Morning Joe - Morning Joe 12/14/23

Episode Date: December 14, 2023

2019: Trump says markets will crash under Biden2023: Markets hit all time high under Biden

What is the specific constitutional crime that you're investigating? Well, we're having an inquiry, so we can do an investigation. Okay. It can tell the production of witnesses. And what is the crime you're investigating? And documents. High crimes, misdemeanors, and bribes. What high crime and misdemeanor are you investigating?

Look, I will, once I get time, I will explain what we're looking at. Wow. That, that has the real vibe of a kid who did not prepare for the class presentation. The book was not just about mice, but it also had men. And that clip is the House Republican agenda in a nutshell. That was also my high school career in a nutshell. He's not lying. All right. The lower chamber is moving forward with an impeachment inquiry, despite presenting no evidence of any wrongdoing by the president. The vote came after Hunter Biden defied a subpoena

from House Republicans, challenging them to hold a public hearing for his testimony. We'll have much more from a bitter and partisan day on Capitol Hill. And then there's this. If he's elected, the stock market will crash. That bell marks a new record high for the Dow Jones industrial average going to close above 37,000 for the first time ever. I've got to say, Willie, it's amazing that he said that. Stock market crash, all-time record high yesterday. Donald Trump, at the same time Donald Trump is saying Joe Biden has gotten us into a depression. The numbers are really strong across most of the sectors. You've got actually economists who have been predicting a recession saying that's not going to happen. We're going to have this smooth landing and that that we're going to also most likely have three interest rate cuts next year.

This reminds me a lot of 1983. Ronald Reagan strapped with a very bad economy in 1983. His approval rating got as low as 35 percent. He averaged 41 percent approval ratings on Gallup throughout 1983. That's about where Joe Biden is right now. You have again, you have this economy zooming up and it's going to follow. Voters are going to, again, start feeling this more and telling pollsters this more. But I got one thing that bothers me, Willie. Just one thing.

You and I both know I can't use the word that I want to use. It begins with D. I'll just say fellas. They're fellas driving around in convertible porsches okay you know but you know what i'm saying and they're driving around their convertible porsches they're going they're pulling into their country clubs they're getting out they're having their caddies run up and get their bags. They're going out. They're going to the clubhouses. I don't know how much Rolex watches cost.

Let's say $30,000 Rolex watches that they first bought. They can't get through their conversations at the men's grill because they keep looking. I'm serious. If their stock counters to see how much money they'll go i made sixteen thousand dollars just in the time i sat down here and then they'll go out and for 18 holes they'll about how joe biden is a socialist who's ruining the economy it happens non-stop these d these d guys it's a french word isn't guys. It's a French word, isn't it? Yeah, it's a French word. I think it ends with an E. But they drive around their Maseratis and their Porsches and their convertible

Mercedes. They talk about how horrible the economy is. They made millions and millions on Joe Biden's economy, some billions and billions. and they attack him as a socialist. It's just pure garbage. Yeah, I know exactly the person you're talking about or the people you're talking about. And I understand the word you're using. I had not to reveal too much. I've had that conversation with that person that you're describing just within the last week, as a matter of fact, and bringing up all the things that you just brought up. And now 37,000 is the Dow, the Wall Street Journal. The front page is covered in stories about how, yes, it looks like there will be a soft landing. No, it looks like we hope now that there won't be a recession. And in fact, we're turning the corner to a place where rates are going to come down. People can get back

into the housing market. Hopefully rents are coming down. So these are all positive indicators. But what you've done is folded in the politics of this. And when you say all that, they go, yeah, yeah, Biden, he's he's old, man. He may not even be on the ballot this year. You know, all the things they run to different places. And when you put together this is an amazing tweet from Donald Trump. When you put together the politics with the economy, this is in 2019. Then President Trump tweeted this quote, you mean the stock market hit an all time record high today and they're actually talking about impeachment? Wow. Will I ever be given credit for anything? Wrote Donald Trump in 2019. There you have it.

You know what they say? There's a tweak for everything, Joe. There is a tweak for everything. And you know, the new thing on Fox is Joe Biden hasn't accomplished anything. They just can't think of anything he's accomplished. That'll be the line. Well, Joe Biden's accomplished as well. I mean, more bipartisan legislation than any president since probably LBJ, bipartisan legislation and more job growth than any president in ages. He's doing better economically in every

area except for Donald Trump. Save inflation. That's because we came out of covid and and those numbers are going down now. But again, it's it's crazy. These people that are rich as hell talking about like like making hundreds of millions of dollars, making billions of dollars. They put on their little vests and they go to conferences and they talk about how Joe Biden, I want to know the word, you know, the word here. But they put on their little vests to hide their fat stomachs and they go out there and and they talk about how Joe Biden is like, oh, he's he sucks as a president. He's too old and he's a socialist. He doesn't believe in people making money. The economy's wrecked. And I hear this all the time. Joe Biden's ruining America.

