Biden Buddy Scarborough Brags: Campaign 'Supremely Confident, Holding Four Aces'

On Thursday's Morning Joe, not content to boast about his insider status with the Biden campaign, Joe Scarborough disparaged his panelists for their inferior sources. Said Scarborough: "Just for people at home, it's important for them to kind of see what's behind the scenes. I have, for six months, since people have been freaking out about Biden's team. I'm telling you, every time I go in and talk to anybody that's running the campaign, the big part of the campaign. I don't know what they're telling you and what they're telling other people. They're like, they act like people that are holding four aces.  . . . They're supremely confident." Yes, Scarborough doesn't know what his colleagues are being told by the envelope lickers in the Biden campaign, but when Joe "goes in," he talks to the people running "the big part of the campaign." Impressive! In addition to letting us know that the Biden people are "supremely confident," and act like they're holding "four aces," Scarborough confided that the top campaign people "know something that I think a lot of us don't know." Joe Scarborough plays the super insider. Don't worry about Trump, folks, Team Biden is "supremely confident!" pic.twitter.com/JAokVcBmYg — Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) May 17, 2024 This sounds a lot like Scarborough trying to buck up the morale of Biden voters -- and donors -- in light of the recent New York Times/Siena poll showing Biden losing in five out of six swing states.  Yesterday, we noted Scarborough's frantic effort to tear down that poll, going so far as to claim that the Times intentionally rigged it against Biden in order to be able to write multiple clickbait stories on the results. Bonus Coverage: Morning Joe Airs Jimmy Fallon Imagining Trump Having To Get Parole Officer's Permission For Debate As is its wont, Morning Joe opened today's show with a clip from one of the liberal late-night hosts. In this case, it was Jimmy Fallon, imagining Trump accepting Biden's offer to debate "assuming it's okay with my parole officer."  That won raucous laughter from Fallon's audience, and presumably as well from most Morning Joe viewers.  But it amounts to an admission that the multiple trials entangling Trump, led by Democrat prosecutors, do indeed make campaigning difficult for him. Fallon might find that hilarious. But it could well elicit sympathy for Trump from many voters. We'll see who has the last laugh, Jimmy. Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 5/15/24 6:09 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: It's a dead heat now. Again, my reaction's not so much to the Times. And I'm dead serious here. It's to people who freak out disproportionately on the Times, and then the Times doing 15 stories on their poll. Fox will not do 15 stories on their Fox poll [which shows Trump leading Biden by one point.] Morning Consult won't. But it's become this cottage industry for people on the other side of the Chinese wall that Mara is not on. So she had nothing to do with this. Please, do not direct any comments or tweets to her. Just for people at home, and I, I, it's important for them to kind of see what's behind the scenes. I have, for six months, since people have been freaking out about Biden's team. I'm telling you, every time I go in and talk to anybody that's running the campaign, the big part of the campaign. I don't know what they're telling you and what they're telling other people. They're like, they act like people that are holding four aces.  [Imagining conversation between himself and confident Biden aides] Well what about this? Yeah, it's pretty bad. What about this? Yeah, yeah, well, that looks really tough. Yeah, boy, Trump. They really -- MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Is this a criticism or -- SCARBOROUGH: No! I'm telling you, they know something that I think a lot of us don't know. And they look at numbers and they see where things are going. They've had a theory of the case, that when people realize Donald Trump is going to be getting into the race, things are going to start gelling better for him.  They understand that you win politics by raising money and organizing on the ground. They understand Donald Trump's numbers are way down in every way in fundraising. And they'll [the Trump campaign] say, oh, we're gonna -- No they're not. They're not gonna -- they're never going to catch Joe Biden.  And as far as organization goes, we all know, anybody who's been involved in a political campaign, if you're tearing up, like, stakes in April and May, you're not gonna put them back down in July and August. Donald Trump is going to be pounded on the ground. The blocking and the tackling, the Biden people feel great about. And they have about a thousand clips of Donald Trump that, every day, they're like, which one are we going to use today? Boop. And it just makes him look horrible. JONATHAN LEMIRE: The Biden campaign -- SCARBOROUGH: They're supremely confident. LEMIRE: Yes. They are cognizant -- MIKA: Makes me nervous. LEMIRE: That it will be very close. They're confident, but they know it's gonna be tight.

CNN's Jennings Takes a Minute to Undo CNN's 24/7 Trump Trial Hype -- No Minds Will Change

Before we get to the substance of their dialogue, let's begin by observing that in introducing Scott Jennings on her CNN This Morning panel Tuesday, host Kasie Hunt described Jennings as a "conservative columnist." It said the same on screen.  Question: when's the last time Hunt or any CNN host introduced someone as a "liberal" columnist? Yeah, I can't think of such a time, either. Meanwhile, Kasie Hunt offered no identifiers for Elliot Williams (eight years serving President Obama), reporter Molly Ball (Nancy Pelosi apple-polisher) or "Republican" Sarah Matthews (who really wants Trump to lose). Conservative people are fine with being called conservative. What's ridiculous is that everyone who agrees with CNN is presented as nonpartisan or objective. Okay, on to the discussion. In the context of the Stormy Daniels hush money trial, Hunt challenged Jennings: "It's reminding everyone of what we went through as a country when he was President of the United States. Uh, and: I'm just kind of curious. How do you feel about defending him with these allegations out there?" Translation: aren't you ashamed of defending this reprobate? This, from the Clinton News Network that defended all of Bill's #MeToo antics. Jennings, over the course of the discussion, made the obvious point: that this trial reveals nothing new about Trump, and is therefore unlikely to change many votes. As he facetiously put put it in conclusion: "October of 2016. No one knew that Donald Trump had had sex with lots of women out there, some of whom were not his wife. No one could have possibly known!" JENNINGS (on Republicans): But they would say things like, this case should have never been brought. This is a terrible court. This prosecutor is a partisan hack -- whatever. And they would also say this: I don't care about sex paperwork, but I do care about that the president has driven as to an inflationary crisis and is going wobbly on our ally, Israel. You're going to see Republicans all over the country make that argument. And I think whether he is convicted, whether the jury is on or whether he's acquitted, I think this will move the needle for virtually no one. This amounted to a small dissent from the 24/7 Trump-trial hype on CNN, including the dramatic readings of court transcripts.  Note: Jennings in turn challenged Hunt to describe what the crime is that Trump is alleged to have committed. Hunt had to admit, "I understand that you are technically correct," i.e., that no one can describe a crime other than a paperwork snafu. Note: As to Hunt saying that the trial is "reminding everyone of what we went through as a country when he was President of the United States," millions of Americans are thinking, Yeah, reminds me that when Trump was president, I could afford to fill my gas tank and shop for groceries, and we weren't involved in foreign wars. Here's the transcript. CNN This Morning 5/14/24 6:03 am EDT KASIE HUNT: Our panel's here: former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams, Molly Ball, senior political correspondent at at the Wall Street Journal, conservative columnist Scott Jennings, and Sarah Matthews, [disgruntled] former deputy White House press secretary under President Trump. Welcome all! . . .  Scott Jennings, this is a guy that, you know, he's the presumptive Republican nominee for president. It's [the Stormy Daniels hush money trial], it's reminding everyone of, kind of, what we went through as a country when he was President of the United States. And I'm just kind curious: how do you feel about defending him with these allegations out there? SCOTT JENNINGS: Well, nothing new has happened here. I think what you're seeing, such a muted reaction from people, is because it's already priced in, it's baked into his candidacy, it's baked into who he is. Nothing -- we know all of this. And I don't have to, no Republican really has to defend anyone's personal behavior to make this -- HUNT: Well, there are a bunch of Republicans standing up behind him. JENNINGS: Well, but they're not necessarily defending his personal behavior. But they would say things like, this case should have never been brought. This is a terrible court. This prosecutor is a partisan hack: whatever. And they would also say this: I don't care about sex paperwork, but I do care about that the president has driven as to an inflationary crisis and is going wobbly on our ally, Israel. You're going to see Republicans all over the country make that argument. And I think whether he is convicted, whether the jury is on or whether he's acquitted, I think this will move the needle for virtually no one. SARAH MATTHEWS: You don't think if he's convicted, it's not going to make a difference at at all? I mean, there was a CNN poll that showed that 24% of Trump backers said that if there is a conviction, that they would reconsider their support. I will admit, that doesn't mean that they are going to change their support, but they would reconsider. And I mean, on an election that's going to be on the margins, then, I think you would be worried about every vote. JENNINGS: If you are someone who -- I'm trying to envision the voter who would go to the polls, say, you know, I was going to vote for Donald Trump, but then I found out he got the paperwork wrong because he had sex with somebody. I don't know who that person is. I don't know who that person is! HUNT: I don't think that paperwork-wrong thing is, is. I mean, to Sarah's point, I mean, he would be convicted for -- the perception is not going to be paperwork. JENNINGS: What's he being convicted for, then? If it's not a paperwork, what's he being -- HUNT: I understand that you are technically correct. I just think -- can anyone consume this -- it's like -- JENNINGS: The problem with this case is, no one can actually explain what he's being convicted for. It was obvious that the case was brought so they could put people on the stand to try to personally embarrass him. That's what it is. HUNT: They were paying her to keep quiet so that voters, particularly women, wouldn't think badly of Trump before the election, right? JENNINGS: [Facetiously] October, October of 2016: no one, no one IIknew that Donald Trump had had sex with lots of women out there, some of whom were not his wife. No one could have possibly known!

