Morning Joe - Morning Joe 3/21/24

Episode Date: March 21, 2024

Rep. Moskowitz dares GOP to hold Biden impeachment vote

And so I just think we should do it today. Let's just call for it. I'll make the motion, Mr. Chairman. I want to help you out. You can second it, right? Like, make the motion to impeach President Biden. Go ahead. It's your turn. You second it. No, nothing. Okay, we got nothing. So I want to, with my last couple minutes, show the American people that they're never going to impeach Joe Biden. It's never going to happen because they don't have the evidence. Okay, this is a show. It's all fake. They just want to do these hearings. It's not leading to impeachment. They're lying to their base on Newsmax and Fox, leading these people to believe that they're going to eventually impeach the president. It's not going to happen at all,

ever, period. They don't even have the votes, even if they had it in committee. They don't have the votes on the floor. They know that. They got members resigning rather than taking a vote on the fake faux impeachment. Just ask Ken Buck, who said the speaker ain't going to get me to take an unconstitutional impeachment vote. Democratic Congressman Jared Moskowitz challenging House Republicans to hold a vote on President Biden's impeachment during their latest hearing yesterday. He's like, come on, guys, we got it. Let's do it. You ready? He's good. He's good. Zeddy Murphy would say in coming to America, that boy's good. Zeddy Murphy would say, I'm coming to America. That boy's good. I mean, he is good. And he's got a lot of material to work with, Rev.

A lot of material. I mean, at this point, Fox, Newsmax, they're all going, come on. You're making fools of yourself. Obviously, they've been watching Morning Joe for like a year because that's what we've been saying. I don't think so. Stop. No, serious. When you start putting Arnold the pig as your chief legal counsel, like, that's a hint.

They have been making idiots of themselves for a year now. And when Arnold starts oinking, it really becomes obvious. Here's actual footage in the Republican caucus room arguing about yeah he's getting ready yeah he's getting ready for the next hearing okay I'm sorry while he's getting the cookies or something yeah everybody knows who your counselor is and I think know, you have to give it to Moscow as he really drove it home. I mean, as a preacher, when you go to the climax of the sermon, he went there to where almost the Republicans had to say amen to that.

Well, and he even had an invitation. Yeah. He said, start playing just as I am and come on up if you want to impeach. No takers. Nobody came down front, Maura, because they've got nothing on Biden. I will tell you what irks me is it's not that these House Republicans are just stupid. They've just acted in such a stupid way. And I wish there were a better word to use than that. There's not a more eloquent word. There's not a more eloquent word. There's not. But what really irritates me is I've had people in the mainstream media, as Trump would say, telling me constantly, like, why is the media avoiding this Hunter Biden scandal? Why is the

media? I know we've all heard it. Oh, you know, we need to do a better job. We need to be more down the middle. And I've been going through this with a couple of well-known journalists. I go, what do you got? Give me what you. Oh, Tony Bobulinski. And give me more. What do you got? They have nothing. And they have been pushing this. And I think a lot of media outlets have gone, well, we have to be fair on both sides. Well, you have to be fair on both sides if there are facts on both sides. There have never been any facts here. No, I mean, you know, one of the tenets of journalism is you go where the facts lead you. And not all facts are equal. Not all sources are reliable. And the fact of the matter is there's no there there. And so continuing to treat this as though there is is really doing a disservice not only to the president, obviously,

but really just to Americans, to the electoral system. And it confuses people because you start to think, oh, well, they're all crooks. There's no difference. And that really is the point, is to distract from Donald Trump's actual prosecution over, you know, very real, very real issues and threats to democracy. And of course, you know, what we're seeing here is all of this impeachment talk was fine when people were focused, when the Republicans were focused just on the primary. But now you're going to see the moonwalk a little bit here back because they're thinking about November. And actually, I don't think that a circus trying

to impeach the president is going to actually be very good for Donald Trump. So the whole thing is trying to save Donald Trump from himself, trying to save themselves from Donald Trump. I mean, they're twisted in so many knots, They don't know what's up and what's down. And Jonathan, as long as they weren't pursuing this as actively as they have been and making fools of themselves, it was actually, sad to say, working. You talk about disinformation, you could look at the polls and all of the lies about Hunter Biden, all of the lies about Joe Biden getting rich off of Hunter Biden, all of the B.S., all of the B.S. that the right wing Trumpers have been spewing, whether it's on podcasts or whether it's in newspapers, whether it's on cable news, it's worked.