He's ruining the economy. Oh, is he really? Record highs, Willie. Record highs. And they're going to you know what they're going to do today? They're going to go out and they're either going to buy like a like a portion of a, you know, a partnership in a private jet today because they're making so much money or they'll buy a Lamborghini and they'll like drive down, you know, some, you know, Westchester Main Street going 80 miles an hour for two seconds and then have to go to a stoplight. And then they'll rev their engine at the stoplight. Then they go 80 miles an hour for another four seconds. Then they'll stop, you know, and they'll have their Trump 2024 bumper sticker talking about how Joe Biden's a socialist. And then they'll get in a wreck because they're going to be looking at how much money they're making per minute because of the economy that Joe Biden has salvaged from Donald Trump. So there you go.

All right. That's all I got to say about that. Along with Joe, Willie, and me, we have the host of way too early, White House Spirit Sheet. But they really irritate me. I don't know what they are, but at Politico, John. You know exactly what they are. I don't. Who they are, because you see them just hang around any country club and watch them go

in with their Lamborghinis or their Porsches. And I mean, I know what you're talking about. I've definitely met the type. I just don't know what the word. Oh, I got it. OK, Lewis. All right. Jonathan Lemire, former White House director of communications to President Obama, Jennifer Palmieri. She's the co-host of MSNBC podcast How to Win 2024 with Claire McCaskill and U.S. national editor at The Financial Times. Ed Luce is with us and NBC News Capitol Hill correspondent Ali Vitale. And I don't mean Lewis. I mean, Lewis told me the word. I got it. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. This has happened. I got it. This has happened before. So, Jen, you know, people wonder why Joe Biden remains remains pretty calm about this while Democrats across Washington, D.C. and America wet their bed.

I mean, he knows where the economy is. He knows where the economy is going. He knows where the economy is. He knows where the economy is going. He knows it's still a very long way to go. Again, in 1983, where, you know, Ronald Reagan is, where Joe Biden was, Reagan's approval rating got at his lowest 35 percent. Why? A recession. He averaged 41 percent in 1983, the year before his election, that he won 49 states. We're not saying Joe Biden's going to win 49 states because there is, of course, the construct, the media construct has enabled people to go out and tell lies about Joe Biden and make money off of it. So they're going to keep telling lies about Joe Biden. They're going to keep making money off of it. But let them make their money. Let them lie. Joe Biden, if the economy keeps

going the way it's going with three rate cuts next year. Yeah, that sure is favorable. I mean, this is not this is not a good like one good jobs report or this isn't one good report on inflation going down. This is what has sort of kept the ceiling on, I think, particularly for consumers. You know, average Americans pay attention to interest rates. They understand what that means. They understand that the implication that has on being able to buy a house or sell a house

or knowing that going into 2024, that the plan is to have three, is to lower the rates three times. I just, I feel like that sort of takes the lid off of people having this overhang, that overhang of concern that there might be a recession, that, you know, that that interest rates are going to continue to go up. If that is gone, then I really do think the you know, the administration can go full borehead and making the argument that the plan is working. And so even as people can start to come down from the state that of anxiety that

people have been in since covid of what's the next terrible thing with some certainty. And, you know, I mean, that is a that is a very big deal. And to go to end the year knowing that that's what's coming next year, you know, I wouldn't expect to see some massive jumps in approval ratings the next week. But that portends a good glide path for next year. Yeah, for sure. Instead of it just being one report that comes out, a piece of data that stands alone. It's an overall direction. And Steve Ratner is going to join us later in the show. Will he be at the Western Wall? We shall see with his charts. But the big story, of course, is, well, we have two hot wars for the president to navigate on the world stage. The Republican controlled House has voted to formally authorize its impeachment inquiry into President Biden, despite failing to provide any evidence of wrongdoing by the president. The vote was strictly along party lines yesterday, with all 221 Republicans voting yes, all 212 Democrats voting no.

Republicans say the move will grant them the ability to better enforce their subpoenas in the courts. House Oversight Chair Republican James Comer has accused Hunter Biden and other Biden family members of engaging in, quote, shady business practices, but, as we said, has yet to reveal any evidence of wrongdoing or influence peddling by the president himself. So here is what several House Democrats said ahead of the vote. The Biden impeachment investigation isn't a whodunit. It's a what is it? It's like an Agatha Christie novel where the mystery is what's the crime? I think if we give him enough time, he's going to prove that Hunter Biden is Joe Biden's son. We're here today not because of any wrongdoing by President Biden, but because Donald Trump wants revenge.

