Morning Joe - Morning Joe 1/2/24

Episode Date: January 2, 2024

The Morning Joe panel discusses the latest in U.S. and world news, politics, sports and culture.

It's the top of the hour. Welcome to Morning Joe. It is Tuesday, January 2nd. Happy New Year, everybody. Israel's ground offensive in Gaza is entering a new phase. The Israeli military has plans to pull back some troops and shift to more localized operations. We're going to go through that development and the escalating tensions in the Red Sea, plus a damning new report on the intelligence failures by the Israeli military. New York Times investigation found that there was no battle plan for a massive Hamas invasion that they were warned about. Also ahead, a look at the long to do list for Congress in 2024 with several crucial items that were just simply not addressed late last year. Plus, the Supreme Court has a tight timeline to rule on what would be one of the most consequential cases involving the presidency.

We'll get expert legal analysis on the issue of removing Donald Trump from the ballot. Two states. Are there going to be more? How will it be handled? With us, we have the host of Way Too Early, White House Bureau Chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire, columnist and associate editor of The Washington Post, David Ignatius, and former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, retired four-star Navy Admiral James Tavridis. He is chief international analyst for NBC News. But first, Willie, Happy New Year.

Happy New Year, Mika. I haven't seen you in too long. Yeah, and Joe's on his way back from the Rose Bowl. I watched. I watched. I watched. It was really painful. That was as painful as it gets. Joe's in mourning this morning.

We can understand why. His crimson tide fell in what was a great game in overtime to Michigan. Michigan was the top seed, was the favorite in this game. Alabama was up late. Michigan came back. This is an overtime. Blake Corham, their great running back, tying things up. And then their fourth down play for Alabama.

Saban going with the quarterback draw. He's got a good quarterback who can run the ball. Low snap probably hurt him. Michigan gets the stop. And the celebration is on for Michigan fans. They go to their first college football playoff championship game that's coming up next monday night in houston and they will play in another great game late last night mika washington also unbeaten the two seed in this tournament beating texas in the sugar bowl uh again texas was fighting right till the end had a play late last play of the game here

knocked away by washington they hold on really good maybe underrated team so your national championship game jonathan lemire michigan and washington two unbeaten teams i guess probably we can say now the two best teams in football given the results um but on behalf of joe that was a tough one they alabama was leading late give mich But on behalf of Joe, that was a tough one. Alabama was leading late. Give Michigan a lot of credit. Their defense was awesome in the first half, especially all over Jalen Milrow in the backfield there.

So we got our matchup now. Yeah, I'm not convinced we're going to see Joe again. This was a really, really, really tough one to blow a late lead there. You're right. Michigan's defense was so good early on. This was a really tough one to blow a late lead there. You're right. Michigan's defense was so good early on. They sacked the quarterback six times, but it just felt like it was so inevitable. Alabama is inevitable.

Saban is inevitable. And they took that lead, and you thought they would hold on to it, and it's stunning that they didn't. They let Michigan go down the field. And a pretty shaky play call there on a QB draw from fourth down. Michigan's defensive line had been so good, and they just completely snuffed it. He had no chance whatsoever. And now it sets up a great title game. And so unusual to have a title game not featuring the SEC. That conference has dominated college football for so long. And it's something fresh blood here. Michigan versus Washington. That will be fun. But certainly our condolences to Mr. Scarborough. Yeah, he'll be OK. He's actually good about this stuff. He loves a great game,

no matter who wins. But it's great to see you guys. Happy New Year. Jonathan, get ready to be really tired in 2024. You don't sleep at all. Willie knows he did the way too early thing. All right. Let's get right to the news. The Israeli military is planning to withdraw some of its troops from Gaza. Reservists from at least two brigades will be sent home this week. The IDF says this is expected to, quote, significantly ease the burden on the economy. Many Israeli businesses were forced to scale back or even shut down after losing much of their workforce to the war effort. The move will also free up units in a case a wider conflict begins with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Still, the IDF says the fighting in Gaza will continue throughout the coming months. But U.S. officials say this withdrawal signals Israel might be shifting to a more low intensity operation, which is something the Biden administration has been pushing for.

