Morning Joe - Morning Joe 12/16/24

Episode Date: December 16, 2024

Republican senator warns pressure to push through nominees could backfire

Donald Trump has been named Time's Person of the Year because no person on earth has taken up more of our goddamn time. Good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. It's Monday, December 16th. We have a lot to get to this morning, including what's being called the ongoing pressure campaign from the president-elect's team and his allies to get controversial cabinet picks confirmed. Meanwhile, defense secretary nominee Pete Hegseth appears to have swayed some senators.

But Trump's selection to lead America's intelligence agencies seems to be having a more difficult time winning over lawmakers. We'll dig into all of this. Also ahead, we'll go through the diplomatic developments out of the Middle East, as U.S. officials are now in direct contact with the Syrian rebel group that ousted Bashar al-Assad. And we'll bring you the latest reporting on these drone sightings that are spreading across several states, as well as the criticism to the federal government's response. What is really going on here?

I mean, come on. Jonathan Lemire, you're going to tell us what's at the bottom of this, because I mean, I don't know. There seems to be a lot of panic out there. You have elected leaders going, look at all of the drones, look at all of the drones, and they're like pointing up at Orion. Yeah, I mean, so it's interesting. Yeah, former Governor Hogan of Maryland, this weekend, identified what he thought were drones and those who saw his pictures on social media quickly noted now that was just a

constellation. That's Orion, but at least there's this crazy back and forth and I mean it's pretty insane. Typical government, though, if they could just put out a coherent, honest message about what's going on. But the fact of the matter is they probably don't. They seem like they just don't know or they know and are completely unwilling to pass that information on to the public and are causing people to just lose their minds over it. Yeah, we certainly didn't get a very clear answer

from the White House podium last week. I will say that one of the lawmakers at the forefront of this, new Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey, who went out with patrols trying to figure it out, he's calling for more clarity from the government, but he says that the more he's looked at it and talked to aviation experts, he thinks most of these are actually just airplanes.

They're planes. Oh my God. And not any sort of suspicious. They're planes, Oh my God. And not any sort of suspicious. They're playing for him. Why is he the only elected official who's out there saying, yes, I'm looking into it. I'm actively doing something. Right, the Wall Street Journal has an editorial on this

talking about how this might be playing into the lack of faith in government institutions. We'll see. We'll cover this and ask all the right questions with us here to do just that. The president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Passe. Drones or UFOs? Is this like close encounters of the third time?

Those are the only two choices? Look at this. Those are the two choices. Well, we got the guy you all know. Former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, retired 4-star Navy Admiral, and also drone follower and UFO watcher James Travidis. Admiral, what's going on up there over the skies of Jersey? What I was watching was the Army-Navy game, which will now be called forever the Navy

Army game. Yeah, exactly. Good answer. Okay. Co-founder and CEO of Axios is with us, Jim Van De Hei, as well. Great team to start off the week. So let's dive right in. As some of President-elect Donald Trump's controversial cabinet picks work to win over

members of Congress, Republican Senator Tom Tillis is warning that the pressure campaign to push through nominees could backfire. Speaking on Fox News yesterday, Senator Tillis criticized those who are threatening to fund primary challenges against Republican senators who've been critical of Trump's picks. What's amazing to me is how people, we're not even in the new administration. And we're at, we haven't even seen the background checks, which I know the administration is sending our way. So there's a lot of information that needs to be gathered.

And these folks who are making primary challenges, running ads, they seem more like political opportunists than me than thoughtful members of the Republican Party. A lot of this are third parties that are making money from the fundraising campaigns to put some ads in there but double-digit percentages are going into their pockets. Here's what I would tell them, if they really support President Trump's nominees they should stand down and let the nominees win on their own merits and I think most of them will. Members are not really swayed by these. If anything they could create a structural

problem for future nominees if they overreach. Cash Patel, who I'm working with because he's on my committee of jurisdiction, is going to enjoy solid Republican support on the Senate floor and coming out of the committee. I think that Pete Hedseth is going to have to go to the committee and answer some questions about organizational experience, some of his past marriages, those sorts of things. All of that's fair game when you're running for a cabinet or sub-cabinet position. And Senator Susan Collins, who has expressed concern with some of Trump's picks, was asked

about the pressure campaign last week. What do you think of the pressure campaign from the Trump allies to try to get you to toe the line on these nominees. Is it effective? No. I've taken many, many difficult votes over the years that I've been privileged to serve in the Senate. Jim Van De Haa, you know, actually, Tom, tell us this.

All right. So many people, what you see, whether it's here or whether you see it on social media, so many people are just out there. It's the grift. They want to say, hey, we're fighting for your side. Contribute here. And it's just it's unfortunately, that's just part of the grift that's out there. But in this case, especially when you're dealing with the Senate, and Donald Trump's not even

president yet, and there are all these threats that are flying around there, and we're going to get them, and we're going to shove it down their throat, and we're going to this, and we're going to that. I mean, you're talking about four senators, and you've probably lost Lisa Murkowski and Mitch McConnell on most of them, Susan Collins perhaps on some. What do you think about Tom Tillis's remarks that this could backfire? I think both things are true, right?

I think senators are really annoyed by it. There's a ton of pressure. This is unprecedented in a transition to power to have people running ads, to be people already threatening to have a primary challenger, putting money into PACs to do just that. So it is annoying to the senators. But at the same time, it's effective. Look what happened with Jodie Ernst in Iowa. She was so opposed to the defense secretary nominee.

