Morning Joe - Morning Joe 12/9/24

Episode Date: December 9, 2024

Rebels capture Damascus, ending Assad regime

At long last, the Assad regime has fallen. This regime brutalized and tortured and killed literally hundreds of thousands of innocent Syrians. The fall of the regime is a fundamental act of justice. It's a moment of historic opportunity for the long-suffering people of Syria to build a better future for their proud country. It's also a moment of risk and uncertainty. As we all turn to the question of what comes next,

the United States will work with our partners and the stakeholders in Syria to help them seize an opportunity to manage the risks. That was President Biden yesterday at the White House addressing the end of Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria. We'll get a live report from the region and bring you expert analysis on this major development in the Middle East.

Also ahead, we'll go through President-elect Donald Trump's exclusive interview with NBC's Meet the Press, including his comments about wanting to jail the January 6th committee members, issue pardons for Capitol rioters, as well as his plans to undo a key piece of the 14th amendment. Plus, we'll bring you Joe's conversation with former President Bill Clinton. They had a wide-ranging discussion on the future of the Democratic Party and much more as the Clinton Presidential Center celebrated its 20th anniversary over the weekend. And Juan Soto is going from the Bronx to Queens, agreeing to the largest contract in professional

sports history. We'll have much more about that massive move for the New York Mets. Good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Monday, December 9th. Good to be here with you all. With us, we have the host of Way Too Early, Jonathan Lemire, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, retired four-star Navy Admiral James Tevrides.

He is chief international analyst for NBC News. President Emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haase, he's author of the weekly newsletter, Home and Away, available on Substack. And Calmness, an associate editor for The Washington Post, David Ignatius is with us this morning. A great group to have with this major development recovery. I've got to say, it was the news this weekend. Actually, over last week David Ignatius we're going to be getting to the story and and all of the details but I must say I've never seen anything quite like this since 1989 when you had one country and the eastern

block after another country just falling by the day after a bloody, bloody gridlock that, you know, cost 500,000 lives over more than a dozen years, Assad's Syria fell just like that and just like that. A brutal, tyrannical 54-year reign over. Joe, it was a stunning day, conclusion to a war that's been so brutal. It began really in the days of the April Spring in 2011, the uprising of the Syrian people against what's been a despotic regime now for decades.

And to have it end so quickly, it's 10 days since this group, the HTS, began to sweep south from its headquarters in Idlib, in northern Syria, and they were in Damascus, it seemed like in the blink of an eye. So it is a moment, as one of my sources in the Biden administration said, in which you could just see the needle of the compass of

world affairs turning away from Russia and Iran to real adversaries of the United States toward we hope better governance, a better chance for the Syrian people. I do worry as somebody who spent time in Syria with these very people who were doing the fighting, rolled into Damascus. Among them are people who were jihadists, who could pose a threat to the future security of Syria. But for the moment, what I was hearing yesterday from administration officials was a sense of this extraordinary change as a weakened Russia and weakened Iran, reeling after Israel's overwhelming response to October 7, really rewrote the basic rules of the Middle East and

altered the balance of power. It is really hard, Admiral Stravidis, to begin to explain how world affairs have been reordered. Of course, the Russians got into the Middle East several years ago, for the first time since 1973, when Putin sent troops in. So you had Iran, you had Russia, you had Syria, and it really created a network of terror, a network of instability. Russia could launch that into Africa. You could have Iran funneling terrorist supplies into Hamas and Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah.

That just all got blown up this weekend. We don't know who the long- term winners are going to be, but certainly the short term losers certainly look to be Iran, Russia and Assad. Absolutely correct. And just look at a map. If you think of it as that old game of risk we played as kids, played as kids, Pouf goes the bridge that runs from Iran, you're showing it now, over to Syria and to Lebanon to the Mediterranean Sea. Pouf goes the Russian bases on the Mediterranean, the warm weather port that they have cherished the Idila for so long as you show there. Now their ability to operate in that Eastern Mediterranean gone overnight. So all of this is a remarkable twist of fate.

I think military analysts are going to focus initially on what the hell happened here so fast. And it's kind of a combination, right? It's corruption and conscription difficulties, long-running fuse in Syria, as David says. It's also the distraction of Russia tied up in Ukraine and Iran flattened by Israel. And then thirdly, let's not underestimate the rise of a charismatic leader. I think a lot of folks are getting to know Abu Muhammad Al Jalani, learn that name, and we'll see where this goes.

Is this gonna be a new awakening, as we all hope? David used the words we hope, and I think we do. I think if you run the numbers here, you know, 25% chance it turns out really well and there's a secular country kind of emerges. I think 25% it shuts down pretty quickly as jihadists take over. Maybe a 50% chance that looks like Libya, which is an ongoing state of conflict. All just too soon to tell, but bottom line, it is confusion to our enemies and success,

at least for the moment, for the democratic side of things. And they collapse, Mika, as we just heard, in part because Russia, as Donald Trump even said on Truth Social this weekend, Russia has been gutted by Ukraine. They didn't have the force to help Assad in this time of need. And post-October 7, Iran has been gutted by Israel and attacks. They don't even have an air defense, effective air defense right now. So these two powerful allies of Assad in Assad's time of need were nowhere to be seen. Well, let's take a look at exactly what happened

and then get right to Richard Haas. Syrian rebels toppled the regime of President Bashar Al-Assad over the weekend, ending his family's decades-long rule. The rebels seized Damascus after a lightning advance across key cities like Aleppo and Homs. According to a senior Biden administration official, Assad has fled to Moscow, where he has been granted asylum. As the news broke, celebrations erupted nationwide,

even in regime strongholds. Meanwhile, Israel bolstered security near the Golan Heights but stated it will not intervene. President Biden delivered remarks from the White House yesterday shortly after Assad's regime fell. We'll support Syria's neighbors, including Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, and Israel, should any threat arise from Syria during this period of transition. I will speak with leaders of the region in the coming days. I had long discussions with all of our people earlier this morning.