Deeply Disturbed Scarborough Accuses New York Times Of Rigging Polls AGAINST Biden!

As we've noted in the past, Mika Brzezinski has expressed concerns over the fragile psyche of her husband and co-host Joe Scarborough, at one point ordering him to take an extended break from the show. Mika might be inclined to give Joe another long time-out after his disturbed and disturbing performance on Wednesday's Morning Joe. Scarborough absolutely freaked out [see screencap and Mika's stone-faced reaction] over a New York Times/Siena poll showing Trump leading in five out of six swing states. Note that the show never actually displayed the bad-for-Biden poll results in question on screen, no doubt not wanting to provide them any additional publicity. Scarborough began by saying that he believed in conspiracy theories, and believed that the Times had entered into a conspiracy with psychiatrists in blue states to split the profits on psychiatric care in return for the Times using skewed methodology in Trump's favor. Joe was - at least we hope - kidding about that. But Scarborough was dead serious when he accused the Times of rigging the polls against Biden in order to write clickbait stories about them: Maybe they're trying to make up for '20, when they skewed in Biden's direction by about four or five points? But every one of these New York Times/Siena polls have been wildly skewed when you compare them to other polls that come out at the same time. (...) And by the way, people are calling Mika, saying this is a just reaction to one poll. No. You can go back. You can look at the tape. We do this every time when the New York Times/Siena poll comes out. It's always an outlier, and the New York Times always gets 15 or 16 articles out of them that everybody rushes to, because it says, Earth ends at 5:00. Hit link at New York Times, 15 times, and they keep writing articles about it.      At one point, an incredulous John Heilemann put it to Scarborough: "You're saying the New York Times is systematically putting these polls out in a way to try to amplify them to drive the news cycle?" Responded Scarborough: "Yes. Yes, I am saying that." Scarborough rudely shouted down Heilemann, who had very politely and cautiously tried to differ ever so slightly in his take (Click "expand"): HEILEMANN: I'm not saying it's not close. I'm not going to carry water for the New York Times or the methodology of this poll. I would keep going back to the thing that I try to say every time we talk about these things. Which is, that I'm really interested in -- and I know you know this. What are the polls showing us directionally about the race? SCARBOROUGH: I understand. There's a difference, though, with the New York Times/ Siena poll, and you know this. It's given disproportionate impact. This year, this cycle, it is skewed wildly in Donald Trump's direction. [Heilemann tries to speak.] Hold on. And the New York Times feasts on it with clickbait stories, like, a dozen at a time. HEILEMANN: And I, what I'm trying to focus on is what I think people should pay attention to [tries to continue]-- SCARBOROUGH: -- [Interrupting] But what I'm trying to focus on is, the New York Times right now is actively shaping the election cycles, where this poll comes out on a Sunday, and on Monday, people go, oh -- and I heard it! And I'm sitting there going, don't be so stupid. That's why we're doing this. [Heilemann tries to respond. Scarborough shouts.]  Hold on. No! No! Hold on a second. Hold on. No, no, no, no,. Hold on. We recently noted evidence that wife and co-host Mika Brzezinski was getting fed up with Scarborough's insolent, incessant interruptions of her. Combine that with Scarborough's intemperate big-footing of Heilemann today, and his explicitly expressed belief that the New York Times—of all media outlets—was manipulating its polls against Biden, and serious questions arise about Scarborough's mental state. Note: Scarborough mentioned that when NPR looked into some of the people quoted in Times articles saying they voted for Biden in 2020 but are now switching to Trump, it was found that they had never voted before. Could be. But ask yourself: when asked by a reporter or pollster about their presidential preference, who was the average person less likely to admit they prefer? Good Ol' Joe Biden, or Trump, whom the media consistently portrays as a monster who will end democracy forever? The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: MSNBC Morning Joe 5/15/23 6:11 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: I have said for the past couple of days, as I've said for the past couple of months, that -- and I believe now that there is a conspiracy. And I do believe in conspiracies. I think psychiatrists in blue states have conspired with the New York Times/Siena pollsters and said, listen: we'll split the profits on psychiatric care if you guys will, will, will have the craziest methodology, which they always have. Maybe they're trying to make up for '20, when they skewed in Biden's direction by about four or five points? But every one of these New York Times/Siena polls have been wildly skewed when you compare them to other polls that come out at the same time. . . .  And by the way, people are calling Mika, saying this is a just reaction to one poll. No. You can go back. You can look at the tape. We do this every time when the New York Times/Siena poll comes out. It's always an outlier, and the New York Times always gets 15 or 16 articles out of them that everybody rushes to, because it says, Earth ends at 5:00. Hit link at New York Times, 15 times, and they keep writing articles about it.  There are, and NPR has found some of these voters that said, well you know, I voted for Biden before. And they said, but wait. This guy, we checked the voting rolls. He has never voted. Other news organizations offer three, four more examples. Not just of people in the surveys but people the New York Times quoted in their article: "Well, here's one of many people we interviewed who said he's disillusioned and is going to vote for Trump." No record of him voting. JOHN HEILEMANN: Yeah. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Okay? HEILEMANN: You know -- MIKA: Are you feeling something, John Heilemann, that you want to say? HEILEMANN: I think sometimes as a general matter, there's maybe an overreliance on voters telling the truth about things in general. Hate to say it. Reporters find this occasionally that reporters lie. Here is what I say about this poll. If I were to ask you this question, Joe: do you know anybody on either side who doesn't think that it's the case that of the battleground states, that Joe Biden is stronger in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin than he is in Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia? SCARBOROUGH: It sounds about right. I've seen some polls that show Georgia's very close. Greg Bluestein actually had an article that says the CNN poll is wildly off. HEILEMANN: I'm not saying it's not close. I'm not going to carry water for the New York Times or the methodology of this poll. I would keep going back to the thing that I try to say every time we talk about these things. Which is, that I'm really interested in -- and I know you know this. What are the polls showing us directionally about the race? SCARBOROUGH: I understand. There's a difference, though, with the New York Times/ Siena poll, and you know this. It's given disproportionate impact. This year, this cycle, it is skewed wildly in Donald Trump's direction. [Heilemann tries to speak.] Hold on. And the New York Times feasts on it with clickbait stories, like, a dozen at a time. HEILEMANN: And I, what I'm trying to focus on is what I think people should pay attention to [tries to continue]-- SCARBOROUGH: -- [Interrupting] But what I'm trying to focus on is, the New York Times right now is actively shaping the election cycles, where this poll comes out on a Sunday, and on Monday, people go, oh -- and I heard it! And I'm sitting there going, don't be so stupid. That's why we're doing this. [Heilemann tries to respond. Scarborough shouts.]  Hold on. No! No! Hold on a second. Hold on. No, no, no, no,. Hold on. What I hear is after these Siena polls come out, every time: oh, well, everything that Joe Biden's done since the, since the State of the Union address, all these, all this money he has put out. All of the campaigning is for naught.  No, it's not! No, it's not! There's one poll that's wildly skewed every time. And it does shape -- if it's a New York Times poll versus a Morning Consult poll and the New York Times then amplifies it 15, 16, 17, times, it, it, it warps reality and everybody responds to that in the media and in the political world. HEILEMANN: So if you're -- all I'd say about this is that I agree with you. That the problem to me, unless you want to speculate, unless you want to suggest you think there is a conspiracy at the Times about this which you're -- SCARBOROUGH: Their methodology is bizarre and Larry Sabato said this, Wall Street [Journal] said that. HEILEMANN: Joe, you're saying something more than that. You're saying the New York Times is systematically putting these polls out in a way to try to amplify them to drive the news cycle. SCARBOROUGH: Yes. Yes, I am saying that. HEILEMANN: And I'm  saying, I'm not, I'd like to know,  I'm curious, as somebody who understands your level of sophistication about reading the media, why you think that's true. What I'm trying to say is, I agree with you. The best bulwark against any polls, outliers or anything else, is for people who are actually consumers of this information, is to not let these -- any given news outlet, or any given poll, shape your perception of the race unduly. SCARBOROUGH: But John, that's not realistic. And I'll tell you why it's not realistic. Because, and I'll say to you, I know people come up to you after every New York Times/Siena poll comes out. It completely changes the political battlefield out there for about a week, week-and-a-half. It distorts the questions that are asked of the White House. It distorts the questions that are asked of Donald Trump. It distorts all of the opinion. It distorts everything.  And that keeps happening every month when this comes out. And then finally, about two weeks later, after the residue of the New York Times/Siena poll leaves, people go, I think Joe Biden's on a winning streak. And then two weeks later it comes out again, and it's garbage. It's an outlier. And yes, the New York Times,  when they have all of these experts questioning the methodology. When they're calling about 20% of the people likely voters who have never voted before, or didn't vote in the last two primaries. When they're even quoting people who say they're switching their vote from Joe Biden, who have never voted before? I'm sorry! The New York Times has to know what they are doing!

