the same outfits. putin is basically ruthless dictator barbie. >> all right. good morning. and welcome to "morning joe." it's wednesday, december 6th. we've got a lot to get to this morning, including donald trump's response to questions about his promise to use a possible second term to seek revenge and retribution. we'll show you what he said. plus, republican senator tommy tubervillle finally drops his hold on hundreds of military promotions. but he's trying to spin it as both sides not getting what they want. let that breathe. also ahead, the partisan fight over the senate's foreign aid package. one contentious issue is threaten to sink the bill. we'll have the very latest from capitol hill. along with joe, willie and me, we have the host of "way too early" jonathan lemire. congressional investigations reporter for the "washington post," jackie al mayny and white house editor for politico, sam stein. good to have you all with us this morning. our top story this hour, the israeli military now entered southern gaza's largest city. israeli forces clashed with hamas terrorists and fierce gun battles yesterday. officials described the fighting as the, quote, most intense day since the beginning of the ground operation. israel's widening air and ground offensive has displaced even more palestinians. the united nations estimates more than 80% of gaza's population has now been driven out of their homes since the start of the war. but israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu has no plans to stop the assault amid his vow to destroy hamas. yesterday, netanyahu said israel must retain open-ended security control over gaza after the war ends in order to ensure that territory remains demilitarized. he said, quote, no international force can be responsible for this. i'm not ready to close my eyes and accept any other arrangement. willie? meanwhile, president biden is blaming hamas for the end of the seven-day truce during a campaign event yesterday in boston, the president said the female survivors and witne to the october 7th attacks are now sharing accounts of, quote, unimaginable cruelty. added, quote, the world cannot just look away from what's going on. it's on all of us to forcefully condemn the sexual violence. bide then spoke about the hostages saying, quote, these are civiliawomen, mostly between the ages of 20 and 39. let me be crystal clear, hamas' refusal to release the remaining young women is what broke this deal and ended the pause in the fighting. so, joe, that's what the president campaign event up in boston, among many things he said, that we'll get into yesterday up there. but this is an issue. the sexual violence that has been pushed -- and it has to have been pushed because so many international organizations have ignored it. this is a central issue now as the president pushes and talks about what hamas is doing and has done to the israelis. >> well, and yet is something, jackie, for some reason, international organizations have not wanted to talk about, and yet the video evidence of unspeakable sexual abuse to -- >> torture. >> torture. sexual torture to israeli women, verified by nbc news. it just is beyond the pale. obviously very shocking that more international organizations are not coming out speaking clearly and strongly against it. and unequivocally, as well as some people on capitol hill. >> it is extremely confounding, especially to see, as you just noted, these progressive lawmakers over the weekend just pramila jie ya paul twist themselves into knots speaking unequivocally on the issue condemning something that is very clearly -- should be considered a war crime. and again, unequivocally condemned. it's hard to imagine how we've gotten to this sort of situation and environment where even saying that raping women as a tool of war is a controversial thing to say. >> yeah. and sam stein, the raping of women so much so that their pelvic bones were broken and killed. genital mutilation in the most unspeakable terms, i can't even -- we can't even talk about here on television this morning. it's so unspeakable. and then to the horror of the families after these just poor jewish women were just savaged in the most unimaginable way and paraded with the streets with cheering palestinians, cheering on them being dragged through the streets like meat. like cadavers. and their family members and jews worldwide seeing people celebrating the absolute savaging of jewish women is unspeakable. that's what international organizations and some progress i haves on capitol hill just can't see clear to speak out against in unequivocal terms. it's always yes, but. well, this happens in war. no, it really it doesn't happen. it doesn't happen in all wars. and this is, again, this is next-level violence against women. >> yeah. you know, when i -- when i initially heard sheryl sandberg speak out about it in a fairly viral video, calling for people to condemn the act of rape as a tool of war, i got to be honest, my initial thought is why does she need to say this? of course everyone will condemn it. it doesn't compute that there was a need to tell people to condemn it. and then of course, joe, to your point, you look around and, in fact, it hasn't been universally condemned or at least people have been equivocating when asked about it. and it's confounding. it should be the easiest thing in the world to say this is a morally repugnant and has no place in society and is against the -- or should be against the rules of war. but, you know, it's hard for me to actually explain what is happening here because it is so confounding. and i do understand what you're saying when you talk to people they want to say, well, it happens on both sides and, you know, this is a modern tool of warfare. the truth of the matter is you don't need to say that. you can just say this is wrong. this is wrong. it should be condemned. and move on with your life and feel good about it. >> well, it doesn't happen on both sides actually. >> this is a systematic strategy to go in and terrorize and traumatize and this was used as part of their goal to go in there and not just decimate people and kidnap people but also to rape women in front of their husbands, fathers and kids and to have gang rapes happening and to rape them to death. and one woman was shot while she was being raped. this is not just something that sort of happens along the way. this was -- i mean, they juiced themselves up with drugs and ran in there with the intent of doing that to women. >> and not only did that, it was a plan that they were going to savage these women and mutilate them, rape them