She was telling her colleagues about it. She was making not even very cryptic statements publicly about her opposition. And then she gets pummeled on X gets pummeled in conservative media A lot of money is spent back home and suddenly she has to say wait a second Maybe this could actually work after all and so I think that pressure Campaign is not going to abate and I think a lot of senators especially those who want to stick around for a long time They are persuadable when that pressure comes. They do fear a well-funded primary challenge. They do want to endear themselves with the president-elect. And so I think that dynamic is going to be

only intensified because there's several nominees that you've talked about a ton on the show that are very controversial, that senators, when you talk to them privately, have deep deep deep reservations about, yet they might hold those deep reservations, plug their nose and say, whatever, I want to go with the president because I don't want the consequences. Yeah, I just heard something though from Tom Tillis there, pretty, pretty shocking. Say, I think most Republicans are going to be okay with Cash Patel. Yeah. A guy who has promised to throw journalists in jail.

Let's just full stop here again. And there was a New York Times article saying, well, you know, because Republicans have some problems with the FBI, then yes, Cash Patel is maybe the guy that they'll be supporting. There are a thousand people you could put in to actually clean up the FBI, to overhaul the parts of the FBI that need to be overhauled, that doesn't have an enemies list, Tom Tillis, that doesn't have an enemies list of like 60, 62 people and hasn't promised to go after them in power and hasn't said, yes, we're're gonna go out and we're going to throw members of the press in jail and yet Tom Tillis is like yeah we know public

that's that is that is shocking that again that you know they're still looking at Hegseth and they should and I've heard like you still some problems for him Tulsi Gabbard had a terrible week last week. But Cash Patel is like, oh, yeah, you know what? Yeah, the FBI has done some things that are wrong. So you're going to put somebody in, again, has an enemies list of over 60 people that he said he's going after and said he's going to arrest members of the media that didn't follow along with Donald Trump's 2020 Stop the Steal conspiracy campaign.

Are the Republicans really going to allow the next FBI director to be a person who has said that, who has done that? To this point, Patel has really benefited from the spotlight being elsewhere. Gates, Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard and how that Republicans even if they haven't had to take a vote yet but even just signaling their opposition to some they feel like well there I can only even do that for so many of these candidates and Patel has flown under the radar and that's gonna continue likely this week because Robert F Kennedy jr. goes to the hill today and he's going to rightly take a

lot of the spotlight there so Patel has more quietly gone through this process. He's met with a lot of Republicans, but you're so right. There are Republicans and there are sure Democrats too. We feel like there might be some changes needed at the FBI. But Cash Patel is not an agent of reform. He's an agent of retribution. He's in that job explicitly because he channels what Donald Trump wants. Longwood said that Patel, no ideology of his own.

It's simply whatever Donald Trump wants him to do. And he has an enemies list of his own that's in his book. He wrote it out. As well as someone who is going to take his cues from who Trump has said for months now, he wants to have retribution against, whether that's his own members of his first administration, lawmakers, members of the January 6, lawmakers, members of the January 6 committee, members of the media. And Patel has shown no hesitation in signaling his support for that. And at least to this moment, Republicans on the Hill seem okay with it.

He's promised to do it. He's promised to do it. He's promised. It's not that he's signaled. He's promised to do it. And I can say, Richard, not only what does this say to other countries across the globe, what does this say to the markets about the rule of law? There's a reason why our stock market is the envy of the world, our economy is the envy of the world.

There's a reason why people are leaving the London Stock Exchange and coming to the United States. There's a reason why businesses from all over the world are coming to the United States. It's the rule of law. You don't have to worry about things moving and changing and the rules and the laws changing depending on who's in office. Somebody like Cash Patel who said, I have an enemies list of 62 people

and I promise you I'm going to arrest journalists and I'm going to get them criminally or civilly whatever it takes. That's Orban. That's exactly what Orban and Putin has said they're going to do. Let's look at their economies. I wonder how that would work for the United States of America once that happened the first time. Two thoughts. Rule of law is the proverbial oxygen of a society and an economy. And you don't notice it's missing until it's missing, by which point it's a little bit late.

So it is. It's essential. It's foundational to all that we are. Second of all, one would have thought if you were the FBI director, you've got enough real challenges on your hand. We still have terrorism to worry about. Indeed, we could have more terrorism to worry about given what's going on, say, in Syria potentially.

Right. Last I checked, we have serious crime problems in this country. Last I checked, we go down and down and down, corruption issues. So I would think the FBI director has his hands full without going after journalists. When you want somebody in the FBI that actually knew how to run the FBI and actually knew, had experience on how to do all of these things? I think that's one of the common threads here with this, with Hegseth and others. Put aside character issues and the rest. It's just a question of whether they have the necessary background. These are enormous management. By the way, there's no member of the Senate that thinks

These are enormous management. By the way, there's no member of the Senate that thinks Pete Hegseth has what it takes to run the biggest, most powerful, most complicated, most Byzantine bureaucracy on planet Earth. No body, no Republican in the Senate believes that. So how does he get 50 votes? That to me is what these hearings need to be more about. Quite honestly, I understand the other personal character issues. What I actually think these hearings ought to be about is whether this person has the qualifications, the backgrounds, the

experience, yes the judgment, I get it, to do these big important powerful jobs. And so if you're thinking like this incoming president who is often self-interested and to him a strong economy Is the definition of strength to him? and I think the point that you've just made is one of the more important ones is how does this ultimately impact the success of Donald Trump and the strength of Donald Trump if destabilization of the rule of law whether it's through the Department of Defense or the FBI Hurts the economy ultimately that's not good for the incoming president.

