling an attack on one is an attack on all. And I suspect that that would cause a great, great deal of problems. So when I started saying that they're going to have a board to go out and go through and fire generals, fire admirals that they didn't like, I again thought it's just not that easy.

It's just the Pentagon and the United States military is set apart and they are not gonna be into the will of anyone who they believe is issuing unconstitutional orders. That's true. And that's because lives are at stake here. You want the best possible commander leading American forces when they go into combat. And the broader question, and we've talked about this before, and we'll talk about it

again, as a national security editor, we're going to look at all these national security agencies. And the question is, will Donald Trump try to politicize them? So will he be picking and choosing leaders, generals, what this committee appears to do for people who support him politically? And again, the Pentagon is the starkest example of that. Again, you want the best possible military leader, not the most loyal one leading our, you know, all of our military members into combat. And then you'll see the same thing at the CIA. You need the best, you know, spying, but also analysis of Russia and China, possible the biggest threats we face. But the Justice Department,

the FBI, you want the best possible law enforcement officials, you know, countering threats in the United States. So that's gonna be the broad dynamic here in the narrative. Are these experts, you know, or are they political loyalists who are in these critical national security agencies? So let's talk about the CIA. President-elect Trump has named John Ratcliffe as his pick for CIA director.

The former Republican congressman from Texas served as director of national intelligence in Trump's first administration. The first attempt to install him in 2019 failed after he removed himself from consideration. Following reports, he appeared to misrepresent his career as a federal prosecutor in Texas. Donald Trump also selected South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem to lead the Department of Homeland Security, praising her as a statement for being very strong on border security. Noem has no significant experience with homeland security issues, but has supported Trump's hardline

immigration policies. She also defended fellow Republican governors in their efforts to crack down on migrants in their state. Sam, let's go back to CIA and then we can get to Governor Noem in a second. John Ratcliffe, a guy very familiar to Donald Trump, had worked with him and has sat in the first administration of former Republican congressman. What's the sense on the Hill of what kind of CIA director he'd be? He's one of these picks that by virtue of having been there in the first term will probably sail through confirmation. People are familiar with him. There's no immediately

red flags like there were the first time around because of the misrepresentation that you talked about. Same with Gnome to a degree. The real one, obviously, as we were just talking about, is Pete Hegseth, where people are just sort of dumbfounded by it. I'm sort of amazed by how stayed the conversation has been to this point about Hegseth, because people are just sort of dumbfounded by it. I'm sort of amazed by how staid the conversation has been to this point about Hegseth, because if we're being frank about it, the reason he is picked is because he's on Fox and Friends, right? And this is true of a number of these picks, right? Mike Walz also happened to be the congressman who had appeared on Fox more than any other

sitting Republican member of Congress in the past two years. These people grab Trump's attention because of their television appearances. He's drawn to the idea that they can present on a medium that he loves. Contemporaneous reporting, she said reporting from last night, suggested the Hegseth decision was done in a matter of 24 hours, that there's internal confusion about it. Similarly with Nome a little bit, people are wondering what kind of credential she has to run DHS, which also we should note overseas FEMA response and can help with that. So, you know, there's some confusion about this,

but I think we're getting to the main point, which is that this is Trump, right? People have become sort of, have come to internalize the idea that he's gonna choose people, not necessarily based on credentials, but based on their ability to handle television interviews and on their personal loyalty to them. And I think with the Hexa thing, and sorry to keep going back here, but I just think it's the most controversial one, is that they've been pretty much clear about their desire

to use the military domestically. I mean, this was an issue in the first term, where they wanted to put down some of the protests happening in Lafayette Square. They used the military. It was a problem for the military leaders at the time. They didn't realize they were being co-opted in that way. Obviously, military officials spoke out against Trump after the fact. I think he looks at this and says, you know what, I don't want to deal with that again. And so find the most, you know, the biggest sycophant that he can find to serve as defense

secretary and see if you can jam it through the Senate. And that seems to be what's happening here. Well, we will see again, the Senate testimony would be fascinating unless it is a recess appointment. I do think with some of the issues, you will have some Republicans that will have some concerns. But again, we'll see. Again, saying something on a TV show, we've done that once or twice. And on a podcast is far different than when you're off a TV show or you're off a podcast.