And so the White House was really frustrated about, you know, who who's bigger concern, you know, you know, Trump and all of his his scandals are, you know, the Biden crime family. They didn't put it quite that way, but it actually cut into Joe Biden's polling. So Arnold the pig and his cohorts have actually done the white house a favor because they've exposed this slide. This was disinformation that they made the mistake of putting out in the light of day and light really is the best disinfectant. And it's wiped this clean off, off, off the slate for, I think for most voters. In terms of a political play, they should

have left it on Fox News, leave it on the podcast, leave it in their fundraising emails. But now that it's gone into the halls of Congress and it's been exposed as as a sham, they have repeatedly been unable to provide any sort of evidence. Their best witnesses are incarcerated or on the run, and they haven't provided any sort of real evidence that that that President Biden or his family have engaged provided any sort of real evidence that President Biden or his family have engaged in any sort of behavior that would be criminal or impeachable. And they're not giving up, at least not yet, because Chairman Comer yesterday said that he's inviting President Biden to come testify, that he wants the president himself to come. And at this point, that's why

Newsmax, that's why Fox, everybody's going, hey, hey, just leave it to the pig. Right. Just stop this. Is Arnold the pig, by the way, one of the Republicans who actually went to one of those elite schools? Did he also have the degrees like Ted Cruz and Josh Hawkins? Well, no, which is why he's the only smart one there. He went to Arkansas. He did. University of Arkansas. We should just note that the—

Post-grad, post-grad at Alabama, where I went. Roll tide. We had a picture of him up. I walked past Bear Bryant and Arnold right there. Yeah, he's got a prominent. Yeah, the damn straight. He is. The White House did not respond.

We just have closed the loop here on the invitation of the president to respond. But Ian Sams did put out this statement saying that hearing was embarrassing for House Republicans. A total waste of time. It's time to move on from this sad charade. There are real issues the American people want us to address. That's White House spokesman. Little known fact. Ian Sams, University of Alabama grad.

I didn't know that, actually. And we belong to a very elite fraternity. There are a few of us scattered throughout who tried to overthrow the student government and get rid of the machine. If you want to do some real reading, the machine at the University of Alabama, that was something. So you failed at regime change? Well, they eventually got driven off campus.

They eventually did. I swear, there is a great book about the machine and Alabama politics over the century. It's kind of crazy. But Ian Zams, one of the resistance fighters. Bama Rush. I mean, as someone who watched the TikTok videos, I'm familiar with the machine. Oh, okay. So there you go. Good try.

Had a select group of fraternities and sororities that ran the entire campus. I'm telling you, Bama Rush. So they talked about the machine. They did. Are you allowed to talk about this? Well, they're not allowed. One allowed to talk about it because, you know, he gets his. I was like Trotsky in Alabama. And it is so funny. I actually, I was sitting, the administration, because the administration used to love the machine. They, of course, don't now because I won good tickets at football games.

But back then, they loved the machine. I actually had somebody in the administration call me in and say, son, I see you're running to abolish the student government. Yeah, it's really not fair. And it's, of course, because I had the light touch. I said, it's about as racist as George Wallace. It's backward. It needs to be taken from the campus. I said, son, I see here you want to go to law school.

Well, there are a lot of people down the street at the University of Alabama law school. And I just cut him off. I said, who says I want to go to your law school? So there you go. I've given a lot of information that's made Mika uncomfortable right now. By the way, University of Alabama law school, a great law school. I was just ready to get out of there, Richard. Actually, it's incredible. Okay, now I need you to stop. That's what I said. Can I ask Richard about the Giants?

Only if you talk about Richard's weekly newsletter, Home and Away, available on Substack. So, Richard, when is Home and Away going to take on the fact that you guys pissed away all your money on a mid-range quarterback and destroyed the Giants' future for the next decade? So, do you wake up feeling this angry every morning? I'm like, this is me happy. This is me happy. Look, Joe, you've got to be a patient. The Knicks, for example, are in their 51st year of rebuilding. And I'm feeling it for the Knicks.

The Giants have about another decade or so to go. Is there a sadder team to follow than the New York Knicks? The Knicks are looking actually okay this year. But the Giants, yes. They, that's40 million a year for Daniel Jones. Kind of bad. Inflationary. So, if you

answered the Boston Red Sox to my question, is there a sadder franchise to follow, you win Rice-A-Roni the San Francisco treat. We'll send it out your way soon after the show. Mika, are you going to start the show up or not? Are you going to introduce anybody? Hey, TJ, what are we waiting? Show us Chopper 4 or something. Give us a segue and we'll try this again. Let's start the show

again. Trying to warn you that it's a long show. 3, 2, 1. Give us an intro, TJ. Can you give us 3, 2. No, I need TJ to give us some music cue or chopper four. Can you do that, TJ? Here we go. Now give us some music. Give us some music. Give us some music. I'm waiting on it.

Oh, my God. Okay. Just tell Q anything seriously. Okay, hold on. Hold on, Mika. Ready? Okay. Wow. Okay. Wow.

