Transcripts For MSNBCW Morning Joe 20200106

He tweeted, let this serve as a warning that if iran strikes any americans or american assets, we have targeted 52 iranian sites representing the 52 american hostages taken by iran many years ago. Some at a very high level and important to iran, the iranian culture and those targets and iran itself will be hit very fast and very hard. The usa wants no more threats. Talking to reporters last night while flying back to washington from his 17day vacation, the president was asked about his threat against irans cultural sites which many experts say would actually constitute a war crime, and the president doubled down. There allowed to kill our people. Theyre allowed to torture and maim our people. Theyre allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people and were not allowed to touch their cultural sites, it doesnt work that way. Heres where we stand on this monday, january 6th. Huge crowds packing the streets of iran for the funeral of general soleimani. The iranian general struck down on friday by a u. S. Drone and for whom that country is the promising revenge. Iran is also signaling a new push towards Nuclear Weapons, tehran will no longer commit to enrichments established in a 2015 agreement from global powers from which the Trump Administration withdrew, and in iraq, lawmakers are calling for the expulsion of u. S. Troops from the country. Something President Trump met with threats of sanctions against baghdad and a bill of billions of dollars. With us this morning, we have National Affairs analyst for nbc news and msnbc, John Heilemann. The cohost and executive producer of showtimes the circus. White house reporter for the associated press, Jonathan Lemire, and president of the council on Foreign Relations Richard Haass and Vice President for third ways National Security program and an msnbc contributor, mika oyang and associate editor for the Washington Post David Ignatius. And you were with the president yesterday as he actually undercut his secretary of state who seemed to scold the members of the media for suggesting that donald trump ever said the United States would target iranian cultural sites. The president then just admitted it, not only in tweets but in front of you and the press corps. Tell us about it. Thats right. I spent last week in west palm beach. s in our flight back to washington yesterday aboard air force one after half our left to the flight the president called up the press pool and proceeded to hold court. Touched on a number of newsworthy matters but we pressed him on this in particular and mika read the quote. He basically contradicted what secretary pompeo said earlier in the day. Pompeo went on every single sunday morning show yesterday and really stressed the United States would adhere to the law and not target cultural sites what it would do would be lawful, and what the president said, he went the other direction. If irans allowed to play by these rules why cant we, too . He would not take anything off the table when we raised this issue with him. Also on the matter of iraq. Earlier in the day the Iraqi Parliament voted to expel u. S. Forces from the country. Thats not a done deal, it may not happen. When we asked the president about that, he said if theyre going to follow through with this, if this is something they really want and the wont way us billions of dollars for a joint air base the u. S. Helped build there, in iraq, then the u. S. Would leave, and would impose crippling sanctions to point he said even rougher than the ones we put on iran. Richard, i want to get to a wall street journal editorial that the paper wrote, the opinion page wrote over the weekend, and it sounded every bit a celebratory and jingoistic as when the United States invaded iraq in 2003, or when they captured and killed Saddam Hussein, or when they killed gadhafi, and their conclusion is that if you question the wisdom of this strike, that somehow you load donald trump so much that you dont care that very Malevolent Force was taken off the globe. They go, in other words, soleimani was a deadly menace but the u. S. Should have done nothing about this deafatations because iran could hit back is appeasement not leadership and then the wall street journal writes, democrats loathe President Trump so much they cant even praise the demise of a murderous enemy. Well, you know kim jongun is considered to be a murderous enemy. Do we, does the wall street journal, do other people think we recklessly go in and assassinate kim jongun . What about assad . Weve had chances im sure to assassinate assad. And so richard, can you because i know you saw soleimani like me as an extraordinarily dangerous force across the middle east and an enemy of the United States of america. But just because youre concerned about the assassination of this iranian leader, does that mean that you loathe donald trump so much that you cant see straight . Look, joe, throughout history weve been up against any number of figures who we loathed and who targeted americans. It doesnt mean that taking them out or trying to overthrow regimes we dont like is, makes sense for American Foreign policy. Youve always got to ask yourself, even if you gain in narrow by getting rid of an individual, do you gain in the large . When i look at the middle east, i dont understand how we benefit from increasing the degree of conflict and violence in that part of the world, making ourselves as well as our friends much more vulnerable, and then taking a step back. I dont understand how this is good for the United States, even this administration. Lets just judge it by what it says. It says the principle challenge is facing the United States are no longer in the middle east. In part because we reach add degree of energy selfsufficiency but theyre in asia, china, north korea. Others say in europe, with russia so how defending american troops in the middle east, theyre so busy protecting themselves they cant fight terrorist, how does that make us safer or make strategic sense . People like me look at this and the take a step back and they say, yeah. You know, i understand the logic of going after somebody like soleimani in the abstract, but in reality, is the United States safer . Does this contribute to our global, strategic position . And i would simply say on balanceance absolutely not. We have been mired in the middle east now for the best part of two decades. This administration as well as the previous one, were dialing that down. This now dials it up dramatically in a way that, again, were going to be far more vulnerable there and far less able to advance our interests around the world and arguably far more vulnerable at home. And i suspect donald trump still has no idea how much this is going to dial up conflict in the middle east, because in that interview we played you of him talking to hugh hewitt on friday he didnt even know who soleimani was. He misidentified him as a kurd after hugh hewitt was trying to lead him in that direction. David ignatius, you and i spoke, it seemed, daily for a very long time about the Iranian Nuclear deal. I was opposed to it. You you are a news man. You stayed down the middle. I think you called it a cosmic, a cosmic bet. A cosmic gamble. But there are a lot of us who opposed the Iranian Nuclear deal who after the deal was done said, well, weve transferred the money. The deals in place. It holds them in check for 15 years. Europes going to stay shoulder to shoulder with the iranians anyway. Us pulling out at this point doesnt seem to make a lot of sense, but now we find ourselves in a place where the iranians had committed to 15 years of a nuclear freeze, and that just went away over the weekend. They are, their Nuclear Program has started back up in full. Joe, as you say, the iranians have announced theyre suspended cooperation with this agreement. It goes to the basic question that secretary pompeo raised, or asserted, that were safer now because of the actions thursday night in killing general soleimani, and the suspension of cooperation with the Nuclear Agreement is, one, an aspect how were not safer, but there are others that may prove more important. We have had to stop our operations against isis. A battle against a vicious terrorist group that was sustained through two administrations. The announcement came over the weekend. Thats over for now. Reason . We simply dont have enough assets, enough Surveillance Drones and other overhead assets to protect our forces everywhere and also conduct this operation. Our relationship with iraq. A crucial Building Block of a more stable region appears to be a kind of casualty, collateral damage, of this operation. The iraqi Prime Minister whos been a supporter of the u. S. Essentially led the Parliament Vote to move towards pushing us out of and then trump in a classic moment of, of misreaction, thundered that he would sanction iraq harder than hed sanction iran. Its a way, if you wanted to ensure that somebody in that part of the world would not be willing to compromise youd make a Statement Like that, and finally, were now in a position where our military leadership is basically hunkered down across the middle east waiting for what they fear are going to be attacks in multiple locations. Thats why the the demand for isr, overhead surveillance is so enormous. They fear this could come at many places in once. So thats where we are after thursday night, and the terrible thing, joe is that some things come at you by surprise. This was predicted over and over again. When the issue came up, what would be the consequences of killing soleimani . This has been rehearsed for ten years, and each time the answer is the same. Youll end up with fewer benefits and more risks. Same thing with the maximum pressure on iran on the nuclear deal. If you do this, it will not push them towards negotiations. It will stiffen their resistance to negotiations. Those two predictions by the intelligence analysts are being borne out before our eyes right now. Right. Live pictures. Here are live pictures in tehran. Predictable. All of this is very predictable and surreal over the weekend, i must say. I think most people looking at what it happened, were wise enough to say they have no idea where this goes, but what shocked me was, again, those who were celebrating the death as a great military victory for the United States of america, i just i wonder where theyve been for the past 16 years, 70 of americans, myself included, supported going into iran, because we were told there were weapons of mass destruction. We captured Saddam Hussein. Iraq. Iraq, excuse me. We captured Saddam Hussein. Saddam hussein was killed. Chaos. Chaos has spread through that region for the past 16 years. The same thing with moammar ga daughtery, turned over his m. A. D. S and the United States went in, killed moammar gadhafi, chaos continues to spread across the region for those actions. Do we really believe in 2019 that the killing of one man, i mean, the killing of osama bin laden. What happened after that . Well, there was a rise of isis that would have probably happened with our without that killing, but, again, mika, those that are acting as if, as if this is some sort of board game and we knocked the king off the table are just ignorant of history. Let us hope for the best, and let us all agree that this guy was a Malevolent Force. Ive always said iran is the epicenter of tear original and has been since 1979, and he was the chief terrorist in that epicenter of terrorism, but he was also attached to a government thats extraordinarily influential. If the iraq war strengthened iran and it most certainly did, its hard to see how this doesnt drive us even further away from the influence of power in iraq and throughout that region. Well, the main military adviser to irans Supreme Leader tells cnn that tehran would retaliate directly against u. S. Military sites. The former defense minister said, it might be argued there could be proxy operations. We can say america, mr. Trump, has taken action directly against us, so we take direct action against america. He said eour reaction will be wise, well considered and in time with decisive deterrent effect pea effect. And added, the only thing is for americans to receive a blow equal to the blow she have inflicted. Ya afterward they should not seek a new cycle. Wow. Lets go there. There were some messages from Homeland Security that american citizens in america could be at risk. Who is really at risk now that this rock has been thrown into a wasps nest . Very certainly american troops in the region are very much at risk. The iranians i think are trying to keep escalation within the military sphere. Executing soleimani was a very big escalatory step here but he was a military target. So they are going to respond in kind. I think for most americans here in the United States, they are physically going to be okay. Iran has not demonstrated much ability to pull off kinetic attacks s ability to pull off kinetic attackss inside the United States. They tried to take out the saudi ambassador here in the United States and that did not work out well for them. Most americans will be fine, but its really important to remember that iran is a very important cyber actor and the attack that crippled the city of atlanta was iranian in origin. You can expect we might see Cyber Attacks against American Targets inside the United States. It is interesting yesterday both iranians and leaders of hezbollah says our attacks will be on the United States military and not against the American People. And i think it was the leader of hezbollah who even said, attacking american civilians would only play into Donald Trumps hands. It seems, again, theyre going to choose their targets wisely, and going to make sure that it doesnt empower donald trump politically. Right. Joe, taking back inside the scene at air force one yesterday. Surreal moment in his press cabin. An nfl football game, seahawks and eagles on the screen behind us. At one moment the president mentioned kind of a dull game while talking about the possibility of retaliation. I posed the question to as to what he expected, what it would be like, almost accepting of it. If it happens, if it happens, and warned iran were they to strike back of course the u. S. Would hit harder and not rule out any sort of these attacks on cultural sites. So, John Heilemann we asked about justifying this attack. Remember, this president time and again has cast out on the u. S. Intelligence agencies and did not want to believe them with inclusion of russias involvement in the 2016 election and repeatedly, of course, questioned the intelligence that led to the 2003 war with iraq. So but hes now making this case, he notified congress via the war powers act this was justified. But does this president have enough credibility to make this case to both congress and the American Public . I think the answer to that is kind of paytonly, no, in the sense weve receive add moment, jonathan, over the course of the last three years we have sat and waited for this day in a sense, the day the president would be confronted with a genuine Foreign Policy crisis either of his own making or thrust upon him. Now were here. A Foreign Policy crisis in some part, some measure, driven by iran and some measure by the pret and their provocations, his counterprovocations in this case. I think this is the thing weve all talked about, the moment would come. When a president stands on the brink of war potentially leading the country into this kind of conflict. Its the moment when the reserves of the capital store of credibility is most necessary, and i think not just because of his attack on the intelligence agencies, not just, although partly because of those, because 6 all the things weve seen over the last three years. Most fundamentally even the president s biggest fans acknowledge the fact he is a pathological liar and told lie after lie after lie. Running counter es. 13,000 lies over the last three years will eventually take a toll. Eventually they will have a piper will be paid. This is the moment where that could be the case, because there are Something Like 50 of the American People who dont believe a word the president says about anything, about matters that are trivial. These are not matters that are trivial. Theyre incredibly profound. And David Ignatius, i ask you this question, reading you carefully over the last few days as this unfolded. In addition to that question, the question of the president s credibility and what happens when a president who has none or at least who has squandered all of it, lets say, with a good half of the American People, what happens in a circumstance like this where that president who is known for his chaotic leadership style to begin with now comes under the scrutiny wee see, the tick tocks of how these decisions were made . On one side you have a president that has, in my judgment, i think a lot less credibility with the American People than you would need in this circumstance if you would have the support of a broad swath of the American Public. Also you have a president whose behavior in other instances d a . Anything you see about how this decision was made that gives you comfort that these decisions are being made in an orderly, rigorous, disciplined, responsible way . Or is this another issue for trump at this point where were reading how this decision was made, raises profound doubts about his leadership style . John, my reporting tells me that the president after the attack on december 27 that killed the u. S. Contractor near kirkuk was presented with options for retaliation and he in that instance chose to strike at the shia militias in iraq. That caused a lot of death. 