So the Republicans leading the impeachment inquiry insisted they are driven by efforts to uphold the Constitution. But this week, some have let it slip that their true intentions are politically motivated. Take a listen. What are you hoping to gain from an impeachment inquiry? All I can see is Donald J. Trump 2024. Can you identify any actual policy decisions that Joe Biden has made in response to getting paid for those policy changes? Well, we'll have to. That would be part of the investigation. Facts haven't taken me to that point where I can say that the president's guilty of anything. President Biden, he must be really frustrated.

He's dragging Trump through the courts. Trump is rising and surging in the polls. There's, you know, this this other issue of whether Joe Biden was involved in his in his son's business dealing that I think the American people are looking at as well. So I think all that together is why you see the numbers where they're at. This has been, I think, the most transparent political congressional investigation since since I've been in Congress. Yeah, that's the most political, Willie, the most political since he's been in Congress. We I've asked I asked you and he did not deliver to give us a clip of Green Acres.

Arnold, the pig did attach at the end, but he refused to do it. Willie, that's just bad producing. We love Alex, but you've got to get the Green Acres. You've got to get the Green Acres clip in there. Yeah, I mean, they say the quiet part out loud. They've been doing that for a long time. When the one congressman from Texas walked by and says, all I can say is Trump 2024, baby. Well, there it is.

Right. That's the whole point of this exercise is somehow to dent in some way Joe Biden, even though they've shown no evidence of it. It also as Democrats in the in the vote leading the conversation leading up to the vote yesterday pointed out to put this side by side with what Donald Trump did, what he was impeached for and what those Republicans have ignored or defended. It really they've sort of lost the high ground when they're trying to talk about impeachment and defending the Constitution. But, Ali, we did get the vote party line vote. The inquiry will go forward. So what happens next? Where does this go? They continue investigating. I mean, the other quiet part out loud about all of this. And as you guys usually do, you pull the exact clips that I think are the most important about this debate, specifically

Troy Nell's coming forward and just saying Trump 2024, because House Republicans have consistently used their majority and their ability to wield the gavel from the very moment that they eventually chose a speaker back in January to play sort of counterpuncher and chief defender of former President Trump at each turn, whether it's Alvin Bragg in Manhattan, whether it's Letitia James, all of these various investigations into Trump, House Republicans through judiciary or oversight or whatever committee have always sought to sort of back up Trump and try to muddy the water. So this is yet another instance of that. In terms of where it goes next, these investigations have been going

on for the entirety of the year. The reason that I'm told from Republicans who are involved in this is that they want to move it forward to an impeachment inquiry so that they can officially say they're in the inquiry phase and have a little bit more juice behind the ability to enforce their subpoenas when inevitably it comes to defending those subpoenas in court. Fine. But I think that the important question that you showed at the beginning of the show, what are the high crimes and misdemeanors? And no one can actually put a fine point on what that is. A, it's because it depends which committee chairman you ask. Each of them are pointing to a different piece of this and saying that that's the high crime and misdemeanor.

But B, they don't have evidence for one yet. And I think that's where this whole thing breaks down. It was surprising for me that they had full unanimous Republican support yesterday to open the inquiry. My understanding was that at least one Republican congressman was lean no, at least before he got on the House floor yesterday. But now they are all marching in lockstep towards this. That breaks down when you actually try to move towards an actual impeachment, though. And I think that's where you start running into problems if you're Republicans. Yeah. And let's be clear. There has been no evidence yet presented at loose, none whatsoever. This is about Donald Trump next year

not wanting to be the only candidate on the ballot who's been impeached. This is trying to level the playing field. This is trying to tarnish President Biden's reputation. We can take Republicans at their word as to what they're trying to do. Now, White House officials I speak to, look, let's be clear. No White House wants to go through this impeachment inquiry. It's certainly not a full impeachment. If we go down that road, it's a drain on resources, a drain on time. It's a drain on just when they could be doing other things. And we know how full the president's

plate is right now, even before he really launches his reelection campaign. But what do you think? Are voters going to see this and see that there's no there there and there'll be a backlash? Could this be a political gift for this White House or is this going to be a drag on President Biden's reelection chances? I mean, I think you're absolutely right. There is no there there. I mean, if you go back to the original, you know, allegations that when he was vice president, Biden asked the Ukrainian government to fire its chief anti-corruption prosecutor. And somehow that was a pay for play. This was something the entire international community were asking for, including the

International Monetary Fund, which was conditioning its aid to Ukraine on it getting rid of a corrupt anti-corruption prosecutor. So what Biden was doing was trying to, along with everyone else, the whole of the European Union, he was trying to get Ukraine to become less corrupt. This is being presented as the exact opposite. Whether that kind of detail, you know, mud, mud's going to stick with some people, whether that kind of detail, you know, mud's going to stick with some people, whether that kind of detail, you know, will come through when it's being presented so falsely and forcefully, you know, I guess depends on who you are and which channel you're watching. The fact that there is no there that probably doesn't bother the likes of Jim Jordan.