And we'll wait and see what his position and his approach is to these extraordinarily important issues. I will only say this again, that the United States military is stronger today than it has been relative to the rest of the world any time since 1945. So when Tommy Tuberville starts trashing our men and women in uniform. I do wonder what he's trying to prove and where he's going with it. And I certainly hope that if in fact this is the incoming Secretary of Defense, he too understands the United States military is stronger today than any time since since World War two. We are an extraordinarily powerful battle-hardened country with a military that fought in Iraq and fought in Afghanistan. We have seen what's happened in Ukraine

over the past two years or so. We have learned a hell of a lot from it. Russia's military has been severely weakened without the loss of one American soul. So our military, you talk to anybody across the world that has seen the United States military go up and down, they will tell you just how strong we are. And I certainly hope that the incoming Secretary of Defense shares that belief. NBC News National Security Editor David Rode, I wanted to ask you about John Ratcliffe. He's been in the intel community before. What are your thoughts about him going to CIA? Again, it helps that he served as ODI and I in the past. And I want to be fair and point out one positive thing. Cassie Hutchinson's testimony to January 6th hearing,

she said the behind the scenes at that point in the final days of the Trump administration, he urged, he did not participate in and questioned Trump's efforts to return, sorry, to reverse the outcome of the election. So that was something that should be noted here. And I do think there'll be less opposition to him. It's just, again, there's going to be this, I think, pressure.

And I'll just keep saying it sort of politicized the findings of the CIA to point out that certain foreign leaders who the president's likes, that, you know, is the intelligence analysis gentler on them than people that the president doesn't like and the dangers of again having politics drive analysis and foreign policy decisions, completely politics or personal loyalty, personal politics versus what's best for the country. All right. NBC's David Rowe.

Thank you so much. Greatly appreciate it. I will say there is some relief in Washington, D.C. with President Trump's election and Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, and also Radcliffe, John Radcliffe, and also Congressman Walz. There is, as even Democrats on the Hill say, it could have been a lot worse. They know Marco Rubio. They know, Marco Rubio, they know. A massive leak of classified information was sentenced to 15 years in prison.

22-year-old Jack Teshara worked as an IT specialist at a Massachusetts base when he smuggled out images of hundreds of classified documents and posted them on a chat platform popular with video games. The material included government secrets about the war in Ukraine and espionage efforts by China against the U.S. Phoenix police have released dramatic body cam footage of an officer rescuing a man who is trapped inside a car

that ended up submerged in a pool. Witnesses called 911 to report a vehicle that drove off the road after 2 a.m. on Halloween. When police arrived, they jumped into the pool, smashed the car's sunroof, and pulled the person to safety. The man was taken to a nearby hospital to get checked out. Police haven't said what caused the crash so far, but they are looking into it.

That is incredible. And also this, Saks Fifth Avenue is calling off its holiday light show at its flagship store in New York's midtown Manhattan. Why? The spectacle has drawn huge crowds of tourists for shoppers for nearly two decades. Kind of iconic. According to The New York Times, the change appears to be a move to cut costs.

What are Willie and I supposed to do in the winter solstice now? We for 17 years have been going down there, been handing out candy bars to orphans and others who are just hungry. Willie, I don't know exactly what we're going to do now. This is sort of an end of an era personally for us. I just have another question for you, Willie. You watch the television. We talked about that yesterday.

So you know they're selling these things on TV and on the internet, you know, where your car gets submerged and they've made it so adi-shattered that you can get a little hammer and hit it, right? Yeah. Have you seen a thing that dude, you just turn it around and go boop and like the whole car shatters? Yeah. You know what I'm talking about?

