Morning Joe - Morning Joe 3/7/23

Episode Date: March 7, 2023

Karl Rove responds to Trump’s CPAC remarks

I can tell you in four years, you didn't see our administration leaking like a sieve. You didn't see a lot of drama or palace intrigue. What you saw was surgical precision execution day after day after day. Ron DeSantis takes a dig at the Trump administration during his latest stop on his book tour. The Florida governor and the former president are the front runners for the 2024 Republican nomination, even though only one of them is officially in the race. Ahead, a veteran GOP strategist explains why DeSantis is stealing some of Trump's thunder. Meanwhile, election deniers are celebrating after three states pulled out of a program to protect voter rolls, with two more states considering joining them.

We'll explain this latest development. Plus, we'll go through the changes Norfolk Southern is making following the derailment of two of its trains in Ohio. And we'll ask Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg about the federal response to the disaster and how to prevent another one from happening when he joins us later this morning. And good morning and welcome to Morning Joe. It is Tuesday, March 7th, and we are live in Abu Dhabi, the crossroads of the world. And it truly is. With our 3050 Summit, Forbes and Know Your Value has come together to create an incredible cross-cultural, multi-generational summit that really, the lineup, Joe, is just the

beginning. Editor Forbes, Randall Lane, is with us this morning. We're going to be talking a little later in the block about the summit. But just really quickly, our lineup is remarkable. But the experience the women here are getting, getting linked up to mentor or cut deals is incredible. First, congratulations to you. We talked about the greatest gathering ever of women leaders. And we did it.

If you look at the lineup, it's mind-boggling. And they're already touring Abu Dhabi as we speak. There's a networking group happening right now behind us. And it's already starting. It's three days that, you know, I think will change the world. It really it really is remarkable. And it's remarkable, as you said, that it's happening here. What really has become the crossroads of the world? This is my second time here just in the past six months. And I cannot believe, first of all, the building. I can't believe the number of places that people are coming from all over the world coming here. And you actually see that in this conference. You just spoke to a delegation from Poland. You spoke to other delegations today. Tomorrow,

of course, we're going to be talking to Hillary Clinton. And it's going to be an extraordinary day of women from how many different countries? From 50 different countries, over 500 women. It overbooked, but that's OK. We're figuring it out. And of course, tomorrow at 7 o'clock Eastern time, right here on Morning Joe, a Morning Joe exclusive, we're going to have on stage with us Hillary Clinton, Billie Jean King, Gloria Steinem. We're also here from the first lady of Ukraine,

Olena Zelenska. So quite an incredible, iconic conversation of women who have changed the world and are changing the world. And I think it's an incredible time on International Women's Day to have this group of women, especially since in America, our daughters have less rights than we did in this generation. And what an interesting time to be talking about women's rights and women lifting each other up around the world at a time when the United States is falling short in some ways, some would argue. And how do we lead given that new dynamic? And certainly, Willie, it's fascinating. You look at these women who have made such a huge difference through the decades, over generations. You just look at Hillary Clinton, of course, Gloria Steinem, Billie Jean King, all these others who worked and have worked for the past 50 years to advance the

rights of women, not only in the United States, but also around the world. But many parents right now looking at their daughters, our grandparents looking at the granddaughters thinking, how could this be 50 years of advancement? And the United States, in some ways, these women had more rights than their daughters have now or their granddaughters have. Well, it's kind of extraordinary to look at the list of women who were there with you in Abu Dhabi and kind of see the arc of women's rights over a half century. You mentioned Billie Jean King. You mentioned Gloria Steinem, of course, Secretary Clinton and all the way through to Malala and some modern day activists and some modern day feminists.

So, you know, we get to know some of these people individually over the years and we see them in certain places. But rarely, if ever, have we seen them all in one place. So we can't wait to see that conversation. You're going to have Mika tomorrow with a whole bunch of them on one stage. And I'm not sure we've ever seen that before. Yes, I know. Wish me luck. I'm sweating a little bit, but we'll make it happen. So along with Joe, Willie and me, we'll talk with Randall a little bit later. We have the host of way too early, of course, White House beer chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire and former White House director

of communications to President Obama, Jennifer Palmieri. She's the co-host of Showtime's The Circus and Pulitzer Prize winning columnist at The Washington Post. Eugene Robinson is with us. And let's get right to the news with veteran GOP strategist Karl Rove responding to former President Trump's criticism of him and other Republicans during his CPAC address. Here's what Trump said, followed by Rove's response. We will liberate America from these villains and scoundrels once and for all. When we started this journey, a journey like there has never been before. There's never been anything like this. We had a Republican Party that was ruled by freaks, neocons, globalists,