Okay, Mika, three, two, one, you're on. Welcome to Morning Joe. With us we have Jonathan Lemire, Reverend Al Sharpton, Mara Gay, Richard Haas, and Joe, who's wide awake and who's, like, literally wasting all of his energy in the first few minutes of the show even though it's four hours long we just started the show but here we go okay we're gonna have to do this again no no no no we're playing this as if this is the top show tj give us the music and the thing again okay now mika mika ready three two one go Okay, now, Mika.

Mika, ready? Three, two, one, go. Welcome to Morning Joe. Our top story this morning. Just take the shot off him. Donald Trump is reaching, he's saying, please pay my bills. Pay my bills for me, because I don't have it. And bankruptcy, that wouldn't look good. Donald Trump is reaching out to high dollar donors in an effort to cover the massive civil fraud judgment against him. That's

according to a Trump ally who tells NBC News they were contacted by a member of Trump's team. Meanwhile, a source close to the Trump family said the former president's defense team is still trying to figure out its options. I think they have until Monday. They are discussing ways Trump could appeal the judge's ruling without having to put the bond up. And what would happen if they can't secure the required sum? Financial experts say an immediate solution for Trump's financial problems would be to file for bankruptcy. He's done it before. As the Washington Post points out, it could delay his requirement to pay the judgment by months or even years. However, the paper cites four sources close to Trump who say the former

president is not considering that approach out of concern that it could damage his reelection campaign. Meanwhile, former President Trump is holding a fundraiser in Palm Beach next month with tickets for the event starting at $250,000. That's Richard Haass money. For $800,000. For $800,000, attendees can receive the title chairperson.

The funds raised will be split between the Trump campaign, the RNC, state Republican parties, and the Save America PAC, which Trump has been using to pay his legal expenses. Mika, let's stop right there, because there's a lot to talk about here. There's a lot there. Mika, let's stop right there, because there's a lot to talk about. There's a lot there. But Jonathan, first of all, let's just talk about the last part first, which is he's going

to have this big fundraiser. He's way behind Joe Biden and money, way behind the RNC. They're all getting hammered. And so they're going to throw a big fundraiser. But then you see he's going to have to split it up four ways. And a big chunk of that, probably the largest chunk, is see he's going to have to split it up four ways. And a big chunk of that, probably the largest chunk is going to be going to pay his legal fees. That is that is an ongoing problem not only for the Trump campaign, the cash star Trump

campaign, but also for donors who were thinking, OK, maybe I want those tax cuts to be continued if I'm a billionaire. But I'm I'm not helping myself get those tax cuts to be continued if I'm a billionaire. But I'm I'm not helping myself get those tax cuts. I'm just helping Donald Trump. Of the four entities that are going to benefit from that fundraiser, three of them could be channeling the money for Trump's legal bills, his campaign itself. Right. The RNC, which is now run by his daughter in law and his close allies. And then the super PAC, only the state Republican parties would seemingly get a share to actually help other candidates. But you also mentioned a key part here. There's a lot of anxiety among Democrats

about where the polls stand right now. But one thing that they continue to take confidence in is a massive and growing fundraising advantage. The president, he wakes up in Texas this morning. He's got $6 million worth of fundraisers. Later today, he raised some money in Arizona and Nevada earlier this week. They have tens of millions of dollars more on hand than the Republicans do. And they I've talked and I've said it here, Mark. I've talked to fundraisers who've said for the first time in their lives raising money, they will call

and say, hey, we have an event for Joe Biden. Would you? And the people cut them off and say, my God, we've been waiting for you to call us. We want to do anything we can do to beat Donald Trump. Anything. Tell us how much to bring. Tell us who to get. And these are people who, of course, who have always hated making those calls because it's always like dragging people in. Not the case now.

So you have to tell of two different campaigns as far as money goes. You've got the Trump campaign again, splitting everything up to pay his legal expenses and the Biden campaign who can't keep people away from giving. Well, and in addition to the cash on hand that the Biden campaign has, they also have a billion dollars that has been that will come to that campaign from outside groups that are committed to spending about that much. So that's going to make an enormous difference. And, of course, you know, this is really the first time that we're seeing the financial drag on the campaign from all of the prosecutions that Donald Trump has been dealing with. And so we're seeing that direct impact.