So you wonder if they're also responding to pressure from their number one ally, the United States of America, where there are really a lot of questions about not only their strategy, but how this all went down. Exactly. And it's a great point because we're learning now the relationship between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Biden is reportedly becoming more strained. According to several sources speaking to The New York Times, President Biden has grown more and more frustrated in recent weeks by Netanyahu's refusal to change tactics in Gaza, despite the insistence of the United States. In early December, Biden reportedly pleased some within the White House by going off script to say Israel risked losing international support if it continued the, quote, indiscriminate

bombing of its neighbor. In his many, many phone calls with Netanyahu, Biden reportedly has urged Netanyahu to take a more targeted approach to rooting out Hamas, something the Israeli prime minister has pushed back against. The sharpest disputes, though, according to The Times, have centered around what to do in Gaza after the war ends, with Netanyahu reportedly resisting Biden's calls for an eventual two-state solution, Mika. Yeah, The New York Times now is out with a sweeping investigation on Israel's failures in responding to the deadly attack launched by Hamas on October 7th.

One key reason, the Israeli military had no battle plan, despite intelligence showing the terror group was likely planning an assault. This is according to current and former soldiers and officers who tell the Times, if a plan for a large-scale attack on Israeli soil did exist, no one had been trained on it. The paper reports Israel's military was undermanned, out of position, and so poorly organized that soldiers communicated in impromptu WhatsApp groups and relied on social media posts for targeting information. The Israeli military reservists were also not prepared to quickly mobilize and deploy.

A major in the reserves tells The Times their training assumed that Israeli intelligence would learn of a looming invasion in advance. He says his paratrooper unit mobilized on their own without a formal call-up order. Roughly seven hours into the fighting, he turned to the reservists next to him and asked, where's the IDF? Making matters worse, if that's possible, the military has acknowledged that it moved two commando companies, more than 100 soldiers, to the West Bank just two days before the attack, a reflection of Israel's mistaken belief that a Hamas attack was not an imminent threat. This doesn't make sense. The assault on a military base left soldiers there fighting for their lives rather than coordinating a response to the invasion. One soldier told the Times that some did not even know they were under attack until Hamas was in their sleeping quarters.

Several were killed in their bunks. Others barricaded themselves in safe rooms. The Times asked the IDF why there was no plan. The military replied that questions of this kind will be looked at into a greater stage. So David Ignatius and Admiral Stavridis. Admiral, I know that you have already said it is long past due that we answer these questions. David, I'll start with you, though. I don't know what the options are here in terms of making sense of this, because the New York Times piece, as incredible as the reporting was, leaves more questions than answers.

It actually is worse than we could have ever imagined. As women were being raped, as children were being forcibly removed from their homes or killed, as people were being killed en masse in the streets and at a concert, you had an army that had no clue what was going on or was caught in traffic. So what are the options at this point in terms of an explanation? I mean, what could be the explanation for this? And is there a nefarious one? So, Mika, the images I found in the New York Times reporting, absolutely haunting. People saying, almost pleading, where's the IDF? Where's this army that Israel has counted on through its history that's been regarded as one of the finest small armies in the world? Where's the IDF?

The image of soldiers being shot in their bunks, in their bases, in an attack that they were not warned of, were not prepared for, images of people, as you said, turning to social media rather than their own battle planning to decide on operations. And I think the problem, Mika, is that that disorientation that we saw on the first day, October 7, and the days that followed, has continued in some ways. Israel didn't expect that Hamas, its adversary, was capable of an attack like the one that happened. They simply had never considered it. There weren't plans for it because they didn't think this enemy could do it. And as they fought in Gaza, Hamas has turned out to be a tougher adversary there than they expected. And that's why this war has gone on and why Israel has gotten so much international criticism for what people say is overreacting. They simply haven't been able to take control of as much of Gaza as they thought. We're now getting to a point, finally, where the Israelis, in part because of

economic need, the need to get reservists back to work so the economy functions better, will begin pulling out initially two brigades. Three more brigades are planned, although no date has been given. And I think Israel, certainly in the north, will now move to a kind of standoff operation scenario where they'll get intelligence that Hamas is located in a particular place. They'll send troops in there rather than maintaining troops surrounding those positions. That will ease the casualty burden for Israel. Hopefully, it will allow greater humanitarian relief in Gaza and make that situation better, reduce the criticism on Israel and the United States,