open border zealots, and fools. But we are never going back to the party of Paul Ryan, Karl Rove, and Jeb Bush. The president did name check me. I was happy to be named in the middle of Paul Ryan and Jeb Bush. But, you know, I think the president's speech was a good one, but not a great one. He has as, you know, he has now begun to emphasize issues. But some of those issues are a little weird. You know, building 10 new cities around America and having people elect school principals just strike me as fanciful ideas. But at least he was talking mostly, not entirely, but mostly about the future. We did have, you know, the recitation that he'd actually won the 2020 election

and that he'd won it by a lot, which I think people are over that. They just move on. You didn't win the election. You aren't president of the United States. Stay focused on the future. DeSantis is laying the predicate for a presidential campaign. He's not exactly running for president yet. He understands that people need to know more about him. And I thought his speech in California and from what I heard, the speeches

in Dallas and Houston, where he spoke to record-breaking audiences for the Republican County fundraising dinners, are all aimed at helping deepen people's understanding of who he is. I think it's a smart move. It's preliminary to becoming a presidential candidate. I mean, Willie, I mean, talk about defining, I won't say deviancy now. OK, well, political defining political deviancy now and to say, oh, at least he's starting to talk about the issues. I mean, he's basically declaring war on anybody who didn't vote for him. He's still lying about losing the election. You know, you now have members of Congress who are going out talking about liberating those poor, poor victims in their minds of people who actually stormed the Capitol on January the 6th. And so now they're

calling them political prisoners. This is a really screwed up, twisted reality. And to try to gloss over it, which some establishment Republicans tried to do and go, well, you know, at least he's starting to talk about the issues. It's to say that's unfortunate. Well, that's a bit of an understatement. It's really I mean, Trump's message top to bottom was sick. And again, it was all out warfare on anybody that did not vote for him or people who voted for him who still won't follow him with the lie that led to the riots on January the 6th.

Yeah, I mean, the line that will be remembered from that speech is, I am your retribution. I am your payback. And so, yes, to say he's been graded on a curve is to put it mildly. I wish my teachers graded me the way Donald Trump is graded by some analysts. By the way, Jeb Bush, who is on that list, who Karl Rove was talking about, has officially backed Ron DeSantis already. Ron DeSantis isn't even in the race. So there's always been that divide between the Bush family and Donald Trump dating back even before 2016.

But Paul Ryan was also mentioned there, the former House speaker, dismissing Trump's chances again of winning the GOP presidential nomination. He was asked about the race during the interview with New York Times magazine. He said previously the primary field needs to stay small to prevent a vote, a split that favors the former president. Ryan telling the magazine, quote, I don't think you can prevent people from getting in the race. What the party donors and influencers can do is to whittle the field down faster. You got 6 percent in Iowa. You got 8 percent in New Hampshire. Get out of the race. But I don't think Trump is going to get the nomination, said Ryan. The ace in the whole reason is that he's unelectable. Even most of MAGA knows

this. We're far better with X person. So, Gene Robinson, the question now is who is X person? Nikki Haley's in the race. Ron DeSantis for the moment is a theoretical choice, but he's certainly barnstorming the country on this book tour that looks a lot like a presidential campaign. So who is person X? And given the crowd, though not as large as some in the past, was very enthusiastic at CPAC for Donald Trump. And given the fact that he still leads every poll among primary votes in the Republican Party, who is person X that Paul Ryan is talking about? You know, I have no idea. We have not seen person X yet, I think. I mean, we certainly certainly, you know, DeSantis, when he gets into the race, we'll see if if he, you know, has the juice to actually go up against Trump. Nikki Haley, I don't think is person X. And then who else is willing to step forward?

I mean, but the approach that Karl Rove is taking and others are taking of sort of patronizing Trump. Oh, you know, isn't he cute? You know, not great. He was OK, but he's the past that. Why are they doing this? Don't they understand that if you're going to not have Donald Trump as your nominee, you'd better take him down. You'd better go after him because he is out there running for president. And yes, CPAC was kind of sad and weird this year. But in fact, he was there and that's his crowd. And you got to take them away from him if you're going to be the nominee.