And I'll send senior officials from my administration to the region as well. We will help stability, ensure stability in eastern Syria, protecting any personnel, our personnel against any threats, and will remain our mission against ISIS, most may be maintained, including the security of detention facilities where ISIS fighters are being held as prisoners. We're clear-eyed about the fact that ISIS will try to take advantage of any vacuum to reestablish its capabilities and to create a safe haven. We will not let that happen. As I've said, this is a moment of considerable risk and uncertainty, but I also believe this is the best opportunity in generations for Syrians to forge their own future, free

of opposition. It would be a waste of this historic opportunity if one tyrant were toppled and only to see a new one rise up in this place. Richard Haass, your analysis on where this goes from here and maybe a brief bit on Joe Biden's foreign policy legacy. Where it goes from here, you know, the honest answer, no matter who you ask that question to, Mika, is we're not sure how it's going to play out. Historically, traditionally, after revolutions succeed in their first phase of ousting the

so-called Ancien Regime, in this case the Assad's, there's often a falling out among the various groups that were part of the effort, because they agreed on what they were against, something very different to agree on what they're for, and there's a scramble for power. So I think something like that is inevitable. And the question is whether it comes together in some large struggle in Syria, or whether you have something very different, almost a patchwork quilt where Syria remains a country on a map, but the Kurds have this part, Turkish back forces have this part, this Sunni group,

HTS that took the lead here, they have large parts of Syria. I think that's the real question there. And I don't think we're going to have a whole lot of influence on this. I think the real question for the United States is how do we use this in some ways to try to influence our biggest concern in the region, which is Iran? And what is it we do in terms of taking advantage of a weakened Iran? Its proxies are on their heels. Iran itself is on its heels.

What can we do now to deal with the nuclear challenge, to try to reduce or cut off Iran's aid for proxies? What do we do about the regime itself? Must be a little bit worried. One other thought, Mika, let me just put on the table. What's so interesting, I was just in Saudi Arabia and the conversations I had with officials there was for the most part you Americans have to get over your hostility towards Bashar al-Assad. He's there to stay. You've got to somehow normalize relations with him. The alternatives are worse.

And what's interesting to me is how much people misread his so-called stability and what this tells us about regimes. And what was it about him? And I think it is my own instinct here is he never really institutionalized it. So it was very brittle. And there's these, some of these, like China is an authoritarian regime, but it's not brittle. It's institutionalized. The most, the most brittle regime in some ways, I actually think is Russia, because Putin has destroyed institutions there. And he himself must be watching events

a little bit uneasily. And then you've got the question of Iran. You know, they're almost in between. There's some institutions there, but also it's pretty top heavy. And I expect they're having some uneasy moments in Tehran right now. Yeah, and Jonathan Omer, obviously, you look at all of the reasons why Syria fell at the end.

US sanctions through the years just gutted the economy. What money they did have was awash in corruption. And U.S. sanctions through the years just gutted the economy. What money they did have was awash in corruption. And those fighters who had been fighting and dying for Assad through the years realized they were getting nothing back in return because there really wasn't a functioning state that was worth fighting for. And so overnight, as we've seen this week, Assad is now gone. But you look, following up on what

Mika said, we're all obviously looking around and distracted by all everything that has happened since the election. But history is going to record the end of the Biden administration. And it's going to see Russia and their military gutted at levels we haven't seen in our lifetime, weaker than levels we haven't seen in our lifetime. The ruble on Iran and the economy close to being shattered. Are you going to see with Iran weaker than they've ever been

since the 1979 revolution. They in effect don't have any air defense systems left. They are at Israel's mercy. And now you have Assad, who is gone. Now, of course, Joe Biden, as you know better than anybody, because you follow him, in Ukraine, he was always being attacked for doing too much or not doing enough. And Israel attacked too much for doing too much or not doing enough. In Israel, attacked too much for doing too much or not doing enough.

Right? And in fact, chances are good, Kamala Harris lost Michigan because people thought he was doing too much to help Israel out now. Well, too much, not enough, I don't know. But history is going to show that what he did in Ukraine to help the Ukrainians in their fierce fight against Russia and the supplies and weapons that he gave Israel, gave them ability to do all of this and again have a map that is completely remade with people who consider themselves our enemies now, weakened in historical manner and on the run. Yeah, all of that is correct, including a weaker Russia, including a weaker Iran, including

perhaps its electoral impact here in the United States. There's no question that Joe Biden will be seen as a deeply consequential foreign policy president with ramifications felt for decades. And certainly there's a note of uncertainty and even trepidation as to what might come next in Syria. But we should also just take a moment to think about the scenes we saw this weekend, the joyful scenes, families reunited

for the first time in years, prisoners who tasted freedom for the first time in decades, just celebrations, that spontaneous celebrations across the country, statues of Assad being pulled down, even one large one being used being pulled as a makeshift sled through the city streets with joyful men atop of it believing that this is a new chapter in their lives, in a new chapter for their country. So really remarkable there even as we try to figure out what comes next. Joining us now to help us shed some insight, joining us live from the Golden Heights is NBC News international correspondent, Raf Sanchez. Raf, so good to see you. Give us the very latest there

from the region, including how Israel, as we were just talking about, how Israel played a role here in some way and also might be looking at this as an opportunity. Yeah, Jonathan, good morning. So we're on the Israeli controlled side of the Golan Heights. We're looking out over southern Syria. Damascus is over the horizon that way. And 48 hours ago Bashar al-Assad was in power there as his family has been every day for more than 50 years in Syria. But today is a new day in Syria. In many ways, it is a new day in the Middle East, as you and the panel have been discussing.