I think Representative McGovern got it right when he said when Trump asks them to jump, they say how high. And that they're now jumping. They're now jumping for Trump. This is his retribution. And it's a PR, a PR, very cynical PR driven attempt to besmirch Biden without any evidence. Well, and forgive me for repeating the question that we ask all too often. But what do our European allies, what are NATO allies? What are our enemies? Think of a country that has a chamber, a House chamber that tells Israelis to go to hell. They're not going to fund them, tells Ukraine to go to hell. They're not going to fund them,

tells Ukraine to go to hell. They're not going to fund them. But they do have time. They do have time to move forward with a bogus impeachment inquiry that they even admit is formless. I mean, I think in terms of this impeachment inquiry, almost no attention will be paid to it. It's seen as bogus. It's seen as a charade. There is enormous amount of attention being paid to what could happen in 2024, not just, you know, amongst our allies, but, you know, in Ukraine. In Ukraine, it is life and death what happens in 2024. Of course, it's life and death what's happening now, whether they get whether they get renewed funding and American supplies to defend from another Putin winter onslaught. All right. Still ahead, a deadly day for Israeli soldiers in the war with Hamas.

It comes as the country's prime minister continues to reject calls from global leaders for any sort of ceasefire. Plus, we have brand new polling on a potential head to head matchup between President Biden and Donald Trump across seven swing states. Morning Joe is back in just a moment. Субтитры подогнал «Симон» The Israeli military suffered one of its highest single day death counts since it began its ground invasion in Gaza in late October. Ten soldiers were killed Tuesday, including a battalion commander and lieutenant colonel commander. The IDF says nine of them died in an ambush attack, while soldiers were in an advanced stage of clearing an area. The 10th soldier died in a separate battle in northern Gaza. Meanwhile, in southern Gaza, the Israeli military has ramped up its attacks. According to The Washington Post, 20 percent of the buildings in the area's largest city have

been damaged in Israeli airstrikes. President Biden criticized Israel's military campaign earlier this week at a fundraiser, saying the country is losing international support because of its, quote, indiscriminate bombings. The White House is now doubling down on that statement, saying the president's comments, quote, reflect the reality of global opinion, adding that while Israel has made some efforts to reduce civilian casualties, the Biden administration wants to see more results. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is voting, is vowing to keep fighting, rejecting calls for a ceasefire amid the growing international pressure. Israel's ambassador to the UK reaffirmed that statement

in an interview with Sky News, adding that a two-state solution with the Palestinians is not possible. Take a listen. We know we cannot negotiate with Hamas. It means we need to have a better future for the Palestinians. And in order to achieve that, you need to do what you did. Is there still a chance for a two-state solution? I think it's about time for the world to realize the Oslo paradigm failed on the 7th of October,

and we need to build a new one. And in order to build a new one and in order to build a new one include the Palestinians living in a state of their own I think that what I think the biggest question is what type of Palestinians are the other side is what Israel really the answer is absolutely no and I'll tell you why the reason there is no peace is because the Palestinians... Without offering a state to Palestine, how can there be peace in Israel? Israel knows today, and the world should know now, the reason the Oslo Accords failed is because the Palestinians

never wanted to have a state next to Israel. They want to have a state from the river to the sea. So the two-state solution is dead. Why are you obsessed with a formula that never worked, that created this radical people in the other side? Why are you obsessed with that? Think about it. Is that normal to carry on with a solution that never worked in the past? The Palestinians kept on denying and now it will create another terror state. Israel is not interested.

That is Israel's ambassador to the UK speaking yesterday. So, Ed Luce, the two-state solution is what explicitly the United States government has called for, what President Biden has been talking about a little more actually just in the last few days, even as a solution at the end of all this, once Israel is trying to root out Hamas, once it has achieved that, what peace might look like. But an absolute non-starter, as we just heard there from the ambassador and obviously for the prime minister Netanyahu as well. Yeah. Talk, Willie, about saying the quiet part out loud. What she said very explicitly there is what Netanyahu has been making sort of very clear, in other words, you know, since October the 7th. But actually, since he began his political career, he has always been opposed to a Palestinian state.