And I don't see anybody doing that. And Joe, it's not just Karl Rove who talks about Donald Trump like that. It's people running against him in the race who say, well, he did a lot of good things. I don't want to criticize the former president. If you're not going to go after the guy you're running against, why are you in the race? But you talk to the Republican establishment and you talk to them behind the scenes and they still will say, well, of course, if he's the nominee, we get to support him because Joe Biden, right? God, Joe Biden, a socialist. When you have Donald Trump, again, they're acting like this is any other year. They're acting like this is 2012, like this is 2004. Back to the carnage speech. You have a guy, you have a guy who is talking about calling people villains who didn't vote

for him, saying, I am your retribution. That's not stirring up violence. He's already stirred up violence on January the 6th. There's just been one fascist talking point after another fascist talking point through the years. This is fascism. You can't round off the curves and try to make it look pretty. It ain't going to look pretty. And I am your retribution. I am your retribution. I've got a question. Is Trump their retribution for losing in 22 or 21?

Is he their retribution for losing in 20 or 19 or 18? Is he their retribution for, like, seriously? This is like a guy who you think is going to go up and dunk the basketball, shatter the backboard. He stumbles and he can't even make a layup. Just call me retribution. No, you're a loser. You keep losing elections.

And yet he pitches himself, Jen, as I am your retribution. They are the villains. Donald Trump doesn't understand today what he didn't understand from the very start. And that is politics is a game of addition. Early on, I tried to talk to people in his cabinet. I said, listen, this is simple. Politics is a game of addition. You want more people on your side. You don't want to go attacking everybody and turning them off. You guys need to be more inclusive.

You need to open up. You need to try to get 50% plus one. It's a message he still doesn't. Why do I say this? You say it every morning i don't say this jim because i'm it's the right thing to do even though it is i say this because they're gonna lose again if they get behind this guy they're going they keep losing and they're going why do we keep i'll tell you why you keep losing, because politics is a game of addition. And Trump is still in the business of subtracting every single day. The I was at CPAC. I met one person who had not been there before.

It did feel a little diminished. The room didn't feel quite as big. The energy didn't feel that wasn't there. But still, when I talk to people about, you know, are you concerned about having President Trump run again, be the nominee again, given all the time, given the losses, the losses in 22, the loss in 20, and they just say no. They really believe in this guy. And it's not that they don't like DeSantis. They do. They just—they think they can have it all, right? They think that they can have Trump in 24. They can keep Ron DeSantis in Florida. And then DeSantis can run in 28. And they think all of this can work out because they believe that they believe their

conspiracy theories. You know, it was all through the weekend at CPAC, I felt like the, you know, the CPACers themselves are bumping into their own conspiracy theories. Carrie Lake came out on top of the vice presidential straw poll. Right. The number one pick to be his running mate. And then her team said she can't be the running mate because the governor of Arizona can't also run for vice president. OK, so like that is the kind of reality that they are living in. Yeah. Kerry Lake won. Nikki Haley was the one other candidate who showed up or the one other potential candidate. They all ran away from CPAC. She made a speech there, was booed at times, went out into the hallway, was surrounded by people chanting Trump 2024 and chased into an elevator. So that's how

that goes for opponents of Donald Trump there. John Charles C.W. Cook has a new piece in the National Review titled Donald Trump's recipe for electoral failure. He writes increasingly Trump likes to point to Paul Ryan, Karl Rove, Jeb Bush, even Ronald Reagan as examples of what has historically been wrong with the GOP, as well as a warning of what the party will become again if any of the other candidates for the Republican nomination prevail in 2024. Jeb Bush probably was the best governor in the history of Florida, writes Cook, and the reforms that were made during his tenure are the primary reason why the state has become as attractive as it is to conservatives of all ages. Paul Ryan's record is equally solid. As for the deployment of Reagan Republican as an insult, suffice to say that if that's where we are now, the world is truly upside down.