I actually anticipate it's only going to get worse over the summer as more Americans start paying attention and the donations continue to flood. And I think also there is something to be said about the no labels campaign, which I think probably won't go anywhere. Right. Make that prediction. And so once those wealthy Americans come to their senses, the hope would be that they, too, would start pitching in. And at the same time, you would have

potential Republican donors who may sit out and say, I just can't bring myself to do it. You know, so this would be a good time for those wealthy Americans to do their civic duty and try not to, you know, support Donald Trump's campaign. Well, we've seen seen quite a few who supported Nikki Haley, who aren't supporting Nikki now, just saying, I can't I can't support this guy. He's too crazy. I'm curious, Rev, knowing Donald Trump as long as you have, as long as we have, I think you've known him a bit longer. What do you think the prospects are for for for bankruptcy for him right now? I mean, it's one thing if you're you're getting your companies, you know, in New Jersey to go bankrupt. It's quite another to do this in the middle of the campaign. You think he'd ever consider that? I don't think he wants to consider it. It may come to that because I think he's probably from the time I knew him surprised that no one has come in as he's apparently been reaching out

to bail them out. And if he does file bankruptcy, it would be a desperate move. It's something that he knows would totally erode his brand and totally say to some of those that are not just his his uh very uh cult following type that uh he really can't manage his business he can't manage the country he knows what it would do to his brand other than his cult following i think he would rather do anything than file bankruptcy, but it may be the only option he has. We are talking about Monday, three days away. And the state attorney general, Tish James, has said, I'm coming after him. And he knows that's no joke.

And you have to remember, he has to deal with this and pay for lawyers and other legal expense in four criminal cases. This is not even one of the criminal cases right this is a civil case so he's has a lot he's got to do because by the time he finishes arguing with his civil attorneys about try another entity to lend me money he's got four different legal teams calling him saying and we need some more money for this court papers that we have to file we need some more money for this court papers that we have to file. We need some more money. He's in a tough spot. Could happen to a nicer guy.

Richard, let me go from one uncomfortable question about the Giants to another uncomfortable question. What do you say to some Trump supporters, but also some legal observers that say that you had an attorney general who ran saying, if I run, I'm going after Donald Trump. She's gone after Donald Trump. The New York Times had an article saying that she's used an old law to go after him in this case. But because it's a bit unusual, there's some people, some legal scholars that say he's got a good chance on appeal to at least either, if not have

the decision overturned, to at least modify the penalties as being excessive. So should he have to pay that entire bond? Should he have to start selling properties? So he's, I see you smirking. I'm not smirking. Okay, should he have to sell properties and do all these other things just to reserve the right to go on appeal? A couple of things. One is it reinforces the sense that's central to his campaign that he's a victim.

Is he in this case? I think the idea that he is being asked to come up with such a large amount of cash in such a relatively small amount of time. I don't know about you, Joe. What's the percentage of your investments that are liquid as opposed to long-term private equity? This is the only thing I had to sell. This coffee mug now wouldn't sell for $50 million. By the way, I actually talked to a billionaire. He said, could you come up with this money? He goes, no. Of course not. He said, it doesn't matter how much money you have. You're not going to be able to come up with $500 million cash. Most people who are that

wealthy are going to have their money either like Trump. It's going to be spread out or it's going to be things that are locked up. Right. Private equity, hedge funds, whatever. They're not they're basically not keeping it in their their JP Morgan bank checking account. It's not necessarily in stocks. So, yeah, I think it's unrealistic to ask for that amount of cash in that small amount of time. Yes. Another way to ask it. Would you be comfortable if, let's say, Joe Biden, former President Joe Biden, was was sued in Texas by the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, after he got out of the White House and put in a position to have to come with $500 million in bond money. So let me make a, the answer is two things.

One, I am slightly uncomfortable about all these state things. Make a larger. I'm very uncomfortable about the state things. I'll be honest with you. Mika's not going to talk to me. I can never say this when I'm like in the same studio with Mika, because she won't talk to me for a week. But I'm very uncomfortable with these state cases,

because what comes around goes around. Exactly. It's actually a really interesting article in The New York Times about how states are increasingly the driving force when the federal government can't get things done. And we all may live to rue that day. But let me you know, in terms of what's what's going on at Trump, I want him to be people to go after him legally for the big stuff. Right. I want the insurrection issues. The January 6th. If you're going to go after him, go after him for the stuff that really threatens America.

I am uncomfortable. It's going after him for these other things at the state level. Go after him for what he really ought to be going after. Well, again, in areas, Maura, that voted, you know, 85 percent, 90 percent against Donald Trump, like in Georgia, 11000 votes. There are a lot of counties that could have should have brought that case. I wish it hadn't been Fulton County, a county that had gone so overwhelmingly against Donald Trump. But what galls me is the case that is like, I think, well, two cases. You can't say one case is more serious than the other. But one of the most serious cases where the guy stole nuclear secrets, allegedly stole nuclear secrets, gave away secrets or secret war plans to invade Iran.