Well, it's terrible for the economy. It's terrible for the stock market. I mean, it's terrible for America. For America. It's terrible for democracy. It's something that we tried to say throughout the campaign on this show. We said, OK, yes, yes, this is a challenge to American democracy. It's also a challenge to American capitalism if you destabilize constitutional norms and

you destabilize the rule of law. So Pete Hegsath's lack of experience for a position as significant as defense secretary is raising questions about his views on the U.S. military and its role at home and abroad. Peter Bergen, a national security analyst for CNN, went through Hegseth's book, The War on Warriors, which was published in June. Bergen writes, the book is an odd mix of slogans and unsupported assertions about the purportedly Marxist and woke U.S. military. It is 228 pages long and has no footnotes and few facts to back up its claims, some of which are dubious at best. Bergen continues.

Hegseth spends a chapter of his book on dumping on the trans troops in the U.S. military, whom he portrays as a key plank of the Pentagon's purportedly woke agenda. Bergen points out that Hegseth's writings about trans troops is a sizable red herring, even using a high-end estimate to only about 0.5 percent of service members are trans people. Hegseth's book is also silent on the big issues that a future secretary of defense might have to face, such as the Chinese possibly invading Taiwan. Meanwhile, the New Republic outlines Hegseth's prediction

that the military may have to mobilize against U.S. citizens in a civil war. And here it is. That comes from his 2020 book, American Crusade. In it, Hegseth writes, America will decline and die. A national divorce will ensue. Very patriotic. Outnumbered freedom lovers will fight back.

The military and police, both bastions of freedom-loving patriots, will be forced to make a choice. It will not be good. Yes, there will be some form of civil war. In another section, Hegseth writes that our present moment is much like the 11th century. We do not want to fight, but like our fellow Christians 1,000 years ago, we must arm yourself metaphorically, intellectually, physically. Our fight is not with guns yet. So Admiral Stravidis, there are so many things That are so effing, it's early in the morning, I'm going to give moms and dads across the East Coast a break.

Yeah, you just don't need to do it. That is so crazy. But what is so disturbing, especially for those concerned about the implementation of the Insurrection Act, is you have a guy here in a book that is saying that America is on decline and dying. That's a lie. It's a total absolute lie. Our military is stronger than any time since 45, relevant to the rest of the world, our

economy, the envy of the world. I was overseas this weekend. I can tell you everybody wringing their hands asking why they can't be more like America. Our allies across Europe just looking at our strength economically right now and just beyond themselves. I mean, America economically stronger than it has been in such a long time relative to the rest of the world. And yet we have a guy who wants to be head of the DOD talking about America dying, America collapsing, America in the 11th century.

This is the crusades. There is going to be a civil war. The military and the police are going to take up arms against its own people. What do you say to the Republican senators and the Democratic senators that are going to have to vote on this nominee? I'm going to pick up three threads. One is the personal character issues. I think those are very, very important. I

think more to follow on that as the FBI report comes out. I thought significant that Secretary Designate Heng Seth indicated supposedly to Lindsey Graham that he is going to allow the woman who he allegedly sexually assaulted to be free of her non-disclosure. All of that is going to come out. Character matters. Number two, what you just unpackaged, Joe, it's the policy questions. I agree with your assessment of all that.

I want to add one that didn't come out vividly there, and it's his comments about women. Women in combat, women in the armed forces. He's trying to kind of walk back from that, but the gist of his commentary thus far has been women are not additive to the mission of the Department of Defense. Look, I commanded thousands of women in combat starting in 1993 when I was captain of a destroyer with a crew that had both men and women. I've commanded women in carrier strike groups under my command in Afghanistan and US Southern Command. Women at the Naval Academy, we talked about the Army-Navy game, there are 22 guys on the field. There are 8,000 people in the stands

from Annapolis and West Point. One-third of them are women. So that basket of policy issues, both the ones you described, and I want to hear from him, full-throated support for women in combat in the military because that's the reality. You can't man 100% of the force with 50% of the population. That's a recruiting challenge no one will overtake. Yeah. And I find it hard to believe that Jodie Ernst, who understands about women in combat, who

understands about sexual abuse, who understands all the things that she understands, there's never been a nominee more lined up for her to vote against. Is she really going to fold on all of her principles on everything she has fought for on the Armed Services Committee regarding the protection of women in and out of uniform

because a couple of ads are run against her? And what could he say now? What could he say that would unsay? There's nothing that he can do to unsay what he has said. 16% of the US military women, I have embedded with female Marines in Helmand who have been under fire, women in combat, they handle it just fine, they handle it just as fine as the men. The fact that we want this retrograde throwback, I don't get the balance between- To the 11th century.