to death -- >> so it felt a little ignored along the way. >> they were then going to video tape it so the whole world could see it and video tape these women being paraded around again through gaza while palestinians cheered wildly. again, treated these savaged women who were raped to death like -- again, like trophies. >> animals. >> yeah. the fact is, again, with all due respect to the congresswoman, this doesn't happen in all wars. maybe that's some moral equivocation that makes her sleep better at night. doesn't happen in wars. israelis aren't doing that to palestinian women. they are trying to kilter rorists that hide behind civilians. >> hospitals, schools. basements, under a hospital. >> americans -- if american troops -- and we actually had elise jordan talk about what -- in world war ii, what happened. american troops -- you would be executed if you did something like this. you would be executed. you would be tried and most likely put to death as elise was saying in world war ii. it doesn't happen all over the place. but -- >> but when they do, it's atrocities. there were definite atrocities in ukraine. we're not saying we have never seen this before. but what you saw in this attack on october 7th was a systematic effort to do this to women. and then for weeks to have women's organizations, the u.n., and others finally recognize it. that was the issue. >> the systematic -- >> we'll talk about this more. >> willie, it was systematic. it was planned. it was filmed. and it was distributed so the whole world could see this absolute barbaric behavior toward women. and there are still people who want to equivocate. >> yeah. not only explicitly in their planning documents, so we know that this was part of a strategy. but it's also on go pro. if you want to be a truther and pretend these things didn't happen on october 7th, shame on you. but we are hearing that equivocation -- i think, joe, probably amounts to a lot of people who think israel is bad generally and wrong here. and so everything that happens in this war they have to lump themselves on the other side. as we said many times, you can want a good life for the palestinian people. you want to respect their humanity, the civilians. you can think that israel is prosecuting the war wrong if that's your opinion. but, my god, if you can't say what happened on october 7th is inhumane and grotesque and wrong and bad, there's something wrong with you. so we'll come back to this war in just a moment. but let's also turn to ukraine because the aid that the united states has been providing for almost two years now is into question. republicans, republicans so far saying foreign aid is part of a national security bill. the bill also must include money for the southern border. yesterday senate democrats unveiled a $111 billion national serity package which includes foreign aid in measures targeting the border. majority leader chuck schumer said he would give republicans a vote on a republican-written border policy amendment if they vote todayn favor of opening debate on the foreign aid do it separately. the offer was rejected by his counterpart in the senate, republican mitch mcconnell. yesterday schumer warned his republican colleagues what is expected of them and what the republican party of old would think about it. >> if republicans want to bring up immigration right now, right the middle of trying to pass aid to ukraine and other issues, the onus is on them to present serious, bipartisan proposals that can get broad support from democrats. ronald reagan would be rolling in his grave, rolling in his grave, if he saw his own party let vladimir putin roll through europe. so once again, i urge my republican colleagues to think carefully about what's at stake with this week's vote. what we do now will reverberate across the world for years and decades to come. >> so jackie, take us inside the dynamics in the senate. the house is one thing obviously, but the senate, this braefing yesterday, the bipartisan briefing where the department of defense, department of state tried to prevail upon republicans to get the ukraine funding passed. if we don't fund them, they're going to lose the war, that putin will roll through ukraine. but they want attached to it, to this legislation, border protections, border security, money -- schumer as we heard there, we'll do that but let's do it separately. how is this going to play out? >> that is the fundamental issue here that democrats ultimately do not want to appropriate this money with border funding and republicans don't trust democrats enough, don't trust what senator schumer proposed there to do this separately because they don't think that it will ultimately get pushed through. and this is life with such slim majorities in both the senate and the house. where these two to three vote majorities, it makes it all but impossible to get things through this highly contentious and polarized environment. especially on these issues, immigration and foreign aid. specially when the republican party, the tides have clearly turned towards this more isolationist posture and overall foreign spending in general is becoming increasingly popular. the more and more administration and democratic lawmakers on the hill try to make the case that we should be dedicating more money towards ukraine, israel, et cetera, you know, in foreign funding for climate projects and really, you know, spending across the board, the more republicans are doubling down on their desire to with hold that money and then sort of redirect the attention to the lack of funding that the biden administration is throwing their weight behind when it comes to the border, which if you talk to any progressive, hispanic, congressional caucus groups, they simply don't believe that money will make any sort of difference on the border. that there is an inherent policy problem when it comes to immigration. and that just throwing resources, more border patrol, et cetera, is not going to make any kind of difference and is really just sort of a performative throwing some red meat at an issue to rile up the base ahead of a big election year. >> so, jonathan lemire, that may be what progressive lobbying groups think on capitol hill. that is not what independent voters, that is not what swing voters in wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania, georgia, arizona and nevada think. it's not even close to what they think. immigration is a massive issue and will be a massive issue in 2024 for these groups. maybe not the general electorate at large, but for these groups, this is going to be a significant issue. you