but more to the point, help the desperate suffering of the Palestinians. But the more we know about this war, and we probably should add in Netanyahu's political and judicial problems that coincide with this intelligence failure and military difficulty. The more we know about the situation, the more I think it's right to see Netanyahu as embattled, as having embarked on a war for which it turned out neither he nor the Israeli military was adequately prepared. And now, several months later, really, really struggling to find an endgame. When I talk to Israeli military commanders, Mika, I simply don't hear clear answers about how they think this war will end or who they think will come in after the

Israeli military to maintain order in Gaza. And I think that's where the U.S. is going to have to play a key role because Israel itself doesn't have the answers. So, Admiral Stavridis, David was talking about the news that broke yesterday, Israel's high court striking down Benjamin Netanyahu's judicial overhaul law, something I think he needed politically to stay in power and avoid indictment, or at least the consequences of an already existing indictment. Putting that aside, I think it was a month ago, you said it was too late, that there were no answers. What the New York Times is reporting has only given us more questions, only given you as more kind of a sick feeling that the answers may not be good. I ask you, what are the options here at this point?

Now that we know soldiers were killed in their beds sleeping, they were stuck in traffic. And let me add that Benjamin Netanyahu supported the funding of Hamas through Qatar, that Benjamin Netanyahu says now is not the time to know these answers. I think it is exactly the time, especially if they want the support of their partners, complete support, transparency. And also, what does it say? I guess their attitudes toward women, at the very least, are less than to be respected, given the fact that it was women researchers who raised the flag months ago that this attack was happening in a 40 page blueprint on this. I ask, what are the options beyond the fact that Israel was not prepared? That seems impossible. So what are the other options? Let's let's go back to why this happened. I think there are kind of three big reasons. One is complacency.

The Israeli military simply could not conceive that Hamas would be able to generate this kind of high end striking combat attack. And they underestimated the degree to which Iran had provided the weaponry to do it, the training, the functionality. So complete underestimation of Hamas, a complacency syndrome. Secondly, you touched on it a moment ago, Mika, the internal divisions in Israel had even reached into the Israeli Defense Forces. We had seen reports of reservists who said, we're not going to report in until this constitutional crisis is resolved. That's pretty remarkable in a military that absolutely

relies on its reserve component. And then thirdly, Hamas itself stepped up and did the unexpected. You know, we talk a lot about 9-11 as a failure, not of intelligence, but a failure of imagination. It was really both. But the crisis for America that has some echoes here is really Pearl Harbor. It's where our military was literally sleeping in their bunks in Pearl Harbor, had no idea seemingly this attack was going to come, even though in retrospect, we saw plenty of intelligence flickers out there. So that moment for the Israeli military reminds me of the Pearl Harbor moment for the United States. In terms of options, I think more importantly than all of that, and Israel will pull that apart, and it can't happen fast enough. They need to be doing this in parallel to the fight. And let's

face it, they're not fighting the Japanese empire here. They are not under existential threat from Hamas. So they can do the investigation and understand. And after Pearl Harbor, what the United States did was bring in new commanders. We got rid of the team that had allowed this to occur. We brought in new, fresh admirals like Chester Nimitz, Bull Halsey, Raymond Spruance. These were relatively unknown officers who stepped in and recovered from that situation pretty remarkably. So I think Israel, A, needs to investigate this now and fully. B, reshape their military leadership based on the leadership failures that I think are quite extant, quite obvious here. And C, heal these internal divisions. Here we get back to the

political and the Benjamin Netanyahu situation. It hurts Israel's national security badly. But as Mika mentioned, quoted in the New York Times, an IDF spokesperson said, questions of this kind will be looked into at a later stage. They just don't want to talk about what happened on that day from the point of view of the military. And David, you've covered the Middle East for so long. You understand Israel so well. And you know that the way that Israel's sleep at night when they're surrounded by people who openly call for their destruction, why they have a thriving democracy and an economy and all the miracle of Israel, is that because they trust that the Israeli military has them protected. They trust that things like this can't happen. They trust that they have one of the most