This coalition of Syrian rebels after this lightning fast advance that basically has brought an end to the 13-year civil war are now in power in Damascus. They're consolidating control. and Bashar al-Assad has fled to Moscow. He has been granted asylum there according to Russian state media. He's with his family. We believe that his wife, Asma, a British-born former investment banker, is with him. Putin prepared to give him asylum but was not there in his moment of need as these rebels were closing in as you've been talking about. Russia bogged down in Ukraine. Iran, Hezbollah weakened after more than a year of fighting with

Israel. The largest of those rebel groups is called Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. It is an Islamist group. It has its origins in Al-Qaeda. It is still considered a terrorist organization by the United States. But this is a group that is doing everything it can to try to signal to the people of Syria and to the world that it is moderated. It is saying there will be no revenge attacks

against minorities. There will be no limitations on the rights of women inside of Syria. And President Biden said yesterday that the US is clear-eyed about what he called the grim record of terrorism of some of these groups, but that the US will engage here and is hopeful that this may be a moment to reshape a free Syria.

Now, you talked, Jonathan, about the joy across the country. I want to introduce you to Abdul-Khafi Alhamdo. He's a man I've known for nearly 10 years. And in December 2016, I said goodbye to him over the phone because I was convinced that he and his family were going to be killed as the Assad regime closed in around their home in the city of Aleppo. They managed to escape.

And I want to play you some sound from yesterday morning in the early hours when he received the news that the Assad regime had been toppled. Take a listen. Now you can sleep while you know that justice is achieved. Now I can understand that my children will not be raised under oppression. Now, only now, I can say that we're free Syria. We're free people. So you saw him there, cradling his young son,

expressing his hope that his children will grow up without oppression and in a free Syria. Just a sign of these are vast geopolitical events, but they mean so, so much to the hearts of individual people in that country. Guys. All right, NBC's Raf Sanchez, thank you so much. 54 years of brutal, brutal tyranny from the asides over,

just seemingly overnight. I wanna talk about what this means for Iran and for Russia. Obviously, the two big losers here thus far. David, let me start with you. Talk about what this means for Iran. So Iran, in the space of really the last three months, has seen its three key proxies. Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and now Assad in Syria, devastated by the force of Israeli arms.

It's hard to imagine that it was just over a year ago after October 7, 2023, that Israel looked so weak and traumatized by the horrible Hamas attack across the Gaza fence. Today Israel's run the table. Its enemies are dead or they're in flight. Iran is weak in a way that we haven't seen, as was said earlier, since the revolution. And I think an interesting question for the U.S. and the West is whether to continue to apply coercive diplomacy on Iran at a time when it can't really defend itself, to resolve this issue that haunts the Middle East of Iran getting a nuclear weapon.

Iran the nuclear weapon would create a different environment, not the hopeful place we're talking about today, but something quite scary. So I think there will be discussion with the new Trump administration and Israel about pushing the next step to get real limits on Iran and failing that, perhaps, to take military action. But it's a moment in which you can see the arc of the Iranian revolution going up, going up, becoming so much more powerful, really beginning to come down now as it loses power with its proxies

and internally. Well, I will say with Iran being at its weakest, in its weakest state since the 1979 revolution, not all of that is great news. If you live by the proverb, beware the man with nothing to lose. Right now, that is Iran. And David's exactly right. Now, a weakened Iran may be more desperate than ever to get nuclear weapons. Admiral Servetus, tell us, if you will, what the fall Adis, tell us, if you will, what the fall of Assad, the fall of Syria means to Russia and what tells us about just how weakened Vladimir Putin's war with Ukraine has left Russia. The right question.

Before I go there, can I just add to something David was saying and that we've all been saying, the weakness of Iran. Let's not forget there's another proxy out there that has not been damaged is continuing strikes. Those are the Houthis on the Red Sea who have effectively shut down the Suez Canal and the Red Sea. I think that's a very tempting target set as we come off of the events in the last few days. Break, break, let's go to Moscow.

This has gotta be a moment of real concern for Vladimir Putin. Your point is exactly right. Not only does he now have to take in Assad as this now vagrant coming with his family on bended knee to Moscow. But more importantly, it's the Russian prestige globally that takes a real hit here. It's the damage to the brand. I think you'd have to go back to Yevgeny Progozhin's ill-fated attempt to topple Putin a year or so ago to see how difficult this moment will be for Putin.

So as I look at the hand of cards Putin has going into what I think everybody increasingly presumes will be a negotiation with Ukraine sometime in 2025, this is a sign of real weakness for Russia. That's good news for the United States, alongside what we see from the weakening of Iran. So, Richard, to close, just give us a sense of what to look for in the next couple of weeks, especially given that there's a presidential transition coming up, and Donald Trump has said what he has said about NATO branching out a bit, what's the challenge for the Biden administration in the weeks to come before the transition? I think there's limited amounts the Biden administration can do here.

That's not a criticism. It's just an observation of what you can do in 40-odd days. Let me make it more broadly. The choices facing the United States, one is, you know, we're obviously, I think, going to start pressing for a negotiated outcome in Ukraine. And I think the real question there is whether what's happened here makes Putin, because he's suffered such a strategic defeat here, whether that makes him more difficult or not against the backdrop of

his systemic weakness to compromise there. But clearly we're moving towards a negotiated outcome in Ukraine. Vladimir Zelensky is articulated his readiness to accept it. I think the big question facing the United States, and it's been central to our conversation here, is less what we do in Syria, it's what we do as a result of Syria and everything else that's happened vis-à-vis Iran. And we have really two paths. One is to try to negotiate a deal with this Iranian government on the nuclear issue and on their support for all their proxies, to essentially shut that down and say, we'll

relieve sanctions if you give us what we want on nuclear and proxies. That's one approach, but that would keep the regime in power. The other is to say, no, we're not interested in a deal right now, and we're gonna press ahead with sanctions, and we're gonna turn to military force to deal with the Houthis and with your nuclear program. And that's something the United States and Israel would do together.

And I think for the Biden administration and then the Trump administration, we have reached a proverbial fork in the road when it comes to Syria about how we finally decide to deal with them at this moment of their real systemic or structural weakness. Richard Haass, retired Admiral James Tevridis and The Washington Post David Ignatius, thank you all very much for coming on this morning. And still ahead on Morning Joe, the White House National Security

Communications Advisor John Kirby joins us to talk about the ouster of Syrian President Assad, plus Axios co-founders Jim Van De Hei and Mike Allen will be our guests to break down how the media is now splintering into dozens of news bubbles and why finding common ground could be even more complex. Also ahead, Joe's conversation with former President Bill Clinton about what Democrats need to do in the wake of the presidential election. You and I have now been friends for years. We've got our political differences and we've got a political history.