go through any polling, you look through polls with independent voters in new hampshire and independent voters in all of these places, the border actually is -- because there's chaos there. and we have said barack obama and joe biden's administration, when they left, had the lowest number of illegal border crossings from mexico in 50 years. things have gotten worse through the last two administrations. so, i guess, i don't understand. tell me what the thinking is of democrats. i don't understand why democrats don't trade ukraine funding for strong border security. we've said it here before. if i were democrats, i would say, okay republicans, i see your border security bill and i raise you some. they have to go into this election showing independent, swing voters, disaffected republicans, let me say the states again in wisconsin, michigan, pennsylvania, georgia, arizona, nevada, let me add new hampshire to that. voters who want to see this white house and this democratic party doing something significant on border security. >> yeah. and those in the white house will say privately they recognize that border security and immigration writ large is a real political weakness for this president heading into his election year. there's a willingness to deal but there's a question of how much and what they want to be seen as doing. but now the republicans are -- some republican senators still want to make this happen but they seem to be at a real impasse right now. jackie, people i talk to on the hill last day or so, they feel like the votes aren't there. they're really not sure how this package is going to get done, we're going to barrel into the winter holidays, that recess, unable to provide aid to israel or ukraine, to come up with border security, none of it. i'm curious as to, a, what you think with your own count, but talk the role mitch mcconnell for so long was a champion, a real champion among republicans for ukraine aid but now seems to be somewhat diminished his ability to get a deal done. >> mcconnell has seen the writing on the wall and actually advised his members to vote against the package because he thinks that they need to take a stand and sort of take this show boat to show that they're not going to budge on border security. but the conversations that my colleagues and i have been having all week and actually really since last week is that we need to reckon with the fact that ukraine funding is probably not going to get done. even israel funding, which every single person in the u.s. congress is mostly behind. there are some discrepancies on how many conditions or assurances some people want. bernie sanders came out with that letter yesterday that called for the u.s. to take -- for biden to at least enforce currently existing u.s. laws when it comes to giving, appropriating that aid to israel in the way they're spending that, making sure they're not bombing civilians with u.s. bombs when -- as they continue their attack on gaza. but i doubt -- you heard gop members say this last week, that any of this is going to get done if anything does get done before christmas. you had max miller, one of the only jewish members in the house gop conference say last week that he was infuriated by this. that even in the case that something did ultimately come to the house floor in this very little time left before the christmas holiday, christmas recess, that speaker said there needs to be offsets when it comes to israel funding. that's not going to go through in the senate. so it is, you know, mcconnell and johnson are at odds with each other and it's reflective of the entire system and the way things are working in congress right now. >> what an absolute shock that the new speaker is once again a raging hypocrite, once again. on just about everything. i can't believe again read the bible, what, hypocrisy, lying it is constant. offsets. did he talk about offsets with donald trump -- >> january 6th. >> i know. that's what i'm saying. he lies about it through his teeth. i don't know. i haven't read that in the gospels. i haven't read that you can lie if you want to gain power. you can lie -- you know, it's a liz cheney talking about her conversations with mike johnson. you know this is wrong. you're constitutional arguments. yeah, i know it's wrong. i know there's no basis for what i'm doing. basically, i know i'm lying but i want to get close to donald trump. like the pursuit of power, he's actually become -- he's just like a tell evangelist, really is. jim and tammy fay baker 2023. and he's lying to republicans. he's lying to evangelicals. he's lying through his teeth. and now even on something as fall as offsets. we have to have off sets. despite the fact that donald trump and i raised the deficit and raised the national debt, more in four years than any president did for the first 220 years in american history. now, he wants offsets. it's so hypocritical. sam stein, though, i have a question. i asked about -- that's why this deal makes so much sense. i asked about the biden administration. why don't they do the deal on border security, be strong and tough, right? well, i'm wondering, do the republicans really want to go into 2024 being the party that allowed vladimir putin to complete his invasion of a sovereign country in europe? first time since hitler and 1941. does he really want to be -- do republicans really want to be that party? do they want to be the party that won't fund israel against hamas? that's how it's lining up. >> yeah. i mean, really comes down to what each party thinks is the potency of each issue, right? democrats recognize f you talk to them, that they have a vulnerability when it comes to migration at the southern border, border reform policies. in fact, our of thing indicates that the biden administration in particular is pressing hill democrats to get a deal. they both recognize that it is a logistical nightmare at the border. they're hearing from tons of democrats in municipalities as well as governors who say we are getting inundated with migrants being shipped up to us or making their way to us and also know that republicans will use this as an issue. on the flip side, joe, to your point, you have to wonder are there some republicans saying to themselves do we want to go into 2024 being the ones who voted down a package for ukraine and israeli aid? could that be used against us? i think it can. i mean, you would have to imagine in prior times that would be a vulnerability politically. all of which suggests that there might be opening for some sort of deal or paired down deal. but of course, everything is sort of like it's