The crusades. The crusades. It used to be like, oh, they want to go back to the 1950s. He wants to go back to the 11th century. I know, I don't get it at all. You throwback. How do you not get it? How do you have Elon on the one hand saying

that our tech is so outdated and antiquated, and then you have a defense nominee who wants to go back to their crusades? It makes no sense. All right. We're going to take a 90-second break. And on the other side, we're going to check in with Ryan Nobles live at the Capitol to get the latest on this. Also ahead, in a new landmark case, the attorney general of Texas is suing a New York doctor for prescribing

the abortion pill to a North Texas woman. We'll talk about the implications of this new lawsuit and the legal battle it sets up between two states. Plus NBC's Matt Bradley joins us live from Damascus with an inside look at a drug lab in Syria that helped fund Bashar al-Assad's regime. Morning Joe is back in 90 seconds. Talked at some of the other headlines making news this morning, a former FBI informant is now admitting he made up a claim that President Biden and his son Hunter accepted millions

of dollars in bribes from Ukraine. I'm shocked. Alexander Smirnov is now pleading guilty to a range of federal charges. Back in 2020, Smirnov spread the reason lie that the owner of the Ukrainian energy company, Burisma, had arranged to pay $5 million in bribes to both President Biden and his son. The claim was leaked to Republicans who made the lie the centerpiece of their now-defunct effort to impeach the president.

I mean, Arnold the Pig tried to tell Comer over and over again. There were so many of these things. Anyone else covering this? that again and they kept saying the lies would come and they would call the lies smoke. Everybody kept lying so other smoke about this and it all leads back to Joe Biden getting a payoff. There's reasons never fire because they were lies yet that their key witnesses were going to be someone who now is

admitted to make up the whole thing or international fugitive. You know, these are people with deep, deep credibility issues. They were never able to provide any evidence, but that didn't matter. Republicans didn't care. They didn't care. There was never any attempt to get evidence. They said, well, it didn't look good.

And they would have the hearings with explicit efforts to politically damage the president. All right. Governor Ron DeSantis is facing a choice in Florida. Either appoint Donald Trump's daughter-in-law to the U.S. Senate or risk the potential backlash from mega Republicans. Lara Trump has openly expressed interest in replacing Senator Marco Rubio, who is set to become Secretary of State. According to the Washington Post, the president-elect himself has communicated that as well. DeSantis is considering his future too, including a possible administration role.

The Senate in 2026 or even another run for president will be following that. And the Wall Street Journal reports Apple is planning a series of major iPhone design changes and a new bid to revive growth. People familiar with the company's plans tell the journal that starting next year, Apple plans to introduce an iPhone that will be thinner than the current models. Is that better? Those same people said the company is also planning to unveil a foldable iPhone.

Okay, can we talk? Let's talk cleaner. Thinner? Like, I guess the young people will love it, but I like like a walking typewriter. I know I need to see and it needs to be substantial and these cases are a joke and on top of it if you change the plug again, your ripoff game is over. That is such a ripoff. You have ripped off billions of people. I don't have that problem with my flip phone.

Let's turn back now to the discussions we were having before the break on Donald Trump's cabinet picks. NBC News Capitol correspondent Ryan Nobles joins us now. You know, Ryan, it's kind of hard to follow all of this because you never really know exactly what the senators are thinking. They'll say one thing like,

we're gonna let the process move forward, which means they're going to let gravity take care of itself, hopefully on Hegseth, many of them are thinking. But it does appear that last week Tulsi Gabbard had a pretty rough week. Tell us about it. Yeah, I think you're right, Joe. The one thing I know for sure is that what I'm being told is that there aren't going to be any more early exits for any of these nominees.

There's not another Matt Gaetz in this crop. That senators seem resigned to the idea that they've got to let this process play itself out. They've got to let the hearings take place. They've got to let the background checks take place. And then if other things pop up along that process. Excuse me. If the hearing process becomes a disaster for any of these nominees, then perhaps that could be the situation that forces some of them out of this particular effort to win confirmation.

You know, Tulsi Gabbard's situation is a unique one in that her, the problems that she has with many of these senators are national security ones. They're ones that can't necessarily be discussed in an open setting. And I've been wondering, you know, just how her hearing could potentially take place. She would appear in front of the Intelligence Committee as she's up to become the director of National Intelligence.

And they may wanna talk to her about some classified information. You know, there may be something having to do with these meetings that she's had, the meetings she had in Syria with Bashar al-Assad. They could have questions about her past statements on Russia that they may want to ask in a classified setting. And that may be something the public is not privy to, and it could either make or break her nomination as a result.

But what we are being told is that these meetings that she's had, they haven't gotten good answers to a lot of these questions that senators have about her past statements and about these meetings that she's had. So there are a number of different ways that this process could play itself out. And as you guys have already talked about this morning,

there are so many of these controversial nominees, but there are also so many no votes that each one of these senators can take and then still allow their political future to be preserved that you have to imagine that most, if not all of them get through, and there may be only one or two more sacrificial lambs that the Senate is willing to take on.

And I think what they're trying to figure out right now is who among this group of controversial nominees is worth extending political capital on to deny them taking on these very important positions that they're up for. All right, NBC News Capitol correspondent Ryan Nobles, thank you very much. I mean, one of those is gonna be Tulsi Gabbard.

I can't believe there aren't people in the Intel committee that have spent their entire adult life trying to build out the Intel committee that's going to allow Tulsi Gabbard to get through, especially after the events in Syria. What do you think? Well, one, the idea that she now has what secret information about or classified stuff about Syria. I think it's kind of late.

Bashar al-Assad, the last I checked, is living in Adasha somewhere outside of Moscow. I think you don't need to ask her about classified stuff. You could just test her on her general knowledge of international relations, what's going on in the world, and I think the depth of the lack thereof will, shall we say, become clear. Yeah. Hey, Jim Van De Hei, as I said earlier, I had a busy weekend talking to business and political leaders in New York and political leaders in New York and London. And they all have the same question. Who's going to be in control in Trump's inner circle?