You go down the list. Then, according to his own people, asked his I.T. guy to destroy evidence, then asked his his his guy that ran the grounds to flood the areas because the I.T. guy wouldn't. I mean, the great frustration is that is in front of a judge who could not be more in the pocket of Donald Trump. So here I do have my concerns about these state cases, but it seems that the cases that the feds have brought that are that involve national issues, my God, they're the ones that he seems to be getting away with. Well, and remember that you actually, you know, if he was to be to be reelected president, I mean, you can be pardoned. You can pardon yourself for federal crimes. You can't actually do that for state crimes. So that's one feature to consider.

I mean, I do believe that I hear you, but I think that the larger risk is actually in allowing Donald Trump to continue his ongoing impunity that he has enjoyed for too many decades. And, you know, anybody else in the United States, if they committed crimes, which he may have done, or if he committed civil fraud as inflating the cost of his real estate assets, anybody else would be prosecuted for that. Anybody else would be held accountable. And so, yes, it is true that New York is now a solidly democratic state. Wasn't always. But at the same time, he spent decades here not paying taxes. He spent decades not being held accountable while people all across New York City were evicted for not paying $800 in rent. Right. So I actually think that there's every reason to go

after anybody who has potentially committed crimes. And, you know, afterwards, he has every right to appeal as well, just like any other American. So I say let the legal system play out. And, you know, it's hard to have sympathy because after his braggadocious behavior for all of these years, you know, yes, Trump Tower is at stake. Well, this is what happens. Again, all the rest of us have to pay the rent. We have to pay our bills. He should pay his. And Mika, I've been saying, especially in the federal cases, he appears to be above the law. Again, I do have some questions about the state cases, but

I'm sure at the end of the day, I'll defer to you, honey. If you even get to come home. But that's okay. This has been fun. She does not like talking about the state cases. That's cold.

That is cold. I'm a little. By the way, it is so cold in this state. Why is it so cold? And it's not just Mika's chilling glare. Is this the first day of spring? Yeah, it doesn't feel like it. Holy cow, it's cold outside.

I think we missed that. And it's getting colder in the studio. It is. It's freezing in here. Trying to freeze us out. Egregious and hypocritical attempts to influence Israeli domestic politics aren't some simple or narrow critique of a particular prime minister. They're an affront to the very independence of the state of Israel, a sovereign nation, a robust democracy,

and one of America's closest allies and friends. Let me say this. I care deeply about Israel and its long-term future. When you make the issue partisan, you hurt the cause of helping Israel. The specific accusation that you are interfering in a foreign election, you should not show any distance between the United States and a close ally at the time of war. That's what Republicans are saying. Well, let me say this. I gave this speech out of a real love for Israel. And if you read the speech,

we called only for there to be an election after the hostilities had declined, after Hamas was defeated. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held talks with Senate Republicans and House Speaker Mike Johnson yesterday via video conference. And Majority Leader Chuck Schumer denied Netanyahu's request to address the Senate Democratic Caucus. A spokesperson for the senator said he made it clear he, quote, does not think these discussions should happen in a partisan manner. And again, once again, you see the Republicans, you know, at a time of immense, immense pain for both the people in Gaza and for Israelis who went through October 7th. And some who are feeling a sense of a lack of validation from their own government you've got the republicans accusing the democrats for getting them but they're the ones actually interfering

with foreign policy with our foreign policy by not passing legislation that would support the israelis and the ukrainians right the israelis the ukrainians taiwan i mean it's it's real it's Right. The Israelis, the Ukrainians, Taiwan. I mean, it's it's real. It's astounding how exposed House Republicans are leaving our close allies across the globe. I'm going to say a couple of things. First of all, the fact that anybody would question Chuck Schumer support for Israel shows you just how desperate Republicans are, what political hacks they are, how they think you are too stupid to actually see Chuck Schumer's, what, 30 year career in Congress. He has been the most steadfast ally of Israel. That's number one. Number two, Richard, the crocodile tears from benjamin netanyahu again the question my question is who is so stupid who does he think is so stupid to forget when he's talking about oh we should not interfere in fellow you know democracies are democratic allies. That's all he does. He basically got involved in the

Romney Obama campaign. He was carrying Donald Trump's water repeatedly. We talked about going back to 2019. You would retweet attacks of Donald Trump, not just of political leaders, of morning cable shows. That's how in the weeds Benjamin Netanyahu got in supporting Donald Trump, in supporting other Republican candidates and going against Democrats. He's been doing this for years to now say, oh, Chuck Schumer shouldn't. It's it's preposterous. I just got to say one other thing again. As somebody who's been one of the fiercest supporters of Israel across my adult life, it is deeply offensive that people tell me that I have no right to speak out when I think just like when I think my former Republican

party is hurting itself, are my fellow countrymen and women are hurting this country that I can't speak out when a friend has a leader who who made one tragic miscalculation after another and put Israel in the weakest position it's been in since 1948. I'm not allowed as a friend to talk about that? That's such garbage. That's Benjamin Netanyahu just saying, let's just keep pushing this off as long. And the Republicans want him to. Just push it off as long because he doesn't want any accountability in the end. First of all, Joe, you not only have the right, you have the obligation to speak out.