You hit it in the corner in the right spot, the whole thing shatters. Yeah. And it goes boop. Yeah. You got one of those in your car do we need to do I need to be thinking about that because I don't think he is going to she is not a good driver, but I don't think she's going to be like I'm a perfect car in a pool, you know what I mean had

the car get in the pool again, I mean I have a for the questions your honor about a lot of what led up to that heroic act by the officers but it's pretty amazing to get your car to pool let's just put it that way unless it's in a like rock an MTV video like anything I saw that happen once in smashing pumpkins 1979 camera so I'm not sure how did that get in there got to work hard. Well, you gotta work hard at doing that We're glad no one was injured here and also that we were able to give free publicity To whoever made that little thing that you just press a button and boom the whole car shatters still out in morning

Joe much more than Donald Trump's latest picks including the new role Billionaire Elon Musk will have that term. He's like this blue ribbon commission where he's gonna be looking like that. Well, in that. Plus what we're learning. As he's thinking about how to cut government waste and spending and abuse. What we're learning about a potential

Trump administration plan to expand immigrant detention centers near major US cities. NBC's Julia Ainsley joins us. With that new reporting, we're back in 90 seconds. Listen, listen. Look what Q did. Q dialed up 1979. Turn it up.

Come on. Welcome back. 26 past the hour, the incoming Trump administration is talking with private prison companies about increasing the amount immigration detention Centers and buildings near them, major U.S. cities, two sources familiar with the plan told NBC News. The centers would be used to hold immigrants before they are deported as part of Trump's promised mass deportation plan. The goal is to reportedly double the current number of ISIS 41,000 detention beds. Sources say the plan would also include the restarting of the policy of detaining parents with their children, known as family detention, a policy that the Biden administration

stopped in 2021. Let's bring in right now one of the authors of that new exclusive reporting, NBC News Homeland Security correspondent Julia Ainsley. Julia, what more can you tell us about Donald Trump's plans for building more detention centers? Well, Joe, this, as Mika said, is to hold people who have been arrested in the interior of the country. We're getting a window now into the details as they're being fleshed out about how the Trump administration is going to carry out this mass deportation effort. What Trump has said will be the largest in American history.

What they're looking at now are new locations to expand capacity. They want to get to over 80,000 beds to be able to hold that many immigrants at a time after they're arrested, before they're deported. They're talking to these private prison companies like GEO, GEO Group, LaSalle, CoreCivic, companies that have had big sores in their stock market prices because of this noted expansion. These are companies that can get facilities running very quickly. They're looking at major metropolitan areas. One of my sources said that they're looking at areas around the metropolitan areas of Miami, Los Angeles, Chicago, in the 95 corridor between Philadelphia and New York and D.C.

These are areas where they need to expand detention because this isn't just for migrants who have recently crossed the border. It's to hold people who have just been arrested. And that also means holding families. This is something we expected the Trump administration to bring back. Now we understand they're making plans for it. These are detention centers that are actually much more expensive to operate because of court orders

that dictate how you treat children in detention, rightfully so. Those are more expensive. It's something the Biden administration said, this isn't necessary and isn't in keeping with our moral philosophy about immigration. So they ended it. We understand the Trump administration plans

on bringing back family detention as they grow to a large extent. So Julia, it's this issue, this plan that so the Democrats, so many of them depressed and upset about the election, they think this will be the galvanizing protest movement, perhaps when this gets started. So tell us a little more about what you've learned here in terms of like those who are going to be targeted. I know you said not just recent migrants.

Does that include people who have been here for years? And then secondly, who's actually carrying out these raids? What agency, which department, which staffers, which force are going to actually be pulling these people potentially from their homes? Well, it would be led by ICE, but Trump has said that he would try to use the military as well if he can get to that legally, and also to call on local police departments, even though a lot of them already say

their resources are stretched thin. But yes, these are people oftentimes who have been living in the country for a long time. They said they will prioritize criminals, but as we see when they're trying to expand family detention, no one is off the table here. And as a fact, I spoke to former DHS Secretary Chad Wolf, who has stayed ingrained with this group, with the incoming Trump administration over the past four years.