I'm starting to understand why, despite all the evidence that it isn't working, Trump continues to behave as he does. And why on each of the last three times he's attempted to compete in an American election, he has proven himself to be such a bewildering loser. End quote. Reminder, our viewers, Ronald Reagan won twice, including once taking 49 states. So I'm not sure what that has to do with losing exactly. Yeah. Key difference between Trump and Reagan is that Reagan was reelected and Trump was not. It is remarkable, though, how little has changed since 2020. The Republican Party is in the exact same place, except everything's a little smaller. CPACs diminished. They come off of a disappointing 2022 midterms. And there was certainly a moment then where a lot of the party did, for the first time, kind of blame Donald Trump and say,

you're the reason why we took these losses. They didn't hold January 6th against them. They didn't hold the pandemic against them. They didn't hold Helsinki against them. They didn't hold children in cages at the border against them or Charlottesville. They held this against him. But already we're seeing that still wasn't enough to finish him off, that his grip on a portion of the Republican Party still remains firm. Now, that portion has shrunk, but it might still be big enough. And at this moment, we would say he is favored to still be the Republican nominee in 2024. And sure, at this moment, the anti-Trump forces seem to be coalescing around DeSantis. But DeSantis is not a declared candidate, as you say. He's not been nationally vetted. There's no real sense whether or not voters, as they get to know him, will actually like him as you say. He's not been nationally vetted. There's no real sense

whether or not voters, as they get to know him, will actually like him as the guy. He's being propped up by Fox News right now, which is interesting. But the bigger the field, the better it is for Trump. And we know, and the one takeaway we can have from CPAC, despite the darkness of his speech, is that his base is still there. And that might be enough to get him the Republican nomination, but almost certainly not enough to get him the Republican nomination, though almost certainly not enough to win in the general in 2024. Certainly way ahead in those primary polls. And Joe, we can point out that Governor DeSantis has his state of the state speech today

in Tallahassee, where he's expected to tout his accomplishments as governor. Also has an event coming up in the next couple of days in Alabama, which we're told just had to be moved to a larger venue because there's such demand for tickets there. Yeah, no doubt about the fact that that he is a draw out there. He went to the Reagan library. Very interesting speech in that it was coherent, which is certainly something that you can't usually say about donald trump and yet at times wooden stiff uh even when he walked off stage it was i've never really seen a politician walk off stage at an address like that and then you know the voice of god comes overhead says everybody please stay seated until the speaker has left the, I mean, it's, he still has some things to work out in his delivery. It's early. It's early. Yeah. Sometimes it's hard. Sometimes early tells you

how it's going to be. I'm not sure if we're there yet or not. We shall see, but we'll see if he will watch the segue. I've been doing this for a while let's see if he eventually throws his hat in the ring one man who of course will not be throwing his hat because it is firmly affixed upon his head boom boom just terrible exactly randall lane is you guys have put i i look over over you and there are so many skyscrapers behind you that weren't here even when we were here six months ago. This is this is an extraordinary. Again, we talk about crossroads of the world. It's I can't believe the growth, even from when I saw you here six months ago. Literally month to month. I mean, when you talk about a boom town, this is it. But it's a boom town. And obviously,

it's a boom town because of oil. But it's becoming a boom town because of trade, because this is a country that's figured out that long term having low taxes, free trade is the recipe for growth. And that's why this is a great place, again, to come here, because, A, logistically, you can get here nonstop flight from pretty much anywhere in the world. But spiritually, this has always been a place where, where the whole world comes, you know, comes through and passes through right around, right around there. One other quick thing about oil, you brought up oil. They understand, they have two decades, 25 years worth of oil left. So you don't actually see it when you talk to people here.

But they're in a race against time. And that's why they're moving so fast to diversify, to look to alternative fuel sources. They're trying everything. They understand that. And it's also why we're here with the Women's Summit. Because listen, the easy thing to do is do a Women's Summit somewhere, somewhere in Western Europe

where women's rights have been established for decades. This is a region, a larger region, that is obviously behind globally in women's rights. But this is a country that within the region is leading. It's leading with tolerance. It's leading with openness. That's why you see all this growth. It's leading with tolerance. It's leading with openness. That's why you see all this growth. It's that mindset.

And that's why we're here, because this is a country that's a role model for a region that we're here to lean into. We can't ignore this. We have to be here and to accelerate this. And, you know, again, that's why it's a perfect place to do this. And the region faces challenges for sure, which is I love that you went to the why Abu Dhabi question, because the 3050 Summit has 500 women, maybe more from 50 different every minute. I know they keep coming and it's great. We have some incredible speakers. But talk a little bit about the goal of the summit, which I think you touched on. But it's we're really taking mentoring and cross-cultural connections to a whole new level.

And hence the name 30-50-7. We have the 50-over-50 list that you pioneered on our Forbes 30-under-30 list. It's the younger generation and older generations mentoring each other. And it's not just the older mentoring the younger because women in their 20s can teach amazing leaders about technology, about what's going on, about AI, just about thinking differently. And so it's a two-way mentorship. So we have a two-way mentorship on Thursday. In fact, the entire day is going to be devoted to teaching and learning where everyone's going to be mentoring and learning from each other. But then it's also about mentoring the entire world and that we're making videos.