If you think Israel, if you care about the U.S.-Israeli relationship, if you care about the future of Israel and you think what they're doing is misguided, you have the obligation to speak out the same way you do if the United States does something that's against our own self-interest. That said, I think I would just question two tactical things that Chuck Schumer did. I think it's right to criticize all sorts of aspects of Israeli policy. I would not have gone the extra thing about calling for elections or making it so ad hominem. The Israelis have made mistakes, including right now. They still have no political answer to what comes next in

Gaza or the West Bank. You can't pursue this policy with military means only. I would keep the focus on that. And I would have called Netanyahu's bluff. I don't like the idea that Bibi is talking to House Republicans. Why not then have the Democrats say, OK, let's have a conversation and let's challenge Bibi on everything that he is doing. Let's challenge him on the lack of aid going into Gaza. Let's challenge him on the use of large munitions in crowded civilian areas. Let's challenge him that there's no plan for meeting an even legitimate Palestinian political aspirations. Hey, how about asking him a couple of basic questions? Why did it take you so long to save your own people? Hey, why is it that you found out in 2018 where Hamas's illicit funding

came from and you and Donald Trump did absolutely nothing about it. Why did you send your guy to Doha three weeks before the attacks and you had the Qataris saying, hey, should we keep sending hundreds of millions of dollars to prop up Hamas? And you said, yes, yes. Also, that'd be a good question to ask, wasn't it? Because Netanyahu won't answer any of these questions. So I don't like the idea that the Republicans are playing this cynical game after not approving the legislation. They're the ones who are, cynical game after not approving the legislation. They're the ones who are, quote, unquote, pro-Israel now. Right. But if they're going to play, again, the Democrats should use this as an opportunity to challenge Netanyahu across the board.

Because, again, what he is doing is against the law. We've talked about this here. It's not only bad for Israel. It is going to be ruinous, I fear, for the U.S.-Israeli relationship. And that is a neither country. Well, and again, what people don't realize, and I guess these Republicans don't realize it, maybe they don't talk to anybody, the clock is ticking. We have Sunni Arab nations, leaders that are ready to go in with the United States,

help rebuild Gaza, help bring about a peaceful solution, spend billions and billions of dollars there and start working towards a two state solution. That clock's ticking. The Biden White House knows it. Democrats know it. I guess Republicans don't know it. But more, this is, you know, campaigns about contrasts. You have Joe Biden, like, for instance, talking about saving Social Security for senior citizens. You have Republicans talking about cutting Social Security. Donald Trump saying, well, that's one thing we could do. We could slash Social Security. But on Israel, you know, on colleges, kids have been calling Biden genocide Joe in Michigan.

He's been attacked. Look at the contrast here. You have Joe Biden, who spent the past month desperately trying to work this out, trying to help Gazan citizens, knowing that if he just cuts off Israel, things get worse very quickly. So he's balancing all these things. Do you have Donald Trump on the other side and these Republicans saying, let Bibi go and or let him do whatever he wants to do? Trump says, I'll let him do whatever he wants to do. I'll give him whatever he wants to do. He needs to just finish it now.

That's a choice. I wonder if voters are going to recognize that choice. Well, tactically, from a diplomatic standpoint, I can't speak to Chuck Schumer's decision to go as far as he did. But what I can say is that it's clear from an American political perspective that holding and just a moral perspective, holding Bibi Netanyahu to account, asking the tough questions is important as an ally of Israel. It's important for the United States to do. And it's also important to show Americans that we do actually care about being an honest and fair broker in the Middle East, that we can call a spade a spade when we see it, and that we care about human rights for all people, including Israelis and Palestinians.

And I think that it's important, too, to say to American voters, we hear you. You know, a lot of younger voters are very upset, understandably, seeing the deaths of Palestinian children. And they want to know that Bibi Netanyahu, that those Israeli policies are being held to account. They're not necessarily anti-Israel. So, you know, I actually think that it wasn't a crazy move. And I think what Bibi is doing is extremely cynical. But that's what we should expect.

That's what he does. And I think it's important. I've known Chuck Schumer since the 70s when Reverend William Jones told us to go out and campaign for this guy to go to Congress. Do you imagine how agonizing it was for Chuck Schumer, as pro-Israel as he's been, to even take this stand. And I'm sure many around him said, don't do this. I really think that Schumer did this because he honestly believes that Netanyahu is in the way of what needs to happen there and for the good of Israel and the good of what's going on in Gaza. And I really gave him a lot of credit because I knew how difficult it had to be knowing Chuck Schumer, because politically he should have just remained where he was, silent on it.