25 militiamen killed and they then attacked the embassy. Those were images of the attack on the American Embassy in baghdad, were really haunting for trump and for his advisers, someone like secretary of state pompeo whod agitated so much about benghazi, the loss of American Life in benghazi, so the new set of options was put to the president s, and im told that although killing, taking out Qasem Soleimani was one of those options that some of the commanders under President Trump were surprised that he chose that one. They followed the orders of the commander in chief, but the commanders know, because theyve been through this so many times, about the dangers, the knockon consequences of such a decision, that they are now hunkered down across the region. Theyre had to suspend some of the operations that are most important to them. Wow. So simple answer to your question is, our military is advising the president , theyre giving him options. He is the decider, and our best guarantee of good sense is that those advisers are the same experienced people as before. You know, Richard Haass, weve talked at length over the past several years about the dangers of having a president , having a commander in chief that had no previous governmental experience had no previous military experience, had no real interest in studying americas history or Foreign Policy, or constitutional norms that most of it was just, just came from the gut. It was his gut instincts and he would tell you that as well. If you read art of the deal he bragged about never preparing, never reading, jumpt shst showi and seeing what would happen. I want to ask you, where are we now as a nation in terms of our relationship with our allies . Never mind our enemies. Our allies . We have a president who has, when it comes to iraq, when it comes to iran, where with iraq, hes hes talked about breaking, you know, the Geneva Convention by seizing oil, and in lands that we invade. Hes now talking about targeting iranian cultural sites, and never mind what that governments been since 1979. Its got one of the most extraordinary historieses, most extraordinary cultures on the planet, and then, of course, the targeting of, really, in effect, the number two person in iran who is being groomed to be president of that country, or some other top civilian position, and while, yes it could be argued that was legal and you argued that in your Financial Times piece this weekend, at the same time, richard, were going into territory that we used to condemn third world countries and the soviet union for going into. Hmm. Just because something may have been league and i say may, the imminence case in no way proven doesnt mean it was smart or strategically wise. Put that to the side. What were seeing, joe, is essentially how America First as a lot of us said all alone is increasingly american alone. Going after iraq now, threatening iraq with sanctions. Not only does that make it more likely u. S. Troops will be kicked out, but it increases iraqs potential dependence on iran or russia or others, plus the sanctions if we ever put them into effect would weaken iraqs ability to challenge terrorists on their territory. Incomprehensible to me. We get out of the 2015 Nuclear Agreement alone. We dont have the europeans or anybody else with us. We threaten the cultural sites in iran, all that does is get iranians to rally around the government, and, know i think, you know, all of this raises questions about american exceptionalism. So rather than richard, can i interrupt one second . Can you just, for people that havent been paying close attention to iran over the past three, four months, you said it gets all of the iranians to rally around the leadership. Talk about the the favor donald trump did the iranian leadership who was facing the worst protests since 1979, since its founding in 1979. Two interesting narratives going on in the middle east over the last couple of weeks and months as you suggest. One was the one inside iraq. Where the iraqis in many ways had turn and the iranians, and what weve done is interrupted that and instead now the iraqis are turning on the United States. And then within iran itself, give the president some due. His sanctions increased Economic Hardship within iran. People had turned against the government, to some extent. I dont want to exaggerate it, but people were questioning all the money that iran was spending on its Foreign Policy rather than on the quality of life at home, but again now, that narrative has been interrupted, and instead people are being, they feel compelled to rally around the government, either because they mourn soleimani or because of the threat against cultural sites. Ive argued all along we should have said publicly to the people in government of iran, youve been doing all of these things. We sanctioned you, but we will stop sanctions you if you behave responsibly. If you stop your Nuclear Program. If you stop subversion and so forth and then the government of iran would have had to explain to its own people why it rejected potential sanctions relief because it was following this confrontational Foreign Policy. We have done just the opposite. We have not given the iranian people any hopes of a better future. Weve not forced the iranian government to defend its ways. We have actually taken them off the hook just when they faced one of the real crises of the iranian revolution. Yeah. All right, bring in nbc news National Security and military correspondent Courtney Kubiak with a whole new dynamic in the region. Troops headed in. Iraqis wanting us out, what are you hearing . Reporter the 82nd airborne, Immediate Reaction force, based out of iraq were brought in last week specifically in response, though, to the protests in baghdad and the threat against the embassy there. They started moving in over the weekend, moving into kuwait. Some into iraq as sort of a regional stability, what the military is calling them. There to provide security to u. S. Troops and installations throughout the region. In addition to that, an entire brigade of the 173rd aviation or Airborne Brigade based out of utley u italy on alert in case they need to be brought in to those threatened and also we have an an f anphibious group ready. When you look where the u. S. Military was a week or ten days ago versus where they are now, the number of troops now flowing into the region or on alert to be brought in, its up tremendously from where it was. This is not just because of the death of Qasem Soleimani, mika, though, this is also because of the protests in baghdad, the u. S. Strikes, the strikes that the u. S. Took last weekend in syria and iraq against kataib hezbollah. There was an increased threat from that. The u. S. Footprint there has already changed and looks like tliz potential to grow more, mika. Nbcs Courtney Kubiak, thank you very much. At this point, joe, whats your make given that now troops are potentially moving, preparing . This changes everything and could be launching us into something quite big. Again, it suggests the president of the United States who did not even know who general soleimani was a few years ago had no idea what he was getting into. Had no idea the size of the hornets nest he was kicking. This is leading hes already had to send more troops over to the middle east after this attack. Of course, a couple weeks ago we reported he was sending more troops to saudi arabia. For a president who said he wanted to get out of the middle east, for a president who said he didnt want to be obsessed with the middle east, and their endless wars the way that george w. Bush and barack obama had, the actions of his past week will ensure that his administration will be just as captive to violence coming out of the middle east, as both barack obama and george w. Bushs administration until donald trump leaves office. Still ahead on morning joe, reports suggest several officials were caught off guard by the killing of the iranian general, but not mike pompeo, who was reportedly a leading voice in urging the president to pull the trigger. Youre watching morning joe. Well be right back. Ht back. So theyll only pay for what they need. Your turn to keep watch, limu. Wake me up if you see anything. [ snoring ] [ loud squawking and siren blaring ] only pay for what you need. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. Liberty. You may have gingivitis. When you brush, and the clock could be ticking towards bad breath, receding gums, and possibly. Tooth loss. Help turn back the clock on gingivitis with parodontax. Leave bleeding gums behind. Parodontax. Dealing with our finances really haunted me. Ttle cranky. Thankfully, i got quickbooks, and a live bookkeepers helping customize it for our business. live bookkeeper youre all set up janine great vo get set up right with a live bookkeeper with intuit quickbooks. Trumpand total disaster. Mplete let obamacare implode. Nurse these wild attacks on healthcare hurt the patients i care for. Ive been a nurse in new york for thirty years. I know the difference leadership can make because i saw what Mike Bloomberg did as mayor. Vo mayor bloomberg helped lower the number of uninsured by 40 , covering 700,000 more new yorkers, Life Expectancy increased. He helped expand Health Coverage to 200,000 more kids and upgraded pediatric care infant mortality rates dropped to record lows. And as mayor, Mike Bloomberg always championed Reproductive Health for women. So when you hear Mike Bloomberg on health care. Mrb this is america. We can certainly afford to make sure that everybody that needs to see a doctor can see a doctor, everybody that needs medicines to stay healthy can get those medicines. Nurse you should know, he did it as mayor, hell get it done as president. Mrb im Mike Bloomberg and i approve this message. Depend® silhouette™ briefs feature maximum absorbency, with trusted protection for all out confidence. Beautiful colors and an improved fit for a sleek design and personal style. Lifes better when youre in it. Be there with depend®. Hey. Hey. You must be stevens phone. Now you can take control of your home wifi and get a notification the instant someone new joins your network. Only with xfinity xfi. Download the xfi app today. It . We. The American People would say we werent doing anything to protect the United States. Is that imminent . The attacks he was putting together so imminent and so big it would have been seen as that kind of negligence . Made the right decision. Theres lots of intelligence. Youve seen some out in the public. The death of the american december 27th. Intelligence as a risk as well. The president made the right decision. So was the justification in that hes been a destabilizing force in the region so long or was the justification this imminent threat . Chuck, its never one thing. Youve been at this a long time. The American People are smart, too. Its never one incident. Its a collection. How em meant were they . Talking days, weeks . If youre an american in the region, days and weeks, this is not something thats relevant. We have to prepare, be ready. We took a bad guy off the battlefield. Secretary of state mike pompeo appearing on all five sunday morning shows yesterday. Meanwhile, the Washington Post citing u. S. Officials reports pompeo spoke to trump multiple times every day last week after the attack on the u. S. Embassy in baghdad, and that pompeo along with Vice President mike pence urged him to kill soleimani. On december 29th, the post reports that pompeo defense secretary mark esper and the chairman of the joint chiefs traveled to maralago where the two defense officials presented possible responses to iranian aggression, including the option of killing soleimani. The report says trumps decision came as a surprise and a shock to some officials briefed on his decision given the pentagons longstanding concerns about escalation and the president s aversion to using military force against iran. Jean heohn heilemann, offici the middle east told me the night of the Soleimani Killing he is at least comforted by the fact that pompeo was a grown up that would be in the room. It ends up according to the reports over the past 24 hours that it was that grown upthat actually pushed donald trump to this act of brinkmanship on iran. Right. And, yes it does appear to be that, that appears to be the case, joe, and that reporting is now pretty consistent across multiple outlets with wellsourced reporters. I think we can take that to the bank at this point. To go back to a theme that you raised in the first block this morning, which is all of us needing to be not, to fall into the trap of amnesia and try to be historically aware. Think back to the gulf, to the iraq war, and there are no perfect precedents here, in the same way the same arguments made about soleimani that were made about Saddam Hussein in, back in 20022003, you have a cadre of advisers around donald trump who are very much like the neocons around george w. Bush who had the agenda coming into the administration trying to find a way to get Saddam Hussein out of power and took 9 11 as a, an unjustified, in that case, excuse to move on iraq. You have, i think, in this case, a similar kind of consistency. One thing that mike pompeo has been known for, long before he became secretary of state, long before he went into the cia and became associated with donald trump was his hawkishness on iran. This is a, the kind of move mike pompeo favored for a long time. And, again, we dont want it is the case. Soleimani, bad guy. I hahave not heard many democra not willing to acknowledge the world is better off without soleimani in it. The same time the question, why now . The question Richard Haass and David Ignatius have been raising are out there, and i think one la to look at this cadre of advisers around donald trump, mike pompeo foremost among them looking for an excuse to make this kind of hawkish move against iran for some time. Saw the opportunity here with the attack on the embassy in baghdad and said, lets go, and donald trump was, i think for largely emotional reasons based on reporting weve been reading, emotional reasons was pushed into a position he would never, ever, have imagined advocating or pursuing when a president ial candidate. Never well, of course. In fact, he said just the opposite. Right. For years leading up to his president ial run and while he was on the campaign and over the past three years. So, David Ignatius, the question is, what why brinkmanship . Why this act of brinkmanship when iran was on the defense. You think about think about their actions. Think about them striking out at saudi arabia. Think about them shooting down an american drone. Think about all of the other things that they were doing that and, yes, the killing of the American Contractor was a great tragedy, but theres nobody in the middle east, theres nobody in the United States that doesnt suggest the killing of soleimani will lead to many more deaths than just one. It seemed that the United States had iran on the run. Uhhuh. Again, the protests may not have been destabilizing to the government in the long run, but the iranians were facing the worst internal dissent since 1979. Since their founding 40 years ago. Worse than the dissent in 2009. So why is it, im reminded of my professor who said im not going to take the chestnuts out of the fire for you. Youre going to have to do this yourself. It seems that we have done just that for the iranians. Instead of facing internal dissent now theyre facing a more unified country than ever before. Instead of facing pushback from the iraqis, who were actually starting to tire of iranian influence,s it is now the iraqis who are turning on the United States of america. Why this, this brinkmanship . Why now . What will be the rewards politically over the next ten years . Well, joe, obviously, we cant predict the future one way or the other, but i think one reason that the president took this very nortant action was a fear that he had about his advisers even more starting with pompeo, that because he acted with relative restraint through the summer as iran staged provocations, attacked shipping in the gulf, shot down a u. S. Surveillance drone, took out 50 of saudi arabias Oil Refining Capacity briefly. U. S. Did not effectively in response to those iranian provocations. There was a fear that we were losing our ability to deter iran, and i think that fear on President Trumps part, im looking weak. I keep saying i want to negotiate. I sent shinzo abe, the Prime Minister to tehran. They scoffed at him. I sent mack croron to talk to h. I think increasingly trump felt his attempts at negotiations were going nowhere. This is what happens in wars. This process of miscalculation where you dont see your own inherent advantages. But, but, but, but, david, let me interrupt. Let me interrupt, david. He had a chance to shoot down an iranian drone in response to the shooting down of an american drone. That would have been proportionalthat would have been understood. He could have targeted a military