So this is not just an event just for 500, 600, 700 people, but it's an event that can impact the whole world because the leaders here are making videos that then across International Women's Day tomorrow will span across the world and be shot out across the world to mentor everybody. So this is really tomorrow a beacon on a day that's always been a hashtag for actually doing something. So, and Mika, tell me, what are you most excited about? The next couple of days are going to be, I mean, they're going to be coming at you at 100 miles an hour. What are you most excited about? The next couple of days are going to be I mean, they're going to be coming at you at 100 miles an hour. What are you most excited? Well, I'm excited about talking to the younger generations. I'm so excited about what we've learned, creating the 50 over 50 list and how it immediately went global.

We had 10,000 submissions for the very first one. And even women age 49 who we had to say, no, no, no, no. You're lying up. But that that list and these women that we have we have to say, no, no, no, no, you're lying up, lady. But that list and these women that we have discovered and immediately going global, so many of them around the world who are here today, here for these three days, here to hear our iconic conversation with the legends of all time when it comes to women's rights and women's issues. But to hear from them, because what they tell the younger generations

is that we have arrived. We're not just trying to get there. We have arrived and we have paved a long runway for you, the younger generation. And I love talking to younger women, giving them advice, but also telling them they can slow down, you know, maybe actually take a moment, be mindful and experience what they're going through so they can really retain what they're learning. And that's the difference from when I started in my career and when I even started doing know your value events. I was rushing through them and telling them all to hurry up. And now my message is slow down. I mean, you look just politically, you look at the woman who signs the bill, dollar bill in the United States, Janet Yellen. You look at the head of the EU.

Around the world. Ursula von der Leyen. You look at Christine Lagarde. Again, the most powerful women in the world are women well over 50. And they're just now, in many cases, coming into their own. You're seeing it also, I mean, with what's going on in Washington. You look at Nancy Pelosi and what she's done over the last few decades or last few years, for sure. She was on our first list.

Absolutely. And what you see when you go down in the lobby here are smiles. Yes. Everyone is smiling. That's what strikes me as different from most events that I go to. Everyone's smiling and a pleasure to be here because they are slowing down and they're learning from each other and they're appreciating, especially the older women, that this is a place and a time this week where they're being celebrated. Well, Randall, they're a part of this.

Every single woman here is a part of this as opposed to going to an event and going, huh, I'll never get there. Like they are a part of this and they are being scooped up into incredible cross-cultural, cross-generational relationships. Randall Lane, thank you very much. As we've said, we've got some really special guests with us throughout the week. Go to knowyourvalue.com or forbes.com for continuous coverage of the 30-50 summit. I'll also be posting a lot on social. In addition to the women Randall and I spoke about, many more incredible women will be taking to the stage, including Jessica Alba, Ayesha Curry, Catherine O'Hara, Misty Copeland, and many, many more. And tomorrow on International Women's Day, I will co-moderate an iconic

conversation with Hillary Clinton. As we speak, we'll hear from Ukrainian First Lady Olena Zelenska and also on stage from women's rights icons Billie Jean King and Gloria Steinem. That's tomorrow live on Morning Joe exclusively at 7 a.m. Eastern. Really look forward to the iconic conversation tomorrow. Randall, thank you. And still ahead on Morning Joe, what we're learning this morning about the search for four Americans kidnapped by gunmen in Mexico. Plus, Norfolk Southern is out with a new safety plan following a series of train derailments. We'll talk to Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg about that. Also ahead, former Republican Governor Larry Hogan is our guest after announcing he won't be making

a run for the White House in 2024. You're watching Morning Joe. We'll be right back. changes following the derailment of two of its trains in Ohio. Over the weekend, 28 cars went off the track in Springfield, one month after a train derailed near the Pennsylvania border, spilling toxic chemicals in East Palestine. The rail company yesterday released a six-point safety plan calling for the improvement of hot bearing detectors on the tracks. The National Transportation Safety Board's preliminary report in the East Palestine crash cited an overheated wheel bearing as a potential cause, saying the sensors on the tracks should have notified the crew earlier. The plan does not include the changes the Biden administration had been calling for,

such as upgrading to a faster braking system and paying workers sick leave. All this comes just days before Norfolk Southern CEO Alan Shaw is set to testify for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. We'll have much more on this when we hear from Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg later on Morning Joe. Meanwhile, pressure is mounting for President Biden to visit the derailment site in East Palestine. Last week, he did tell reporters he intends to go, but there is no trip in the works at the moment. A senior White House official told NBC News, quote, when or if the president should go is, of course, a question we would talk about. But I don't think this is something we've been agonizing over in real time. The White House says Biden has not yet visited because he doesn't want to detract from cleanup efforts.

