willie, you look at the leads in the papers today, the major papers today. "the wall street journal" talking about the white house warning that funding for kyiv to run out in weeks. obviously, a desperate, desperate situation for those trying to stop a russian invasion here. the leads on "the times," also, their lead story, of course, about israel pushing further south into gaza and approaching another large city center and the growing concerns about a humanitarian crisis. and, of course, over here, something that there's more and more focus on, it's about how donald trump's second term could obviously create a much darker trump and, of course, willie, very few checks and balances. we'll be getting all of those things today. a lot of really important stories and a lot of ground to cover. >> yeah. we're also going to be joined by liz cheney in just about an hour from now, and she'll tell us about her warning, as well. she believes if donald trump is elected to the white house again, he may never leave. she'll explain that and also some new nuggets coming out of her book about the days and the weeks around january 6th. a busy morning ahead. >> absolutely. along with joe, willie, and me, we have the host of "way too early," white house bureau chief at "politico," jonathan lemire. editor of "the washington post," david ignatius is with us, as well. the israeli military appears to have begun its ground offensive in southern gaza. tan ks and armored personnel ar in the area. it sets the stage for what will likely be one of the biggest battles of the war in southern gaza's largest city. israeli officials believe the military leadership of hamas has been seeking shelter there. israeli defense forces have declined to comment specifically on these developments but say they are operating all over the gaza strip. air strikes were launched in the south over the weekend. the plan to invade the area has been met with stark warnings from u.s. officials to protect civilian lives. yesterday, gaza's two main internet service providers announced another near total blackout. officials say it was caused by a cut of the main fiber roots. service has started gradually returning this morning. >> david ignatius, of course, we have pictures in "the new york times." of course, an invasion into the south takes a humanitarian crisis that was already dire and obviously amplifies it. think of all the people who streamed, listened to the israelis, went from the north to the south. israelis cut gaza in half, began to work north of gaza, northern gaza, trying to root out the terrorist cells, trying to figure out where the hostages were. now, the population has been pushed to the southern half of gaza. now, the military exercises move forward there. it looks like a major risk for the very thing that the biden administration fears, and that is more civilian casualties at a high rate that we saw the first couple weeks of these battles. >> joe, the head of the international committee for the red cross, highly respected, spoke yesterday of an intolerable level of human suffering in gaza as this war moves forward. israel is tightening its control of southern gaza, just as it did in knot earn gaza in the first weeks of the war. i think their goal is to try to trap yahya sinwar, the head of hamas, in gaza operations, and, if possible, arrest or kill him. many israelis would treat that as victory in this war. but all the signs of attempts to control that territory, checkpoints being established on sal hadeen road, where i was two weeks ago, just a choke of people. i had a feeling reading the stories, as you may have, there was, for gazans, nowhere to run. they're being told to evacuate one place to go to other places. those places are under bombardment or may soon be. it is an impossible situation. u.s. officials, i think, are near a breaking point, but not there yet. a break with israel over this would be a fundamental change in policy. you had sharp warnings from kamala harris, from secretary austin and secretary blinken, but there's no break yet. the u.s. is still treading water on this, letting the israelis continue their attack. >> i suspect if we see images in the next few weeks like the images we've seen in the past few weeks, there will obviously be increased pressure and, i would suspect, even possibly a public break, demanding that civilian casualties be kept down. willie, for people who haven't been following this closely or haven't been following politics in the middle east closely, of course, these palestinian refugees in their own country, pushed from the north to the south, now 2 million people jammed in the south. israelis now telling them they need to go elsewhere because they have to root out hamas. hamas, of course, as we all know, they hide behind civilians. they hide underneath hospitals. they hide in schools. they hide in mosques. they hide in place where is they hope the most civilians will be killed when israel is trying to root them out. that said, this humanitarian crisis, of course, started because of hamas, but also amplified because egypt has shut off the border so the palestinians can't go into egypt and be safe until this war ends. >> it's been one of the questions we've been asking for over a month, what about egypt? why wouldn't they let refugees in the country the way poland welcomed refugees when that war started? they've been a conduit for humanitarian aid, of course, but in terms of refugees, not much to speak of. you're right, the civilians who have been told after october 7th, almost two months ago, to move south are now in a place where they're being attacked again because hamas puts themselves behind civilians in the south. israel is now saying the place we told you to go, leave there, too. hamas is there. we've got to get in there. if you're a civilian in gaza, it is a terrible predicament, but benjamin netanyahu has made no tt he is going to continue to prosecute this war and go after hamas, whatever that ans. this factors into how will the united states continue to fund this? aid is hanging in th balance as congressional republicans want policy changes and border spending as part of a national security supplemental package. sources tell nbc news bipartisan talks on border policy changes tied to the supplemental have broken down now. u.s. office of management and budget is warning without congressional action, the u.s. will run out of resources to help ukraine by the end of the year. the white house sounding the alarm about this, saying, if we want to stop vladimir putin, if we want to continue to help israel in its fight against