Joe Scarborough's Mother's Day Brag: I Was A Multi-Sport Star!

Regular Morning Joe viewers are all too familiar with Joe Scarborough's annoying habit of working the fact that he used to be a congressman into conversations. But for a bragging change of pace, Scarborough somehow managed to slip into his Mother's Day reminiscences that in high school, he apparently was a multi-sport star.  In baseball: "I played baseball. All-Star, had a high average, all this stuff." In basketball: "I was scoring like 30, 35 points a game." Honk if this makes you think of another famous Joe who brags about being a football legend in high school in Delaware. The irony is that, for Scarborough, on those rare occasions when he failed in sports, his mother was anything but sympathetic. When he struck out to end a game, she told him: "If you can't do any better than that, Joey, you'd be doing yourself and the family a great service by never playing baseball again." And when his team lost a basketball game, her reaction was: "You know, it would have been so great if God would have given us at least one natural athlete." Yikes! Scarborough also shared this poignant memory: that his mother really didn't want to have him at all! She didn't want a third child, who was Joe. Though Scarborough claimed she eventually got over it and that he was even the apple of her eye.  I'm reminded of the joke about the two mothers chatting, and one brags to the other: "My son pays his psychoanalyst $375/hr., and all he talks about is me!" Paging Dr. Freud to Scarborough's rescue...Or perhaps, Stuart Smalley. Repeat after us, Joe: "I'm good enough. I'm smart enough. And doggone it, people like me." And sure, feel free to throw in: "Did I ever mention that I used to be a Member of Congress?" Far be it from me to delve into Scarborough's psyche. But could it be that the scars of his mother's tough love, and knowing that, at least at first, she was disappointed to give birth to him, in some way account for his penchant for bragging, be it about what a macho man he is, having been a congressman, and now, about having been a high school multi-sport star? Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 5/13/24 6:03 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: You know, it's so interesting. I, um, everybody loves to talk about their moms. Oh, she was so sweet and the most loving, she was an angel. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Mary Jo. SCARBOROUGH: As you know, Mary Jo loved Joey. She loved me so much. And some people would say, like, that I was the apple of her eye after she got over having me. She wasn't really pleased to have a third, a third child, but she eventually did. She was there every step of theway and was the biggest supporter.  But, you know, there was another side of my mom that, that people don't talk about. And I know this sounds weird. This is only, like, 20, 30 seconds, but I saw Ed Sheeran on Howard Stern's show last year, and it explains the success of my mom in being a mom. Here's Howard Stern talking to Ed Sheeran. ED SHEERAN: You learn nothing from success, nothing. You learn everything from the failures. And this is the thing that annoys me about the state that the world is in at the moment. No one talks about failureanymore. It's like shame.Like, failure is shame, like, let's just bury that and not talkabout it. No one goes, oh, what did we learn from this? Whereas with success, everyone shouts about it. But there is nothing in success. Success happens from failing hundreds of times. SCARBOROUGH: So the reason that reminds me of my mom is one of -- I think one of her best moments was, I played baseball.  And, you know, All-Star, had a high average, all of this stuff. Bases loaded, and a key game, and I struck out. Threw my bat down, walked to the car. I was so angry. I got in the back seat, and I said, I said, I'm just going to quit. My mom, you know, drives off. And she quietly says, Well, if you can't do any better than that, Joey, you'd be doing yourself and the family a great service by never playing baseball again.  MIKA: Oh, ouch. SCARBOROUGH: Right? So I sit back, and I'm like, what? That's not what a mom is supposed to say! Guess what? It made me go out and practice harder. It was unconditional love. MIKA: Aww/ She knew you. SCARBOROUGH: But man, she was tough. She was a tough mother, and she never -- like, no time for, like, sympathy for, you know, if we messed up. She let us know. And that, that combination of love and toughness, I think, it makes all the difference. . . .  SCARBOROUGH: And when we lost, my mom let us know. Like, I lost a basketball game. I remember, again, back seat, you know, and I was, I was scoring, like, 30, 35 points a game. We still lost, and my mother turns to my dad in the front seat, so her three children can hear it in the back. She goes, You know, it would have been so great if God would have given us at least one natural athlete." MIKA: Aw, come on. SCARBOROUGH: Who says that? No! No! So, what happens, we get home, I get the basketball out, and I'm shooting for, like, the next two hours.  This is parenting! I mean, it's not just hugging people and being -- you know, Mika, that term, snowplow parents, where we, we want to do everything for our kids and we don't want our kids to ever feel any discomfort. No! That's not what's being a good parent is about.