We've been talking about this for weeks now. Is the president going to go? Should the president go? All of that. Is there something in the go? Should the president go? All of that. Is there something in the works? Does the White House feel any obligation to be there at this point? At this moment, there have only been preliminary conversations. The White House president is not going there this week. The schedule has been, it's nothing on there for a trip to Ohio. The aides are still considering going there. And certainly, in the early days of an accident like this, you don't want the president or

any major principal to go because it draws so many resources from the ground. He travels with such a security apparatus. It would be a distraction. It would slow things down. But it's been a month. There's a way now for him to go. The political pressure has mounted not just from Republicans. We did see Donald Trump go. We have seen Republicans make some sort of absurd claims about the president's priorities as opposed to going to Ohio, saying he shouldn't have gone to Kiev and said he should

have gone to East Palestine. But there is a way to do both. And that's what some Democrats are starting to say, too, is that it's just the politically smart thing to do, to go to, you know, he is so good at empathy. He is able to be there, relate to the people there, a lot of working class folks, maybe not a lot of Biden voters, but that shouldn't matter. And I do think that at some point the White House will give the OK for him to make this trip, but it's not going yet. And until he does, it's one of those things where the questions will just mount. Jen, the EPA has been on the ground from the beginning. The administrator has been there several times. Secretary Buttigieg has been there as well. You've been saying the president should

figure out a way to get there. How important is this that President Biden visit East Palestine? I mean, the most important thing is that the responsibility of the federal government to deal with, to understand what happened there. DOT is doing that to deal with the safety issues around the toxins and air and water. EPA is doing that. And then there's the leadership that comes from the president of the United States and showing concern for the American people. I understand that in this, particularly in this part of Ohio, you're unlikely to find a lot of, you know, unlikely to find a lot of Biden supporters. That doesn't matter when you're dealing with a crisis like this and we're

dealing with a tragedy like this. And eventually, the president, you know, I know that the president said himself that he would go, and eventually they will. It's irksome for the White House. You know, you have these kinds of situations where you're doing the work, right? The federal government is doing the work of what needs to happen there. You're getting grief on the politics. You know, when you address the politics, you know, when Biden actually does go, you will get criticized about something else. That's the nature of the job.

So at some point, you know, so he should go. At some point, he will go. It won't limit, you know, I don't know that he'll get a lot of political gain, but that's not the point. The point is to show that the president of the United States cares. And I think that the administration in general is doing a good job. You see—you know, I know you're going to have Secretary Buttigieg come on later, talk about rail safety in general. This is not just a problem for East Palestine. There was another derailment over the weekend. And Ohio, it's a problem for any community that has these kinds of materials going through their communities.

And, you know, it's also wise for administration from the political perspective to widen that aperture and talk about rail safety in general. Yeah, I mean, there's the symbolism of the visit. But more importantly, as you say, there's a question of why this keeps happening and the danger it poses to these communities. Coming up next, amid the fighting in Ukraine, China is pushing back against American warnings not to arm Russia. Richard Haass joins us next to discuss where things stand. Morning Joe is coming back in a moment. The battle rages on in the Ukrainian frontline city of Bakhmut today. Ukrainian and Russian forces continue to fight within and around the city, which has been ruined by the fighting.

In the midst of a siege by Russian forces, Ukraine's top generals say yesterday their goal is to bolster the city's defenses rather than to retreat from the area. The New York Times reports Ukraine has calculated the Russian siege in the city is weakening. Now, Ukraine will try to stall Russian forces through a battle of attrition before a planned counterattack. Meanwhile, this morning, China's foreign minister is defending possible military support for Russia by suggesting the United States is being hypocritical. The accusations of American hypocrisy stem from the military aid the U.S. provides to Taiwan, which China does not recognize as a sovereign nation. The foreign minister did deny China has provided any weapons to the Russian army. U.S. officials have been warning for weeks

now that intelligence gained from Russian officials indicates China is considering arming Russian forces in Ukraine. Joining us now, President of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass. He's the author of the new book titled The Bill of Obligations, The Ten Habits of Good Citizens. Not just a book, but a bestseller. Richard, good to see you, my friend. Good morning. Let's start there with China. President Xi gave a speech just yesterday going after criticizing the United States, saying it's kind of orchestrating this worldwide effort to suppress, I think was the word he used. Used the containment word. Yeah, containment, exactly.