hamas, we got to get this supplemental package through. over $100 billion now they're asking for. >> the office of management and budget notified leaders sunday night. we heard from national security adviser jake sullivan at the podium yesterday, saying the time is running out. by the end of the year, the u.s. will have run out of money to send to ukraine, and it'll leave them in a dire position. europe is still supporting ukraine, but there has been waning there, as well. the united states, of course, is the backbone of this alliance. president biden has really built it to support ukraine. if the u.s. is unable to continue to back them financially, that'll really hinder ukraine's ability to try to ward off russia's ongoing invasion. of course, it'd also change the perspective of the u.s. around the world. congress at least to this point isn't moving very fast. senator schumer is trying to get things going in the senate right now, but the house is worried this is bogged down. there's a sense that there's really not much progress from the last week or so. the winter holiday break is coming. if this spills into the new year, not only will the money have expired, but congress will be consumed with government spending fights, trying to keep the lights on in washington. there's alarm in the white house about what's next. the lead story in this morning's "new york times" is warning how a second term could unleash a darker trump. highlighting the former president's violent and authoritarian rhetoric on the 2024 campaign trail. theap notes that, as he runs for president again facing four crim prosecutions, mr. ump may seem more angry, desperate, and dangerous to american-style acyhan in his first term. but the throughline that emerges is far more long running. he has glorified political vie violence and spoken admiringly of autocrats for decades. an interview from three decades ago, trump spoke admirably of how china crushed democratic proteste in the square, and also praised saddam ssein, and also duterte, strongmen. in a hypothetical second trump administration, the forces that somewhat contained his autocratic tendencies in his first term, including some staffers, congressional republicans, and a partisan balance on the supreme court, ul all be weaker. as a result, mr. trump's and his advisors' more extreme policy plans and ideas for a second term would have a greater prospect of becoming reality. >> let's bring in now staff writer for "the atlantic" anne applebaum. her new piece, part of "the atlantic" special issue, outlining the dangers of a second potential term for donald trump. titled, "trump will abandon nato." thank you for being with us. "the new york times" lead written by charlie savage, jonathan swan, and maggie haberman, it is much like a piece that "the washington post" has recently written, and also what's happening with "the atlantic" this month. you, jeffrey goldberg, so many others, writing about the dangers of a second trump term. again, this is all lifted straight from, i believe it was your book in 2017. it appears your warnings are taking shape in the form of donald trump's plans for a second term. >> i think people are suddenly realizing trump is likely to be the republican candidate, and they're also realizing just about now that he is running on an explicitly anti-constitutional platform. he's running as someone who would overthrow the constitution, who would undermine it, who would, you know, undermine the american civil service, maybe the military. i think that's why you're suddenly seeing so many people writing about it. in fact, you know, your previous item, we're already having a taste of what a trump second term could look like. really, in this irresponsible battle for funding over ukraine. here is an ally we have been supporting bravely for the last, you know, 19 months. they are fighting on the ground. they're undermining the army of one of our important geopolitical rivals, russia. we're, you know, arguing in washington about whether or not to keep helping them? i mean, that's outrageous, but it's a taste of what could happen if trump were to win. in which case, he is very likely to say, "i don't care about europe. i don't care about nato. i'm leaving." >> so, anne, as you studied in your book, as you studied what orban did on the path to power, as you studied what law and justice party did on the path to power, i don't remember it even being as explicit. >> right. >> their threats against democracy in hungary and poland, even being as explicit as having a presidential candidate promising to terminate the constitution, execute generals that are insufficiently loyal, and ban television news networks that he doesn't like. again, in the campaign phase, this seems far more explicit, far more extreme than even what we saw in orban's rise and the law and justice's rise in poland. >> no, you're absolutely right. i mean, it's true that, in both of those cases, it was the second term. it was the second time of being in power when those political parties and leaders, you know, began to push back against the media, you know, change the constitution, change the courts. so in that sense, this is a parallel. you're right, this kind of language about, you know, attacking my enemies and describing them as vermin, you know, which is the kind of language that nazis used to describe their enemies and describe jews, you know, this isn't something you heard in central europe. it sounds much more like what you'd hear in russia or in one of the really severe autocracies around the world. it's not even -- it's not even the language of declining democracy elsewhere. >> anne, let's be specific on your piece about donald trump getting out of nato. first of all, how that would work. what does it look like for the it states to get out of nato? and the implications of that, given what we're livingough in ukraine, give president biden's efforts to strengthen nato, thated mbers, on the cusp of adding another still, getting 800 miles of new border up along russia with its latest member. what would it mean for the united states to withdraw from nato? what would it mean to the world? >> first of all, it is important to understand what nato is. you know, nato is an alliance based on a pretty open-ended treaty. you know, article 5, famous article 5 of the nato treaty, just says, "an attack on one member will be treated as an attack on all." it doesn't say what you have to do. there's no obligation to do anything. but it has created a psychological effect. the idea is that there is something like collective defense. the united states plus its