CNN Claims This 'Sordid Detail' from Stormy Daniels Will Hurt Trump With Women Voters

On CNN This Morning, CNN senior political analyst Mark Preston said that porn star Stormy Daniels claiming in court that Donald Trump didn't use a condom ("protection") during their alleged sexual encounter constitutes a "sordid detail" that will hurt Trump with women voters in swing states.  Preston: I assume now that there are women in these five or six states that we're looking at now, whether it's Wisconsin or Michigan or Pennsylvania or Nevada, Arizona, or Georgia who perhaps would have thought about voting for President Trump. But then they, see this, and not to be very sordid. But this is pretty sordid. I would assume if I cheated on my wife, I mean, she'd kill me, but that would be one thing. She'd probably kill me twice. There's, another thing, though, to, I believe to cheat on your wife and then have it publicly come out that you didn't use protection. And I think that that is -- I'm telling you though -- that is something that I think will hit home. Host Kasie Hunt gleefully agreed with Preston, chuckling as she said, "It's all very sordid." No qualifiers from anyone on the panel about the porn star's claims being "alleged." The veracity of her testimony was seemingly taken as a given. And CNN has been gavel-to-gavel "sordid" during Stormy Daniels Week. Meghan Hays, a former Biden aide, was also only too happy to agree, saying that come September and October, those sordid "details" would be highlighted in TV ads targeting moderate women voters. Preston should know a thing or two about sordid sexual details in the lives of prominent politicians. He's a former aide to . . . Sen. Ted Kennedy. Note: When Preston said that his wife would "kill" him if he cheated on her, a laughing Hunt interjected, "I would hope so." Fine. Now imagine the reaction if a woman on the panel said that her husband would kill her if she cheated on him.  Here's the transcript. CNN This Morning 5/10/24 6:06 am EDT MARK PRESTON: We're seeing what's happening in the courtroom right now, and we're paying a lot attention to these sordid details. In the court of law, I don't think the sordid details are going to matter, and perhaps could backfire, what have you. Court of public opinion, though. I mean, we are talking about trying to -- I assume now, that there are women in these five or six states that we're looking at now, whether it's Wisconsin or Michigan or Pennsylvania or Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, you know, who perhaps would have thought about voting for President Trump. But then they, see this, and, and, and not to be very sordid -- but this is pretty sordid.  KASIE HUNT: [Chuckling] It's all very sordid.  PRESTON: I would assume if I cheated on my wife, that would, I mean, she'd kill me, but that would be one thing.  HUNT: I would hope so [laughs.] PRESTON: She'd probably kill me twice. [Extended Hunt laugh.] There's, another thing, though. To, I believe, to cheat on your wife and then have it publicly come out that you didn't use protection. And I think that that is -- I'm telling you though -- that is something that I think will hit home. You're laughing, Meghan, but it's true. I think that that is something that, there's a trust level. There's the moralistic level, you know, issue, that people wrestle with. I'm wrestling with that right now on TV. HUNT: I am too, for the record. MEGHAN HAYS: To your point about these five or six states that they're trying to play to. Those are the Nikki Haley voters that are these moderate women in suburban cities that are going to vote. Who are they going to vote for? They are the undecided.  And these are the things that are going to come up. And these are the ads that the Super PACs and other people are going to put forth come September and October to remind these women of these details.

Morning Joe Mocks Trump In Bomber Jacket: Biden/Obama, Hello?

Morning Joe had great fun today mocking Donald Trump over hosting a dinner at Mar-a-Lago last night for purchasers of his NFT trading cards, which feature Trump in a variety of heroic images. He's George Washington on the Delaware, he's Elvis Presley in a black jumpsuit with shades. But those weren't the ones they mocked. "MSNBC Republican" Elise Jordan singled out one image for particular ridicule: "The bomber jacket. Now, that is really quite a -- what did they do? Take Tom Cruise, and then just put Trump's head on it? I mean, that is actual, just complete propaganda." It apparently didn't occur to Jordan or any of the other panelists that Trump is not the only president with an affinity for bomber jackets. The difference is that people at MSNBC actually worship the coolness of Obama. Do the images below refresh your memory, Elise? CBS News, 2019: "Barack Obama goes viral in custom '44' jacket at Duke-UNC game." GQ, 2019:  "Barack Obama's Bomber Jacket: The Inside Story:The most exciting part of last night's Duke-UNC game took place off the court." Esquire, 2020: "The Story Behind Obama's (Extremely Good) Three-Point Bomber Jacket: The suddenly stylish former President has been rocking one particularly enviable pick from Lululemon." A replica Obama bomber jacket is actually on sale to the public. No word on whether Barack gets a piece of the action.  You can easily Google some embarrassing Obama-Adoration bomber jackets for sale. But apparently, that's on brand for MSNBC.  As long as we're on the subject, may we point out to Jordan that Tom Cruise was also a fictional fighter pilot? It's a mark of how popular culture is more real to some people than actual historical figures, fighter pilots like Chuck Yeager, Bob Hoover -- John McCain! -- among others.   Trump's sale of pieces of the suit he wore for his iconic mugshot in the dubious Fani Willis prosecution in Georgia was also the object of great mirth and hilarity, with Scarborough exclaiming "Oh my God! What the holy F is going on here?" And the normally even-handed Willie Geist flatly declared that the pieces of the mugshot suit for sale are "undoubtedly" not from that suit.  Evidence, Willie—or are all accusations against Trump fair game? He may not rival Obama in the movie-star worship, but even Joe Biden fans can buy the "Joe Biden Aviation Jacket" in leather. And don't miss the opportunity to get your own "Biden Harris Peace Love Equality Hope Diversity" bomber jacket on eBay. Elise Jordan should have one of those. The Biden-Harris website seems to prefer those "Dark Brandon" products with the shiny red eyes.  Kamala Harris superfans can just go to the National Archives Store for their "Madam Vice President" polo shirt and cap in pink, not to mention the cartoony "Madam Vice President" socks. Merchandise is bipartisan.  