sophisticated intelligence operations in the world. So what is your sense internally inside Israel about how that has been shattered a bit and what kind of pressure is, in fact, Prime Minister Netanyahu under internally from the Israeli people? Or are they so focused right now on the effort to defeat Hamas that they're unified on that question, willing to accept that we'll deal with what happened that day at a later date? So, Willie, I think you put your finger on what has has been so traumatizing for Israel. Israel lived on the strength of its military, its conviction that no matter what its adversaries tried to do, Israel would respond quickly and decisively. And the opposite happened here. Israel responded slowly and uncertainly.

And I think for Israelis across the country, this has been deeply disorienting. This isn't the military that they expected and need. I think there's been a lot of second guessing up and down the chain. I think a lot of this has come to be focused on Netanyahu, a leader who's seen as being more focused on his political interests in staying in power than on the unity of the nation. Certainly in the months leading to war, Israel was as divided as I've ever seen it as a correspondent. Now as the war is being fought, as I talk to Israeli commanders, the people who seem to have the best sense of the battlefield aren't those same IDF commanders. If you want to talk about ideas for where this might end, about the day after, as we like to say,

those are things that the best people in the IDF are thinking carefully about. Unfortunately, there's not political consensus behind them yet. And I think we're going to have to begin to think about a post-Netanyahu scenario for Israel. He is embattled, losing support. The Supreme Court's rebuff of his judicial reform package makes his problems, I think, all the more difficult. But to go to the basics, Willie, as you said, an army that symbolized the country and on which the country depended seems to have failed here. And that really hurts and upsets the whole country. And there's two things we're talking about in this, Jonathan Lemire. Number one,

when Admiral Stavridis talks about complacency syndrome, that makes sense for the weeks and months coming up. I mean, it doesn't to me, because when they talk about Hamas living their lives 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to want to kill Jews, to want to kill Israelis, that doesn't sound like you should be complacent just, you know, from the outside. But let's just let's let's entertain that. It doesn't explain what happened in the seven hours. OK, the eight hours, the nine hours where soldiers were operating on their own, making up stuff on WhatsApp to try and figure out what to do to help, stuck in traffic, sleeping like somebody in the moment was making decisions or not. And that's the question, I guess, I ask you, is the White House

interested in these answers as they work to help their partner? They're working on wars on two fronts, okay, where they need clarity to appeal to our Congress and to the American people as to why we are supporting these wars. And I guess my question is, is the White House interested in these answers? Are they concerned about the answers? Oh, they most certainly are. And from the early days after October 7th, U.S. officials made it very clear that they wanted to know just what went wrong. And this is this is so devastating for Prime Minister Netanyahu, who really billed himself as the security, national security prime minister. And it's not just it's both complacency, but also being distracted.

The Netanyahu's focus was on the West Bank. He just redeployed two commando units, the IDF did, in the days before the attack, because Netanyahu was placating his political base, his coalition government of these extreme right-wing settlers in the West Bank. That's where he wanted his focus. He certainly didn't put his focus on a two-state solution. And that, Mika, is at the heart of the frustration and rising frustration that the White House has with Netanyahu, that he has not given license to this support, that they feel like a two-state solution is essential for peace and stability in the region, as is Admiral Stravitas, the idea that Israel shouldn't be part of a Gaza occupation whenever the war does come. The White House has

been so clear about that, and Netanyahu seemingly not listening. And this comes at a difficult moment where we're seeing tensions rise in the Red Sea. The U.S. is taking more aggressive action to ward off these Houthi rebels. They're leaning on Israel to be more targeted in their strikes of Gaza. Depends on the day whether Israel seems to be listening there or not. But it does seem like that though Netanyahu has become an unreliable partner, the U.S. feels he's not going anywhere, at least for now. So the U.S. has to be able to manage this. How do you think they can? First and foremost, let me go to the sea for a moment and what's happening in the Red Sea.