And he said, look, there should be no exemptions because if you exempt one group, more of those people will come. When you talk about protests, the fact that they're looking at these major metropolitan areas, if you think about building a new place to hold migrants outside Denver, LA, Chicago, they could be garnering protests for that. Right now I understand they're looking at existing structures, trying to see how many beds they might have available, and say a county jail, or an existing ICE detention centers,

but they could also have to build up temporary soft-sided facilities to try to increase capacity very quickly. That could look like tents. That's something else that draws a spectacle, could draw protest. I think what's clear is they start to hammer out some of these details is they're not shying away from the visuals. In fact, I think that's what they want.

They want to show a really big impact on day one. It's something Stephen Miller has said that they've been given a mandate to do. He wants to see 1 million immigrants arrested and deported each year. NBC News homeland security correspondent Julia Ainslie, thank you very much. This just in, Jack Smith, the special counsel pursuing two investigations into President elect Trump, is set to step down before the new administration takes power. The New York Times reports Smith plans to finish his work and resign alongside his team. Smith also plans to file a report that summarizes his work and decisions for release to the public since his investigations will no longer go to court.

Smith is investigating Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election as well as his mishandling of classified documents. The Justice Department has a longstanding policy that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted for crimes. So Sam, there are so many reasons that Jack Smith took that this action. One, just the practical impact of it. You also though had that longstanding Justice Department ruling and guidance that a sitting president can't be indicted. You also of course have the Supreme Court immunity ruling which looms large over any investigation over the incoming president. Yeah and I think it's it's fitting in a way that this news is

breaking on the day that Donald Trump's heading to D.C. to meet with Joe Biden in the White House, getting the audience at the White House that he never gave to Biden during the last transition of power. I mean, this just goes to show you the dual planes on which these two men are operating. Donald Trump prompted an insurrection for which he was investigated, for which the special counsel was launched. Joe Biden will oversee an orderly transition of power. Obviously, Smith was never gonna be able to continue his case against Trump.

Once Trump assumed office, for all the reasons we outlined, Trump has said he was gonna fire him within two seconds. The question was always, what would he do with the co-conspirators? And I'm sort of curious if those, I assume they're gonna have to drop those cases to Smith is resigning obviously you know if you believe that he had a virtuous case that he should have seen it to the end this is a depressing moment because Trump will have evaded the accountability that

he richly deserved for January 6 and that's what happens when you win an election you get to skirt that responsibilities and I think that's that's what we're seeing here. election. You get to skirt that responsibilities. And I think that's what we're seeing here. On top of all this and all the appointments we've been talking about this morning, Senate Republicans will vote for a new leader today. This morning, Senators John Thune of South Dakota, John Cornyn of Texas, and Rick Scott of Florida, all seeking the position. Last night, the candidates made their final pitches and answered questions during a closed-door forum. Today's vote will be by secret ballot. That is notable. The

winner will be majority leader when the Republicans do take control of the Senate in the new Congress. So Jackie, there's been a push by some close advisors and supporters of Donald Trump to get Rick Scott to that Senate leadership position. But how is the Hill handicapping this race this morning? Yeah, there's certainly been an unorthodox campaign around getting Rick Scott nominated to the next majority leader, the first new majority leader since Mitch McConnell in 18 years. You have seen a number of people publicly endorse him, but at the end of the day, today, it's going to be a secret ballot vote.

So that we—the results are really unexpected. And this could perhaps be the first opportunity for Senate Republicans to buck President-elect Trump and the person that he's tapped, Rick Scott, to be the next majority leader. But Mike Lee, senator from Utah, he held a roundtable discussion last night for members to be able to hear the pitches from the different candidates, John Foon, John Cornyn, the Johns, as we call them, and Rick Scott. They all have similar reforms, which is essentially giving more deliberative process and power back to rank-and-file members.

A lot of the members have been critical of the way McConnell has conducted business along with Democratic majority leaders. Senator Lee has called them the firm and basically says that he's backing Rick Scott because Scott is the most reform minded candidate to try to buck the power of the firm, to allow members to call more amendments,

to allow them to actually be more deliberative about spending bills, and to actually enact the Trump agenda. I think that is the key point here. And I think the decision that lawmakers have today is whether or not they want someone like Rick Scott, who has made it very clear that he is going to be a right-hand man and a tool of Donald Trump in terms of expanding presidential power and potentially bypassing the Congress completely to get certain things done?