target. Somewhere again, why why such a disproportionate act when all its going to do is keep donald trump and u. S. Troops entangled in the middle east for years to come . Joe, you know, the terrible truth is that if you dont take those, you know, relatively modest proportional responses along the way, you build up a big stack of selfconfidence on the other side and then you think youve got to take an overwhelming, decisive step, which obviously President Trump decided to take in killing this iconic figure of the iranian revolution. Ive been hearing from our military commanders for months this concern that the iranians dont seem to be getting the message through various channels. Weve used lots of channels to send a message to iran in the last six months. Knock it off. They took, tried to take our consulate in bazar in southern iraq back in december had to evacuate. Message, knock it off. They have not gotten those messages. So thats part of how we get here, is inadequate deterrence, a signaling that wasnt received. We do have to put a lot of blame on iran here. Iran has continued to push for its unilateral advantage, in part because its embattled at home, an economic war. Thats how we get here. Missed signals and then overwhelming probably, inappropriate decisionmaking in the end by the u. S. , and now we think, how do we try to unthread this so we dont end up in a general war . You know, jonathan, thats a great frustration it leaves for me. Let me speak for myself. The iranians shoot down a drone. We do nothing. The iranians target saudi oil fields, nobody does anything. Theyre allowed to stir cahaos n basra, nothing happens. Finally we respond with the embassy assault, but help us understand as a white house reporter, how can donald trump seemingly have decided to appease the iranians one time after another after another, to such a point that we were actually stating on this show just last week that the president s refusal to ever respond to their acts of aggression are only going to empower them even more . How does the president go from refusing to shoot down an iranian drone, responding in kind there, to actually targeting the number two person in iran, which, of course, seems to say thats a bit to say thats overmodulation is i think an understatement. Lets start by taking a step back to his campaign where he sort of presented a contradictory at times incoherent Foreign Policy commitment. One hand say he wanted to remove u. S. Troops pull us out of the middle east and same time say bomb the hell out of isis. He wanted it both ways. Yesterday aboard air force one he told us how actually soleimani is someone hed been watching a while. Knew he was a threat. He was particularly impressed with his sort of rhetoric. Felt he was someone able to, lack of a better phrase, fire up the other side and realizes he was a danger. That said, according to our reporting and echoing with what the Washington Post has, we reported as well over weekend, presented this array, menu of options after that contractor was killed and after the storming of the embassy, he immediately seized upon the most dramatic one calling for this strike. They spent a few days, his aides sort of taken aback, not sure they had the justification for it, represented it to him the day of the attack but he was firm. This is what i want to do, even aware of what consequences may come. So, richard, i mean, i saw you sort of shaking your head going along there. Talk to us a little bit about what does happen next . This is something thats obviously potentially a tinderbox, were seeing footage of the streets of tehran. What sort of response did they deliver . Can tehran risk delivering . What should americans expect . Say all was baked into the cake over three years ago when we basically got out of the Nuclear Agreement and practiced Economic Warfare against iran. Of course, they were going to respond. So we lit a fuse, and we are now where we are, because of a process we started. Its as if, jonathan, no one ever said to this president if you confronts they first economically and then militarily they will respond, and events inconsistent with America First, inconsistent on china or north korea. No one ever pointed out the krixds contradictions to him, it appears, or to his policy. Seeing two things iran is doing. Serious moves to get out of the 2015 Nuclear Agreement at some point will present us and israel and others with big choices to make. The other is iran is going to increase the odds that we are forced to depart iraq. That will increase iranian influence over iraq and also leave iraq much more vulnerable to terrorism. After that iran has any number of devices. Cyber, using militias. Think about it. What country havent he heard a lot from . Saudi arabia. Why . Saudi arabia got hammered a few weeks ago. Iran has also options against the saudis not selfsufficient and saudis know they cant necessarily count on us. What triggered this . It was more than anything else an american dieing. What if iranians basically go around the world, the middle east, and say so long as we avoid killing americans we can do all sorts of things to raise the price of the United States by hurting their friends, hurting their allies . So iran has time. It can choose. The great irony of this is donald trump has now seateded the Strategic Initiative to iran. The answer to the question is whenever iran wants, wherever they want. They now can decide to what extent the United States has to focus on dealing with threats in the middle east. This is now, weve now moved from a strategic situation, where we had the initiative, we were going to focus more on china and north korea what have you, more at home, to now iran has the strategic they can decide whether were she to react whatever they might do around the middle east. And, richard, the graeatest danger to the saudis may be and others around the region, exactly right, donald trump is not going to respond militarily to any acts of aggression from this point on. Certainly not in an electionier, unless an american is killed. Unless a direct American Target is struck. Which is why the saudis have expressed concerns and other gulf allies have expressed grave concerns about what the americans did. But i just want to push back just a little bit on what you said before when you said that it was america who lit the fuse getting out of the deal and putting these harsh restrictions on the iranians. I mean, it was soleimani and the iranians who helped prop up assad, and helped push forward that blood bath in syria that ended up killing 500,000 people and causing the greatest refugee crisis since world war ii. It was soleimani and the iranians of course who continue to prop up hezbollah, who continue to target american troops, not only in iraq but around the globe, and try to kill american troops across the globe. I mean so i the only thing im taking note of is you saying that it was we who lit the fuse. The iranians have been aggressive. They have been enemies to our allies. They have been enemies to the United States of america, it seems that, of course, the iranians are responsible for much of whatever befalls them moving forward. Joe, so let me clarify. Iran is not a status quo power. They are an imperial country. They wanted to increase iranian influence throughout the middle east. Obviously iraq, syria, lebanon for decades, and in they had been succeeding. What i said we lit the fuse is we basically rather than fighting them back in many case where is they were pushing, we werent fighting them back, for example, in syria. Instead, what we took was the one area where iran was complying with its obligations, the nuclear area, whether you like the agreement or not they were in compliance with it. We took ourselves out of that and then basically committed Economic Warfare against them directly. And we didnt give them a diplomatic offering. That is where the roots of this Current Crisis are. Youre right. Iran had been a problem for years. In all sorts of ways, and thats why we were doing a lot of what we were doing in iraq and had other options for helping other countries. As you said a few minutes ago when they did things against saudi arabia and we could and should have done things directly against them there, but we took it to them directly and didnt give them an alternative and kept escalating. Theyve responded and why weve been on this show talking about the potential for exactly this. That because there was no structured diplomacy, the danger of the United States in iran stumbling into a war has been there for three years, and we are finally now on the brink of stumbling into it. Well, theres also the political ramifications or perhaps the strategy. Coming up, well talk about how these escalating tensions with iran are playing out on the campaign trail. 2020 candidate Pete Buttigieg will be our guest. Morning joe will be right back. Also we have new polls out of iowa fascinating. Get to those, next. whistling whistling the good news . Our comfort lasts all day. The bad news . So does his energy. Depend® fitflex underwear offers your best comfort and protection guaranteed. Because, perfect or not, lifes better when youre in it. Be there with depend®. Seaonly abreva cany to help sget rid of it in. As little as 2 1 2 days when used at the first sign. Abreva starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells. Abreva acts on it. So you can too. Till he signed up for Unitedhealthcare Medicare advantage. bold music now, its like he has his own health entourage. He gets medicares largest healthcare network, a free gym membership, vision, dental and more. Theres so much to take advantage of. Cant wait till im 65. A few more chairs, please. Unitedhealthcare Medicare Advantage plans, including the only plans with the aarp name. Free dental care and eye exams, and free designer eyewear. Go ahead, take advantage. If you listen to the political it sounds like we have a failed society. But nothing could be further from the truth. Americans are compassionate and hardworking. We arent failing. Our politicians are failing. Thats why im running for president. To end the corporate takeover of the government. And give more power to the American People. Thats how well win healthcare, fair wages, and clean air and water as a right. Im tom steyer and i approve this message. I find it very disturbing that we have a president who is greatly expanded military spending, and i have to tell you i have voted against all of trumps military budgets. The question is, why now . Why not a month ago . Why not a month from now . And the Administration Simply cant keep its story straight. It points in all different directions. Let me make it clear. President trump has no authority to take us to a military conflict with iran, period. If youre serious about protecting our country, then that means you ask tough questions. For example, you ask questions about the consequence of an action on foreign soil before you go ahead and take it. And you get congress involved, because Congress Needs to be involved in matters of war and peace as a way for the American People to be involved in matters of war and peace. Some of the 2020 president ial candidates reacting over the weekend to President Trumps timing and motive in the killing of iranian general soleimani. Former mayor Pete Buttigieg will be our guest in just a few minutes, and joining us now, msnbc correspondent vaughn hilliard, traveling with the candidates as they campaign in iowa and New Hampshire. Also with us, former aide to the george w. Bush white house and state departments elise jordan and political reporter for the Washington Post and msnbc political analyst robert costa, the moderator of Washington Week on pbs. Good to have you all this morning. So let me start with you, robert costa, and ask you about the possibility of a response from congress to these attacks obviously, democrats are trying to move the limits of the president s warmaking powers in iran. And that actually would line up with the ideological preferences of a lot of republicans. What have you heard from the America First caucus, so to speak, in the Republican Party that, like trump, have been allergic to u. S. Involvement overseas . Joe, while House Democrats are moving to take action on war powers to try to get President Trump to move to congress, based on my conversations with Top Republicans the person to watch monday is senator rand paul of kentucky. Someone whos built a relationship with President Trump but a noninterventionist on Foreign Policy. Will he use his Political Capital to try to exert leverage in the u. S. Senate where republicans have control . Thats the looming question today. And let me ask you, elise jordan, where do republicans go . Where do the president s allies go when many of them are concerned that this president has no analytical construct undergirding his Foreign Policy, that this could have been as simple as the president responding to the grand ayatollahs taunt on twitter . Youre going to have other republicans, though, that this appeals to their neocon leanings and to their desire for a more hawkish Foreign Policy. So you see the split between the republicans who have been pushing for more restraint, like senator paul, and then republicans like Lindsey Graham that are pretty excited about more hawkish moves towards iran. So it makes you wonder what the lingering influence of john bolton and then youve got secretary pompeo within the administration on donald trump given that he loved a dman camp that he wasnt going to get us in anymore wars and push comes to shove and donald trump shows he can react on impulse without any strategy seemingly in place. Well, there may be one which well talk about in a moment. A new poll shows a threeway tie for first place in iowa between senator Bernie Sanders, former Vice President joe biden and former mayor Pete Buttigieg, according to the latest cbs ugov poll, sanders, biden and buttigieg all tied at 23 in the early primary state. Senator wElizabeth Warren follos and Amy Klobuchar tops out the rind five up two. Meanwhile in New Hampshire sanders and biden are statistically tied. Sanders leads with 27 of support. Up seven points since november. Biden follows with 25 . Up three. Both sit within the polls over a fivepoint margin of error. Warren now sits at 18 , down 13 points. Buttigieg has 13 , down three, and klobuchar has 7 , up four since november. Some candidates on the move up, vaughn. Exactly. I think the question, look, were 28 days way way from the iowa caucus and looking at Foreign Policy never name add top priority among democratic voters. Even on the campaign trail. Just this last week alone the question hardly has come up to these candidates and, yes, joe biden, former chairman of the senate Foreign Relations committee who Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg questioned his early iraq war vote. What you are seeing on the democratic side is a coherent message. One, largely putting their finger up in the air because of a lack of understanding where the Trump Administrations Foreign Policy itself is. Look, inauguration is 12 months away from now, and you go back. Even back in october when the Trump Administration decided to pull troops out of northern syria. Even Bernie Sanders condemned those accesses saying the u. S. Decided to abandon its allies. Looking at this polling youre seeing joe biden continue to hold on that large support. Pull up the poll there, looking from cbs and that poll yesterday, voters are asked, who do you think has the best chance essentially to beat donald trump . The folks said that 87 of democratic primary voters think joe biden could beat donald trump. Looking at the rest of the numbers, theres a significant dropoff. What youve continued to see over the last year is the top priority for democrats is beating donald trump. Theres a second poll here. So you see in iowa, an incredibly large part of the democratic elech threat thinking joe biden can beat donald trump. You see there among the folks that say these candidates are top voice, 49 named joe biden top choice say enthusiastic about supporting him where you see on the contrary 67 folks that say Bernie Sanders top choice, enthusiastic. You see Bernie Sanders leading in New Hampshire, tied essentially in iowa. What you see out of a Bernie Sanders candidacy is one that goes not only among folks that like Elizabeth Warren, but if you plook look at polling, seco choice is Bernie Sanders. Bring up andrew. Andrew minerd, met him at a Pete Buttigieg event in portsmouth, New Hampshire. We talked there and he was undecided between Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders. Yesterday said he are you going with . I planned one month ago to go with Bernie Sanders. A lot of folks bring to down to Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. Then the Pete Buttigieg or joe biden wing, but andrew, he was on top of this and said they are both bold and fearless and exercise discipline and fairness in judgment. What well see over the next month is folks trying to get down to what is a very open field. And vaughn, weve heard from so many democratic operatives is, youve got to keep your eye on Elizabeth Warren in iowa because she has such a strong organization, but then look at her numbers and it really has been such a slide. What are you seeing on the ground when it comes to Enthusiasm Holding for