So what are we seeing play out with Russia at the center of this, with the United States and China on opposite sides? Well, it's ironic because you remember when Kissinger and Nixon were making American foreign policy, the whole idea was in this triangle of the three great countries, it was get the United States and China on one side against the Soviet Union. Now you have China and Russia teaming up against the United States. And I think China's made the strategic decision that they will do what they have to do to make sure Mr. Putin doesn't lose. And it's really significant. We're having this big debate about arming Ukraine. Should we give them F-16? Should we give them all the tanks?

My guess is China might quietly try to offset what it is we do. So the idea that we have some decisive options to transform the battlefield, I would guess not. I don't think China's prepared to let that happen. And so what does the United States do if China does, in fact, start to arm Russia openly, giving them weapons and clearly taking a side in the war when we said that's a red line for us? What does that mean? How do we respond? My guess is they're already transferring all sorts of so-called dual-use equipment. Semiconductors, when you send them there, can be used for lots of purposes. My guess is they're also probably routing some arms around third countries. So they're trans-shipped rather

than directly shipped. We try to get sanctions. And that's a lot of it will be more U.S. sanctions. But there's not a lot left. I think the Chinese actually have calculated. Let me see. You guys kept the tariffs in place. You're already restricting the flows of technology to us. You're already restricting our access to the United States for anything. So I think they've almost said, hey, not a lot more they can do to us. I think they're a little bit worried about European sanctions. But then the Europeans, in many cases, are so committed to access to the Chinese market, the Chinese probably think that whatever price they pay would be modest. I just don't see Xi Jinping, who so hitched his wagon to Vladimir Putin, and yesterday the foreign minister doubled down on it. I just don't see

them allowing the Russians to come out badly here. So, Richard, let's talk about the influence or lack thereof Washington might have with Kiev right now. Bakhmut's a good example. We just heard from the defense secretary, Austin, suggests that this is not a significant city. He sort of suggests, you know, read between the lines saying that Ukraine not, maybe this is the best use of their resources. We hear from Zelensky last night saying they're all in. They're not abandoning Bakhmut. And there is a real fear that if they exhaust their resources here in this battle for a city without much strategic significance, it will hurt their ability to wage a real counteroffensive down the road. We've also seen the administration try to signal to Ukraine, hey, Crimea probably shouldn't be part of your counteroffensive. No sense that Kiev is necessarily

listening. Just walk us through what that relationship is going to be like the longer this war goes on. Yeah, first of all, with this battle that's going on, it's almost become more psychological and politically significant than militarily. And it also has become almost a metaphor. You don't want to have to destroy Ukraine in order to save it. And I think the U.S. is really worried about the effort that's going in here. More broadly, though, Jonathan, I think you're on to a big issue. We just talked about the United States and China. We've talked about the United States and Russia. Those are classic relationships between foes or competitors. We have a playbook for that. Turns out in foreign policy, the most complicated relations are often between friends,

where you agree, but how do you disagree? Think about the United States and Israel over the years, or the U.S. and Pakistan over the years, or the U.S. and South Vietnam back when we were with them. So I actually think the U.S.-Ukraine relationship is really, really complicated. And you got to some of the big ones. How do they spend the resources? Crimea. Yes, Crimea should be part of Ukraine. But do you try to liberate it militarily? Is that feasible? Is that necessary at this point? So I actually think sooner or later, there's going to be real friction between the United States and Ukraine. We've kind of finessed it up to now, and we keep saying whatever they want, they set the war aims. I don't think that's viable. When does the United States allow a partner to set the war

aims or the aims of American foreign policy? So I just think we're moving at some point towards some very uncomfortable conversations. Richard, Gene Robbins has got one for you from Washington. Gene? Richard, you said that you think Xi's aim is that Russia not lose this war, but that's not the same thing as Russia winning the war. Do you think Xi has an end game in mind or an end situation in mind that would be satisfactory to China, that would allow Russia perhaps to save face, but that would be short of the investment of materiel and money and everything else that would be required to prop Russia up to actually win the war? It's a good question. Look, this is not the most important issue to China. So what China really cares about, Gene, besides their domestic

situation, is Taiwan. That's really what they're focused on. So I think here, he's made a personal commitment to Putin. He's put his prestige a little bit on the line with his no limits agreement of just over a year ago. I don't think the Chinese mind that U.S. readiness is being diminished. So much of our military stocks are going to Ukraine. They therefore wouldn't be available if there ever were a Taiwan conflict. But I think China would prefer not to cross lines and not to become the target of a new U.S.-European campaign. So my view is they'll probably do as much as they have to, but not more than that. They don't mind this war continuing.