Or are they going to go with more moderate candidates like Cornyn or Thune, who have a laundry list, as we've seen this MAGA campaign air of discrepancies with Trump when it comes to certain policies. That meeting starts at 930 in Washington. GOP conference gets together and we'll pick its new leader. We'll see the Washington Post. Jackie Alameda. Jackie, thanks so much.

Also this morning, Jonathan LaMire. That meeting, Donald Trump and President Biden at the White House, courtesy not extended, of course, by Donald Trump and Joe Biden four years ago as he was contesting the election. What do we expect to see today? It's sort of an unthinkable scene in some ways. We remember the last time Donald Trump was in the White House when he slunk out the morning of January 20th, 2021.

He opted not to attend incoming President Biden's inauguration that afternoon. He left that warning instead on Marine One. And at that moment, when it seemed like his political career was over, hard to imagine he would come back to the White House. And now he is, and he's doing so as president-elect. We are expecting a photo op that's customary between the two men there in the Oval Office. They'll probably say a few words for the cameras. That's about it. We'll see if they respond to shouted questions. It's certainly a victory lap for Donald Trump coming in here. We'll recall that when he came in in 2016, he was invited by then President Obama. Trump, told by people who were there, was very nervous, very overwhelmed by the setting. He couldn't believe he had won and achieved the Oval Office. I don't think we should expect that time

around. Obama also warned him that North Korea would probably be the biggest international challenge he faced then. I don't know if President Biden will try to impart wisdom to Trump this time around. He may. It's unclear if Trump will listen. And certainly we should note also a credit to President Biden here to adhering to this tradition, reviving this tradition, to invite his successor to the Oval Office, as painful as it must be, Joe and Mika, because we know, of course, that Joe Biden, since the beginning of his 2020 campaign and throughout his four years in office, has labeled Donald Trump an existential threat to the nation's democracy.

And now he has to welcome Trump into that Oval Office as his successor. It's always it's always a fascinating scene. And you go back through history. I mean, we can go back, of course, eight years in Barack Obama. Very polite, as Donald Trump said, very polite, very open to Donald Trump when he came. And Donald Trump was actually a very complimentary of how welcoming and how open he was when the arrest when the rest of the official Washington was obviously not happy he was there. They went in and there was that advice given, which was that you need to worry about North

Korea. That's going to be your top challenge. A lot of people would say Donald Trump wasn't he didn't take that advice. He started writing love letters to Kim Jong-un. So, are you sure my mic's off? I'm practicing the Senate thing. So anyway, so don't rush me Alex. I got some stories to tell. So anyway, here's story number one. It happens all the time.

I mean, you know, when Eisenhower came in and Harry Truman was trying to talk him through what it was gonna be like to be president of the United States, Truman wrote later, he was just shocked. Ike just wasn't paying attention, couldn't care less with what Harry Truman had to say. And they, of course, had a very, very chilly relationship. And then when Ike left, eight years later, John Kennedy came in and he noticed that John Kennedy, after he told him, if you press a button, the helicopter, Marine One, will come to pick you up right back here. And then started trying to take him around the world, tell him where all the hot spots

were going to be. And you notice Kennedy kept staring down at the button. And he basically said, son, you got a lot more to worry about than that button right there. Kind of like listen to me. But of course, JFK thought he's an old man. Again, these meetings are usually fraught with some tension. Obviously, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter was especially driving up to the swearing in ceremony.

So historians love looking at these meetings and seeing exactly what dynamics play out. This should be really fascinating. The dynamic this time around should be completely new. Coming up, one of our next guests is comparing this year's election loss to the one Democrats experienced back in 2004. New York Magazine's Ed Kilgore will break down the lessons we learned then and how it compares to now. Plus, Politico's Jonathan Martin says the scale

of Vice President Kamala Harris' defeat may double as a silver lining for Democrats. He'll join us to explain. Morning Joe is coming right back. President Biden will host President-elect Trump for a sit-down meeting at the White House. Yeah, a sit-down meeting makes sense with a combined age of 160, I think standing up is...