Elizabeth Warren at all . I think that with Elizabeth Warren, suz blazedale from Marshall Town marshalltown, iowa. She says Elizabeth Warren is her top pick. The question, shes not confident she can win. I asked Elizabeth Warren this last week and said what do you tell folks like sue . Folks around the country you are their top pick, how do you actually beat President Trump . She said, people didnt think barack obama was electable or that donald trump was electable. Shes been in the race more than a year. 28 days left. Reality, folks like sue are not convinced of that right now. John heilemann, i look at numbers out of iowa and New Hampshire, and correct me if im wrong, please do, it seems to me that joe biden is, if these number was to hold, and were less than a month out and theyre not going to hold obviously, but biden would be the big winner here, because hes Holding Serve in iowa and New Hampshire. Two place where is he was like third and fourth not so long ago and could still end third and fourth, but if he finishes first or second or a close second, what we dont see in these two polls is what comes next, and that is, of course, South Carolina and nevada, but more importantly, super tuesday, where hes going to gain a lot of support from black voters that Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and mayor pete just arent going to get. Right. Well see, joe. One of the things thats a big question for joe biden is down the path, his ability financially, although he had a good Fourth Quarter to compete in the big, huge, multistate tuesdays. The three of them that play out in march where a vast number of democratic delegates will get al low gated. As you know, the schedule this year after South Carolina on the last saturday of february super tuesday is just three days later and its, though, the biggest delegate trove of the entire competition. One question facing all the candidates, ones in the top tier who has the money to be able to be running in the early states, also putting money into those big states like california and texas down the line. One place where biden has a disadvantage, but i totally agree about one really important thing. Which is we are now in 2020. Welcome to it. After a year of watching joe biden demonstrate a lot of flaws in this candidacy. A lot of flaws in his performance, what we saw getting through this year, he also demonstrated and extraordinary amount of resilience. I dont think theres anybody in iowa, where i spent a good amount of time who thinks the biden operation is anything as strong as the buttigieg or warren or booker operation in iowa. To your point, on the other hand if joe biden manages to fish first or second in iowa hes really the only candidate in this field who could runned table, bounce out of iowa, finish first or second in New Hampshire and then because of his strength in these more diverse states like nevada and principally South Carolina, hes the only one who could not could essentially come out of those first early states, the february states, with a giant head of steam heading into the states that are going to produce 70 or so of the democratic delegates in the month of march. So the fact that biden, who a month ago, two months ago, people on the ground in iowa said he could finish fourth or fifth, the fact hes now in a three itway tie for first, if you believe the poll, and i would like to see more polling. Weve been very thin on the ground in polling in iowa and New Hampshire in the last month or so. Id like to see more polling to confirm this cbs ugov poll. If confirmed by other polling the fact biden could win iowa was unthinkable to people two months ago and puts him in incredibly strong position going into the iowa caucuses. I would like to see two or three more with biden bunched up at the top, but if the poll is accurate and if this is the way we move forward, bob costa, over the next month, obviously a positive for joe biden who really need to start calling teflon joe, because this is a guy thats turned in one bad debate performance after another. If i had a dollar for every person who told me the best day of joe bidens campaign would be his first, and it would be all downhill from there, why id have almost as much money as you, bob. So biden biden, despite the fact he was seen as a frontrunner, biden has oddly enough outperformed the expectations of the washington Political Class. Thought he was too old, too tired. He was too bumbling, and he was too weak, and all of those debates except for, of course, the last one. But, joe, i just spent the past week on the ground in iowa and winning over the washington Political Class may be only part of the battle for Vice President biden at this point. He has to contend with the other person whos sitting at the top of both of those polls you cited. Senator Bernie Sanders. Senator sanders has this grass roots base while its not an overwhelming majority or even close to it, its a hard base in iowa. Its a hard base in New Hampshire, and his team when i sat down with them, clearly put in a huge emphasis on the california primary and super tuesday. When i sat down with senator sanders a few days ago, front page of the Washington Post, he wasnt taking on senator warren or mayor buttigieg. He was going right for vp biden saying in iraq many in the Political Class may think this helps biden because hes sianed and Foreign Policy, sanders kept coming back to his own opposition of intervention in iraq in the early 2000s said bidens vote for intervention makes it impossible for him to generate enthusiastic among new liberal voters. Could be the fault line because of the demonstration with iran. The antiwar block epitomized by sanders and others and hawkish intervention now against President Trumps policy, but still known as more hawkish. That seems to be a new emerging story line in this democratic race. You know, Jonathan Lemire, seems that joe biden is benefiting from a field thats splitting up a lot of the same, the same, very progressive, very white, educated voter, not only in the northeast but across the country, and so you have bernie, elizabeth, mayor pete, all of these other candidates splitting up the same vote. I just dont know, and forgive me for sounding like a broken record, i dont know that Bernie Sanders is ever going to sell in the black churches of South Carolina, or georgia, or illinois. You know . Or in chicago. Or, you pick the industrial state. Is bernie ever going to sell there . Hes hes in his mid to late 70s. Hes been in american politics for 25, 30 years and theres still no evidence he can walk into a black church and win votes and if youre a republican, thats aokay. But if you are a democrat and want to win the democratic nomination, i just dont see the pathway forward, unless you can do that and, of course that applies to Elizabeth Warren and mayor pete as well. Uhhuh. Thats right. A number of candidates in the democratic field who really struggled to garner any sort of minority support. Ben smith of Buzzfeed News was on the show, a keen observer, wondered ifs air strike, iran and National Security become as primary focus of this campaign, went so far as saying thats the day Bernie Sanders became the democratic nominee. See if. Plays 0 ut that way. Joe bidens strength is as strong as John Heilemann, his resiliency. A lot of shaky debate performances and, yes, bottoms out, a late crash in iowa or New Hampshire and there is one more debate to go before votes are cast, he could fall down. So much of his case is the idea of electability. If he suddenly were to finish third or fourth in one or both of those states, we could see some of those supporters in the south who have stayed with him to this point maybe abandon him say, maybe he cant win. I might start shopping around. If hes able to hang near the top, then he goes in to super tuesday in a great strength, a position of strength. If it fractures, the other thing looming, of course, the unknown. What Michael Bloombergs money has to do with this. You cant turn on the Television Without seeing his ads, including televised Football Games over the weekend. Bloomberg has set up shop in super tuesday for months, blankets ads there, who knows what happens next . Looking for a potentially very long, arduous campaign. Richard haass, on the politics of the iran situation i wonder if biden can be seen really as having trumps number . On being able to really articulate the damage hes doing to our nations supremacy and stability, even yesterday was saying, this is a guy who seems to be unmoored. The more the walls close in on this guy, the thing i worry about him the most is doing something irrational. Maybe getting us into a war. Does biden have trumps number in terms of why he is doing what hes doing in iran . And is, perhaps, he the best to articulate that . My short answer is probably yes. He gave a good statement the other day in response to the strike on soleimani and he obviously has by far the most Foreign Policy experience of everybody. Id say he, but everybody, though, also faces a little bit of a dilemma, because a lot of americans are going to say, well, its good that we killed this guy. Hess was a bad guy. How do you thread the needle of saying that in, this was a warranted attack, even a if strategically created a lot of questions . For a lot of democrats thats a challenge and obviously the historical thing. Up to now, invisible in the debates. How does that play out given 2003 and for most democrats this is not the issue that gets them up. Indeed, quite a debate with the one left if rather than discussing medicare for all for two hours we actually started discussing the iran strike and its repercussions. A fundamentally different context and, sure, joe biden by far has the most knowledge, has the most experience. What i dont know is how that intersects with where the democratic voters are, but that could become now, i defer to the people around the table, the pros on this, not me but become as new variable in the democratic race. Joe, isnt it like appealing to those in the middle . Those who might be on the fence about trump . I mean, joe biden articulating that this president might do Something Like this in order to sort of garner votes. They may see through that. Too early to tell. I certainly know obviously those who support Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren will be the most likely to oppose joe biden, because of what happened in 2003 and beyond, but it is far too early to tell how the killing of soleimani is going to impact this race. I suspect the democrats are going to be so close to each other between now and the early contests, that it wont have that much of an impact, but certainly will have an impact in the general election for americans who want to see how the next president is going to respond to the chaos in the middle east. Richard haass, thank you for being with us. Vaughn, thank you so much as well. And bob costa, got to ask, what are you working on this week . This first very eventful week of 2020 . Dont forget about Speaker Pelosi not only dealing with the war powers issue but deciding when this week to hand over the articles of impeachment to the senate. Majority leader mcconnell continues to say he wont really negotiate, and in any significant fashion with House Democrats. So what does she exert from the senate gop at all is an issue to watch this week as 2020 unfolds. What Jonathan Lemire said about super tuesday. Keep an eye on super tuesday even as everyone scrambling in des moines. Iowa is important but super tuesday could decide the nomination. I agree and i agree, too, that those dismissing Michael Bloombergs impact on this race on super tuesday. Right. When few other candidates are going to have the money to advertise in california, texas, and across those states, theyre going to award 40 of the delegates, theyre whistling past a political graveyard. Nobody knows for sure what the impact will be but i suspect much more than people are thinking right now. Up next, Pete Buttigieg is no longer the mayor of south bend, indiana, but as we know, hes got his eye on another job. The president ial candidate joins the conversation, next on morning joe. Will be a massac. We need to keep moving come on [ suspenseful music playing ] welcome back to morning joe. It is 24 past the hour. Joining us now, democratic president ial candidate former mayor Pete Buttigieg of south bend, indiana. Also with us for this conversation, the host of msnbcs politics nation and president of the National Action network, reverend al sharpton. Good to have you all onboard today. So mayor pete, well start with your take on the killing of soleimani and what can and should be the way forward dealing with the fact that iran has made it clear it will respond. Theres no question theyre going to respond. There are lots of questions about how, but we have some questions to ask of our own president. Look, there is no question that soleimani had american blood on his hands, that he was a bad actor in the region, but if there is anything that we have learned in the last 20 years about the middle east, its that taking out a bad guy is not necessarily a good idea, and what weve seen here is, no evidence that theres been proper consultation with congress, and more importantly and more dangerously, no evidence that theyve really thought about the consequences. Right now in my mind, with the troops moving to the middle east, and having known what its like to be on the inside of one of those airplanes you need to be able to trust that everybody up your chain of command has thought through whats ahead, and were just not seeing a lot of indications of that. You know, already certain things are happening. Including the fact that it is even less likely that Irans Nuclear ambitions can be controlled. We have a suspension in our counterisis operations and evidence that we are moving towards a scenario where well be expelled from iraq. So if they were thinking about this in terms of the 3d chess it is and not checkers, weve not seen evidence of why they felt this was the only or best decision. David ignatius. Mr. Mayor, i want to ask you about one of the issues weve been discussing this morning on the show, and that is, the possibility that the iranians mistook President Trumps relative restraint in not shooting down, responding to the shootdown of a u. S. Drone in june as a sign of weakness. So i want to put it to you directly. If you were president and the iranians had shot down an american surveillance drone in june, as they did, what would your response have been . Would you have taken proportionate action . There would have needed to be some response, but if i were president we wouldnt be here to begin with. Remember, this started with withdrawal in the jb pocpoa. Alarming yesterday when mike pompeo suggested the war, anded is were at war or implied it, he said the war began when the nuclear deal began. Nothing could be further from the truth. That was the beginning of a chain of moves and countermoves escalations and destabilization that has brought us to this point. We never should have been at the point that were at right now, but even so, even with the tit for tat actions and continued maligned activities, even the secretary of state and the administration have apparently backed off or muddled any claim this was really necessary to prevent attack, or even that it had the effect of preventing whatever attacks were under way. Mr. Mayor, the president returned to washington last night facing, of course, the fallout from the strike, but also a looming impeachment trial which could start as soon as next week. Do you think those two things are linked . You wondered why now . Havent present add good case. Is it because hes facing impeachment . It is tough to know what going on in the president s mind. I do know in our minds we have to do two things as citizens and country. One, constitution baseds on the law, fabts acts and law. Not that were expecting a lot from the gop, but we need to hold up that principle as a country. Meanwhile, we have to watch a process with iran by the way may unfold in unpredictable or drawnout ways. People picture, were at war. You think of tanks rolling down streets and conventional conflict. Something could happen today. Something could happen weeks from now and it may be a series of bank shots. Were going to have to be on guard as a country for all kinds of direct and indirect effects that could play out over weeks or months and meanwhile have an election on our haunnds to deci what our future will bes this president has never been shy about mixing foreign issues with domestic policy but we have to do something, politics, Party Politics has to stop at the waters edge and should have nothing to do with issues of war and peace. As you just suggested we dont know what the state of play will be between america and iran by the time january 2020 comes around. A lot of field before then and now and could be in a hot car, thing hot war and things could simmer down. Foreign policy, whiplash of Obama Administration on climate or nuclear deal or other things had a policy more or less in line with conventional policy, bipartisan Foreign Policy, consensus, sometimes a little to the left than what george w. Bush had done but donald trump came in and thrown up the checkers board in the air. Right. On iran, whats the strategic objective . If youre president