This is big casino for the global economy, frankly. This Red Sea is the size of the state of California. It lies right under the Suez Canal. And so far, the Houthi rebels, who are completely creatures of Iran, trained, equipped, organized, ordered, much like Hamas is, these Houthi rebels are actually creating the conditions in which the big shipping companies are simply not going through there. This is like closing the Suez Canal. Now, we're not there yet, but you could see the outlines of a real blow to the global economy because 15, 20 percent of the world's shipping passes through the Red Sea. So, yes, we have to continue to work with our friends, partners and allies in the region. That's Israel, but it's also the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, as well as our NATO allies who are

all engaged in the maritime side of this. Going back to land for a minute. What I worry about, Jonathan, here are two things. One is tactical from the report back to Mika's excellent questions. How could this happen? Another part of it we haven't touched on is no plan, no training, no sense of practicing to respond to this. That's pretty remarkable because that's what militaries do. They build plans that mirror what their enemies might do. Then they train against them. To me, the most striking thing in the New York Times reporting was the lack of any kind of planning, training or exercising. As Minka said, soldiers just making stuff up.

That just hurts your heart as a military professional. You can't conceive of that. And then secondly, at the strategic level, what this does, and this is what would keep me awake at night if I were an Israeli in my bed, is that deterrence is shattered. The opponents see this weakness. Hezbollah says, hmm. The Houthis say, hmm. Iran says, hmm. Deterrence, if not shattered, is certainly deeply weakened here. Those are big concerns. The U.S. needs to stand with Israel in this time. But we have a very troubled partner leading that nation. Retired Admiral James Tavridis, thank you very much for

coming on. Happy New Year. We're glad to have you this coming year in the months to come as we cover this story and this question. Still ahead on Morning Joe, former Trump staffers echo warnings and concerns over the possibility of a second Trump presidency. We have that plus a breakdown of the legal battles facing the GOP frontrunner this year as the election approaches. And later, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre will join the conversation to discuss what the Biden administration has planned for 2024. You're watching Morning Joe. We'll be right back. As much as him and his retribution is the almost cult-like following he has over his most diehard supporters, the threats, the harassment, the death threats that you get when he targets you and he's deliberate in targeting is really horrifying and has no place in our American discourse. And it's unlike anything I've seen in the decades plus I've been in politics. Our singular focus needs to be,

if he is the nominee, on making sure that he is not elected the president again next November. Even if that means electing a Democrat. It's really disappointing because I look at these options and I'm upset with them. But at the end of the day, I trust one person with our government and democracy than I do the other. And so I've never voted for a Democrat in my life. But I think that in this next election, I would put policy aside and choose democracy. Former Trump White House aide speaking out on the dangers of a potential second Trump term. The Supreme Court is poised to rule on one of the most consequential ballot cases in American history. At least two states now

have ruled former President Trump is not eligible to hold the office of the presidency. The Colorado case has already been appealed. If the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, the New York Times writes, justices will act in the shadow of two competing political realities. The Times reports they will be reluctant to wrest from voters the power to assess Mr. Trump's conduct, particularly given the certain backlash that would bring. Yet they will also be wary of giving Mr. Trump the electoral boost of an unqualified victory in the nation's highest court. Chief Justice John Roberts will doubtless seek consensus or at least try to avoid a partisan split of the six Republican appointees against the three Democratic ones. Joining us now, the author of that piece, Supreme Court reporter for The New

York Times, Adam Liptak. Also with us for the conversation, former U.S. attorney and MSNBC legal analyst Joyce Vance. Adam, in your reporting, what is the question before the courts here? Because while in some of your analysis, there's a concern about looking partisan or tipping the scales. Isn't the question about engaging in insurrection whether or not he did? The question for the court is a legal question. And that question is whether the 14th Amendment to the Constitution adopted after the Civil War bars people who have first taken an oath to support the Constitution and then engaged in an insurrection. And lots of people think the case against Donald Trump is airtight, that he did both of those things. Right. But there are a lot of sub issues and threshold issues that may be attractive to the court if it takes the case. It hasn't taken the case yet, but

the Colorado Republican Party has already asked the court to take the case and act really fast before this Super Tuesday primary. So it's quite likely the court engages. Yeah, Joyce, I want to ask you in a second about how quickly the Supreme Court needs to take this up, how quickly it will. But let's talk about its job in this case. Is it not the job of the Supreme Court here to interpret the Constitution without concern for the political backlash or the questions that might arise for the country, which are all noteworthy and things we should probably be concerned about? But in terms of the justices on that court, are they not just looking at whether this is constitutional? That's the job. And as Adam points out, the issue in front of them is the pure legal issue of Trump's eligibility. The court isn't supposed to take into account any political considerations.