Out of the question. Yeah. So, we got Rudy O.F. State, Pete Headset, the Secretary of Defense, Kristi Noem running Homeland Security, and maybe, for Secretary of Education, Trump might nominate this guy. I'd like to buy a U.

Well, you're going to get three U's. I'd like to solve a problem. Okay, well let's hear it. Treat yourself a round of sausage. I'm sorry, that's not it. Wait, treat yourself a round of sausage wasn't the answer? That's always my answer. That's really good. That's always my answer, Willie, to everyone, right?

That's my answer. Also, what is a round of sausage? Like you're at the bar, sausage on me. Thanks, Willie. Down to a bar, hey, the sauerkraut's on me, everybody. As you all can see, Mike Barnacle has joined the conversation. We're going to get to the country yourself. Random sausage guy.

When you realize what really was hungry. Come on. All right. Let's get to. Given what you just said, Mike, let's straighten up. Let's get to some of those mornings. Must read opinion pages. Conservative columnist Jonah Goldberg has a piece for the Los Angeles Times entitled, Victorious Republicans Are Once Again Falling for the Mandate Trap. And Jonah writes in part, whatever Trump believes his mandate is, at least some of the people

who voted for him will have different ideas, say for dealing with inflation and writing the economy. There's very little that he can do that won't result in some people saying, this isn't what I voted for. Once again, a victorious party is sticking its head in the mandate trap. In the 21st century, Yuval Levin writes, presidents win elections

because their opponents were unpopular. And then, imagining the public has endorsed their party activists' agenda, they used the power of their office to make themselves unpopular. This is why the incumbent party lost for the third time in a row in 2024, a feat not seen since the 19th century.

Hence, the irony of the mandate trap. In theory, Trump could solidify his build on his winning coalition, but that would require disappointing the people insisting he has a mandate to do whatever he wants, which is why it's unlikely to happen. You know, the thing is, Mike Barnicle, Donald Trump obviously, this is a victory, as we've said, that belongs, Donald Trump obviously, this is a victory, as we've said, that belongs to Donald Trump. It doesn't have to do though with ideology so much.

If you look at the fact that in the swing states that Donald Trump won, Democrats won the Senate in Nevada, Democrats won Senate in Arizona, which of course they had a real progressive when they're in Ruben Gallego. They won the Senate in Wisconsin. They won the Senate in Michigan.

It looks like they've lost the Senate in Pennsylvania, but the state and other people are not calling the race yet because the Republican is 30,000 ahead of the Democrat. And by last count, I saw states said there was still 100,000 provisional ballots, absentee ballots, overseas ballots. So but that's going to end up being close. We suspect Dave McCormick will end up winning that officially probably over the next several days. But still, well, and again, then go to North Carolina, you have a Democrat who won by double digits in North Carolina.

So any Republicans saying, we won this massive mandate in basically a 50, 49 divided country. We'll make the same mistake Bill Clinton made in 92, when he overreached and helped elect people like me in 94 and Republicans got in control for the first time in 40 years. Joe Biden won a very close race in 2020 and people started saying, you need to be like FDR. Well, he didn't have the FDR mandate and many people thought he overreached as well. And so there is always, as Jonah says, this back and forth and back and forth.

And we will see whether Donald Trump will try to build on those successes or overreach like just about every other president has done this century. You know, it's interesting. All the races you mentioned were statewide, various senators, governors, and things like that. But the top of the House vote for the President of the United States separates that office from everything else. And I do think, Joe, that what happens is that people vote for the presidency on either

up or down. They either vote for him or against him, or for her or against her in this case. And a lot of people turn their backs to the Democratic Party because of what they were hearing from Democrats. That's another thing I would submit. And they didn't go for what they were hearing and how they were living. And inflation, I think of all the things

that impacted the election, inflation still remains and was the critical factor. Because what the Biden administration was doing nearly every day, God bless them, coming on television and telling people, voters, that we had the strongest economy in the world that is actually the truth. We have the strongest economy in the world, but it's not the economy, the average lived economy that people endure each and every day in this country.