Because that's going to move on tariffs, that's on how immigration is going to be carried out, that's how a thousand different policy questions are going to be asked. And you have actually a report on this, and it is the divide. And this is, again, this is what's vexed business leaders on both sides of the Atlantic, political leaders on both sides of the Atlantic, thought leaders on both sides of the Atlantic. Who is going to have his ear the most, the creators or the destroyers?

Tell us about it. Joe, I think you understand Trump's mind as well as anyone. I think their intention right now. The creators are the folks you're seeing named to the economic jobs, the energy jobs, the AI jobs, where they feel like they can juice economic growth, try to keep jobless rates low and then keep the stock market soaring. If he does that, he feels like he'll have a very successful presidency.

He'd be popular, and he'd get sort of what he wants out of the White House. But at the same time, all the people you talked about earlier, all these people who are up for cabinet jobs that are controversial, they would fall into that destroyer category. And those are people that are brought in specifically because of their loyalty, partly to do retribution, partly to gut the very agency that they're being put in charge of. And I think that's the reason you have

such jarring moments with Trump. I think you're gonna see these wild swings between the two of them. Tying all of your stories together today, think about that drones in the sky, right? Like just right now, you have a ton of people sitting on X who think that it's UFOs or think that it's the Iranians are ready to wage war on America.

You've got others paying no attention to it. You have the president-elect saying, maybe we should just shoot them down. Then you talk about, He said that Defense Secretary worrying about a woke Military or worrying about Trans in the military really the biggest topic and you have smarter people on the set today than me on this That the military needs to worry about that the next Defense Secretary has to worry about is drones or it's related to drones It's how do you move as quickly as possible?

is drones or it's related to drones. It's how do you move as quickly as possible to a type of warfare that's waged in space with satellites, with drones, with new technologies, less dependent on boots on the ground, much more dependent on getting the best and the brightest into government to figure out how do we take this advantage that we have over China, meaning we created AI, we

have a big lead over them on ships and a lot of the thinking that goes into AI, how do we take that and make sure that our military is even more dominant in the next generation. So when you get bogged down in these small, ball little things, you lose sight of the big picture where we do have an enormous advantage going in. Well you talk about this trans issue. Again, like 0.5% of the military right now trans. If that, and yet this is his obsession, we have a possible world war breaking out in the Middle East. We have a possible world war breaking out in Eastern Europe with North Korean troops down there.

And I do want to follow up on something you said, because this is something I picked up overseas. The obsession, and we're not talking about the drones over Jersey. We're talking about the drones over the front between the Ukrainians and the Russians and the things I heard this weekend about what those drones are doing and how for advanced they are moving is nothing short of extraordinary. It is making so many defense systems almost obsolete right now Jim and you're exactly right. We either obsess on that, not the 11th century crusades.

We either obsess on bringing some order to the Middle East and not on 0.5% of who's in the military right now, or we get left behind by people who don't know how to run the Pentagon? It's astounding, and I will say, this is one of the things that I kept hearing over and over again. You guys are ahead of all of us. You've lapped us 12 times, but the world's moving on.

Are you really going to be focusing on the 11th century, on civil war? I mean, that's the question that was repeatedly asked. Yeah, I mean, it's a legitimate question to ask because it does go to what you said. Like for any dogging of America during the campaign or doing it in books, like it just defies the logic on the ground. We have so many built-in advantages right now. And listen, on the good side, like if you could get the Pentagon focused on what it needs to focus on, I think it's a good thing that you suddenly have really smart entrepreneurs like Mark Andreessen or Elon Musk thinking about government and trying to apply some of their mindshare to it. Having

the smartest people who've built these technologies, who understand these technologies, thinking about it and advising the president could be a net very positive thing if you structure your administration to make sure that you're focusing on how do you make the advantages we have bigger and bolder so that we create a bigger gap between us and China. That's what victory would be. That's what success for the country would be. But when you get into grievance or you get into retribution, that's the type of stuff that does rattle markets. It does rattle world leaders.

It does rattle ultimately the public. Maybe the public is just too disoriented right now, but the public will see this and the public doesn't want people jailing reporters. It doesn't want you doing things that defy institutional norms. And so we'll see how it plays out. It is important to remember the market is at 45,000 right now. You have people who believe, like for instance, Warren Buffett, that it's overvalued. You have top leaders, hedge fund leaders,

starting to take their money out of the markets because they fear the volatility coming up. That's why when you start talking about having these people ill-equipped, these people seeking retribution, these people that aren't up to the task, you start...and I will say tariffs too. There's going to be a real battle, I think, internally over tariffs, because Donald Trump doesn't want to see the stock market, which many people already believe is artificially inflated, drop 10% in a day. And trust me, where it's sitting right now, if the moves are wrong, it's going to drop

10% in a day. Last night, the FT dropped an article. They're going to slow down interest rate cuts because they fear the inflationary pressures of the incoming administration. Now I will say he's put somebody that the street really respects in Treasury. He's got some other smart people around there. They can manage this, but I have a feeling the message is going to be steady as she goes or else you're going to have people wishing for the good old days.

And I am dead serious of Joe Biden's 45,000 Dow Industrial. That FT article was really important because it showed a consensus that the inflationary pressures are going to grow, which among other things, sets up a clash between the chairman of the Federal Reserve and the new president. And that is also something investors and others will not want to see.

There you go. Head down. Axios co-founder Jim Van De Hei, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. One more note. Go Packers, man. very much. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. Go Packers, man. They're looking good.