His selling point as Israel's leader and in multiple elections he's been reelected has been that he will provide security to Israelis. Well, he's completely failed to do that. The intelligence failure on October the 7th is being laid at his door. He would lose an election now. So he's looking for another another tagline. And instead of me being Mr. Security, he's going to be Mr. No Palestine. That's what he's going to fight the election on. And of course, that directly clashes with what the Biden administration is saying the day after goal should be in this situation. And I don't really see any way around that. This split is going to get worse and worse. Netanyahu will run against Biden in spite of Biden

being his best friend. There's only one friend that Netanyahu has, and that's himself. So we're going to see this split get a lot worse. And it's going to be the basis of Netanyahu's reelection campaign next year. You know, Jonathan O'Meara, following the heinous attack of October 7th, we talked about the importance of keeping things in context and talking about the heinous attack. We're now a month or two past, and we see somebody who is doing things that damages Israel in the eyes of the world every day. Benjamin Netanyahu. I mean, here's a guy we found out that was begging Qatar to keep funding Hamas, giving him billions and billions of dollars weeks before the attack. Qatar said, do you want us to keep giving Hamas money?

And the answer from Netanyahu's government was yes. Yes. Keep giving him money. Netanyahu's government had the secret plans written down that that that Hamas had to destroy, to go through the gate and to write detailed documents, burn, kill, shoot Israelis and the Netanyahu government ignored it. And we can go on and on. But but this is when. Anybody in Israel is asked why it's because he was so obsessed with avoiding a two-state solution that he made a deal with the devil. He, quote,

was buying quiet. Netanyahu cozied up to Hamas and Israelis are dead. More Israelis are dead in this attack than any time since the Holocaust. And Netanyahu and Netanyahu's people are saying we're going to keep doing what we've been doing over the past 10 years. We're going to keep telling the world to go to hell. We're going to say no to a two-state solution, and we're going to do whatever it takes, even if it makes Israelis and Jewish people at home and across the world less safe. We're going to do it. I'm sorry, we can't be a partner with this guy forever. We just can't. We can't be a partner with a guy that allowed Jews to be raped, shot, killed and burned. And his government did nothing for eight, nine, ten,

eleven hours. And we can't continue to be an ally with a guy that actually turned the spigots of money on to Hamas, telling Qatar to give them billions and billions of dollars. And before all this, questionable moves made a lot of questionable moves, some say, to remain in power and avoid indictment. Well, he's indicted. He wanted to avoid going to jail. So he started a war against the Supreme Court that split the country. He was so obsessed with that that he forgot what an Israeli prime minister's first job is, and that is to protect the people of Israel and, by extension, protect Jews there and protect the 15 million Jews living across the world.

He has failed on every count. We cannot continue supporting Benjamin Netanyahu. They need to put somebody in power that's more interested in protecting Israelis and protecting Jews than they are interested in protecting themselves from staying out of jail. An overlooked part of President Biden's comments about Israel the other day was when he said that the Netanyahu government was the most conservative in that nation's history. Netanyahu has cozied up to right-wing elements there in Israel. President Biden spoke out against his efforts to overhaul the judiciary and, of course, the settlements in the West Bank. Even now,

the Netanyahu government has been slow to condemn the violence by extremist settlers there in the West Bank because, as just noted, they still have no real embrace of a two-state solution. Despite that being the U.S. saying over and over and over, that must be the endgame here. And, Joe, as you know, I reported some weeks ago that the Biden administration believes that Netanyahu's standing is not tenable. Eventually, he will be pushed from power. There are many close to President Biden who say that day can't come soon enough. And of course, Ali Batali, all of this is the backdrop to these ongoing negotiations in Congress, because Congress hasn't sent a dime to Israel yet, two months out from those October 7th terror attacks. Obviously, the foreign aid to both Israel and Ukraine has been linked to the border security talks.

Give us an update. It seems like the lawmakers are heading for the exits before the holidays. Is there any chance of any kind of deal that could be done before then? Or is this going to be punted into the new year where the counter is already very full? Yeah, this is the open conversation that I'm having with our Hill team all the time, with our sources on the Hill, trying to figure out if the Senate leaves today, for example, will we see them come back next week or will we not see these folks again until January? The House speaker has made clear

he doesn't see a reason to call the House back. As of today, they're supposed to leave then for the next three weeks. As far as right now, we don't see them coming back. Johnson said just the other day he doesn't see the Senate making enough progress in their bipartisan negotiations to warrant bringing the House back because they wouldn't have anything to vote on. And in my understanding of where these negotiations are, really everyone from a leadership perspective has a seat at the