Morning Joe Expert: Stormy Daniels' Testimony Hands Defense 'Major Issue' For Appeal

MSNBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos has once again proven himself to be an independent thinker, someone who calls them as he sees them and doesn't dutifully toe the liberal media line. In the past, we've noted Cevallos saying that Roe was ripe to be overturned, because there was no constitutional basis for it. More recently, he called a Hunter Biden plea deal not merely a sweetheart deal, but a "gift from Heaven." Cevallos was back at his iconoclastic truth-telling on today's Morning Joe. He repeatedly called Stormy Daniels' testimony in Donald Trump's hush money trial a "major issue" available to the defense for the appeal of any possible conviction, which could lead to it being overturned. The notion was that her testimony was excessively prejudicial to Trump. Cevallos analogized the situation to the recent overturning of one of Harvey Weinstein's convictions on the grounds that overly prejudicial testimony had been admitted. Cevallos mentioned that even though trial judge Juan Merchan had rejected a defense motion for a mistrial based on Daniels' testimony, he did acknowledge that some of her testimony perhaps should not have been allowed. Said Cevallos: "If you're a defense attorney, you're marking your notebook, and now you have your first major issue." Concluded Cevallos: Concluded Cevallos: "So if two years from now, we're back here saying, the conviction got overturned: this is terrible! Well, this might be what we look at. And we can say, well, the prosecution took a calculated risk, and it's yielded benefits in the last 24 hours. But maybe in a couple years, those benefits will not have been worth the risk.        Bonus Coverage: Scarborough Bigfoots Mika Again -- And Again! Amid a press report that Mika is fed up with the incessant interruptions of Joe Scarborogh -- her husband co-host -- Scarborough was back at his bigfooting of Mika in the very first minute of today's show. It was clear from Mika's facial expression and body language that she was not pleased. Mika even emitted a "wow" in reaction to Joe's rude recidivism. Scarborough acknowledged that his latest interruption was sure to incite lots of email criticism. And despite asking Mika to forgive him, just three minutes later Scarborough cut Mika off yet again! Mika has forged a side career based on her "Know Your Value" books and conferences. The notion is to encourage and empower women to stick up for themselves in their careers. So, not a good look for Mika to permit herself to be regularly trampled by Bully Boy Scarborough.  View Rude Joe in action here.

MSNBC Airs Threat To Possible Trump Veeps: You Could End Up Being Executed!

The liberal media isn't waiting for Donald Trump to announce his running mate before going on the attack. MSNBC has aired a pre-emptive strike on all the potential VP candidates. And not only did it contain a vitriolic denunciation of them, but it also included a not-so-veiled threat of the most ominous sort. Tara Setmayer, a former Republican congressional staffer turned member of the disgraced Lincoln Project, was a guest on Sunday's edition of MSNBC's The Weekend. Here's how she vilified the people whose names are apparently in the running as Trump's running mate: "They're despicable hypocrites. These are the worst people, because Donald Trump couldn't become who he has become, the malignancy of Trump could not have spread like this without the enablers.  "Plain and simple: these are Vichy Republicans. And for the historians out there, they will appreciate what happened to the Vichys during World War II." "What happened to the Vichys?" Readers will recall that during WWII, the Vichys were established in France as a puppet government of Nazi Germany. They were a government of Hitler collaborators.  And, to answer Setmayer, "what happened" to the Vichys? When the war ended, more than 10,000 were executed. So Setmayer was sending a chilling threat to the potential VP candidates and anyone else who might "collaborate" with Trump: you might meet the same fate as the French collaborators with the Nazis! And the liberal media denounces Trump's alleged disregard for the rule of law and threats against opponents? Note: This wasn't the first time we've caught Setmayer jumping ugly against Republicans. Last year, when Ron DeSantis was riding high as a potential Republican presidential candidate, we noted Setmayer attacking his wife Casey as a "Serena Waterford wannabe." As we wrote at the time: "Waterford is the character from The Handmaid's Tale who has been described, in a website about screen villains, as "the cruel, fanatically religious wife of Fred Waterford, the dictator of Gilead." Setmayer did stop short of recommending Vichy-collaborator treatment for Casey DeSantis.

Jon Meacham On Morning Joe: No 'Buts' About It—You MUST Vote For Biden!

You might think of a presidential election as a choice among candidates. Not to historian and occasional Biden speechwriter Jon Meacham. He will brook no dissent. There is no choice. You MUST vote for Joe Biden! On today's Morning Joe, Meacham told to Biden phone buddy and informal adviser Joe Scarborough the election prospects are "thrilling and terrifying. It's thrilling because it's up to all of us.... What's terrifying is that it's up to us, and it's up to the voters in the swing states." Meacham doesn't really trust the people, and that's why he's going to keep telling you the "stakes" are too high, you can't vote Republican: "I think it's going to be impossible for people to vote in the fall and not understand what's at stake." He knows many voters aren't spending this whole year in a fetal position for the survival of democracy, but gosh, voting for Biden is really, really important! "What I would say to anyone who says, 'Yeah but. Yeah, Trump is awful but, whatever," is there is no but. It's got to be, "Yeah, Trump is that, and, I'm going to vote against him." There is no but? It's "got to be" a vote against Trump, i.e., for Biden?  And the liberal media accuses MAGA of disrespecting democracy? Win or lose, Trump is sure to get tens of millions of votes. But Meacham doesn't even try to understand what motivates people who say, "yeah, but" -- not to mention the millions who outright like Trump and everything he is and stands for.  Such is the arrogance and condescension of the liberal media.  Question: When it was disclosed that Meacham was an occasional Biden speechwriter, MSNBC announced that "per network policy," he would no longer be employed as a paid contributor.  So what about Joe Scarborough? As mentioned, it's been disclosed that not only is Scarborough a frequent Biden phone buddy, but also serves as an informal adviser, offering his "take" on issues of the day.  What's the MSNBC "network policy" that permits Scarborough to continue in his multi-million-dollar MSNBC gig? Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 5/6/24 6:37 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: Jon Meacham, there is simply, we won't even ask. And we stopped asking some time ago for historical parallels. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: There just simply aren't. SCARBOROUGH: There are no historical parallels in this country. But, my gosh, as you said before, what is at stake is so massive this fall. I'm curious your thoughts when you see this testimony, and the Time magazine article. The continued threats of an authoritarian regime coming directly from Donald Trump . . . And so, I'm just curious about your take on where we are right now. JON MEACHAM: I think, my answer is, at once, to me, thrilling and terrifying. It's thrilling because it's up to all of us. It's up to the voters in the seven or eight states. It's up to those of us who have strong feelings about the continuance of the constitution order, to make this case. And that's great, right? That's we the people. What's terrifying is that it's up to us, and it's up to the voters in the swing states. And it's up to those of us who have to make the case to people around the country.  If -- there's no mystery here, right? It's going to be -- I think it's going to be impossible for people to vote in the fall and not understand what's at stake. And if, and maybe that's part of what those of us who, you know, want to make this case have to keep doing, is making sure we say it. And it may seem repetitive to the political-industrial class, but that doesn't matter. I think as Ed would say, you know, there are normal people who are better adjusted than we are and don't worry about this all the time. But it's really, really important. And I don't think, again. What I would say to anyone who says, "Yeah but. Yeah, Trump is awful but, whatever," is there is no but. It's got to be, "Yeah, Trump is that, IIand, I'm going to vote against him.