It took a lot of courage to do it. And we can't pardon the fact you had hundreds of thousands of people marching against Netanyahu right before October 7th, when he was trying to change the judiciary. He's under indictment. Let's not talk about Netanyahu like he's the saint of Israel. He is not. He's been controversial there, and he's under certain criminal cases there. But even beyond that, I think the fact is that Schumer has taken a position that is in the interest of Israel and the United States and Gaza. And I think that that is what's important.

Let's just be clear. I think he was directionally right to criticize Israel over policy. I think there's a lot that's going on that's not in Israel's interest or ours. My only, where I hold back is I think tactically he went too far. Even though Bibi Netanyahu, as Joe pointed out, regularly intervenes in American politics, I just think Senator Schumer, the extra 10 percent, and talking about the need for Israeli elections, I just think we as Americans should focus on policy. Let the Israeli public figure out the politics.

And the polls make it clear. Most of the Israeli public are opposed to Bibi Netanyahu. Sooner or later, that'll work its way through the Israeli political system. And President Biden offered an endorsement of Schumer's sentiment, which was clearly deeply personal. And Schumer has given interviews since saying that it came from the heart. And he speaks about his Jewish faith. You know, it also gives the White House a little more operating maneuver room here with Schumer giving them some cover while they can continue to push Netanyahu behind the scenes. And right now, in the next couple of days, Mika,

we expect that team of Israeli officials to Washington to discuss plans for Rafah. The U.S. is offering contingencies, alternatives to that full-scale invasion because they're deeply concerned of the humanitarian toll there. Absolutely. Richard Haass, thank you very much for being on this morning. And I am sorry for Joe. Go Giants.

Thank you. Go Giants. Thank you. Go Giants. Exactly. A former longtime employee of Donald Trump tells MSNBC the culture at Mar-a-Lago would have led many people to commit crimes on Trump's behalf. Brian Butler, also referred to in the classified documents indictment as Trump employee five, spoke last night on MSNBC's The Beat with Ari Melber. The 20-year Mar-a-Lago employee previously testified before a grand jury in the case involving Trump's handling of classified documents. Butler also told special counsel Jack Smith that on June 3rd, 2022,

he was asked by Trump's valet and co-defendant Walt Nauta to move the boxes, which he would later learn were full of documents, onto Trump's plane in Florida. Butler said he later had conversations with his friend, Mar-a-Lago property manager and Trump co-defendant Carlos de Oliveira regarding secret visits made by Nauta to Mar-a-Lago and efforts to review and delete security footage. The way I see it, if these were his personal personal documents and or he's allowed to have these by the PRA, why would you need to ask questions about video footage? Why would you possibly move the documents when they are coming to retrieve them?

To me, it just doesn't make any sense. On top of that, why would you put two lower-level employees in the position they're in if you did nothing wrong and these are your personal documents. So you had the impression from the people around that Trump knew the things that went down were bad or illegal and he didn't want that on video. Oh, absolutely. I mean, why else would you need to know the video footage? And then why were they calling and asking me,

hey, why didn't you tell me that this guy was on video moving boxes? Wow. Butler added he does not believe the investigation has politicized and that if Trump genuinely believed he was not in the wrong, he should have just cooperated with investigators. Trump's co-defendants, Nada and Dio Liviera, have pleaded not guilty to the related charges against them. And joining us now, former deputy chief of the criminal division for the Southern District of New York, Christy Greenberg. She's now an MSNBC legal analyst. And Christy, we'll get to the documents case in just a moment. But I want to ask you about the bond, $464 million and counting, that I think Trump has to pay by Monday. You can let me know about the deadline.

But a number of things are going around. I've brought up, obviously, family members who have a lot of money, like his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who received, I think, $2 billion from the Saudis. The Trump campaign sent an emergency memo to supporters via text on Wednesday, which included a message to Attorney General James, quote, keep your filthy hands off Trump Tower. I don't know if he's going to try and get voters to help pay for this.