But I know you, I think. And I like you. Now suppose you and Mika did a makeover of your living room. Then you ask me to come visit. And I visit and it is beautiful. Everything about it is beautiful, except in the corner, you've got this beautiful curved couch, but behind the couch, there's a pink elephant.

And now I could ask you, I said, I guess you're still a Republican, you just turn a little pink, or something. We could do it. We find it. Almost doesn't matter what I say. The one thing I cannot do is to come in, drink your coffee, talk about how beautiful your living room is, and turn around and not mention the pink outfit. And ignore it. Which reminds me... Almost half past the hour, President-elect Trump is vowing to pardon most, if not all,

of the January 6th insurrectionists on his first day in office. He made the comment during an interview when NBC's Meet the Press yesterday. The president-elect also said members of the House January 6th Select Committee ought to go to jail. Cheney was behind it. And so was Bennie Thompson. And everybody on that committee, for what they did, honestly, they should go to jail.

So you think Liz Cheney should go to jail? For what they did? Everyone on the committee you think they should go to jail. Anybody that voted in favor- Are you going to direct your FBI director and your attorney general to send them to jail? No, not at all. I think that they'll have to look at that, but I'm not going to... I'm going to focus

on drill baby drill. I'm going to look at everything. We're going to look at individual cases. Yeah. But I'm going to be acting very quickly. Within your first 100 days, first day? First day. First day.

Yeah, I'm looking first day. To issue these pardons. These people have been there, how long is it? Three or four years. You know, by the way, they've been in there for years and they're in a filthy, disgusting place that shouldn't even be allowed to be open. Let's bring in the co-founders and CEO of Axios, Jim Van De Hei, and co-founder of Axios, Mike Allen.

We're going to get guys to the article about the splintering of the media, but first, obviously, we should address this. Jim Van De Heide, quote, they should go to jail. Liz Cheney, Benny Thompson, Adam Kinzinger, everybody else on the committee, that is obviously, that's obviously a red siren. And I would say specifically for Joe Biden when he's talking about what pardons need to be issued, but for everybody post-election that said, oh, well, you know, people didn't want the fascist rhetoric.

They didn't want the harsh retribution. They were voting because of the price of bread and gasoline. Well, Donald Trump, post-election, still talking this way, what's it mean? Well, I think, let's separate those two. Like, I think the idea that members of Congress who are doing their job, doing their investigation, came up with their conclusions, and then reported those should go to jail,

obviously we've never heard any other president in history say that that would be the case. He wasn't crystal clear he's gonna follow through with that. Obviously, it's something that bothers him troubles him to the point that he brought it up again and i would but i would separate that from the january six pardons which he made crystal clear he's doing it was a good on day one

and i think that you can turn to the issues where there's like a massive two different lenses on it that nothing captures it more than this like to a lot of people, to probably us, people stormed the U.S. Capitol, people were injured, people were killed, the proceedings of the seat of freedom were disrupted, and now those people, it sounds like they'll be set free, and he'll do it on the first day in office. And I think it's one of the reasons, one of the many reasons Democrats were so ticked off at Joe Biden for pardoning Hunter, because they feel like, ah, man, now we don't even have the moral high ground

to be able to say that this is absurd. But make no mistake that the president in that interview, which was very, very newsy interview, very newsy interview, because he said he's gonna do that on day one, a lot of executive orders, including many covering immigration on day one. He was even clear that if you are here illegally

and part of your family is not, that they might force the entire family to leave the country. And so when they talk about the hierarchy of people that they're gonna remove from the country, yes, it starts with criminals, but he made it pretty elastic and we should take him at his word

because he's been following through on that. Yep, and by the way, Wall Street Journal headline here talking about Donald Trump wanting to get rid of birthright citizenship. Let's just say right here, that's not going to happen. That's a constitutional amendment, not going to happen. But still, the headline is going to be out there. People are going to chase after it. Mike Allen, a very, very good point that Jim just made. Whenever he was talking about persecution against people that investigated him, for the most part, it was more generalized. They should go to jail. Jack Smith, for what he did, et cetera, et cetera. Are you going to do it? No, I'll let Pam Bondi look at it, Cash Patel look at it. But the one thing he was very specific about, as you all noted, was January 6th rioters

that were going to be released. And my question is this, when push comes to shove on January the 20th, on January the 21st, is he really going to pardon people that were violent, that beat the hell out of cops, that gassed cops, that used bear spray against cops? Because if so, there will be a tremendous backlash even from people who voted for him. No, that's right. And Joe, that's why the people around him, the people he's talking to, the people in his ear, people who are calling his cell phone, matter so much because we saw President-elect Trump repeat in this great interview with Kristen Welker the fact that he sees success as his retribution.

He's talking about the golden age of America that he wants to create. And yet, absolutely, he leaned in to this. Kristen Welker asked him, oh, are you going to do this within the first 100 days? And that's when he said, first day. And Joe, I can tell you, as I talk to Republicans, as I talk to people in the Trump transition, they say that the Hunter Biden pardon will be a big part of their talking point if they go ahead with some of these pardons that they will say you open the door, it's a threat on the sweater, they absolutely will pull. Yeah, well, again, they can use those, Jonathan O'Meara, if they want to, but you're going

to get family of cops that had the hell beaten out of them for just doing their job, defending the people's house, defending the United States Capitol. Good luck with that politically. It will not go well. You can go, Hunter Biden, Hunter Biden. They'll go, yeah, well, that guy that you just let out of jail that was sentenced 10 years for beating the hell out of a law enforcement officer? You know, that's on you.