Scarborough Rips MSM For Mocking MAGA As Rednecks -- But Did the Same Himself

With all the focus on Joe Biden's decline in mental acuity, have we overlooked the possibility that his phone buddy Joe Scarborough is also suffering some short-term memory loss? The question arises in light of this comment Scarborough--now in his seventh decade--made on today's Morning Joe. "You know, Jen [Palmieri], there is a stereotype of the Trump voter that the media does. Oh, people are stumbling drunk out of their trailer park and, you know, shooting raccoons or something like that. No, it's bankers. It's lawyers. It's people with advanced degrees." So Scarborough rips the MSM for stereotyping MAGA as people "stumbling drunk out of their trailer park, shooting raccoons?" Really, Joe? This from the man we recently caught mocking Jim Comer, the Republican chairman of the House Investigations Committee as saying in a stereotypical southern accent, apropos of his committee's investigation of Hunter Biden: "We ain't got nuthin' but a squirrel fryer and a hound dog. " Scarborough, who claimed: "Comer and his gang are running for the hills. In their coon hats, holding a squirrel fryer in their left hand and a shotgun in the right!" The same Scarborough who we caught putting on a heavy Southern accent to mock Speaker Mike Johnson's belief in the Bible. In reality, as Scarborough surely knows, Johnson sounds more like a newsreader from Nebraska than anything resembling the typical native of his Shreveport, Louisiana home town. More recently, we noted Scarborough indulging a negative stereotype of Southerners, describing legislators who had adopted a pro-life law as "old, fat, white men in Mississippi." So yeah, Joe. The media really does mischaracterize Trump voters and the people they elect -- just have a look in the mirror. Note: Instead of rednecks, Scarborough blamed "billionaires" for making the election of Trump possible, and he said they're "not understanding that this is not just a threat to democracy, but this is a threat to capitalism." At least Joe didn't point the finger at the Rothschilds. And a nervous Scarborough noted Trump "way ahead" in a number of swing-state polls.  Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 5/2/24 6:13 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: You know, Jen, there, there's a stereotype of the Trump voter that the media does. Oh, it's, people are stumbling drunk out of their trailer park and, you know, shooting raccoons, or something like that. No! It's bankers. It's lawyers. It's people with advanced degrees. This is something Anne Applebaum brought out so masterfully in her book, The Twilight of Democracy. Which is, it's, it's, the elites make this possible.  Think about all the billionaires that said, Oh, I'll never vote for Trump. Now, it's like, yeah, I'll vote for Donald Trump. They know this. They read this. They read that Donald Trump says that there's going to be mass deportation. He's going to force prosecutors to arrest political enemies. He's going to execute generals that don't follow his commands. He's able to use SEAL Team Six to execute political opponents. And he says, you can't arrest me for that.  You can go down the list. He's going to be a dictator from day one. He's going to terminate the Constitution. On and on, they've heard all of this. They heard what he said to Time magazine a couple of days ago. It is a dark, autocratic vision of America. And these people, these educated people with advanced degrees, are the ones saying, yeah, I'll support Donald Trump again. Thinking, oh, you know what? Maybe my investments will go, or maybe he won't tax me 3%. Not understanding that this is not just a threat to democracy, but this is a threat to capitalism. JEN PALMIERI: Right. Well, I mean, that's the thing that makes me think maybe they will reconsider if they continue to hear him -- DONNY DEUTSCH: No. They don't get that. PALMIERI: They don't, they don't, they will not make that connection? DEUTSCH: What Joe just said: they don't get how it could affect them negatively. PALMIERI: They don't think that that's going to affect affect business? But there are the 20% of people in Republican primaries who still are not voting for him. And there's the people that say that they were worried about Jan 6th. There's people that, you know, the Republicans Against Trump, those videos about people who voted for him twice but, because of January 6th, won't do it a third time. And, you know, keep doing these interviews, keep saying this, it's like, Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. SCARBOROUGH: You look at the polls, though. PALMIERI: I know, I know. SCARBOROUGH: I mean, a lot of swing-state polls, if you're talking about Nevada, if you're talking about Georgia, if you're talking about North Carolina, they're not even close. Trump way ahead.

Scarborough Backtracks on Protesters: I Was Only Mocking 'White Woke Pampered Elitist' Kids

It wasn't exactly a mea culpa. But on today's Morning Joe, Scarborough did a modified walk-back of his strong criticism that we noted yesterday of campus protesters and the failure of administrators to discipline them, and how it will all lead to Biden  losing in November.  Scarborough mentioned that after his comments yesterday, he had received critical comments from "well-intentioned" critics who said it was right to protest the Vietnam War, and right to protest Israel's war after the October 7 slaughter by Hamas. So he backtracked to suggest he only meant to mock rich white kids. [?] I'm certainly not saying this of all the student protesters that are out there. And certainly not children of Palestinian families who have lost loved ones through the years in this war, in this conflict. I will say, though, among, again -- and I've spoken with some of them. I want to be careful. But among these white, woke, pampered, elitist -- I'm not supposed to use that word. Let's say children from wealthy families that decide, as Dr. Brzezinski said so many years ago, that they're going to play radical for a weekend and then go home to Mommy and Daddy's mansion, there's a complete ignorance about the complexities of this issue.   Why did Scarborough single out "white," woke, elitists? Surely there are black and brown woke elitists who are cluelessly protesting on campus. Why does Scarborough give them a pass, hmmm? Sounds like Scarborough is between the same rock and hard place as Biden: wanting to express solidarity with Israel, but without overly offending his left-wing base.  Willie Geist then came in repeated everything Scarborough just said. "You go, guy!" Both Scarborough and Geist stressed that they have been very critical of Netanyahu's handling of the war -- which would seem to be required at MSNBC.  To their credit, Scarborough and Geist did express that Jewish students don't feel safe on campus, and described how clueless many of the protesters are, with no understanding of the genocidal implications for Jews of "from the river to the sea," or of the generous two-state deal that Israel offered the Palestinians 2000, but which the Palestinians peremptorily rejected.     Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 4/30/24 6:11 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: I had a lot of nice, wonderful, well-intentioned people that watch this show, love this show, write me yesterday, and I wrote a lot of them back, called one or two back, saying, you know, Joe, the Vietnam war was a bad war, Joe; you were talking. And this Gaza thing, we understand the kids and what they're doing. I understand, obviously, the protest to an unjust war. And we've, of course, been bitterly critical of Netanyahu's response in Gaza. So we understand all that. I'm curious what your thoughts are on -- and we're going to talk to Jonathan Greenblatt in one moment -- but how you balance that with not just outside agitators but also a rising sense of antisemitism on college campuses and social life. And I will tell you, I know, I know first-hand from friends and family members that Jews are being pushed to the side socially. And, and that, that woke white girls and boys coming from elite families are telling their friends that they can't hang out with Jewish friends.  And I could go on. I've been -- and maybe one of the reasons I was engaged as I was yesterday is, I've been hearing about this now for three, four, five, six months. Where Jewish students don't feel safe on college campuses. And this isn't a bubble wrap or snowflake moment. This is people talking about genocide, screaming at them as they try to go to their English class on campus. . . .  You know, Willie, the thing is, and I'm certainly not saying this of all the student protesters that are out there. And certainly not children of Palestinian families who have lost loved ones through the years in this war, in this conflict. I will say, though, among, again -- and I've spoken with some of them. I want to be careful. But among these white, woke, pampered, elitist -- I'm not supposed to use that word. Let's say children from wealthy families that decide, as Dr. Brzezinski said so many years ago, that they're going to play radical for a weekend and then go home to mommy and daddy's mansion, there's a complete ignorance about the complexities of this issue. Now, of course, if you listen to the show, you would understand many of the complexities of this issue, because we have been really tough on Israeli officials that come on this show. We have asked why they've continued to allow illegal settlements in the West Bank over the decade. Why they have continued to fight against a two-state solution for peace. Why they have done what they have done in Gaza. Why they did with Hamas, why Netanyahu was Hamas' ally leading up to October the 7th. So, it is very complicated. That's lost, though, in a lot of those things. And when you start talking about even West Bank settlements with a lot of these students, their eyes glaze over. They -- because that's not in the TikTok video. Again, I'm not saying this about all the students. But I will tell you, I'm saying it about a hell of a lot of students I have spoken with. When you go, well, you know, in 2000 there was an Oslo Accord where Bill Clinton had gotten together, and they were giving 97% of the West Bank to the Palestinians, and the other 3% they were going to make up with Israeli land. And they had figured out, you know, a capital in East Jerusalem. And they sit there with their eyes glazed because they have no idea what happened in this peace process, what happened through the years. They just, they see something on TikTok, and they're like, Israel bad, and Hamas good. And they go out and they start shouting at Jews -- some. WILLIE GEIST: Yeah, and you don't even have to go that deep. You can ask, what does it mean to chant, from the river to the sea, and they don't know.  And then when you tell them what it is, and we've seen this from reporters asking some of them --again, not all of them. Some of them have a deep understanding of this -- they don't understand that that means the elimination of the State of Israel and the people who live within that state. So, I've been having a lot of these same conversations as you, Joe. So if you watch our show, you know how critical we've been of Netanyahu, of the prosecution of the war. That we grieve and mourn for children and women who have been killed in this war, that are starving in this war. It's a terrible, terrible thing. But that does not give kids on college campuses license to chant, from the river to the sea, and to say that Jewish kids should not exist, in some cases, at Columbia, for example.