european allies plus canada would come to one another's aid if attacked. it did happen once after 9/11. there was a declaration of article 5, and nato members came to u.s. aid in afghanistan. also what that means is that if trump were to be president, and if he were simply to say, "i don't believe in collective defense anymore. i don't care about europe," which he has said, by the way. he said, "i don't give a shit about nato to john bolton." he tried to leave the nato alliance when he were president before. if he were to say that and be backed up by his cabinet members, that's it. the problem of collective defense is gone. there would, of course, be a reaction. you know, the senate would fight back. former military chiefs, there might be political resistance to it. really, all he has to do is say it. if people don't believe he'd go to war for them anymore, why wouldn't russia say, "okay, if that's how it is, then, you know, why should we defend poland" -- sorry, the u.s. isn't going to defend poland if we attack the airports being used to bring in ukrainian aid. it'd simply create the impression that collective defense is gone. by the way, that'd have an impact in taiwan and south korea, as well. >> this is, again, as anne said, david ignatius, it's not the language of democracy in decline. this is language announcing the death of democracy when you talk about terminating the constitution, executing generals that are insufficiently loyal, banning news networks who you disagree with, and promising to jail political opponents. that's domestically. then internationally, donald trump -- >> this is the part he says out loud, by the way. >> he said this in the first term, giving the green light to vladimir putin, to xi, to kim jong-un. these are the three leaders he respects the most, praises the most. this is a complete reshaping of western style democracy, of jefferson democracy, madisonian democracy, however you want to do it. again, he's telling us right now, if he is elected, that will come to an end. >> joe, reading the articles that you described, one significant article was robert kagan's in "the washington post" over the weekend. it basically said, "we are on the road to dictatorship." what i found myself asking, what i'd ask my colleague, anne, is what americans, and, in particular, u.s. public officials should do about it. these warnings increasingly are specific and, i think, have to be taken seriously. that was the point of kagan's article. this is coming at us. we either act or we'll live with the consequences. you've thought a lot about this. you're one of the best writers on these issues of preserving democracy. what would be a list of things you think people should do now to prevent this disaster from happening? >> so there's a range of things depending on who you are. you know, if you're an ordinary person, you can join a civic organization. you can work on behalf of -- either on behalf of a republican candidate who would defeat trump or on behalf of the democratic party. you could involve yourself in local politics. you can -- you know, you can stop treating democracy as if it were sort of something you don't have to think about except once every four years. you can be involved in it every day. but think there are also some more specific things. the republican officials who understand trump, who worked with trump, his cabinet officers, you know, his national security advisors who know exactly how dangerous he is, should, you know, begin to campaign now. they should go around the country. they should speak as a group. they should say, "here's what the stakes are. here's what this man does." you know, clearly, the republican opposition should unite around one candidate. probably at this point, nikki haley. if nikki haley were to lose, she should think of running as a third-party candidate to split the vote. people need to begin to think seriously, how do we stop this? how do we prevent him from winning? how do we communicate the danger to the american people? >> right. >> of course, jonathan lemire, the problem now for those who want to push back against donald trump, in the republican primary, a split field. nikki haley, who is on the rise, but you have chris christie facing increasing pressure to get out of the race, to try to stop donald trump. of course, ron desantis, whose campaign has been seen lagging badly, also not facing as much pressure, but a one-on-one between nikki haley and donald trump is actually something that donald trump fears the most. i will say it, nikki haley nomination is something democrats fear the most. they do not want to run against nikki haley. so how does the white house sort through all of this? >> the timing of this conversation is such where the next republican debate is tomorrow night. just four republicans left on that stage. these debates have seemed irrelevant because of how far ahead trump is in the polls, but i think we should be watching christie and ramaswamy. they're in sort of a second tier. it's really about desantis and haley tomorrow night. can one really wound the other, where one, therefore, and right now haley would be the person with the momentum, would surge forward and become the clear trump alternative? maybe the field would begin to winnow. desantis is not going to get out before iowa and new hampshire, but it's been noted, the primary calendar for republicans, there's about a month between new hampshire and south carolina. that might be the time where we see the field shrink to just trump and one other opponent. maybe it's haley. maybe that crystallizes the chance. that might be the republican party's best chance to move away from trump. right now, these are wish casting. he is a massive, massive lead, and it seems far more likely, to anne's point just now, that even if haley were to be defeated and trump were to be the nominee, she wouldn't challenge him as a third-party candidate. she'd get in line behind him and maybe try to become his vice president. >> right, exactly. that's the problem there. the only one who is criticizing him full on is chris christie. "the atlantic's" anne applebaum, thank you very much. her piece part of the magazine's special issue on a potential trump second term is online now. still ahead on "morning joe," we'll take a look at new polling from younger voters on next year's presidential election. >> this is obviously a key group. >> yes. >> right now, it seems more split than they have been in the past. if donald trump is to be defeated, those younger voters are going to need to move toward joe biden and the democratic party over the next ye