I want to read you what Liz Cheney had to say. Here is the truth. Donald Trump attempted to overturn the 2020 presidential election and seize power. He mobilized an angry mob and sent them to the United States Capitol, where they attacked police officers, invaded the building, and halted the official counting of electoral votes, Cheney said. Donald Trump's suggestion that members of Congress who later investigated his illegal and unconstitutional actions should be jailed as a continuation of his assault on the rule of law

and the foundations of our republic and Jonathan Lamire for a new incoming president, you know what? That is not the fight he wants to pick. I mean, he may want to pick that fight, but it's just not gonna end well. It's not the fight he should pick, but it very well may be the fight he chooses to pick. Yes, it is a deep concern. Who knows what charge these January 6th members of the committee would be actually hit with

if he were to do this. And I think there's a few things to hit here. First on the pardons point, I mean, they can use the Hunter Biden thing as a talking point, but these pardons were coming anyway. There's nothing to do with Hunter Biden. Let's be clear about that. That's first. Secondly, on the deportations piece of this, which is again, he'd leaned into, he doubled

down. He said, well, I wouldn't separate families this time around like he did in the first term. That's because I would deport entire families. And I do think there's a lot of people, Democrats, who are so despondent right now, who do wonder if in those early days of the Trump administration were he to follow through with this. That would be the moment that would electrify the opposition to the protests were he to actually do it.

We'll have to see if he does. There'll be a lot of pushback, even from the business world, which he cares about quite a bit, but he's at least to this moment saying that he will. And lastly, Joe Meek, this idea that he said, well, I wouldn't direct people under me to carry out these arrests,

to carry out targeting my political opponents. That's giving him some plausible deniability. Maybe he won't on January 21st say, hey, arrest Liz Cheney. He's already directed it. He has said these names over and over and over for months. They already can take their cues. That would be at his behest for this to happen. For sure.

We have to see how these choices pan out as well and whether some of them get through or not or how they're put in place. And also, Donald Trump will have a decision to make for himself. What will be more important to him on day one? Meetings with leaders, Democrats, Republicans, working on policy and legislative action and perhaps getting things done, meeting goals, or starting this way, which would make it very hard for any

of those other things to happen. That's a big choice. Also, Adam Schiff, who was on the committee, he's being sworn in as a senator today, and he will be joining us later on Morning Joe. Well, you know, Jim, there are two doors, all right? And Carol Merrill's behind, you know, you got to tell Carol Merrill which door to open up here. That's an old Price is Right thing, Bob Barker.

But the two doors. Donald Trump talks about, hey, I want to move forward. I want to make America great. I want our economy stronger than ever. I want to focus on making this country great again. There's that door you can open, or there's the door that we saw in 2017 where the first months were just completely crippled by one protest after another protest after another protest. And of course,

Republicans got slaughtered in 2017 elections from, you know, the suburbs of Pennsylvania to Virginia. 2018, they lost. 2019, they lost. The question is whether he's going to repeat himself, because he can't do two things. Right. He can't look forward and work on a legacy that he thinks is going to be about making America greater and stronger and more powerful than ever before while going after political opponents. I think he would argue otherwise. and stronger and more powerful than ever before, while going after political opponents?

I think he would argue otherwise. He would argue, watch me, I'm gonna do both. They're very clear when you talk to them. They think they can do both. The way we look at it is they basically assemble the team and kind of an idea of creators and destroyers. The creators are the people who are gonna be getting the economic jobs and the jobs around energy jobs where you can create

Where you can create momentum in the economy create growth create new jobs create new industries at the same time They have these destroyers at FBI or DNI or at the Pentagon if he gets his way Where they feel like they do want to go after both their enemies, but also they want to go after what they consider like useless bureaucracies. They really do think they can take the wrecking ball on one side while building on the other. I agree it's very difficult. Governing is a hell of a lot harder than talking,

but they are hell bent on doing it. And if you look at the people they're surrounding themselves with, it's people that egg them on, right? Like if you think about the theology of like an Elon Musk, it's like, yes you can. You can do a lot more than people think you can do. It might be ugly, it might be messy,

but at the end of the day, you're gonna have a hell of a lot more success if you choose that route. That is the route they will go down. Well, if they try to go down both routes, Meekha? That'll be hard. Again, like I said, it won't end well. They're gonna lose in 20, you know, they'll lose 25 elections, 26 elections, 27 elections, but they can try it.

So Jim and Mike, you are out with a recent piece for Axios looking at the growing divide and how Americans consume their news. It's entitled Shards of Glass Inside Media's 12 Splintering Realing realities in which you label and explain the dozen different ecosystems that you say modern media consumers inhabit. Starting with the musketeers. Jim, take it from here. Yeah, I think, listen, it goes back to the beginning of this conversation of is there a big segment of the country that thinks it's okay to pardon the people who stormed the Capitol on January 6th. The truth is there are and a lot of that has to do with information. I think the

most useful thing for your viewers is stop thinking about news and start thinking about information. That's how people's minds get molded. It's what are they consuming? A little bit of news, a little bit news adjacent, some of it just nonsense, but that is like the information bubble. And it used to be that all of us kind of looked through the same window, go back 15, 20 years ago, a couple of newscasts, a couple of cable stations, newspapers, all the same standards.

That's now been shattered. And so tell me how much you make or where you work or what you do, and I'll tell you where you get your information from. And that information bubble that you live in could be completely different from the person sitting next to you and that's what's new, right? If you're a young guy who's interested in fitness and kind of vaguely interested in

the news, you're getting your news from the musketeers, right? A little bit on acts, probably listen to Joe Rogan might be listening to Huberman podcast on longevity in health and what's really fascinating to me is the thought experiment I give people is you could be sitting at a table with people of different ages from different regions and every person around that table might be getting their news on a platform you've never visited on from people that they trust that you've never heard of and getting hopped up about a topic that's never come across your desk.