Scarborough Scolds: College Administrator Failure To Quell Protests Could Elect Trump!

Joe Scarborough started today's Morning Joe with a rant against weak college administrators who are failing to put down pro-Hamas campus protests. Scarborough's central beef was that their fecklessness could lead to . . . the election of Donald Trump! Scarborough analogized today's situation to that of the student protests of the 1960s that led to the election of Richard Nixon in 1968 and "five more years of war." As if "Happy Warrior" Hubert Humphrey would have ended the Vietnam war more quickly? And in a bit of ultimate scaremongering, Scarborough dropped the usual End of Democracy bomb: "Let's see if they're now going to elect Donald Trump for, I don't know, maybe the last election in American history. If so, good job. Way to go. Way to go!"  Does Scarborough seriously believe that? And was Scarborough's rather authoritarian rant about the need for college administrators to enforce discipline and rules, or else "leave!", sincere? Or was it simply the reflection of his partisan angst that the campus turmoil could lead to the defeat of his phone buddy, Joe Biden? Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 4/29/24 6:03 am EDT MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Also ahead, the latest on the protests over Gaza that are spreading to more and more college campuses. And, we're going to have an exclusive, first look at Forbes' list of the new Ivies, universities who are poised to replace the elite institutions, in part because of their handling of the protest. It is a much bigger story. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Even before, even before these protests. MIKA: This is a trend. SCARBOROUGH: And I've got to say, just the absolute weakness of the administration, the cowardice of the administration, and, unfortunately, on these elite colleges, having people that are now running these elite colleges on faculty boards that, that, that burned down college campuses in the 1960s, that were responsible for the election in part of Richard Nixon in 1968 because of the chaos on college campuses, because of the chaos in Chicago.  And they gave America Richard Nixon and five more years of war. Good job. Let's see if these administrators, the ones that, like, tried to levitate the Pentagon in the 1960s with Abbie Hoffman. The ones who took over presidents' offices in the 1960s, that, that trashed college campuses. Let's see if they're now going to elect Donald Trump for, I don't know, maybe the last election in American history. If so, good job. Way to go. Way to go, by not being able to discipline students that violate your rules. You either have rules or you don't have rules. You either have standards or you don't have standards. And if you can't live by them, leave!  And let's get some adults in these universities that actually teach students that there are consequences when they break the rules, when they break the laws, and when they spout genocidal chants over and over again.

MSNBC Bites Biden From The Left For Failing To Pack The Supreme Court

On Saturday's edition of MSNBC's The Weekend, hosts and guests alike bemoaned Biden's failure to seek to pack the Supreme Court. Their comments came in response to oral arguments at the Court this past week on the case regarding Trump's claim of presidential immunity. The panel expressed fears that the Court might expand presidential immunity -- if not to the extent of the right to assassinate political rivals, as Trump's lawyer suggested could be an immune act.  Co-host Alicia Menendez teed up the packing notion, saying that in light of what happened in the Court last week, clearly something "structural"--packing or court "reform" is necessary. Guest Ankush Khadori strongly agreed, calling Biden's failure to push for packing a "historic political miscalculation."   Co-anchor Symone Sanders Townsend, mentioning that she had worked for Biden, said that he is someone who believes in "the rule of law." But Sanders suggested that it is "time to do things differently." Again Khadori agreed, flatly saying that in supporting the rule of law, Biden "is holding the wrong view. I hate to say that about the president. He's been wrong about this the whole time." Wait a second! Isn't the Democrats' big beef against Trump that he refuses to accept the rule of law? But discarding the rule of law is a good—indeed a necessary—thing if it benefits Democrats? Khadori claimed "this Court, over the last few years, is systematically running roughshod through our Constitution. They, in just the last few years, they overturned Roe, they've invalidated affirmative action in higher education, and they basically legalized same sex discrimination. They threw out part of the Biden administration's signature domestic policy effort on the student loan forgiveness plan." But even legal scholars on the left have acknowledged that Roe was poorly decided. Indeed, MSNBC's own legal analyst Danny Cevallos opined, before the Dobbs decision came down, that Roe was "ripe" to be overturned because "the right to privacy [upon which Roe was based] does not exist either in the history or the text of the Constitution, and that Roe "stands on a weak foundational basis." As for affirmative action, the phrase itself is a euphemism for reverse racial discrimination, a clear-cut violation of the Equal Protection clause and legislative prohibitions of racial discrimination. The "student loan forgiveness" Biden has granted by ignoring Congress and court rulings against him. Who's "running roughshod through our Constitution" again?  Here's the transcript. MSNBC The Weekend 4/27/24 8:22 am EDT ALICIA MENENDEZ: If you were part of the 70% of Americans who agree that the president should not have absolute immunity, and then you watched what transpired this week in court, what is left as recourse, right? There's court reform, there's stacking the Court? What do you see as the path forward, because clearly something more structural is necessary. ANKUSH KHADORI: Yeah, I agree with that. I think, actually, as we think about this administration and its legacy, I think it was -- it will go down as having been a historic political miscalculation. MENENDEZ: You're talking about the Biden administration. KHADORI: Biden administration, to not have made a real, earnest effort at Supreme Court reform. They put together a commission that produced a report that nobody read. It was not a serious effort to actually pursue Supreme Court reform, and now -- SYMONE SANDERS TOWNSEND: Why? Because the president, President Biden, I mean, I worked for him at that time. I was a part of the transition, and I worked in the White House, and I know for a fact, and Eugene, you've been asking the questions too -- I was there.  He himself does not believe that that is an avenue that should be explored. Joe Biden is somebody that believes that, in the rules of law and laws the systems. And one could argue, I [inaudiable], whew!--it's time, it's time to do things differently. KHADORI: Well look. I mean, yeah, I am aware he has that view. He is holding the wrong view. I hate to say that about the president. He's been wrong about this the whole time. And now, this Court, over the last few years, is systematically running roughshod through our Constitution. They, in just the last few years, they overturned Roe, they've invalidated affirmative action in higher education, and they basically legalized same sex discrimination. They threw out part of the Biden administration's signature domestic policy effort on the student loan forgiveness plan.  And now they seem poised to issue some sort of ruling that will change the law which has already been in place for a couple hundred years. We all assumed a president could be criminally charged after he, leaving office, to now come up with some crazy new doctrine. And -- MENENDEZ: To say nothing of the Idaho case that they are listening to right now, which is like all of their chickens coming home to roost. SANDERS TOWNSEND: Yeah, and its like yeah, we don't want to save women. KHADORI: All of the cases coming back to them after Dobbs is a mess. And this, this immunity ruling, if it comes out as most of us are expecting, it will go down in history as a practical effect, as a practical matter, as a sequel to Bush versus Gore.