If he gets someone to pay this for him, Christie, does he have to disclose that or how does it work? So he does not have to disclose that. There is not the requirement in the courts, at least, for transparency into what the source of the money is from the plaintiff's perspective. They just want to make sure the money is there. But obviously, it's a different question politically. Obviously, the American people with a presidential candidate want to know what the source of his money is, in particular, whether or not it compromises him in his dealings with foreign governments, foreign leaders. It's a real national security issue. But at least from the legal perspective, no, there's not going to be transparency. As to your question

about the deadline, yes, the money has to be paid by Monday. He either has to get a bond or he has to put up the whole amount in cash. And I think that was a pack that Mika brought up. First of all, Christy, we want to thank you for braving the cold weather outside to come in and endure the cold weather inside. There's a cold nor'easter. TJ, I know you're running a little hot, but if we could turn the air conditioner off, that would be awesome here. It's like, seriously, we will hand out Canada goose, not Rice-A-Roni coats afterwards, if that's politically correct. So $464 million. What happens if he can't come up with that money? So if he can't come up with that money, I assume that Tish James already has a plan in place.

She has a list of what his assets are that she knows of from discovery in that case. What are the properties? What are the bank accounts? And she's going to look to put liens on those immediately. She's going to look to freeze and to seize, right? To make sure that they're freezing those accounts so that he can't start moving money and then really looking to get seizure warrants to seize so that she can-

So they seize and sells it and gets money from that to get the 464 million? Well, right now, I mean, I think that the key would be just making sure that you have enough to get the entire amount. But yes, once it's frozen, then she can take various enforcement mechanisms to go about seizing those, whether it's properties or bank accounts, to actually make sure that everything is in place, that she could actually seize it. So let's move to the Florida case. We heard from witness number five.

I'm a big, big defender of the federal judiciary. I always have been, even when they don't rule the way I want to rule, even when the Supreme Court goes their own way. I'm like, well, you know, that's how they've lived their whole lives. That's what they've talked about. If they're more conservative or more liberal. I'm having a hard time defending Judge Cannon's actions and not just because it's against Trump. But here's here's somebody who's already been humiliated by the 11th Circuit, like one of the most conservative circuits in America. And I just got to say her her rulings

are just mind boggling. I don't understand them. And I'm not alone. A lot of legal experts are just completely perplexed. So I was willing to give her the benefit of the doubt initially, just she's a new judge. She's inexperienced. She's taking time and she's trying to get it right. But she's getting it dead wrong. And every time she gets it dead wrong, it's always in Donald Trump's favor. I mean, just in the last month or so, we have a ruling where she is ordering the identities of witnesses to be unsealed. There's no trial date. There is no need to be unsealing the identities and statements of witnesses who could be harassed

and have a risk of harm. Then you have her recent non-ruling that she's going to kick the can down the road on whether or not the Espionage Act is vague. It's not vague. It's been it's well-established law. The terms are clear. It was clear to Donald Trump who was told he couldn't keep the classified documents. That was a bad ruling. And then you've got your third strike, which is this recent jury instructions, which, again, we don't have a jury. Well, yeah, but she's basically saying Trump can decide whatever he wants. He can do whatever he wants to do. Right. Well, as long as he said it was personal, he doesn't get the PRA.

Whether or not something is personal or presidential is not the point. He's charged with committing violations of the Espionage Act and nothing in the Presidential Records Act gives him authorization to have classified information. It's a red herring. If this were a law school exam, she would be failing. Well, yeah, no, no law professor would ever put that down as a possibility. And I'm dead serious because no student would be stupid enough, not even me in first year class to follow that rabbit trail because you know the defendant can't determine the outlines of of of the the statute i mean to say oh you just you know trump can decide

it means whatever he wants it to mean it's insanity when judge cannon was assigned the case there were fears that she would rule in favorable for donald trump and she's done nothing to disprove that uh let's move to another one of Trump's legal matters, which is Georgia. We got a ruling late yesterday. The judge said that he cleared the way for Trump and other defendants to appeal his ruling that allows the DA, Fannie Willis, to stay on the case. This just seems like another thing that's going to just keep the clock running, another delay tactic. Is that right? It is. I do think the Georgia appeals court will take this up and they essentially they're within 10 days. The parties have to have their briefs.

There'll be opposition briefs. And then once the court of appeals gets it, they have 45 days to decide. But the one thing that's interesting and different in Georgia than in D.C., the all of the pretrial motions, that case is not on hold. So Judge McAfee has said in Georgia, while this appeal is potentially pending, I will still be ruling on pretrial motions. I will still be moving things along. So that is a difference in D.C. where everything is stopped. All right. MSNBC legal analyst Christy Greenberg, thank you once again. Come back soon. We appreciate it. It'll be warmer next time, I promise. Oh, my God.

Ooh, Mika, come on. Yeah. Is it cold in there? Oh, yeah. Okay. It's going to get colder. Still ahead on Morning Joe. Good Lord. Republican Congressman Mike Lawler of New York will be a guest to discuss the crisis at the southern border and aid for Ukraine. Plus, the chair of the Democrats' campaign arm

in the upper chamber, Senator Gary Peters of Michigan, will join the conversation