One more note, if I could, about President-elect Trump's picks for his administration. He announced over the weekend Richard Grinnell as the special missions envoy. During Trump's first term, Grinnell served as U.S. ambassador to Germany and the acting director of national intelligence. The New York Times describes Grinnell this way, quote, a loyalist known for unbridled social media attacks on Mr. Trump's perceived critics and many others. Mr. Grinnell led a shambolic effort to challenge the-

That's a very word, by the way, the New York Times. Shambolic, use it more often. The 2020 election results in Nevada after Mr. Trump's loss there. And he has lobbied assiduously for a diplomatic job Use it more often. The 2020 election results in Nevada after Mr. Trump's loss there. And he has lobbied assiduously for a diplomatic job in the new administration. So Jonathan and Leah, right after Donald Trump was elected, we heard the possibility of Rick Grinnell being Secretary of State, some other high-up positions.

This obviously not what he was looking for. What happened? Yeah, there was a lot of spec. Grinnell openly campaigned, and that may have worked against him here. He, you know, he did serve in the first administration. He was a loyalist during the four years when Trump was out of office, helped the campaign. He goes a social media attack dog to say the least. But he wanted Secretary of State or another really high profile job.

There's some really good reporting out there about how he denies being personally involved but those close to him were paying people to lobby on his behalf. Like he'll pay you a couple thousand dollars to post this or post that. Grinnell himself has separated himself from that effort but it didn't work. It rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. And even though Steve Bannon and some really influential figures in the MAGA world wanted Grinnell to get a top position, he has to sell it for this. All right, let's move to the fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, exposing the luxury lifestyle of the country's former dictator and the brutal torture system set up in his prisons.

We're getting a look inside now at a Syrian drug lab that produced an amphetamine-like stimulant that helped fuel the Assad regime. Let's bring in NBC News international correspondent Matt Bradley who joins us live from Damascus. Matt, you went inside the lab. What did you find? Yeah, Mika, well, it's just another signal of one of the pillars of this regime having fallen in these 14 year long civil war,

there was no foreign currency that the regime could use or to prop itself up. Obviously business went bust throughout the country. They didn't have any cash and they needed drugs to give to their soldiers. So this was not only fueling the fight financially, but also psychologically. It was a really sinister movement.

It flooded the entire region with its multiple wars with drugs. Here's our report. Throughout Syria, celebrations for the fall of Assad and the pillars that once propped up his regime, like this factory on the outskirts of Damascus. It wasn't so long ago that this place was making potato chips, and then the old regime took it over

and turned it into a factory for narcotics. As Syria's economy collapsed during its nearly 14 year long civil war the Assad regime relied on drugs as a source of foreign currency. This is Captagon. It's basically like methamphetamine. It would be just as much at home at a nightclub as on a battlefield. Ahmed, a rebel field commander, told me this industry destroyed a whole generation just so Assad can earn as much money as possible. All right, so he's saying all of this is ready for export. This is Cactagon. It's hidden inside this, you know, fake box to basically transport what looks like wires

But it's all drugs Fueling the Assad regime's narco state. During our visit the original factory owner turned up. Like many Syrians, he's just returned from exile abroad. So he says that now that he's back He's planning on developing the factory again and turning it into what it did before he's planning on developing the factory again and turning it into what it did before, which was making chips and chocolates and snacks. Hope for renewal, like so much else in this new Syria. And guys, here's the thing, that factory owner we just spoke with,

you know, he's going to have to rebuild everything. Everything he has is gone, and we're seeing that all over this country, but everybody is still smiling. And that's what's actually so remarkable about being here for the past week, is that everybody here is ecstatic about this new regime and this new Syria, despite the fact that there's just signs of ruin and destruction everywhere we look. It's remarkable. All right.

NBC's Matt Bradley reporting live from Damascus. Thank you so much. Thank you, Matt. So, Admiral Stavidis, so many different reports this weekend about what's going on in Syria. I'd love for you to give us your insights. There seems to be a balance, hope in the streets, and yet warnings from the survivors of the Arab Spring and the blowback after that a decade or so ago saying this is going to end badly. Where are you? I hear echoes of my own past here, which is as NATO commander I led the intervention in Libya. And when Muammar Gaddafi was finally taken down by his people, there was jubilation, there were smiles for weeks, for a few months.

Now Libya remains a very riven, roiled place, kind of pulled apart. So put me down in the skeptical but hopeful category. I think what we ought to do in the United States is look at what are our interests there. Number one, let's get rid of these weapons of mass destruction, notably chemical that Bashar al-Istad has still kicking around in that country. Number two, preventing the rise of another Islamic state. This is pretty fertile ground.

Nature abhors a vacuum. Geopolitics really abhors a vacuum. There are still remnants of the Islamic state. And then third and finally our allies in the region. We've got both Israel with the border and Turkey, NATO ally. That's a NATO border on the north up there. Those are our interests. So what we ought to do and I think we're doing it pretty well right now is get the international community engaged. So international, get our inner agency

working together. You can't solve this one with just the Department of Defense. You need state and Treasury and all of that. And then third and finally, Joe, you need public-private cooperation. I was really struck. Okay, now we're not going to make amphetamines, Captagon. We want to go back to making potato chips. That's a public-private enterprise. Obviously, companies aren't going to rush into Syria at this point hardly. But over time, there's got to be private sector engagement if you're going to put that economy on a good footing and keep the smile on the face of the Syrian people.