table, except for folks from Johnson's staff, because House Republicans have made clear they will only go along with foreign aid packages to both Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan is also lumped into this end of year supplemental package. They'll only go along with it if there's also provisions on the border, but not just that, specifically the provisions that they put in their border package earlier this year, which has many restrictive and frankly red lines for a lot of not just House, but also Senate Democrats. I think what I'm looking for is we're starting to see the chorus from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus get louder over the fact that they hate some of the provisions that are clearly on the table in these negotiations. Things like rolling

back the way asylum is handled. Is it Title 42 coming back on the table? There's a bunch of different bullet points that we've heard bandied about in these negotiations. Nothing is firm. Nothing is on paper. At least that was the case when we left last night. The Senate and its key negotiators have continued holding meetings, huddling in the Capitol. They were working into the wee hours, is my understanding, last night. But it doesn't mean that they're any closer to any kind of an agreement. I think the thing I keep coming back to is now that immigration, one of the thorniest issues that all of us have watched bipartisan negotiations seemingly come together on and then fall apart, Congress has been incapable of dealing with this issue over the course of the last several years when it was a standalone. Now you put it next to things like Ukraine and Israel funding, which are thorny in their own ways. It just makes this supplemental package that much harder. And frankly, time is ticking down on the table. And all of this made for quite a scene up on Capitol Hill a couple of days ago

when President Zelensky was talking to Republicans and they were asking him about immigration and the border. He said, I understand you have domestic political problems. I'm here looking for bullets. So I'll let you guys sort out the rest of it. NBC News Capitol Hill correspondent Ali Vitale, thank you for your reporting. So, Jen Palmieri, it does appear that the White House is open to some kind of a deal on immigration. Of course, they'd all like to do this separately from funding for Ukraine and separately from funding for Israel. But is it your sense that the White House and the Biden campaign as well understands that something has to change? There

is a crisis at the border and that they do have to address immigration, especially with an election year around the corner? Yes. I mean, in one word, yes. And I thought it was interesting a couple days ago, Senator John Fetterman said talked about this issue and said it's not xenophobic to think that we need to deal with the problem at the border. There is an actual problem at the border. He said something like, you know, the population of Pittsburgh is the equivalent of that showing up there and we need to deal with it. And so when you have progressive senators like that saying this is a problem that we need to deal with, it suggests that, you know, the dynamics of the issue, not the dynamics of the issue are moving, but that the recognition of just the logistical human problem at the border is recognized.

I have heard from senators that they feel that this deal can happen. Ali is certainly right, though, that the details matter a lot and that there's concern that you don't want to understand that something may need to be done here, but not to give away too much that you're starting a new baseline for negotiate, you know, longer term negotiations that have undone a lot of what of some of the protections, particularly, you know, that some of the asylum and humanitarian protections that is that there's a concern about how about the details. But I think that with the White House want to get something done here. Yes, they do. Yeah, the White House wants to get something done. They're willing to the Republicans

more than halfway. And John Fetterman is right. The senator is right. And we're hearing it from Democratic mayors, Democratic governors. What's happening at the border is a madness, just complete madness. And the Biden administration understands that. And they're trying to get to a deal with the Republicans, not just because they want the Israel funding and the Ukraine funding to go through. They're trying to get to a deal because they understand the border needs to be fixed. But every time they've tried to get a deal with Republicans, Republicans have run away because Republicans don't want the deal. Republicans don't want the border fixed. They want their talking points for when they go on other cable news networks. They want to bitch and moan and whine and be little snowflakes

and be triggered by all of those immigrants coming in. But then when Biden's team starts talking about our Democrats on the Hill, start talking about fixes, they run away like little babies, like little babies. It's so sad. I feel so sorry for them. They're little snowflakes. They just want to whine instead of getting things done. They don't want to help Israel. They want to whine. They don't want to get things done. They don't want to help Ukraine. They want to whine. They don't want to get things done. They'd rather Vladimir Putin win than Joe Biden win. It's that simple. Even on the border, the Biden administration's gone more than halfway. They're willing to do the deal on the border. But the Republicans are whining.

They're running away. What they don't understand is they're giving Biden and Democrats in swing districts incredible issues, not just abortion, but say, hey, look, the Republicans, the Republicans, they not only betrayed our allies in Israel, they not only allowed Vladimir Putin to walk into Kiev. Took away 50 years of rights. They Kiev. Took away 50 years of rights. They not only took away 50 years of rights, they wouldn't even fix the border. This is what Biden proposed. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten. And the Republicans said no, no, no, no. No to border security. Republicans no, no to border security.