But I think Adam's dead on the money when he talks about there being a lot of potential procedural off ramps that the court could take that would permit Trump to remain on the ballot. And I think in this situation, it's difficult to believe that they'll completely divorce themselves from the policy considerations. A lot of people are concerned about removing the choice from the hands of voters. But if we look at it strictly as a legal matter, there are certain eligibility criteria to be president. You have to be 35. You have to be a native born citizen. Those sorts of criteria are a little bit more black and white than this question of whether or not Trump engaged in insurrection. So that, I suspect, is the area that the court will focus on if they want to avoid disqualifying him based on the 14th Amendment. And Joyce,

what about the speed? Some of these ballots are to be printed in a matter of days, actually. So how quickly can we expect the Supreme Court to move here? Right. So the Supreme Court could go ahead and accept the case based on the existing petition. They might decide that they want to wait for the former president to actually file the notice of appeal. Here's the bottom line, though. If Trump does not appeal this ruling and the court doesn't hear the appeal from the Colorado Republican Party, then he will not be on the ballot in that state. Maybe that's something he believes is survivable. But with so many other states in play, Maine is only one of them.

There are another of other states looking at this. I think the court will have to go ahead and take up the issue. And with at least Maine and Colorado part of the Super Tuesday primary group, they need to do it quickly. Adam, draw upon your experience covering the highest court to put this in some context for us. Seems like the most important election based case since Gorby Bush in 2000. Frankly, one of the most important cases that it may ever take. And beyond that, tell us the role of how you see Chief Justice Roberts approaching this and what sort of strategy or consensus building he might try to use. Well, the court, as you know, is embattled. It's going through a rough period. Its public approval ratings are down. It's

been the subject of ethics scandals. And this is not a case the chief justice is eager to have, but it's probably unavoidable. This question needs a national solution. And his impulse is going to be to try to avoid doing damage to the legitimacy of the court, which a 6-3 Republican-Democrat split of the appointees on the court would give rise to. So I think he would look for consensus. He would look for something incremental. He would look for something technical. And there are, as we've been discussing, off ramps. There are ideas that Congress has to act first or that it's a political question. So I think the chief justice will will want to find a way not to give Trump a victory here, but to tell the American public that it's not the court is not taking a position

on the question of whether he engaged in insurrection, but probably look for some technical way to rule for Trump, but not in a kind of earth shattering way. This is not a court that's been particularly sympathetic to Donald Trump. It's a conservative court, but it has rebuffed Trump and his allies when they tried to get the court to overturn the election. And when the Manhattan D.A. and a congressional committee sought records from him, the court voted seven to two against Trump with all of the Trump appointees in the majority and only Justices Thomas and Alito in dissent. Yeah, no, there is some reporting that former President Trump is very worried about this.

And Joyce, it's very hard to count how many different legal battles this former president is fighting at the same time. In this case, are Colorado and Maine the only states that are doing something like this? You know, they're not, Mika. Other states have ruled that Trump does get to remain on the ballot. The Minnesota Supreme Court has taken that position, and there are proceedings in a whole host of states. This is complicated because we don't have one national election. We've got 50 different state elections with different rules. So, for instance, in Colorado, Trump has to establish he's eligible

to run. And that drove some of that ruling in Michigan, where the law is a little bit different. The courts have held that Trump is eligible to remain on the ballots, at least for the primaries. So all of this complexity adds up to Adam's point that the Supreme Court really will have to decide this issue. We can't have a patchwork quilt of 50 different states with 50 different rules when it comes to a presidential election. MSNBC legal analyst Joyce Vance, one of the co-hosts of the Sisters in Law podcast. Thank you very much. Supreme Court reporter for The New York Times, Adam Liptak. Thank you for your reporting this morning. We appreciate it. And still ahead, it appears the college football playoff committee got it right.