So, Richard, you just heard the admiral outline what he thinks the US needs to do in the region. Secretary of State Blinken is in the area now. US officials have started talking to the rebel government there. But there's some competing interests. Israel's going to have a say, Iran's going to want to say, Turkey wants to say. How do you see this structure being put in place? Well, I'm also on the skeptical side. The idea that you're going to have a benign government that rules over all of Syria, that

would make you a cockeyed optimist, more likely to have a problematic government or probably multiple places of autonomy. The Kurds, the Israelis will have their space, the Turks have their forces. Certain other groups, ISIS will come back in places. I think for the foreseeable future, Balkans like Syria seems more realistic. U.S. should do the kinds of things we're doing. But actually, I think the bigger issues for the United States are not in Syria because I think there's a limited upside there. I would say focusing on Iran. Right now, Iran is on its heels. How do we lock in the idea that Iran doesn't have a nuclear program that's meaningful, doesn't continue support of proxies?

Do you think Iran's rushing toward a nuclear program, given that they are at the weakest states they've been since 79? Well, they've been moving gradually towards it over the last few months. What we want to do is stop it, ideally diplomatically, if need be militarily. That's something we would do with Israel. Also, we still have the problem with Gaza, the hostages, and so forth. So I think there's limited things you can do.

And Syria, if you look at the history of Syria, since its creation, had divisions. It was an artificial construct of the French after World War I. The idea that we're gonna put Humpty Dumpty together again and make Syria Switzerland, okay, but a bit idealistic. Not gonna happen. So, Admiral.

Okay. We've talked about drones over here. We're going Let's talk about drones over the swamps of Jersey. Is it real? Are they airplanes or are they just constellations in the sky? Yeah, this is exactly the right question last night I did a little thought experiment and I've spent a lifetime on the bridge of ships with binoculars scanning the horizon looking at targets in the sky. I just went outside at night with a pair of binoculars and looked up. What I came up with was four things that kind of looked like they might be drones but after watching and listening another quality.

One was a commercial airliner, one was a Navy helicopter, we got a Navy base nearby, one was the Star Venus, which I mistook for movement. And one kind of flickered behind a tree and went away, probably a light airplane landing at a small airport near me. So, color me skeptical, a word we've at a small airport near me. So color me skeptical, a word we've used a couple of times this morning on if we are facing a

major threat from drones. I think the question is what do you do about this this conversation that's evolving? You need to kind of combine some intelligence as in getting out and monitoring. Who's buying drones? Where are they buying them? Are people on social networks talking about operating drones? We need some technology solutions. The Department of Defense has excellent systems

that can quickly tell you, that's a star, that's an airplane, that's a helicopter. And we need that interagency cooperation just like we do in Syria. We're not going to solve the drone problem with just the local police. You need local police, you need stateys, you need the Department of Defense can provide technology, FBI, it's got to be an interagency effort to bring it all together. A final thought, going back to Jim's riff on drones, it is the big military problem. It's not just drones.

It's unmanned vehicles of all kinds, satellites under the ocean, in the sky. It's cyber, AI, it's special forces. That's the future of Warp Air, and controlling these drones is kind of the edge of that, but these are really two separate conversations. Retired Admiral James DeVridis, thank you very much. And Richard Haas, thank you both very much for being on this morning. Go Giants. Okay, coming up, Pablo Torre is here to go through the biggest headlines from across

the NFL. And the team he says is now clearly the best in the league. under pressure stays on his feet It is caught for a touchdown by McClorick Jackson looking deep down the field Bateman is wide open at the ten, at the five and Bateman gets in! Touchdown Baltimore! Couple big plays on third down on this drive Third and four rush in zone

Lamb adjusts in a fitting down on this drive third and four rush in zone lamb adjusts in a fitting way for this drive to end. Barrow looking deep he's got Higgins out there caught touchdown Cincinnati deep for Adams he's got Devontae Adams Adams is going to take it into the end zone for a chance touchdown. Or use the run game or quarterback run game. They set up Mitchell, it's going to be a double pass and that one is intercepted! It's Bonito! Empty set, blitz coming. Mayfield out to the left. throws on the move for Mike Evans who gets loose.

down the sideline Mike Evans, it's a touchdown for Tampa Bay. second and four staying on the ground to Cook, nice cut. Cook taking off, he actually almost got stopped but he's going home for the touchdown. 35. Love putting it up top back of the end zone. Oh, did Dobbs catch that? What a catch from Romeo Dobbs. Touchdown, Green Bay.

Some of the biggest touchdowns across the NFL yesterday. Let's bring in right now the host of Pablo Torre finds out on Metal Art Media and SMBC contributor Pablo Torre. Pablo, yesterday too. Hello, hello. Just classic games, classic matchups. Yes, a separation Sunday. Yeah, it really was.

I mean you had, you had of course the Steelers and the Eagles and then you had the Bills and the Lions. Pulling it out with the Lions. Yeah. So we teased that you were gonna tell us who the best team in the NFL was. Who is it? It's the Buffalo Bills. And look, this has been a pretty easy race

for the Lions to win up until this game. The Lions, unlike the Chiefs, right here are the contenders in the NFL if you've been hibernating all season. The Chiefs have the best record, but the Chiefs keep on winning by the hair of their chinny chin chin to use the pig again. And here the Lions and the Bills come in.

And I have the Lions because the Lions have been incredible in the toughest division and Josh Allen. Yeah, again, just nobody has scored more touchdowns on the ground and through the year in the same game than this gentleman right here. And so, Sean, they just keep on winning these 40, 40ish big high scoring games and they can win any way you want.