january 2021, what are you trying to do walking in the door . Along with north korea, one of the most dangerous countries in the world. Right. Whats your goal walking in the door, heres where we got to get to with iran and how ill get us there. We wont be friends overnight. Our objective security American Security interests. Our primary responsibility. A what does that mean jp a dangerous regime becoming less danger by the way why the nuclear deal was so important and doing whatever we can to contain activities causing harm and destabilization across the middle east. Ive got to say, im glad that we are talking more about Foreign Policy. Although im not glad were in this situation. I got to tell you, being on the campaign trail, much more than you would expect, this is on voters minds, even before what happened with iran. You go to iowa, they tell you to make sure you know a lot about corn and soybeans and other issues that are particular to the state, same in the other early states were visiting, but every state i visit just as often as i hear backyard questions i hear questions about americas role in the world. How well keep america safe, about ow relationship with allies and whether its, how well handle the middle east and iran or just more broadly. This is the time for us to talk about and decide what this countrys leadership role around the world really is and ought to be for our interests and for our values. Mayor pete, weve had some concerns on this show obviously over the past three years about the president s interpretati s of his article 2 powerses. I found it interesting you said the president confronted soleimani with congress. When president of the United States will you have to consult with congress if you have a known terrorist in military sights you may not get back in military sights the next two or three years . Wooer not talking about a scenario out of the show 24 going to the president for an order, wait, i got to get all members of congress in the room. Not talking about that. You give a coquell branch of government a heads up, and you respect cons stewart processes and authorities. As commander in chief i will do whatever is necessary in order to keep the country safe. That is so what would you do in this position . Lets say you decided that soleimani or another known terrorist, somebody that the United States government had identified as a terrorist was in military sights and you may not get the opportunity for another two or three years to take a critical target out. What would you have done in the president s position, if you had decided that you needed to move forward with a strike . Right. So in a scenario where there is no alternative, but to strike, or that is the best alternative, you give congress a heads up. It may be before. It may be during. And it may be immediately after, but you dont surprise the United States congress, and more importantly, that heads up to congress is to congress as a body, not to certain members who agree with you politically. The idea of the gang of eight is that it by its very shape, very structure, the fact the gang of eight is democratic and republican leaders, it embodies that idea. The Party Politics stops at the waters edge. You inform congress and then if theres an actual war power situation, you dont notify congress by tweet. There is a reason why we respect this coequal branch of government and by the way, right now in addition to the formal interactions with leadership that ought to take place its worth mentioning there are a lot of newer faces in congress with a lot of professional expertise. National security profs who have run for and entered congress who used to work these issues professionally. Like Elissa Slotkin and andy kim. A lot congress has to offer throughout its ranks, but as a matters railroad for the body and involvement of the American People you give leadership the heads up. Look, part of the problem with the country, in my view, why weve found ourselves in endless war is that the American People have not been involved in decisions about war and peace. One of the reasons why ive proposed that in the future, if i ever had to go to congress for an authorization to use force, something i hope would never happen, but if we do, there ought to be a threeyear sunset so that if we really need to stay, you have to go back to congress and have that conversation. The American People need to participate in these decisions, and by the way, lets be honest. This is not just something to complain about white houses doing. Congress has been all too happy to step away from these responsibilities because theyre tough. Members of military have the courage to go overseas, those elected should have courage enough to make decisions on this. Talk about mayor pete, reverend, as if he werent here for a minute or two, and then you can grill him with whatever questions you want to grill him with. We were talking about Bernie Sanders do well and, of course, mayor pete doing well in the early polls in iowa, in New Hampshire. I brought up the question whether any of these candidates from what i called the bill bradley side of the party, or the Upper East Side wing of the party, are going to be able to convert over enough black voters in the churches of South Carolina, georgia, mississippi, chicago, l. A. I mean, just, we can go down the list. Its such a critical part of the democratic party. Why do you think mayor pete had trouble converting black voters to his cause . And how does he, how does he make that move after New Hampshire as he goes down to South Carolina . Well, i think that when mayor pete announced, i felt that he had little to no chance, slim to no chance and slim was out of town at the time, but i as things have developed, he has picked up some support. Ive been watching the reaction of many people i respect, mehl mcmorris and a civil rights activist from way back and others that have come onboard but its still not enough. I think whats impressed some people, Frederick Douglass plan dealing with economic as well as social equality, and i think that its going to be interesting that a lot of people do not understand South Carolina, which is the first test of real black votes, many of them are military families. So how he deals with iran and the other candidates deal with iran is also going to be significant to the black vote in South Carolina. Weve got to stop seeing blacks as one dimensional. Theres a large military family that, a family percentage in the black vote in South Carolina. Right. So now you can pretend like slim is there and ask him a question. Go for it let me ask you, in light of what you have said about how you would have handled this kind of iran situation, and many of us raising doubts that there was imminent danger, how shooting and killeding one man, a bad man, all of a sudden disassembled an imminent threat . What happened to the rest of the threat . Why wouldnt this other general continue . Would you, if you were to be president , bring america back to the Iraq Nuclear Accord that president obama had negotiated . Well, yes. Whats left of it. We need to figure out if theres a way to reconstruct. The Iran Nuclear Deal as we know it is gone. But the objective of keeping iran from Getting Nuclear Weapons has never been more important. The first letter in the jcpoa, a goal towards keeping iran from Nuclear Weaponss that has to be priority but even harder a year from now to reach that priority. Its still important. Just because it didnt solve every problem doesnt mean it didnt solve or address an important problem. Even this administration. Even the Trump Administration was certifying early on it was working. Yes, denuclearizing or delaying Nuclear Achievements in iran will remain a National Security priority on my watch because the last thing a place as volatile and dangerous at the middle east needs, the last thing they need over there is more Nuclear Weapons. Mr. Mayor, i guess i would followup with that and ask, what would be your position on the ongoing u. S. Relationship with iraq . How would you deal with that as president , and what kind of troop presence would you want to have . What kind of involvement Going Forward this many years after the 2003 invasion . Well, i have no interest in keeping or adding a ground troop presence in iraq. I dont believe we should have invaded in the first place. Now, though, that relationship is an important one, and seeing the Iraqi Parliament vote to expel the United States is just one example of how our situation got even more complicated as a result of these actions. Remember, one of the big ambitions that soleimani had in life, he may wind up helping to achieve in his death which is to consolidate irans control and influence in iraq. Why does all of this matter . Isis and terrorism. We need to make sure that america is safe. That is our only real interest worthy of any kind of consideration of military force, and that doesnt have to require big engagements of ground troops. It does, though, become a lot easier if we have a strong reship with a capable Iraqi Government able to ensure that things like isis dont grow and get worse on iraqi soil. That is obviously, its take an step backwards as have all of our counterisis operations in the last few days. So mayor pete, how are you feeling . Hows iowa going . Are you guaranteeing like joe willie namath, guaranteeing a win in iowa . A guy who won the super bowl when you werent even alive. Tell you about it later. Are you guaranteeing a win in iowa . What im doing is working my heart out as my team is making sure we have a good result and i think we will. We were in iowa before and after the Christmas Holiday and we saw big crowds coming out in the cities and Population Centers like youd expect but a lot of rural areas. A lot of those obama to trump switching counties that we talk about so offer. Seeing people coming out of the woodwork, and a lot of people will come to me at the end of the event, come on the rope line and say, im one of those future, former republicans that you like to talk about. This is a message that is reaching a lot of different kinds of people who want to see change. Im not tricking them into thinking im conservative. Im telling them that this is our one chance to end a Trump White House that is as disgusting to a lot of people on the other side of the aisle and to their values as it is to us. Joe biden supported the iraq war in 2003. George w. Bush and dick cheneys iraq war. Can he be trusted and manncomma in chief . Ill let him speak to that. I have a different judgment. I was not in the senate at the time but opposed to that invasion, and i think that those who were have obviously been vindicated by history. But shouldnt voters take a look at joe bidens decisionmaking . Him supporting a war that neither you nor barack obama sported in 2003 . Absolutely. Look, when you run for office your record is fair game and your judgment on important issues can be derived based on your record. Look, the 21st century is going to require original thinking about what it takes to keep america safe. Were going into a time when were dealing not only with conventional military threats and things like the rise of competitors around the world like china, which is not a military adversary and hopefully never will be but is absolutely a National Security challenge, and were seeing things like right. Cybersecurity issues. Stateless terrorism, threats of global pandemics. The National Security picture in the years ahead is going to require a whole new level of thinking. A new framework. Right. And the kind of judgment thats ready to learn from the lesz s lessons of the past and look to the future. I know you have to go. One quick question about Bernie Sanders a man youre tied with according to the cbs ugov poll in iowa. Bernie sanders medicare for all plan, critics say will take away private Health Insurance from 165 million americans. Is that a reckless policy . And is that a dangerous scheme that americans just cant afford to take on . I think throwing the switch and kicking that Many Americans off their plans is a mistake, but more than that, its not necessary. Isreckless, though . Is it reckless . Id say say. We can achieve the goal of University Health care organically. The plan i put forward is, if you agree that that public plan will be the best one, which you would have to believe in order to be for any medicare for all scenario, if you think its the best one let americans choose. Why dictate to americans what plan they should be on . And also why dictate a timeline to americans . If this public plan we can create is going to be the best one and i believe it will, then lets let americans choose it on their own time. Then if there are issues we need to learn, we will find out in the course of that path instead of finding out the hard way. This is a huge part of American Life. This is a huge part of the american economy. And weve got a responsibility to make sure that every step we take creates more security, more affordability, and more benefit for americans. And by the way, i know that because theres been more controversy around it, this question of coverage has been dominating the health care conversation, but weve got to talk about Mental Health, Prescription Drug prices. One nmore area the house did th right thing and Mitch Mcconnells senate is blocking it. I dont know how Many Americans are aware of that. Rural Health Care Provider and racial inequity in hooutcomes. As this process moves into the next stage i hope we talk about all the Different Things a the stake making sure health care is afford and and available to every american. Former mayor Pete Buttigieg, thank you very much for being back on the show this morning. Thanks for having me. Reverend al sharpton, thank you as well. Greats to have you both. Still ahead why by the way, rev, i love your show on the weekends. Its so good. We base our weekends around your show. I mean, doing a great job. I mean, and its so timely now. Thank you so much for what you do. Thank you. Thank you. Absolutely. We love watching it. As i said, will hurd is standing by. You saw him there. Well ask the former undercover cia officer to explain why he believes it was a good move to kill irans top military commander, and before we go to break, im kicking off the week at know yoyourvalue. Com for starting out of your career. Talk about it the book earn it i cowrote. Put down the phone and disconnect from social media at work. Its tough. I struggled with it myself. Alex. Others well see your focus and commitment in the workplace. Joe thinks im a tad hypocritical. The irony, alex. You can cut it with a knife. Can you not . Mika talking about putting down the phone at work . Sorry. I missed that because she was texting meal while reading it. The tease. Okay. But heres the thing. To establish yourself, you must maintain your focus. Danielle bravo, millennial coauthor wrote this. I want to hear from you. Send your strategies to unplug at work. To knowyourvalues. Com. Stay focused. And limit yourself at home. It is critical. The top, i mean, the the top tech people in the world limit their own childrens use of devices when at home. This is a Mental Health issue as well. For sure. Boy, read read this. Were going to delve into that as well at noyourvalue. Com. Well be right back. K. For all out confidence. Depend® silhouette™ briefs feature maximum absorbency, beautiful colors and an improved fit for a sleek design and personal style. Lifes better when youre in it. Be there with depend®. This melting pot of impacted species. Everywhere is going to get touched by climate change. You may have gingivitis. When you brush, and the clock could be ticking towards bad breath, receding gums, and possibly. Tooth loss. Help turn back the clock on gingivitis with parodontax. Leave bleeding gums behind. Parodontax. Through the at t network, edgetoedge intelligence gives you the power to see every corner of your growing business. From finding out whats selling best. To managing your fleet. To collaborating remotely with your teams. Giving you a nice big edge over your competition. Thats the power of edgetoedge intelligence. President trump yesterday claimed that his tweets are sufficient notice to congress of any possible u. S. Military strike against iran. Trump tweeted, quote, these media posts will serve as notification to the United States congress that should iran strike any u. S. Person or target, the United States will quickly, fully strike back and perhaps in a disproportionate manner. Such legal notice is not required but is given, nevertheless. Joining us now, member of the house intelligence and appropriations committees, republican congressman will hurd of texas. And congressman, David Ignatius has the first question for you. David. Congressman, i want to ask you as a distinguished former cia officer, about two judgments that your former colleagues made in recent years. First, the question came up more than once about whether it made sense to take Qasem Soleimani, the Quds Force Commander killer, off the battlefield. And repeatedly, were reliably told, the analysts said as one put it to me, the juice wasnt worth the squeeze. We wouldnt get enough out of it to be confident it was a good idea. And then, second, on the question of maximum economic pressure, the analyst said thats not going to push iran toward negotiation. Its probably