That's new and I think we have to reckon with a lot of our politics, a lot of our cultural issues, a lot of our conflict. It's all downstream from information. So if you're in business or you're just interested in what's happening in the country, you have to get your mind around this shattered glass phenomenon. So Mike Allen, let's get you to weigh in on a couple of these other bubbles. You pick, in terms of ones you feel most important, although I'll note that of these, there's the Instagrammers,

there's the right-wing grandpas, so listen to Fox News. But the kids, the kids, TikTok, which is the very future of that platform now, in doubt. No, Jonathan, here's a fascinating fact about these fragmented realities, these shards of glass. Because there's very little overlap among them, right? You tell me your ideology, your job, your income, your location, your age, like I can

put you in one of these shards. But whereas we used to say, oh, like there isn't shared reality anymore, now there aren't even shared topics, like those Instagrammers, the right-wing grandpas that you mentioned. They're talking about different things, case in point. Last week I was asked to go on TV and talk about the pardons, and they said, can you come on and talk about lawfare? That's probably not NBC or MSNBC, right?

Like that is from the right. And so different topics. And here's a real wrinkle, Ben LeBolt, the White House Communications Director, a senior advisor, told Jim Meaford-Collum that we wrote on this shards of glass phenomenon that when they're looking at Americans voters consumers ages 18 to 35 there could be something that's the lead of Morning Joe or Axios and they're not even aware of

it or it's an eight second nine second clip with a totally different context so a 90 minute debate becomes they're eating the dogs, they're eating the cats, a remix on Jonathan TikTok. And of course the universe that Axios and Morning Joe fit neatly in, Jim, is what universe? It's basically, if you think about elites, and I hate that term, but it's people who are looking to get informed about what's happening in the news on a day-to-day basis, largely to do their job or because they're deeply involved in government

or in civic debates. And you know, that's what, so you think about, like you guys have a good day, you might have 2 million viewers, right? We have a good day, we might get 2 to 5 million people coming to the site. That's not 330 million people. It is a very valuable slice.

I think it's where people who are running companies, running media, running government go to to get informed. But like Mike said, there could be an entire population of people who are taking little pieces of that and running with it in ways that would be indistinguishable to how we even talk about it or how we write about it. And you can sit there and say, ah, this sucks, man, I really wanna go back.

You can't go back in time. Like we have no choice but to realize that the world is changing. And basically you just have this collision of information consumption, politics, and business slash technology all at once. Intellectually, I find it quite invigorating, quite interesting.

I think all kinds of new ideas and new businesses will be born from it. And I think your job, our job, is to try to look at this stuff as clinically as possible, be curious, not condescending. And I think that's what we all do when we're doing our very best. When we don't do that, people dunk on us. Well, you know, the thing is, when I read the article, somebody showed it to me and I was just absolutely fascinated by it because it really does show you the world that we're living in right now. And again, it's not something that I look at

and I'm horrified by. It's like something I look at and go, oh, okay, yes. All right, so there are these 12 right now silos and a lot of times they don't cross each other. How do you get your silo and start moving out to some of the other areas? I understand them a lot of times they don't cross each other. How do you get your silo and start moving out to some of the other areas and understand them a lot better? I was at an appointment the other day and a woman was talking about her parents.

I think they and their right-wing grandpa, category, I'm not sure, and they are convinced from what they had been reading that hurricanes were brought here by our enemies. And convinced, absolutely convinced. And there were a couple of other pieces of information that were disinformation that were just that is now part of their reality.

So it's also that problem. You guys have just scratched the surface here. This piece is amazing and we should talk about it more. Axios co-founders Jim Fandahai and Mike Allen, thank you both very much for this and we'll see you soon. Up next, Pablo Torre and Paul Feinbaum join us with the biggest storylines from the NFL and the college football playoff now set with one notable omission. Roll Roll tight. We'll be right back. ["The Daily Show Theme"] Nate, see what call he sends in here.

Falcons bringing pressure. Darnold in trouble. Sam Darnold keeps it alive. Darnold on the run. Open man! Coverage blown! Walk-in touchdown, Justin Jefferson! Mayfield goes underneath, gets it to McMillan,

and he is gonna stroll in for the Tampa Bay touchdown! Second and five. Wilson has it, throws it. Got the touchdown. Ben Jefferson. It is Hertz. Dancing, firing, scoring. It's a touchdown to Calcutera.

And Philadelphia takes the lead. Prider the snap. Gillen the hold. The kick no good. On the count of three. Dylan the hold, the kick no good! On a day where special teams failed the Saints time and again a special teams play decides it. Good time to the end zone. Got it. Smith touchdown. The Dolphins win.

There they go following the tie-down. Purdy looking end zone. He throws touchdown to Juan Jennings. I don't know how many organized football leagues there are for three-year-olds. That was news to me. On a give, Charbonne. First down and more Charbonne turning on the Jets. Charbonne takes it to the house. Touchdown Seahawks. They blitz Stafford sees it. Nakula hits a block. He might go. Nakula scores. Touchdown Rams. It is Mahomes on the roll Mahomes pumping stops throws complete for Kelsey in the first down they've done it again Mahomes to Kelsey Chargers can't stop it the kick will come

from Matthew Wright this is for the division for the Chiefs. And right, off the up right, and in for the division. It's the doik for the division for the Chiefs. That is the most Chiefs thing ever in 2024. The most Chiefs thing ever. Unbelievable. Another win. Just barely. So let's bring in those from the top place, of course, NFL yesterday, including the Chiefs once again, winning barely thanks to a walk off field goal from their third swing kicker. Let's bring in the host of Pablo Torre, finds out on Metal Arc Media, MSNBC contributor Pablo Torre, and ESPN commentator

Paul Feinbaum. We're going to get both of them on the college football playoff in just a moment. Pablo, let's first of all talk about the good, the bad, the ugly yesterday. The good, the 49ers look like the 49ers again. The Steelers now 10 and three, if you can believe that. Yeah, they are looking solid. The bad, New York, my God. The Jets, the Giants.