Republicans suddenly don't want border security. They want the talking point. They don't want our borders secured. Now, I think I think there's some of the Senate that actually do. I've heard James Langford talking in good faith about negotiating. I've heard some other people talking in good faith about negotiating. I'm sure there's some good Republican senators that want to negotiate. Nobody in the House that I've seen, though, nobody's come forward in the House to say, let's secure the border and actually

let's do something about it instead of whining, being little snowflakes going on cable news networks, hoping to get 14 people watching us or maybe having a TikTok video and getting like 37 hits. I mean, it's just ridiculous. So I want to circle back to Ed Luce. Ed, you're working on biography of a great mind, a great foreign policy thinker of our time who had something to do with Middle East peace processes. Camp David, we're talking, of course, of Dr. Brzezinski, Mika's father. Every time we

bring him up in Middle East peace, Mika breaks out in a cold sweat. But tell me, what's your best insight on Dr. Brzezinski's approach at this point in this negotiation process? So Mika breaks out in a cold sweat because she was there at Camp David for those 13 days. I guess some playdates with Amy Carter and whatever they were occupying you with. But it is one of two times. To be clear, Ed, it is true. And Jimmy Carter, Jimmy Carter validated this at Dr. Brzezinski's funeral. Mika did, in fact, run over Minak and Bacon with a gun.

No, I didn't run him over. It was a slight nudge. A slight nudge. By mistake, because I got the... I said, so that's true. He said it's true. Nudge is a good word. Nudge is a good word. Nudge is a good word. I mean, what Camp David achieved in 1978 was the biggest sort of increase in Israeli security that had been seen, pushed by an American administration to date. And that was to take Egypt off the list of Israel's enemies, to normalize with Egypt.

The other sort of great effort—and, of course, Dr. Brzezinski was heavily involved with Jimmy Carter's negotiations with Sadat and Begin there over those 13 days. And the other was the Bush administration with the Oslo Accords. And I think what Dr. Brzezinski would be saying today would be very little different to what he was saying then, was that Israel's security is very much intimately bound up to Palestine's sense of security, that the two cannot be separated,

and that a two-state solution is the most pro-Israeli thing that we can be pushing for. And furthermore, that America supplies the arms to Israel is the most pro-Israeli thing that we can be pushing for. And furthermore, that America, you know, supplies the arms to Israel, the Iron Dome that protects it, and also the diplomatic cover at the UN. And this cannot be a blank check. If we see Israel doing things that are harmful to its own security, and Secretary Austin, you know, made it very clear,

this is strategic blunder, then we have to call out when we see our friends blundering. And I think that would be Mika's dad's position on this. Yeah, and that's a brilliant way to put it. And he, of course, is brilliant. But yes, we course, is brilliant. But yes, we're we're we support. I support the Biden administration supports a two state solution, not just for Palestinians, dignity and safety. We support it for Israel's long of the things with the Abraham Accords. Abraham Accords cynically believe that you could ignore the Palestinians and strike deals with different Arab states who also hated the Palestinians and that the Palestinian issue would go away. Did it go away? No, it won't go away until there's a two state solution. And Benjamin Netanyahu and people who speak for Benjamin Netanyahu saying there can never be a two state solution are lying.

There can be. Not right now. Again, context is key. The last thing Israelis want to do right now is talk about a two state solution. And we certainly understand that. But this is something that has to be over the horizon. is talk about a two-state solution. And we certainly understand that. But this is something that has to be over the horizon. The United States can't allow people like Benjamin Netanyahu to continue to take the reckless actions that he's taken that's divided Israel, made it less safe,

fed Hamas billions of dollars through Qatar, and then just sat back and slept for seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13 hours while these Israeli women were being raped and little babies were being shot up in their cribs. We can't let that sort of person just just have a blank check. Exactly. Because he had a blank check. And look what's happened. U.S. National Editor at the Financial Times, Ed Luce. Ed, thank you so much for coming in this morning. I know it's a very stressful and difficult time for you.

And we appreciate your coming in to talk about this and other things. Thank you, Ed. All right. Coming up, U.S. stocks surged yesterday on signs the Federal Reserve could start cutting interest rates sooner than expected. Steve Radner will join us with charts on what's driving the optimism from the central bank. Morning Joe is coming right back. As we approach the end of the year, it's natural to look back on the progress that has been made toward our dual mandate objectives. Inflation has eased from its highs, and this has come without a significant increase in unemployment. That's very good news.

But inflation is still too high, ongoing progress in bringing it down is not assured, and the path forward is uncertain. As we look ahead to next year, I want to assure the American people that we're fully committed to returning inflation to our 2% goal. I have always felt, since the beginning, that there was a possibility, because of the unusual situation, that the economy could cool off in a way that enabled inflation to come down without the kind of large job losses that have often been associated with high inflation and tightening cycles. So far, that's what we're seeing. That's what many forecasters on and off the committee are seeing. This result is not guaranteed. It is far too early to declare victory. Some optimism there from Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell as he spoke yesterday. His comments, as we mentioned, helped to send the stock market to record highs, clearing 37,000 as it closed. Joining us now, former Treasury official, Morning Joe economic analyst, Steve Ratner.