going to push em toward more hardline policies. So i want to ask you, were were your colleagues right in the basic judgments that they made warning about the consequences of these actions . Well, david, those are some colleagues that believe that. There are other colleagues that believe the opposite. And and i do believe taking Qasem Soleimani off the battlefield was a good move. He was the head of the most dangerous, wellequipped, terrorist organization in the entire world. And the fact that he thought that nothing was going to ever happen to him, which means he flew into the Baghdad Airport not because he was transiting there to go to barbados with his family. He was there in order to work with his proxies to kill more americans and to kill more of our allies. And taking someone of this significance off the battlefield is a good move. Theres going to be repercussions. And his replacement is going to be looking over his shoulder, as will all the other folks within the irgc, the iranian military. The second the second question, david, again . Second question was whether maximum pressure effectively Economic Warfare against iran would backfire. Just strengthen the hardliners. Well, when the negotiations around around the jcpoa, what everybody refers to as iran deal, the reason the iranians came to the table was because of the economic sanctions that were in place there. One of the missing pieces of this maximum pressure is making sure that our european allies were on board with us. Now, that the iranians have said that they are going to enrich uranium, however they see fit, im hoping this is an opportunity for our european allies to join us, put those snapback sanctions in place and see if we can get the iranian government to change. But lets be lets be honest. The iranian government has been at war with us for almost 41 years. To think that theyre going to change overnight is impossible. And we need an International Coalition in order to show the ayatollahs that they have to change their behavior. And if they want to come into and become part of the International Community again, its real simple. Stop killing americans. Stop killing our allies. Stop killing your own people. They killed 1,500 people that were peacefully protesting back in in november. Stop lying about your Nuclear Weapons programs. And stop trying to influence the governments in places like yemen, iraq, lebanon. Do those things and and youll be welcomed back into the into the world community. Congressman, secretary of state mike pompeo was saying on all the sunday morning shows that we are safer now that soleimani is gone. Given the fact that President Trump plans to respond to any response forcefully and has said so in his tweets. And given the fact that iran has said they will respond. How does that make us safer . It doesnt make us any different than where we were before this attack. Oh, no, it actually is quite different. Weve got weve got iran ready to respond to their top general being taken out. Sure. And the president saying hes going to respond even more forcefully. That is a whole lot different than a week ago today before this happened. They tried to overrun our embassy. And what is the response to that . Do nothing . Thats what many of my colleagues are suggesting that we do. Or appease the iranian government. We should sit down with the iranian government after theyve taken out maritime civilian maritime shipping . After theyve taken out civilian energy infrastructure. After theyve killed 1,500 of their own people that were unarmed. After they tried to overrun our our embassy. And and youre suggesting that we should sit down and negotiate with folks that do this . This is actually, youre suggesting congressman, youre suggesting that youre suggesting that President Trump should have done something that several previous administrations had deemed too contentious, too dangerous to do in response to our ongoing relationship with iran which has, of course, been tense as it always has been. You are telling us we are safer today after the killing of soleimani . Because if you are, i would contend that thats not necessarily true. And secretary of state mike pompeo is trying to go ahead. The iranian government is is a danger and that he have been killing americans for a long time. And so to think that we would that that that they wouldnt be continuing to do that, regardless of what happened with soleimani, what i am saying is taking soleimani off the battlefield is a good thing. He was the head of the largest and most wellequipped terrorist organization in the world. This is what happens to terrorist organizations. And you cant hide behind a uniform of your country to prevent you from being treated like a terrorist. All right . He was a terrorist. The the events youre describing have happened since trump ripped up the iran deal. Trumps policy toward iran has now taken a dramatic turn toward the more dangerous. Iran is preparing to respond. We are not safer. Im staying on that topic. Are we safer . I would contend we are not. There is going to be more attacks. Iranians are going to do what the iranians have always done. And thats attack american forces. Attack our allies. Attack our interests. Right . The jcpoa did not necessarily make us safer. The jcpoa only addressed one aspect of the iranian regimes rogue behavior. The yes, we want to curtail their advancements in Nuclear Weapons. They also have conventional military. They also are the largest statesponsored terrorism. They are also working to to ferment discord in other countries around the region. The jcpoa only addressed one of those issues. It was one chapter in a larger book. And you gave up too much in order to get that one chapter. Right. So to say the iranians, they were continuing to support terrorist organizations when the jcpoa was in place. They lied during the negotiations of the jcpoa. The iranian government is not a reasonable, rational government. Right . And so so to say that they werent going to continue to escalate activities is just wrong. And, yes, we live in a dangerous world. And this is why we need to make sure that we get more of our allies together in order to deal with iran as an International Community. All right. Congressman will hurd, we do appreciate your coming on. Thank you very much. Coming up, congresswoman Elissa Slotkin served multiple tours in iraq. Now, she says the Trump Administration owes congress an answer about the iran strategy. Shell be our guest straight ahead on morning joe. We are back in one minute. We are back in one minute. Then i realized something was missing. Me. My symptoms were keeping me from being there. So, i talked to my doctor and learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of Crohns Disease after trying other medications. And the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. Humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. Serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. Before treatment, get tested for tb. Tell your doctor if youve been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if youve had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flulike symptoms or sores. Dont start humira if you have an infection. Be there for you, and them. Ask your gastroenterologist about humira. With humira, remission is possible. Hed go after a read what he said very closely. Weve made clear that the cost if they use proxy forces in the region will not just be borne by those proxies. Theyll be borne by iran and its leadership itself. Those are important things they need to put into its calculus. So that was secretary of state mike pompeo saying that the president didnt say hed go after a culture site. Well, reading what trump said very closely, the president , on saturday, tweeted. So its spelled out for you. Quote, let this serve as a warning that if iran strikes any americans or american assets, we have targeted 52 iranian sites representing the 52 american hostages taken by iran many years ago. Some, at a very high level and important to iran. The iranian culture and those targets and iran itself will be hit very fast and very hard. The usa wants no more threats. Talking to reporters last night while flying back to washington from his 17day vacation, the president was asked about his threat against irans cultural sites, which many experts say would actually constitute a war crime. And the president doubled down. Quote, theyre allowed to kill our people. Theyre allowed to torture and maim our people. Theyre allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people. And were not allowed to touch their cultural sites . It doesnt work that way. So heres where we stand on this monday, january 6th. Huge crowds are packing the streets of iran this morning for the funeral of general soleimani. The iranian general struck down on friday by a u. S. Drone. And for whom that country is promising revenge. Iran is also signaling a new push toward Nuclear Weapons. Tehran will no longer commit to limits on enrichment established in a 2015 agreement with global powers from which the Trump Administration withdrew. And in iraq, lawmakers are calling for the expulsion of u. S. Troops from the country. Something President Trump met with threats of sanctions against baghdad and a bill of billions of dollars. With us this morning, we have National Affairs analyst for nbc news John Heilemann. He is the cohost and executive producer of showtimes the circus. White house reporter for the associated press, Jonathan Lemire. President of the council on Foreign Relations, richard haas. Vice president for third ways National Security program and msnbc contributor, mika oyang. And columnist and associate editor for the Washington Post, David Ignatius. So, Jonathan Lemire, you were with the president yesterday. As he actually undercut his secretary of state, who seemed to scold the members of the media for suggesting that donald trump ever said the United States would target iranian cultural sites. The president then just admitted it, not only in tweets, but in front of you and the press corps. Tell us about it. Thats right, joe. I spent most of last week in palm beach covering the president during the end of his winter vacation. On our flight back from from florida to washington yesterday, aboard air force one, about a half hour left in the flight, the president called up the press pool to his cabinet at the front of the plane and proceeded to hold court. Touched on a number of matters but we pressed him on this in particular. Mika just read the quote. He basically contradicted what secretary pompeo said earlier in the day. He went on every single sunday morning show yesterday and really stressed that the United States would adhere to the law. Would not target cultural sites. And the president flat out went the other direction saying that, as you read, that, you know, if irans allowed to play by these rules, why cant we, too . This isnt how it works. And he would not take anything off the table when we raised this issue with him. He also, on the matter of iraq, earlier in the day, Iraqi Parliament voted to expel u. S. Forces from the country. Thats not a done deal. That may not happen. But he said, well, if theyre going to follow through with this, if this is something they really want and if they wont pay us billions of dollars for a joint airbase that the u. S. Helped build there in iraq, then the u. S. Would leave. And would impose crippling sanctions. He said theyd even be rougher than the ones we put on iran. Richard, i want to get to a wall street journal editorial that the paper wrote. The opinion page over the weekend. And it sounded every bit as celebratory as when the United States invaded iraq in 2003 or when they captured and killed Saddam Hussein. Or when they killed gadhafi. And their conclusion is that if you question the wisdom of this strike, that somehow you loathe donald trump so much that you dont care that a very Malevolent Force was taken off the globe. In other words, soleimani was a deadly menace but the u. S. Should have done nothing about his his because iran could hit back . That is appeasement, not leadership, they say. And then they go, the wall street journal writes, democrats loathe mr. Trump so much and so blinded democrats that they cant even praise the demise of a murderous enemy. Well, you know, kim jongun is considered to be a murderous enemy. Do we does wall street journal, do other people think we recklessly go in and assassinate kim jongun . What about assad . Weve had chances, im sure, to assassinate assad. And so, richard, can you because i know you saw soleimani, like me, as an extraordinarily dangerous force across the middle east and an enemy of the United States of america. But just because youre concerned about the assassination of this iranian leader, does that mean that you loathe donald trump so much that you cant see straight . Look, joe. Throughout history, weve been up against any number of figures who we loathed and who targeted americans. It doesnt mean that taking them out or trying to overthrow regimes we we we dont like is the way makes sense for American Foreign policy. I think youve just always got to ask yourself even if you gain in the narrow by getting rid of an individual, do you gain in the large . And when i look at the middle east, i dont understand how we benefit from increasing the degree of conflict and violence in that part of the world. Making ourselves, as well as our friends, much more vulnerable. And then taking a step back. I dont understand how this is good for the United States. Even this administration, lets just judge it by what it says. It says the principal challenges facing the United States are no longer in the middle east. In part, because weve reached a degree of energy selfsufficiency. But theyre in asia, with china, with north korea. Others would say in europe with russia. So how does sending thousands of american troops in the middle east, and by the way, theyre so busy now protecting themselves they cant fight terrorists. How does that leave us safer . How does that make strategic sense . So, you know, people like me look at this. And they take a step back and they say, yeah, you know, i understand the logic of going after somebody like soleimani in the abstract. But in reality, is the United States safer . Does this contribute to our our global strategic position . And i would simply say, on balance, absolutely not. We have been mired in the middle east now for the best part of two decades. This administration, as well as the previous one, were dialing that down. This now dials it up dramatically in a way that, again, were going to be far more vulnerable there and far less able to advance our interests around the world. And arguably, also far more vulnerable at home. And i suspect donald trump still has no idea how much this is going to dial up conflict in the middle east because in that interview we played you of him talking to you hugh hewitt on friday, he didnt even know who soleimani was. He misidentified him as a kurd after hugh hewitt was trying to lead him that direction. David ignatius, you and i spoke, it seemed daily for a very long time about the Iranian Nuclear deal. I was opposed to it. You you are a newsman. You stay down the middle. I think you called it a cosmic a cosmic bet. A cosmic gamble. But there are a lot of us who opposed the Iranian Nuclear deal, who after the deal was done, said, well, weve transferred the money. The deals in place. It holds them in check for 15 years. Europes going to stay shoulder to shoulder with the iranians anyway. Us pulling out, at this point, doesnt seem to make a lot of sense. But now, we find ourselves in a place where the iranians had committed to 15 years of a nuclear freeze. And that just went away over the weekend. They are their Nuclear Program has started back up in full. Joe, as you say, the iranians have announced theyre suspending cooperation with this agreement. This goes to the basic question that secretary pompeo raised or asserted. That were safer now because of the actions in killing general soleimani. And the suspension of cooperation with the Nuclear Agreement is one aspect of how were not safer. But there are others that may prove more important. We have had to stop our operations against isis. A a battle against a vicious terrorist group that was sustained through two administrations. The announcement came over the weekend. Thats over for now. Reason . We simply dont have enough assets. Enough Surveillance Drones and other overhead assets to protect our forces everywhere. And also conduct this operation. Our relationship with iraq, a crucial Building Block of a more stable region, appears to be a kind of casualty. Collateral damage of this operation. The iraqi Prime Minister, whos been a supporter of the u. S. , essentially led the Parliament Vote to move toward pushing us out. And then trump, in a classic moment of of misreaction, the thunder that he would sanction iraq harder than hed sanction iran. Its a way if he wanted to ensure somebody in that part of the world would not be willing to compromise, youd make a Statement Like that. And and finally, were now in a position where our leader our military leadership is basically hunkered down across the middle east waiting for what they fear are going to be attacks in multiple locations. Thats why the the the the demand for isr overhead surveillance assets is so enormous. They fear this could come in many places at once. So thats where we are after thursday night. And the terrible thing, joe, is that some things come at you by surprise. This was predicted over and over again. When the issue came up, what would be the consequences of killing soleimani . This has been rehearsed for ten years. And each time, the answer is the same. Youll end up with with fewer benefits and more risks. Same thing with the maximum pressure on iran on the nuclear deal. If you do this, it will not push them toward negotiations. It will it will stiffen their resistance to negotiations. Those two predictions by the intelligence analysts are being borne out before our eyes right now. Still ahead, more on the surreal scene aboard air force one as President Trump was watching sunday football while threatening iran with death and destruction. Youre watching morning joe. Well be right back. Managing type 2 diabetes . Dimitris on it. Eating right and getting those steps in . On it dimitri thinks hes doing all he can to manage his type 2 diabetes and heart disease, but is his treatment doing enough to lower his heart risk . [sfx glasses clanking. ] sorry. Maybe not. Jardiance can reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults who also have known heart disease. So it could help save your life from a heart attack or stroke. And it lowers a1c jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. Ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. A rare, but lifethreatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. Stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. Do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. Taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. Lower a1c and lower risk of a fatal heart attack . On it. With jardiance. Ask your doctor about jardiance. Depend® silhouette™ briefs feature maximum absorbency, with trusted protection for all out confidence. With jardiance. Beautiful colors and an improved fit for a sleek design and personal style. Lifes better when youre in it. Be there with depend®. honk i hear you sister. Thats why im partnering with cigna to remind you to go in for your annual checkup, and be open with your doctor about anything you feel physically and emotionally. But now cigna has a plan that can help everyone see stress differently. Just find a period of time to unwind. A location to destress. An activity to enjoy. Or the name of someone to talk to. To create a plan that works for you, visit cigna. Com mystressplan. Cigna. Together, all the way. The main military advisor to irans Supreme Leader tells cnn that tehran would retaliate directly against u. S. Military sites. The former defense minister said, quote, it might be argued that there could be proxy operations. We can say america, mr. Trump, has taken action directly against us so we take direct action against america. He said, quote, our reaction will be wise, well considered, and in time, with decisive deterrent effect. An added quote, the only thing that can end this period of war is for the americans to receive a blow that is equal to the blow they have inflicted. Afterward, they should not seek a new cycle. Wow. Miko oyang, lets go there. You know, there were some messages from Homeland Security that american citizens in america could be at risk. Who is really at risk now that this rock has been thrown into a wasps nest . Well, very certainly, american troops in the region are very much at risk. The iranians i think are trying to keep escalation within the military sphere. Executing soleimani was a very big escalatory step here. But he was a military target. And so they are going to respond in kind. I think for most americans, here in the United States, they are physically going to be okay. Iran has not demonstrated much ability to pull off kinetic attacks inside the United States. I m you may recall they tried to take out the saudi ambassador and that did not work well for them. So i think most americans will be fine. But its really important to remember that iran is a very capable cyberactor. And the attack that crippled the city of atlanta was iranian in origin. So you can expect that we might see cyberattacks against American Targets inside the United States. Jonathan lemire, it is interesting. Yesterday, both iranians and leader of hezbollah said our attacks will be on the United States military and not against the American People. And i i think it was the leader of hezbollah who even said attacking american civilians would only play into Donald Trumps hands. It seem, again, theyre going to choose their targets wisely and going to make sure that it doesnt empower donald trump politically. Right. And joe, to take you back inside the scene at air force one yesterday. Surreal moment in his there was an nfl football game. The seahawks and eagles were on the screen and at one moment, the president even mentioned kind of a dull game today while he was talking ab tout the possibility of retaliation. I posed the question as to what it would be like and he was almost accepting of it. He sort of shrugged and said if it happens, it happens. Then warned iran, were they to strike back, the u. S. Would hit even harder. So, John Heilemann, we also asked him about the intelligence that he received that allows him to justify this attack. And lets remember this is a president who time and again has cast doubt on the u. S. Intelligence agencies. Did not want to believe them with their conclusions about russias involvement in the 2016 election. Has even, you know, repeatedly of course questioned, you know, the intelligence that led to the 2003 war with iraq. So but he is now making this case. He notified congress via the war powers act. That this was justified. But does this president have enough credibility to make this case to both congress and the American Public . Well, i think the answer to that is no. In the sense that were kind of reached this moment, jonathan, i think where over the course of the last three years, we have sat and waited for this day in some sense. The day where the president would be confronted with a genuine Foreign Policy crisis. Basically, took three years. And now were here. In this case, its Foreign Policy crisis that was, in some part, in some measure, driven by iran. And some measure, driven by the president and his provocation their provocations, his counterprovocation, in this case. I think this is the thing we have all talked about. The moment would come when a president stands on the brink of the edge of war. Potentially leading the country into this kind of conflict. Its the moment when the reserves of the store of credibility ais most necessary. Partly because of all the things weve seen over the last three years but the fact that even the president s biggest fans acknowledge the fact that he is a pathological liar. We now have these running counters. 13,000 lies over the course of three years. Those eventually are going to take a toll. Theyre going to eventually have a piper will be paid. And i think this is the most where that could be the case because there are Something Like 50 of the American People who dont believe a word the president says about anything. About matters that are trivial. These are not matters that are trivial. Coming up, the house is pushing an effort to reassert Congressional Authority over war powers. That effort is being led by our next guest, congresswoman Elissa Slotkin. The michigan democrat joins the conversation straight ahead on morning joe. Introducing new Vicks Vapopatch easy to wear, with soothing vicks vapors for her, for you, for the whole family. New Vicks Vapopatch. Breathe easy. Apps except work. Rywhere. Why is that . Is it because people love filling out forms . Maybe they like checking with their supervisor to see how much Vacation Time they have. Or sending corporate their expense reports. Ill let you in on a little secret. They dont. By empowering employees to manage their own tasks, paycom frees you to focus on the business of business. To learn more, visit paycom. Com of course id love to take an informal poll. I used to be a little cranky. Dealing with our finances really haunted me. Thankfully, i got quickbooks, and a live bookkeepers helping customize it for our business. live bookkeeper youre all set up janine great hey you got the burnt marshmallow out delivery man he slimed me. janine tissue . vo get set up right with a live bookkeeper with intuit quickbooks. The easy way to a happier business. You always want to be able to for your patients. F get them out of pain, get them out of pain fast. We have a new product out there sensodyne rapid relief. If you use it on monday, by thursday, youll be enjoying that Chocolate Ice Cream again. They can start it, and 3 days later, i know that theyre going to have the results they were looking for. Some things are too important to do yourself. Get customized security with 24 7 monitoring from xfinity home. Awarded the best professionally installed system by cnet. Simple. Easy. Awesome. Call, click or visit a store today. Why are you convinced if there is an imminent operational attack getting put together against american interest, why are you convinced taking out soleimani has done anything to stop it . We would have been culpably negligent had we not taken this action. American people would have said we werent doing the right thing. President trump is it that imminent . Is what the attacks he was putting together so imneminent d so big, it would have been seen as that kind of negligence . Made the right decision. Youve seen some of it out in the public. The death of american december 27th. The president made the right decision. So was the justification in that hes been this destabilizing force in the region for so long . Or was the justification this imminent threat . Chuck, its never one thing. The American People are smart too. Its never one moment. Its never one instance. Its a collective. Its a full Situational Awareness of richk. When you say the attacks were imminent. How imminent were they . Talking about days . Talking about weeks . If youre an american in the region, days and weeks, this is not something thats relevant. We have to prepare. We have to be ready. And we took a bad guy off the battlefield. Secretary of state mike pompeo appearing on all five sunday morning shows yesterday. Meanwhile, the Washington Post citing u. S. Officials reports pompeo spoke to trump multiple times every day last week. After the attack on the u. S. Embassy in baghdad. And that pompeo, along with Vice President mike pence, urged him to kill soleimani. On december 29th, the post reports pompeo, defense secretary mark esper, and chairman of the joint chiefs, traveled to maralago where the two defense officials presented possible responses to iranian aggression. Including the option of killing soleimani. The report says trumps decision came as a surprise and a shock to some officials briefed on his decision. Given the pentagons longstanding concerns about escalation and the president s aversion to using military force against iran. John heilemann, an official in the middle east told me the night of the Soleimani Killing, that he at least took comfort by the fact that pompeo was a grownup that would be in the room. It ends up, according to the reports over the past 24 hours, that it was that, quote, grownup, that actually pushed donald trump to this act of brinkmanship on iran. Right. And yes, it does appear to be that that appears to be the case, joe. And that piece of reporting i think is now pretty consistent across multiple outlets with wellsourced reporters. So i think we we can sort of take that to the bank at this point. I do think, to go back to a theme that you raised in the first block this morning, which is all of us needing to be not to fall into the trap of amnesia and try to be historically aware. You think back to the gulf to the iraq war. And and there are no perfect precedents here but in the same way, there were these arguments made. The kinds of arguments being made now about soleimani that were made about Saddam Hussein back in 20022003. You have this cadre of advisors around donald trump who are very much like the neocons around george w. Bush who had the agenda coming into the administration of trying to find a way to get Saddam Hussein out of power. And and took 9 11 as a an unjustified, in that case, excuse to move on iraq. You have, i think, in this case, a similar kind of consistency. If theres one thing mike pompeo has been known for long before he came secretary of state, long before the cia, long before he became associated with donald trump, was his hawkishness on iran. This is the kind of move that mike pompeo has favored for a long time. And, again, we dont want to it is the case. Soleimani, bad guy. I have not heard very Many Democrats who have not been willing to acknowledge that the world is better off without soleimani in it. At the same time, the question of why now . The question Richard Haass and David Ignatius are raising are out there and i do think one has to look at this cadre of advisors around donald trump who have been looking for an excuse to make this kind of a hawkish move against iran for a long time. Saw the opportunity here with the attack on the on the embassy in baghdad and said, lets go. And donald trump was, i think for largely emotional reasons, again, based on the reporting weve been reading. Emotional reasons was pushed into a position that he would never ever have imagined advocating or pursuing when he was the president ial candidate. Coming up, Harvey Weinsteins criminal trial is set to begin today in manhattan. Well talk to the pulitzer prizewinning journalist whose reporting helped lead to the rest of this disgraced producer. Morning joe is back in a moment. Were reporters from the New York Times. This melting pot of impacted species. Everywhere is going to get touched by climate change. Trumpand total disaster. Mplete let obamacare implode. Nurse these wild attacks on healthcare hurt the patients i care for. Ive been a nurse in new york for thirty years. I know the difference leadership can make because i saw what Mike Bloomberg did as mayor. Vo mayor bloomberg helped lower the number of uninsured by 40 , covering 700,000 more new yorkers, Life Expectancy increased. He helped expand Health Coverage to 200,000 more kids and upgraded pediatric care infant mortality rates dropped to record lows. And as mayor, Mike Bloomberg always championed Reproductive Health for women. So when you hear Mike Bloomberg on health care. Mrb this is america. We can certainly afford to make sure that everybody that needs to see a doctor can see a doctor, everybody that needs medicines to stay healthy can get those medicines. Nurse you should know, he did it as mayor, hell get it done as president. Mrb im Mike Bloomberg and i approve this message. What are you doing back there, junior . Since were obviously lost, im rescheduling my Xfinity Customer Service appointment. Ah, relax. I got this. Which gps are you using anyway . A Little Something called instinct. Been using it for years. Yeah, thats what im afraid of. He knows exactly where were going. My whole body is a compass. Oh boy. The my account app makes todays Xfinity Customer Service simple, easy, awesome. Not my thing. Joining us now, member of the Armed Services and Homeland Security committee, democratic congresswoman Elissa Slotkin of michigan. She previously served as a middle east analyst for the cia. And also, served as an acting assistant secretary of defense for interNational Security affairs where she oversaw middle east policy, among other regions. Also, with us journalist and resident at Georgetown University school of foreign service, elise. So congresswoman slotkin, have we gotten any sense of what the grounds were for this killing of soleimani . Yeah. I mean, we have seen a war powers notification come over to the hill. And that, you know, does lay out a case for why this happened and sort of notifying congress. But i think we wont really understand until we get a full briefing from the administration. So i know thats something were working on. But, in particular, on this issue of kind of the imminent threats that the secretary of state keeps talking about, we need to understand the underlying intelligence that was there just to get a sense of the threat. Explain how you are going to lead a vote to limitl the president s power to make war against iran. Yeah. I thats not how i would phrase it. To be honest with you, if were going to go to war, right, and this is certainly something this cycle of escalation is something that could lead us to war. Then shouldnt we have a conversation about that in congress and as a country . And im married to an army officer. He was in for 30 years. My stepdaughter is in the army. My soninlaws in the army. Shouldnt we have a conversation if were going to slide into a conflict like this . I just think its, a, in the constitution. And, b, something that we owe the military if were going to slide into this. Talk act yobout your concern though, of congress. Basically 535 secretaries of state limiting a commander in chiefs ability to make decisions in the moment. When he or she, democratic or republican, may have an opportunity to take out a target that that commanderinchief believes is an enemy of the United States. Yeah. First of all, i mean, every president. This one, past, future, all have the right to selfdefense. Always. They dont have to go to congress to deal with that. If we are under imminent threat, we should go. And thats exactly why i want to know the basis of that, right . I have no problem with that. What i have a problem with is the larger conversation of where this leads. And weve already started to see events turning that were largely predictable. That could, you know, inadvertently lead us into a conflict. So shouldnt we have a conversation about that . Im not trying to be secretary of state. Im trying to understand if we, as a nation, should be having a conversation if we want to get into another protracted war in the middle east. I dont think theres anything wrong with having that conversation. As a former middle east an l analyst, you understand that situation certainly as well as anybody on capitol hill. If you had the opportunity to take out soleimani this past weekend, would you have taken it . Well, listen. I mean, i worked in and on iraq for my entire professional career in the executive branch. 