It is seriously, just as well as the ugly, my Atlanta Falcons now four game lose streak. What were your takeaways from week 14? We've moved from me wanting a scientist to evaluate the Kansas City Chiefs, the luckiest team, I believe, in the history of sports, to we need a priest. We need a priest to examine this, Joe. We're in the realm of the supernatural. This is, by the way, this game in particular, they win this on a doin' field goal, going left, bouncing in right, kicked by Matthew Wright. And if you don't know who Matthew

Wright is, that's okay. Nobody did. He's the third string kicker. The third string kicker, and that is the third kicker of the Chiefs season to win with a field goal as time expired to get yet another victory in an improbable run that everybody is just like, what do you do with this? What do you do with a team that feels like just a billionaire getting tax cuts when it comes to good fortune.

It's totally unnecessary how they're doing it. They are doing it. So I'm just, I am flabbergasted as always by this team. Yeah, I will tell you, this reminds me of Vikings team a few years ago that kept winning by, you know, a touchdown or a field goal. And when they collapsed, they collapsed. This is not a team even though

I picked them and I always pick my homes when it gets cold towards the playoff. Always pick it. This is not a team that's going to win the Super Bowl. I just don't think. Yeah, that's a bold, bold, bold. I know I'm betting against the field. Paul Feinbaum, we're going to get to college in a second but just after talk about Bryce Young. Here's a guy that the Carolina fans were ready to throw away six or seven games ago. Bryce has had a remarkable run the last three or four games, and if he actually had some support, they would have beaten the Chiefs and the Eagles. Of course, it works out best for him because the more they lose, not because of him, the better draft pick they get next year.

But Bryce Young, he's suddenly looking like that guy we saw for 40 years at Alabama. No, Joe, and what's so remarkable is that literally everyone in that community and around the world of the NFL wrote him off. I mean, he was down, he was benched. I mean, this isn't just some guy being benched. I mean, this is a Heisman Trophy winner, the number one pick, and he just has nothing around him because that is in contention for the worst franchise

in really modern history. And that's saying a great deal, considering that Daniel Schneider is still alive somewhere. Incredibly though, they're coming so close and really he's done everything imaginable. He doesn't have great receivers. I mean, last week he was about to win the game in overtime and his running back fumbled. Yesterday you saw against the Eagles, an NFL receiver can't make a simple catch, but it is one of the greater comeback stories of a guy on a team that's only won three games.

He won't get any awards, but he deserves some. Yeah, that would have capped off if an NFL receiver could actually catch a touchdown pass. That would have capped off a 98-yard drive, Pablo, and that would have been where the legend begins. Any final thoughts on the NFL, Pablo? Oh, I'm just glad to celebrate the end of the Jets season with you guys. We've talked about Aaron Rodgers so much.

He has a documentary, by the way, coming out next week. It's great timing for me because I happen to enjoy just a shout-in, Freud, of that dude basically being paraded out there as if this season did not happen when this season was worse than last season when they didn't have Aaron Rodgers but who's keeping score at home at this point. It's very funny for me. Enjoy being here with you guys talking about Aaron Rodgers as always. Glad we can make your morning. Longest playoff throughout of any team and professional sports.

Any team in any sport in America. And the Jets haven't beaten Miami in Miami, I think, since 2014. Now Paul, let's get to why I came today. Yeah, we've been waiting for this. Syria and threats, political threats. Listen, the college playoffs and even going to 12, it's a joke how they do it. Nick Saban said it yesterday. The fact that they don't set this up like you set up March Madness where you actually get the four best teams and you put them the head of the four brackets. Just listen to

this. I hear Pablo sighing already because he was probably one of those guys saying, yes, TCU deserves to be in a couple of years ago. So we now have in Indiana and SMU, Paul, we have two teams, two teams in the playoff that haven't won a single game against the top 25 opponent all year, all year. And they're gonna get crushed in this playoff. And the committee knows it's a joke. I don't know why they've set this up in the way, but Merritt has nothing to do with any of this. And let me just say, for people out there that are saying I'm saying this because of Alabama, no. No. I

was saying yesterday, you lose three games in Alabama, you don't deserve to go to a playoff. But two things can be true at the same time. This system is terribly flawed. It has nothing to do with merit. It has a committee going, Oh, we have to be fair to TCU because they beat nutley high by three touchdowns. I mean, and you've got teams like Alabama to beat Georgia, that beat South Carolina, who of course beat Clemson, that beat Mizzou, beat three top 20 teams, and SMU, who's 0-2 against top 20 teams. Now, here's the second part of it.

The top four seeds, Paul. The top four seeds. Two of those four seeds, Arizona State and Boise State, who both of them would lose five to six games if they played inside the SEC. Easily, easily. So Paul, here's my question to you as an Alabama fan, and I'm dead serious. Why wouldn't Alabama leave the SEC and either become independent or go, I'm serious, or go play in the ACC where quality wins. I kid you not

Quality land winds are considered Duke Wake Forest and Louisville. I'm totally serious. I think it's stupid for us to stay in the SEC Stupid because if we go out of the SEC where we beat each other up weekend and week out We get to go to the playoffs every year. Our team's not beat up and we can win one national championship after another. Pablo, I can't help but think a year ago this morning, we were all gathered here together and Alabama had gotten in the playoffs and it was a much different mood than this funeral we're having today.

Joe, let me let me get to your question. And you're you're right in everything you said, except I don't think that Alabama should leave the SEC. First of all, SMU is in the playoffs. Do you know why? Because they beat Duke. They beat Duke. Not Mike Shishinsky in basketball,

but they beat Duke in football. That is their card. That's how they got in. As far as your other question, it really is an important question, Joe, because right now I feel very comfortable that the head of the SEC and the head of the Big Ten are having very serious conversations. These two men control college football. And the only, I'm not going to

give you a long explanation, but the only reason we have this playoff today is because other commissioners tried to torpedo it after Oklahoma and Texas entered the SEC. They threw a fit They tried to block the 12-team playoff that had already been announced So they had to compromise you understand that they made a deal for this year It won't look the same next year and when the TV contract runs out at the end of 25 It will look dramatically different It has to be seeded and if it's seeded correctly Alabama is, and SMU's doing whatever SMU does this time of the year. You know, it seems to me that, you know, Pablo,

when you have these ESPN shows that talk about it and Booger comes on and he talks about how Nutley High School's JV team went 12 and 0, so they should deserve to be in. The big lie that this is all based on is that all conferences are created equal. So SMU deserves it because they got to the ACC Conference Championship.