Steve, good morning. Good to see you back at your post at the Southwestern Wall. Very glad to be back at the Southwestern Wall. Thank you. Let's start with your first chart, Fed lowering inflations and the rate projections, what it might do next year. Yeah. So consistent with what Chairman Powell said yesterday, the Fed has changed a number of its projections. This is actually one of the most consequential meetings I can remember

at which the Fed did nothing in the sense of not changing rates, but they did a lot of other stuff. So let's start by talking about what's happening with inflation. And this is, of course, what underlies all of these rate increases, all of the Fed's effort to slow down the economy. And what's very dramatic is how the Fed has changed its inflation expectation just in three months. If you go back to its September projection, which is this blue line here, the Fed thought inflation this year was going to be 3.3 percent. In three months it has taken it down to 2.8 percent. That is a major change. And it has lowered its inflation projections along the rest of the curve for the next several years. So that is what leads the Fed

to have changed its expectations about interest rates. And again, if you just go back to September, this blue line is what the Fed thought was going to happen to interest rates. And again, if you just go back to September, this blue line is what the Fed thought was going to happen to interest rates. This is what the Fed now thinks is going to happen to interest rates. Three interest rate reductions of a quarter of a point each this year. And then interest rates continue to stay below what it previously thought and getting all the way down below 3%. What's one other thing to note here is that the credit markets, which have their own view of life and their own view of the economy, actually think interest rates are going to come down even faster. They think they're going to come down by one and a quarter percent

over the next year. So a very bullish outlook from the market and a positive outlook from the Fed. So, Steve, is it fair to say that we don't want to put up the mission accomplished banner here yet, but that the Fed achieved its goals with these rate hikes that sometimes frustrated people as they continue to go up, did the job they were intended to do, which was to tame inflation? It's really quite extraordinary. This may well be the first time we have had inflation of this magnitude and gotten it out of the system without a recession, what the market likes to call immaculate disinflation. And it is really it will be really quite an accomplishment if this actually occurs. Well, let's see if it occurs. We can move to your next chart suggesting a soft landing. Let's remind our viewers what that means exactly.

And if you think that's going to happen. So soft landing is another word for immaculate disinflation. It means basically getting inflation back down to the Fed's 2% target without having a recession. Again, something that would almost be without precedent in recent American economic history anyway. But let's take a look at what the Fed is, how the Fed is saying that. So the Fed is basically saying that we will have continued economic growth. This is real GDP growth year by year going back to 2016. Obviously, we had a hit during COVID. We had a strong 21, 22 and again, 23. If you looked at the Fed's projection from one year ago, this 2.6 number for this year's

growth rate would be 0.5 percent. They thought the economy was going to really slow down, and it didn't. And then as you look out, they're projecting smaller but positive increases, meaning no recession in their forecast at the moment, the so-called soft landing. And that has very significant implications for unemployment. Unemployment, of course, is still down near a historic low of 3.8%. They do think it trends up a little bit to 4.1%, part of keeping inflation under control. But this is still well within what economists call full employment,

a really, really successful economy. A lot of good numbers there. And a huge one on Wall Street yesterday, as you know, Steve, crossing and closing over 37,000. Obviously, the market's looking at the possibility now, the distinct possibility that rates will come down, which is good news for Wall Street. Sure. And we can take a look at the stock market reaction in real time because it is quite interesting. So this is yesterday. We look at the S&P. That's kind of what investors look at.

And you can see that the stock market was kind of flat during the day. This is noon on, flat during the day. The Fed announces its decision, puts out a statement, and the market immediately jumps. And then you had the Powell Press Conference. We showed a clip of that just a few minutes ago. And the market just took off from there, up 1.4% on the day. That is a very, very significant move by the stock market. But what's even more significant is what that means for the year. So the stock market at the moment, after yesterday, is up 22% year to date. And while the Dow Jones has hit a record, the S&P is just short of it. The record that occurred back here when the Fed first started raising interest rates.

High interest rates are the enemy of the stock market. Low interest rates or the expectation of low interest rates are the enemy of the stock market. Low interest rates or the expectation of low interest rates are the friend of the stock market. A lot of objectively good data. We're not even talking about politics here. This is just all good for people. Low unemployment growth and hopefully that soft landing you've been talking about. Steve Ratner with his charts at the Southwestern Wall. Steve, thanks so much. We always appreciate it.