Two thoughts on this. One is the Lions defense decimated by injury. Yes. Something to worry about for them in January as well. And one might wonder if the Eagles now have caught them atop the NFC. My only counter to the bills, and I agree, Josh Allen is the MVP, their offense is extraordinary.

Teams like this, teams are built to simply outscore the team. We have to win games 40 to 35. And I speak of a few New England Patriots teams who are like this, a few Peyton Manning teams like this. They tend not to win in January. Yeah, I mean, the counter to that this season, though, is just that I don't, there's maybe, maybe one or two teams where I feel good about their defense.

So much of this season has been mediocrity has been wait a minute. Okay, a team that can stop the run suddenly gets blown up. When we talk about the story of this season, it's that again, the cliche in the NFL is any given Sunday this season. The reason the Bills are so fantastic is because they have a guy in Josh Allen who just feels like he's at the peak of their powers. Mahomes doesn't feel like that right now. And now injured. Let's talk about the battle for the Keystone State. I mean you get the Steelers and the

Eagles. What an incredible matchup. Two teams top form and the Eagles this year not doing what they did last year after a strong strong start. They're not collapsing. They're hanging in there. A franchise record, 10 straight wins, but not without some ricketyness. So heading into this game, A.J. Brown and Jalen Hurts, the story was the feud. Jalen Hurts, Joe, you remember him from those days at Alabama.

Yes, I do. The critique was, could he really be a true drop back passer? A.J. Brown, a wide receiver, in the tradition of wide receivers throughout time, said, I need the ball more. And this, again, was a team atop the NFC East quite comfortably. And they come in to Pittsburgh. They come in against the Pittsburgh Steelers.

And we know the Steelers, what they do. They make life hard for teams that feel good about themselves. And they win very comfortably. This was an enormous, enormous indicator in a in a football swing state as well. About, OK, maybe these Eagles are to be considered a real real contender. Yeah you know it's funny I think Jonathan we're going to have to sort of go back and look at our picks everybody said the Lions and the Chiefs. And now second maybe the Lions and Chiefs but also maybe the Eagles and the Bills. We have four really good teams right now.

Yeah I think that's right. And I wouldn't count out the Steelers either. They were missing their best receiver yesterday. Their offense did seem a little limited. But it was impressive that Philly could win after getting a rare subpar game from Saquon Barkley. Yeah. He didn't do that much. He's going for the rushing record, 670 yards.

Didn't really happen. There was another statement in the Sunday Night Football game, though. The Packers go to Seattle, tough place to play. Seahawks had won, I think, five in a row. And they just dominated from the go. Yeah. Run the ball, run the ball, run the ball, win the game.

That's right. So if you think about the hardest tests in the NFL, the Seattle Seahawks right now entering this game, they play in what used to be, I think the Chiefs, Claire McCastle's Chiefs just beat the record a couple of years ago, the loudest building on earth when it comes to sports venues. That was the Seahawks building that we're watching right now

Also, their defense was the best in the NFL over the last four weeks and the Packers come in and it looks easy It looks really easy. It looks remarkably So talk about the NFC North who would have ever guessed you got the Bears? I mean you got Bears before nine, but you've got the Lions 11 and 2 you got the Vikings 11 and 2 on a win streak and then you got the Packers 10 and 3 looking great I mean that is that is the division it's as impressive a division as I can remember in modern football the Vikings just clinched by the way a postseason birth because Sam of that game Sam Darnold is somehow now in the conversation for do we need to give that guy a ton of money

because he's piloted this team? But if you look at the playoffs, yeah, you have three teams that are all going to be there. So let's talk about two teams that have underperformed terribly this year. One, the 49ers who continue to underperform, shocking six and eight. Yeah, just shocking six and eight. But the Dallas Cowboys, we of course turned it on in my household because we want to see Bryce Young who'd been playing great. He didn't have a chance to set up because man, Micah Parsons and the Cowboys actually looked like we thought they were going to look all year. I mean their defense of line was explosive. I like to imagine you just like monitoring Bryce young on

Sunday just to make sure he's OK like he's your kids studying abroad like is he doing all right. This time he why don't we just stop. Yeah, he's done very well for the last five weeks he has done so much really well no one has embodied the moral victory quite like Bryce young not a lot of wins but you're like man he's he's making something out of himself. And I say that joke because this game.

He looks good. He looks good. Well, the Cowboys, you just embodied what Cowboys fans have been yelling at their television. It's why they lead the country in TVs thrown out of windows. Micah Parsons is one of the great defensive players. Dak Prescott went healthy,

was one of the great quarterbacks. This is the great brand in American sports. And finally, against the Panthers, against Bryce Young, they look like it for a glimmering, shimmering brief Sunday. Finally, let's just talk about the Giants. How bad can they get? They have the number one overall draft pick. So Richard Haas, wherever you are, take heart in that.

But it's bad. It's bad. I mean, look, what did they say take heart in that. But it's bad. It's bad. I mean, look, what did they say? It's always darkest before it's completely pitch black. It goes completely dark in Chairman Mao. I think we might be in the Chairman Mao phase of the NFL season for the Giants. And by the way, rewarded by a bit of socialism

with the NFL draft. The worst get the best. It's a delight. OK. Thank you, Pablo. The latest episode of Pablo Torre Finds Out podcast. Today I am. Available now you Pablo. The latest episode of Pablo Tory finds out today I am available now Pablo Tory thank you always good to see you on Wednesday.