Both games yesterday were incredible. One went into overtime. The other came down to the final second. We'll go through those games and some of the headlines out of the NFL with Pablo Torre. He joins us next on Morning Joe. This is all you need, living in the big machine now. Michigan tight ends in the ballgame. They hand it to Cora McGinn and makes the cut. First down.

Spins and scores. Blake Cora puts Michigan on top in overtime. Game on the line. It's Williams in motion. Low step. Melrose stopped! Michigan makes a stand and comes up with a milestone playoff victory. Texas trailing all night long. One last chance to advance to the national championship game. Ewers lobs it up and it is incomplete. Some of the scenes from yesterday's thrilling slate of college football games all coming down to the last play.

The Washington Huskies there at the end, defeating the Texas Longhorns in the Sugar Bowl. And Michigan stopping Alabama short in the end zone in overtime, short of the end zone in overtime in the Rose Bowl. Both now face off Monday night in Houston for the national championship. Joining us now, the host of Pablo Torre Finds Out on Meadowlark Media, ESPN's Pablo Torre, our good buddy. Pablo, great to see you, man. Hello. Happy New Year.

Happy New Year to you. So let's go in order. We'll go back. Joe's not here, so we can talk openly about the Alabama loss, which is painful for all of us. We should talk about Joe. This is embarrassing for everybody that I cannot yell at him, Willie. Like, Joe was at this game. Joe saw a Nick Saban team, which I would say this.

It's impressive that they got here. Yeah. But what happened at the end of this game raised all sorts of questions that I would have loved to make fun of Joe about. You didn't like the call at the end? The call that we'll get to in this highlight reel, because it was back and forth. Alabama was up in the fourth quarter. Yeah. But it gets to overtime and they run Jalen Milrow on essentially a quarterback sneak right up the middle. And he just collapses to the floor. And look, Michigan, the Harbaugh end of this, I want to also like doff my cap. This is a man who was a little bit of Napoleon on Elba, a little bit of ankle monitor house arrest to his season. There's a whole spying scandal.

But his Michigan team, objectively more talented, it turns out, than Alabama, which is not a sentence you can say very often. And so I just imagine that somewhere as this play is unfolding, as Michigan is rolling down the fleet. Here's overtime. Blake Gorham. We got there. Yeah, man.

Just an impressive run. And somewhere there's Joe in the stands. I presume weeping Mika. I don't know if he weeps at these things, but I feel like when here's the play running right into the line and people are just like, that's what we called after like five minutes of timeout. That was it. Now, Milrow

can, he's an incredible runner. Yes. It was a low snap. I'll say that kind of killed in his defense, but still that's tough right up the gut against a run defense that had been so good all night. Yes. Michigan's defense dominance of Alabama's offensive line, I think, was the most shocking part of the game. They're on to the championship game against Washington. Yep, two undefeateds.

Maybe doesn't get all the love it deserves. I think it will start to now. Michael Penix Jr. is incredible. Finished second in the Heisman. Threw for 430 last night. He's incredible. Still, this game came down to the last play as well. Yeah, these are both two suspenseful games.

The first game was a defensive slugfest. This one was more offense. And Texas is no slouch either. And so this game was certainly more back and forth. Michael Penix Jr., as you said, might be a top three pick in the NFL draft. A guy that we'll see. I don't know if they put kids on adults on Wheaties boxes anymore, but like he's a candidate for that sort of a thing through for a zillion yards, as you said. But when I'm watching this game, Willie,

I am thinking to myself, I don't know how many people are familiar with the experience that is the Washington Huskies. And suddenly in the national championship game, you're going to see a team unload all of that. That cannon attached to Michael Penix's shoulder is going to be on full display. And this was a game, admittedly, that got a little hairy at the end. Washington had one of those late stage game like experiences where you're like, I hope they're not going to just blow this and choke it away. They should have kneeled it. They didn't try to run it. But they outlast Texas and it was a nail biter to the end. I think we can say, can we not, that the committee, after all the consternation about Florida State and everything else, got it right here.