They don't need Russia to win. They simply don't want Putin to be humiliated in the United States and their allies to have a major victory. So they're buying oil, they're shipping dual-use equipment, and they'll probably one way or another get military stuff there if they have to. But they're not looking to make Ukraine the centerpiece of U.S.-China relations. Their focus is on their part of the world. And again, Taiwan, one good piece of news there, just to say, I thought it was interesting that the new speaker decided he wouldn't do what Speaker Pelosi did.

He is not going to Taiwan. I think if that had happened, it would have been a major flare up in tensions. Instead, Taiwan's President Tsai is coming to the United States later this month. And it looks like the new speaker will meet with her here in the United States. And that might be something of a bullet dodge. Not a lot of pieces of good news in this in this most important relationship. But just possibly that's a little bit of a little bit of a bullet dodged. Richard, the most important question for last. The Knicks have won nine games in a row.

Is this finally, after 50 long years of waiting, our year? No. But we are heading in the right direction, Willie. Yes. Keep faith alive. Yes. I agree with you on both points. No, but we're headed in the right direction.

A legit playoff team this year. Yeah, they are. They'll win a round. That makes some noise. I've got a question for you. Yes. Danny Dimes. Sign him.

Sign him. Sign him. Big day today. Yep. He's going to make a lot of money today. Danny Dimes. All right, Richard, thanks so much. Good to see you.

Still ahead, a look at some of the must-read opinion pages. Plus, Democratic Senator Mark Warner joins us. He's introducing new legislation that would ban or prohibit foreign technology like TikTok. Talk to him about that and much more when Morning Joe comes right back. Beautiful live picture at six fifty three in the morning of downtown Manhattan, looking from the top of our building to the NFL offseason. Some stuff brewing here. The first major free agent signing, the New Orleans Saints,

have a new quarterback under center. The team offered a four-year deal to former Las Vegas Raiders quarterback Derek Carr. Sources say the deal is worth $150 million, with $100 million in guaranteed money. It also includes a no-trade clause. Meanwhile, the Seattle Seahawks sticking with quarterback Geno Smith. Had a great season last year. The NFL comeback player of the year, as a matter of fact.

He's staying put with a three-year, $105 million deal front-loaded with $52 million for Geno Smith next year. Amazing. He had a great year. He was the Jets' backup a couple of years ago. Four years. Nick in 52 next year. Good for him. All right, so this opens the door now in Las Vegas. We knew the door was open, but now it's official. Derek Carr is gone. Aaron Rodgers, is he going to stay in Green Bay? Is he going to go to Vegas, maybe come to the Jets? What are we thinking here? So Rogers just exited what was called a darkness retreat, where for four days, he went to the woods in Oregon, holed up in a little cabin, and didn't have any interaction with another human being or see any light. I'm being serious. This is what he just did. He has emerged, and he has said, like the groundhog coming out, he'll make his pronouncement

soon as to what he wants to do. There's a sense that he is going to finally leave Green Bay. He's flirted this for a few years, but this might be the year where he finally goes. And these are the two choices, Jets or Raiders. If he goes to Las Vegas, he'd be reunited with Devonta Adams. They've got a great offense there. That's possible, but a very tough division and conference. And if he comes here, he'd be retracing the steps of another Packers legend, Brett Favre, who also went to the Jets, although he found more success later with the Vikings. I wonder how Rodgers will handle the New York media, the fishbowl environment here. It's very different than what he has experienced before. Some of his quirky beliefs might not play so well.

He also kind of had a down season last year. So I know I think a lot of Jets fans, though, are desperate for a QB. They have a team they think is built to win now. Rodgers, certainly an upgrade to what they had. Back pages of both tabloids in New York saying the Jets need to go get Aaron Rodgers. Now with Derek Carback, we'll see if they get their man.