14 years. I did three tours over there working under president bush and then under president obama. You cant work on the shia militias and not have soleimani in your mind constantly. The man was extremely dangerous. He had a real problem with the United States. And he oversaw a strategy that was aimed at forcing us out of the iraq and causing chaos in the region. He is not a good guy. And also also, he was responsible for, as you know very well, the killing of hundreds of american soldiers during the iraq war. So again, if you if you had the opportunity that President Trump and his advisors had this past weekend, would you have taken it . So we had those conversations in both the bush and the Obama Administration. And what always kept us from moving forward and having that sort of conversation at a serious level was the expected response. That we knew that taking out the equivalent of a fourstar general on the iranian side would take us into a new zone. And we had better thought through the strategy and tit for tat that would come after in order to avoid a protracted war. And every time we had that conversation, we always stopped because we didnt feel that getting into another entrenched war in the middle east was good for our Strategic Interests. So regardless of whose fault it was for the escalation that we had with iran and im talking about just to make sure nobody watching thinks that im blaming the United States of america for irans actions over the you know, over the past 40 years. But Donald Trumps failure to respond to a u. S. Drone being shot down. Donald trumps failure to respond to attacks on our allies oil facilities. Donald trumps failure, time and time again, to show the iranians that he was actually going to draw a red line in the sand may have led to a point where he was he was faced with either having to stand up to the iranians once and for all or not. Given the facts that the iranians did all of those things, plus had a big impact on the storming of the u. S. Embassy in iraq. With that information in front of you, would you have then decided we have to take this guy out . I just dont think that any one incident, any one event, unless im missing a massive piece of intelligence which im open to reading and understanding. I just dont think that any one incident should have led to a move that was this significant without thinking through a fuller strategy. And i think like one of your gek ge guests said, i mean, we have had the shia militias targeting us a long time. Before 2011, it was a regular thing. I ran for duck and cover bunkers constant constantly, right, during a different era. So its not like we havent been under threat from these guys. But when you are the president of the United States, the job is to balance our Strategic Interests in a bigger way and thats what i havent been educated on. Im open minded but so far, i have not seen that strategic look. Do do you trust the lets just say the fluid explanations that this administration has given you . The secretary of state first saying that there was an imminent attack against u. S. Interests coming and then backing off yesterday and and suggesting that perhaps he was responding to a longerterm threat that soleimani had posed and would pose in the future. This is the thing. I mean, just if theres an imminent threat, if people were truly at risk in sort of an immediate way, just bring that to us. Im very open to hearing about that. But im not going to take it from his talking points on a talk show. I want him to come to congress and explain it to us. Hes done that in the past with an intel officer. You know, we should have the director of the cia sitting next to him so that we can hear the independent Intelligence Community assessment of what actually went on and precipitated this. Congresswoman, its Jonathan Lemire. I want to follow up on that exact point. The idea of not just trusting the judgment of the president but the people around him. Do you have confidence right now in the secretary of state, mike pompeo, defense secretary esper, National Security advisor obrien whos only been on the job a short time, do you think the president is being well served by his advisors . And should the American People have faith in his judgment and the credibility of the intelligence . Well, listen. You know, for me, from what ive heard, although, you know, thats only from the media. From what i have heard, this i of going after soleimani was not a particularly thoroughly vetted option. And, to me, thats the job of the seniormost people around him is to vet these ideas before they put something in front of the president of the United States and ask him to approve or disapprove. And, frankly, the president should ask that of his advisors and expect it. So i i dont get the impression that thats what happened. That thorough vetting. Certainly, folks at the pentagon and the agency were surprised by this, which doesnt reflect a process of real vetting. And that concerns me. And i think people forget that when it comes to Something Like erratic behavior, you know, if you want to be erratic on something here at home, you can do that. When youre erratic on the National Security stage, that has real demonstrable impact, right . If they shoot down one of our unmanned drones and we say, thank you, iran, for not responding. And then a couple months later, take out a fourstar, basically equivalent fourstar general, that is confusing to anyone trying to understand what were doing. And it has demonstrable threats and impact on us and our strategic interest. So i think you should expect thorough vetting from his advisors. And im not sure, im not convinced he got it. All right. Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin. Thank you very, very much for being on this morning. Elise, youve been talking to your sources since this all went down. There are reports that secretary of state mike pompeo was really pushing this. Whats the thinking behind that . And who else was . I mean, look. There are a lot of hawks in the administration on iran. Certainly, secretary pompeo is among them. But i really think it was the storming of the embassy, according to my sources, that was really the last straw for him. You remember its not just about his, you know, anger towards iran. Secretary pompeo, when he was a congressman, was really one of the toughest critics of secretary clinton after the secretary Hilary Clinton after the benghazi attack. And when you see a benghazistyle storming of the u. S. Embassy in baghdad, you know, months before pompeo is expected to leave his post to possibly run for the senate in his home state of kansas, thats not a very good look for secretary pompeo. Im not saying thats why he pushed the strike but certainly that was in his mind in terms of the kind of optics. Because, you know, youve seen soleimani, the iranians, going after the u. S. For the last six months. And there hasnt been any action till now. I think it was the storming of that embassy that really fueled the anger in this dming. Administration. Is there anyone else who was pushing it . I mean, i wonder what the Strategic Thinking is moving forward. I think the problem is there is no Strategic Thinking. I mean, the iranians completely are are driving this. Theyve been driving this for the last six months with all the attacks. You remember about a year and a half ago, secretary pompeo was talking about going after iranian proxies in iraq for hitting the consulate in bozra. All of a sudden, the u. S. Made this i dont think it was very strategic but it was a major escalation. And now, they possibly could get kicked out of iraq. U. S. Forces. Thats something the iranians have been looking for for some time. I do think they miscalculated in terms of they didnt expect that the u. S. Would take out general soleimani. But certainly, the iranians have the advantage now with the response. The u. S. Is really bracing. They dont know where its going to be. But the iranians have networks across the middle east. In syria. In lebanon. In yemen. Throughout the whole region. And the u. S. Now, once again, is on the back foot. The gulf states are very nervous. The Defense Deputy defense minister of saudi arabia, the brother of mohammad bin salman is on his way to washington today. Gulf states really concerned and coordinating about next steps. So, elise, lets both play devils advocate here. Obviously, a lot of people concerned about the coming iranian attack. But what would you say to the fact that iran has been back on its heels for quite some time . That the sanctions actually have ravaged the economy in iran. There has been unrest, which of course has disappeared for the short while. But will most likely come back. And part of that unrest came from a population who was suffering economically, who was tired, much like donald trump supporters, tired of its country extending itself across the region and the world. Is it possible that after the loss of this singular man, this singular force in irans militt actually the iranians are going to have to be actually more cautious in whatever response they make moving forward . Well, its absolutely true, joe, that the regime has been kind of a little unstable for some time, and you have seen protests against the regime in iran, and youve seen antiiranian protest in iraq. The problem is now, and i think that the Economic Situation was really what caused the iranians to lash out against the United States, particularly over the last six months, but i think now you see the regime with nothing left to lose. The economy as you said is really in the toilet. Theyve lost one of their major generals. There could be some of the opposition think that this might be a time to strike. But the security institutions in iran are still intact. Now with the killing of soleimani, even if there was a Little Division on how to approach the United States, there isnt any more. Some moderates like rowhani and foreign minister sareef, the question is where is it going, how does the u. S. Get this on a more productive footing with iran. Otherwise youre kind of headed towards armageddon. Elise labott, thank you very much for being on this morning. Up next, the latest on the growing and Deadly Wildfires in australia. Plus, Harvey Weinstein goes on trial for sex crimes today. Investigative reporter megan touhy joins us. Were back in 90 seconds. The wh. I cant see. I cant see you need to trust me. Jump everything your trip needs, for everyone you love. Expedia. For everyone you love. Do you recall, not long ago we would walk on the sidewalk all around the wind blows we would only hold on to let go blow a kiss into the sun we need someone to lean on blow a kiss into the sun we needed somebody to lean on all we need is someone to lean on diarrhea . Pepto diarrhea to the rescue. Its 3x concentrated liquid formula coats and kills bacteria to relieve diarrhea. The leading competitor only treats symptoms it does nothing to kill the bacteria. Treat diarrhea at its source with pepto diarrhea. 53 past the hour. An update now on the wildfires in australia. 150 fires are still active. 64 of them uncontrolled according to the rural fire service. The wildfires which have been burning since september have scorched 12 million acres, destroyed 2,000 homes, claimed 24 lives, and an estimated 480 million animals have been killed, according to university of sydney. New zealand which is a thousand miles from australia saw effects of the fires which turned skies there orange, in what one auckland resident called proper apocalyptic. Now to Harvey Weinsteins criminal trial which is set to begin today in new york city. It comes more than two years after New York Times and the new yorker broke the story on decades of allegations of Sexual Harassment, assault, and rape against Harvey Weinstein. In all, more than 80 women accused weinstein of sexual misconduct. The focus of this weeks trial is a lot narrower. The producer faces felony charges from raping one woman in 2013, performing a forceable sex act on another woman in 2006. Weinstein faces top charge of predatory Sexual Assault and faces life in prison. He has pled not guilty to charges, denies ever having nonconsensual sex. Joining us now, Investigative Reporter for New York Times and msnbc contributor megan touhy. She and jodie cantress exposed the decades long behavior of weinstein. Shes coauthor of the book she said. Breaking the Sexual Harassment story that helped ignite a movement. Megan, obviously a lot at steak for Harvey Weinstein and his victims. Curious with stakes as high as they are, possible life imprisonment if convicted, any efforts by the weinstein legal team to strike a deal with the state . There have been no indications that there was ever going to be any deal. This was basically a case headed to criminal trial from the beginning, and there have been interesting developments along the way, that i think will surprise people. People around the world will be watching this trial. Harvey weinstein helped ignite the me too movement, and i think many people are hoping and expecting the legal system will deliver criminal justice for him and his accusers. But this is a very narrow case. Charges are based on only two women, and the prosecution has suffered some setbacks along the way. Right. It is a narrow case, and also rightly because were talking about a criminal conviction the standard of proof is extraordinarily high, much higher than say an investigative reporting piece. Is there a concern among victims that while weinstein may be guilty, certainly in their eyes, in the eyes of most people, because you have the reasonable doubt standard that maybe the state cant prove that case and he gets to leave a free man who sort of flashes the victory sign and says to everybody, see, all of this has been much ado about nothing. I have been slandered. Thats what his lawyers intend to do. They argued, they said Harvey Weinstein has been guilty of inappropriate behavior, he may have offended women and harassed them. You know, Sexual Harassment is illegal under civil law but not a crime. Harvey weinsteins lawyers have argued that he has not committed any sexual crimes. And they will be making that case in court. They have already produced emails that he exchanged with one of the alleged victims, the woman who was allegedly raped in 2013, emails show they had ongoing communication that appeared friendly, even romantic at times. Theyll make the argument that all of these encounters were actually consensual and that he is actually a victim of the me too movement gone too far. Because of all of the allegations in the press, all of the victims that have come forward, this case seems like such a slam dunk for the prosecution, but it isnt necessarily so just because it is so narrow. But they want a victory and other victims will be allowed to testify at the trial. Is there anything we can expect from that . I think youre making an important point. On one hand, the prosecution suffered some setbacks, they were forced to drop other charges when contradictory accounts came out, allegations of police misconduct. The chief detective in the case was ousted on allegations of police misconduct. In this twist, the prosecutors arent calling the main Police Officials to testify in this case, but on the other hand, they won a significant victory, and the judge allowed them to bring in the testimony of three victim, four victim witnesses. While the criminal charges are centered on two women, one of them still remains anonymous, theyre able to bring in four victim witnesses that will be able to testify to an alleged pattern of Sexual Assault. That was significant in that bill cosby trial. He was convicted the second time around. Megan touhy, we will be watching this. Thank you for your reporting. Thanks so much. John heilemann, good weekend but a bad weekend for jonathan la mere. The patriots lose. I have to say bad weekend at my household, too, new england spouse. In the end, successions, dominance, way more important than anything on the football field as far as i am concerned. Brian cox justly rewarded. Will brady return . Tom, i think he will. Not a guarantee, the fact that it is not a guarantee upsets me deeply. All right. That was pathetic. That does it for us. Stephan Stephan Stephanie rule. Thousands