Clemson deserves it because they won the ACC. Let me give everybody a little stat. Well, let me ask you, Pablo. Over the past 25 years, how many national championships do you think the SEC has won? So I looked it up and I know over the last 20, the SEC has had 10 champions or finalists. Champions are runner-ups, which is a crazy stat,

but what do you got? What's your number? I've got, and I'm counting Texas now, who won in 2005. I see what's happening. The coalition has built. No, no, no, no, no, no. No, there's, the only win, 20 out of 25 national championships this century have been SEC teams, whether it's Auburn or Florida or Alabama or LSU, Texas in 2005, who of course,

was in Southwest Conference. But I'm just saying this lie that the committee holds up and that Booger McFarland holds up every year, all conferences are created equal, just an absolute joke. And it means fans don't get to see the best play. Paul's got something. Paul, what you got? Joe, one more thing. After Texas beats Clemson in two weeks, do you know what Clemson's record will be in the

SEC this year? It will be 0-3 because Clemson lost to Georgia on the opening weekend, 34-3. They lost to South Carolina, which is in the second tier of the SEC, trying to get to the first tier, on their home field, Joe. And you know they're going to lose to Texas. So that's the comparison. It's going to be right there for America to see

that the representative of the ACC will likely almost positively be 0-3 against the best conference. That's how ridiculous this really is. And here's where I agree with you, Joe, as much as I do detect a distinct whiff of the Alabama Tuscaloosa Cabal trying to orchestrate a better future for its citizens.

This is a 12-team field for the first time. I just want to reiterate that. It is a success on the level of look at all of the Sturm und Drang I believe they say in Germany about the 12th spot right. So the whole idea at the outset was this is going to be boring everyone's just going to get in whatever and meanwhile here you have a dream scenario for everybody not in the SEC you have Alabama and its constituency saying how dare you leave out the biggest baddest team in the SEC, you have Alabama and its constituency saying, how dare you leave out the biggest, baddest team in the history of college football

because they were fighting for that last spot and because this coalition, this rainbow coalition of conferences decided to enshrine collectively the ACC championship game. And so Paul is right, in the near future, you will see a two-party system, Big Ten and SEC threaten to take their ball and go home because when it comes to the business of this,

what is a shame for me as somebody who enjoys watching the emotional roller coaster, the emotional wooden roller coaster that tends to be Alabama is that I can't. You guys are gonna be in the ReliaQuest Bowl, which I'm reliably informed is a real thing. You'll play Michigan in that. Good luck. Have fun. It would be more fun if Alabama was, you know, in the dance, in the big one, as always.

Well, because, and again, it's not because of brand. It's not because of conference. Alabama beat Georgia. That's true. Alabama beat South Carolina, which Clemson lost to. Also lost to Vanderbilt. Alabama beat Mizzou badly. And Oklahoma. Yeah, yeah. Well, so, yeah, you know why?

Because you go through the SEC schedule and you get the hell beaten out of you week after week after week after week. If we were playing Duke, I'm serious, Duke and then Wake Forest and then Louisville and then Oklahoma. Okay. Our players would be smoking cigars at halftime. I mean, that's just the way it is. But this is, I just, I'm gonna leave it at this and then we got to go.

All I want is a merit-based system. And this is not about a two-party system. I think, Paul, all I want-offs in college football to look like is March Madness, where you've got, you know who are the four best teams, and you know that they're going to be the ones that are number one in their bracket. If that were the case here, and then you do it the number twos that way, and the number threes, and the number fours that way, there'd be no problem here. You actually do it based on merit. Well, the only good news is this is so bad that it will get better and I feel very confident in reporting to you and they're working on it as we speak. But we're stuck with it this year. It's

still better than it was, Joe. You and I remember when the Poles used to pick it and you might have two or three different champions. So it's great improvement, but this idea of little league baseball of giving everyone a trophy, and that's essentially what they did to SMU on Saturday night. They were getting blown out. They made this heroic comeback, and this committee is watching this altogether at a five-star resort outside of Dallas,

and they all go, we can't deny SMU, and the SMU coach said it would be criminal if they let them out. It's actually criminal that they let them in. So we have buried the lead. We have buried the lead. Oh, we don't have to get into this necessarily. We don't need to cover this.

And that, Paul Latorre, briefly, Juan Soto signs a record $765 million contract with the New York Mets. And it's not just that he chose the Mets over the Yankees. He left the Yankees to sign with the Mets. It is a new era in New York baseball. Yeah, this is the largest contract in the history of sports bigger than Leo Messi, Patrick Mahomes,

anybody on the planet. I have never seen this. I'm a little shaken, John. The Yankees. I'm enjoying that. I am noticing your shot in Freude, to just keep on using the German here today. It's bad, it's bad.

And Juan Soto, look, Steve Cohen, this is what happens. If you fell asleep for 20 years and you woke up and you said, wait a minute, a guy is getting 700, he's getting the GDP of Micronesia over 15 years to sign with the Mets. What the bleep is happening? Steve Cohn is one of the 100 richest men in the world. He's a billionaire, private equity guy, hedge fund guy,

excuse me, I'm gonna get that detail right. Steve Cohn has said, I have all of the money, I'm going all in, whatever you thought George Steinbrenner was, the late great George Steinbrenner, it's me now. I am him, I'm gonna get this guy, and they did. And I just, I haven't seen it like this. This is an embarrassment for the Yankees,

and it's a problem because the Mets, as we know, had a miracle playoff run, and now they have all of the firepower that the Bronx used to, and it doesn't feel good. Host of Pablo Torre finds out on metal arc media Pablo Torrey and ESPN Paul fine bomb like an Alabama fan from up on okay