These are the two best teams. I will stipulate, I was watching last night thinking, I still think Georgia would beat all of these teams. But that's a conversation for another day. Well, Georgia would love to have it. I mean, Florida, the state of Florida, would like to have it less because they got blown out by 50, I believe. 60. Sorry, excuse me. Yes, yes. All the votes have now been less because they got blown out by 50, I believe. 60. Sorry, excuse me. 63 to 3.

Yes, yes. All the votes have now been counted. They got blown out by 60. It's embarrassing for FSU. They threatened legislation because they were left out of this. Georgia lost to Alabama. Can't complain too much. But I think they got it right.

The political system, I dare say, worked. There we go. OK, let's do some quick NFL. Man, the Baltimore Ravens look good. Lamar Jackson, probably the mvp i think he led my fantasy team most importantly to a championship there it is on sunday you were whispering this before the segment and i was like we're really gonna yeah all about fantasy deserved willy i mean they smoked a pretty good miami team hit it absolutely 56 to 19 and the

baltimore ravens look there's been this carousel of teams all season because I believe the NFL has been most defined by mediocrity this year. Who is the best team this year? And right now the answer is unequivocally the Baltimore Ravens. Lamar Jackson is the MVP. Lamar Jackson is setting records. He's a guy who has been questioned for whether he's a real quarterback. Is he quarterback-y enough? And, yeah, look at this throw.

It's pretty quarterback-y. Sufficiently quarterback-y, I dare say. And so the Dolphins were once the team that everybody was afraid of. And here come the Baltimore Ravens statistically, as well as just by the eye test. Old scouts love the eye test, Willie. Look at what your eyes are telling you. This is the team that's probably going to win the Super Bowl, assuming everything holds, sir. They're telling me Lamar is very quarterbacky. Really quickly, what's up with the Eagles? They look terrible lately.

They were the previous answer to who's going to win the Super Bowl. Well, the team that was in the Super Bowl last year lost it, but now they're back and they have a vengeance. They have this play, the tush push that no one can stop. They push. Jalen Hurts has butt cheeks and no one can figure out how to solve this. Well, the Cardinals, the Arizona Cardinals have now solved it. A number of teams in the last month have solved it.

And so the Philadelphia Eagles have gone to that very Philadelphia place of total ecstasy at one point to suddenly, I think we've got to fire the head coach. I think we've got to fire people. People are angry, and I don't have answers for them other than to say that they are, in fact, to quote a former Cardinals coach, Dennis Green, they are not actually as good as we thought they were.

Eleven months after being in the Super Bowl, Philadelphia fans want everybody fired. That's how it works there. You can catch more of Pablo through his podcast, Pablo Torre Finds Out on Meadowlark Media. Pablo Torre, always great to see you, my friend. Thank you, sir. Still ahead, Richard Haas standing by with his analysis on why 2024 could be the biggest year yet for democracy. Also ahead, we'll discuss how a change in messaging has shaped the abortion debate, how that's being discussed and why it's now leaving conservatives scrambling to respond.

You're watching Morning Joe. We'll be right back. This could take all night Think I need a devil to help me get things right News this morning out of Ukraine, where its two largest cities have come under heavy attack this morning. Russian missiles hit the center of Kharkiv, and in Kiev, capital, five areas of that city were struck. The Ukrainian Air Force said the barrage involves some of Russia's most powerful weapons. It follows a massive assault on Friday, the Kremlin's largest single attack on Ukraine since the war started. At least 41 civilians were killed in that barrage, Mika. All right, we're getting also to this breaking news we're covering out of Tokyo. This is on the heels of an earthquake in Japan yesterday. Japanese local media is now reporting that five crew members aboard a Coast Guard plane that

collided with a passenger jet after landing have died. We're told the pilot was able to escape. It happened overnight on the runway of one of Tokyo's busiest airports. You see the plane bursting into flames there as it landed. Get this, all of the 400 passengers on board the Japanese Airlines flight got out safely. The Coast Guard personnel was on the way to help victims of yesterday's earthquake. Right now, crews are still working to try and contain that fire.

But look at that, those pictures of the fire are unbelievable. When you hear that the reports are these 400 passengers had under two minutes to get out of the plane. There were multiple toddlers. Everybody got out of the passenger plane alive. Incredible. We'll be following this breaking story out of Tokyo. Coming up.