People pulling into gas stations and brand new Ford F-150 trucks or expensive cars or old cars and getting half a tank of gas because they were running out of money looking at the numbers trolling on the gas. Things like that, grocery prices. That's what did it. Not ideology, money. Gas and groceries, my chronicle's been saying that for a long time.

Another editorial from the board at the Japanese News, which is the English language version of a Japanese newspaper, US protectionism is the title. Trump's tariff measures a matter of concern. The editorial board writes, if US President-elect Donald Trump pursues protectionist measures under the banner of his America First policy, the global economy will suffer a serious blow. If the United States unilaterally imposes tariffs, China, Europe, and other countries will retaliate, and a renewed trade war is inevitable. The U.S. economy as a whole is showing remarkable strength, but lower-income earners are suffering,

as Mike just said, from high prices. However, protectionist measures will not create enough jobs and will instead reignite inflation. This will only discourage Trump supporters. The United States should proceed with measures from a realistic viewpoint of what is in the national interest. So Sam Stein, there remains a question of whether Donald Trump will deliver on these grand promises of tariffs, massive tariffs. In some cases he talked about during the campaign. He could also talk about a relationship with Mexico, if there are tariffs imposed down there, over immigration questions.

But the bottom line is, as every economist, right, left, and center will tell you, tariffs do add to the cost of things, raising inflation in America. Well, first of all, it's heartening to know that you two are also subscribed to the Japan News. I get it every day. Oh, you get it online. I get it every day. Online.

Oh, you get it online. I get it delivered. Paperboy. That's just me. This gets to the point that we're all sort of wondering, right? Is how much and how quickly will Trump move to really aggressively upend things? And this could be in terms of terrorists, could be in terms of deportations, could be in terms of Pete Hexeth allowing the military

to go into your communities, to round up people who are here illegally. It's what Jonah Goldberg was writing about, which is will he overinterpret the mandate? Now, frankly, the truth is he ran on this stuff, right? He ran on all these, it wasn't hiding the ball in the stuff, voters voted for it, he's within reason to say on the stuff. Voters voted for it.

He's within reason to say, this is what they asked for and I'm going to give it to them. And that would be justified. I do think there would be a backlash to it because I'm not sure voters really internalize all these things. You saw anecdotally people were Googling what is a tariff after the election, which maybe would have been smart to Google it before the election, but whatever. That's what we have. So that could end up being the thing

that sparks a backlash, right? If people suddenly see that, in fact, the price of goods actually is going up because of tariffs or because people who traditionally are helping you pick the vegetables from the ground have been deported and suddenly things are more costly and wait, this guy said he was gonna get control of costs. So these are all the things we're waiting for.

And we'll see how fast Trump moves on January 21st. And we'll see how much he interprets the mandate as something he should pursue or something he should operate towards as a long-term goal. Yeah, I will say as far as mandates go, we can sit here and say, well, don't overread your mandate. And I think that's certainly be smart, especially when you look at things like what Mike said, that a lot of voters went to the polls and they voted against the Biden-Harris administration because gas prices were higher, groceries were higher.

They didn't like some social issues. There was a lot of stuff mixed in there. I'm not sure they're going to want the groceries to go higher because of tariffs. But Donald Trump promised tariffs. He promised massive tariffs. He ran on it. It was sort of at the forefront of his economic policy. And so I know people on Wall Street,

people at Wall Street Journal editorial page are very concerned about tariffs as are a lot of our trading partners. But again, that was a centerpiece of his campaign. So nobody can act shocked if he comes forward with massive tariffs. And it's the same thing as we were talking about as far as mass deportation. He promised mass deportation time and time again. That was at the forefront of his campaign, and the American people voted for him. So when we're talking about overreaching, again,

the question is how humanely do you, you know, interpret that mandate and how do you deport that many citizens? That's gonna be the question, that's gonna be sort of the rub on how do you do it, fulfill the campaign promise, and not turn off a lot of voters. That's the challenge. Not deporting citizens, illegal immigrants. What's that? Deporting illegal immigrants. Yeah, that's what I was saying.