Morning Joe Hails Colleges Cracking Down on Pro-Hamas Protesters!

On Thursday, Morning Joe treated us to surprising praise for Speaker Mike Johnson -- albeit regarding his support for aid to Ukraine, something dear to Joe Scarborough. Friday brought another surprise: tough talk about the pro-Hamas protesters wreaking havoc on American campuses, and praise for university administrators taking action to curb their excesses. Thus, Joe Scarborough condemned students occupying the offices of college presidents, even suggesting that any president who tolerates that should "seek employment elsewhere." At one point, Scarborough even called protesters who blocked graduation speakers "brats." Willie Geist spoke positively about the chancellor of his alma mater, Vanderbilt, who actually expelled three students who had occupied his office. New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters has written an article on the matter: "Colleges Warn Student Demonstrators: Enough." As a panelist on Morning Joe, he criticized protesters at the University of Michigan, his alma mater, who had marred what was supposed to be a joyful event for outstanding students. He also acknowledged that college administrators have been slow in dealing with these problems. He cited the Trump years during which speakers who were conservative, or affiliated with Trump, were often canceled or shouted down.  President Biden is reported to be "obsessed" with Morning Joe, so much so that he has made Scarborough a frequent phone buddy and informal adviser. But if Biden tuned in on Friday, he couldn't have been thrilled with the panel's take. Biden's already under pressure from the Pro-Hamas/River to the Sea wing of the Democrat party.  And now even the liberal media is starting to call for crackdowns on those protesters? Oy vey! Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe  4/19/24 6:47 am EDT WILLIE GEIST: So Joe, yesterday, you saw another case, several in recent weeks, where heads of school, chancellors, administrators, have said, there is a line now between free speech. We've allowed you to protest, we've allowed you to go to certain places. We've opened dialogues on our  campus, given you a place to have these debates.  But when it comes to harassment of Jewish students, when it comes to interrupting the operations of, say, a class, or a speaker, or people moving through the campus, we're now saying, you can't do that anymore. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Yeah, exactly. Whether you're talking about the, the interruption of the functioning of the Golden Gate Bridge, or the normal functioning of Columbia University, you know, it's, it's too much. It's too much. You can have free speech without, again, stopping the normal functioning of these institutions.  . . .  And so, I'm glad the president of Columbia University has stepped forward. You know, some people may call allowing students to take over president's offices at Columbia in the 1960s a storied tradition. I don't. I call that anarchy. Like, if you're a president of the university and you're letting students take over your office, maybe, maybe you should seek employment elsewhere.  Because I guarantee you there are a lot of parents that send their children to schools who don't want students running the place. They'd like grown-ups to run the place. And it looks like that's what's happening in Columbia. GEIST: Yeah. I'll speak for -- you know, I went to Vanderbilt University. They've had a lot of this on their campus in recent weeks. And a group of students a couple of weeks ago pushed their way into Kirkland Hall, where the chancellor's office is. They pushed aside an unarmed security guard, they sat there for 20 hours doing exactly what you're talking about, Joe. And Chancellor Diermeier, who runs Vanderbilt, ultimately said, okay, you're all suspended. And then one by one, reviewed their cases and expelled three of the students. SCARBOROUGH: Good! GEIST: And said, we've given you a place to have free speech. We've given you a place to protest. We've given you a place to voice your opinion. We've created symposiums where both sides of this discussion can be heard. You didn't participate in that, but you broke into our office and sat here. So now, three of you are no longer students of Vanderbilt University. And that was one of the first schools, actually, to do that, and I think you've seen more if it now since then.  Jeremy Peters, the national reporter for the New York Times is writing about this. He's got new reporting on how those administrators are now responding to a surge in anti-Israel protests on campus. Also with us, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, Jonathan Greenblatt. His group is out with new data on antisemitic incidents in the United States in the last year. Good morning to you both. Jeremy, I'll begin with you. It does seem to have been, just within the last couple of weeks even, a bit of a change in the approach that some, not all, that some leaders of campuses, of universities across the country, are taking with these protests. What did you find in your reporting? JEREMY PETERS: That's exactly right, Willie. Schools have had enough. And Vanderbilt issued what are believed to be the first expulsions of student protesters related to demonstrations stemming from the October 7th Hamas attack on Israel.And from Vanderbilt to NYU, to Columbia, to the University of Michigan, to Pomona, schools are saying, basically, look, this is not about free speech. You have a right to speak up. You have a right to demonstrate. What you don't have is a right to harass and disrupt. And that's what's really been impeding these universities core mission, which is to educate your students. And you can't have an environment that is constantly disrupted, where students are subject to harassment, where they're spit upon, where they're yelled at.  Where graduation ceremonies, or like the incident I wrote about at my alma mater, the University of Michigan, this honors convocation that was supposed to be this kind of lovely, celebratory moment where kids who were the highest-achieving students are honored. Their parents and grandparents are there. And shat happened? It got disrupted and had to be shut down early because of pro-Palestinian protesters were standing up and shouting down speakers and unfurling banners. And this is something I think universities have been slow to acknowledge. I mean, remember during the Trump years, universities really became this, this cauldron of protest activity, where this kind of overly censorious culture developed. Where if there was a speaker who was conservative, or aligned with Trump, instead of letting that person speak, a lot of times the speach would be canceled out of fear for the safety of that speaker. Or people would interrupt the speaker. And now, you know, I think universities are saying, we didn't do enough to rein that in, but now they are. SCARBOROUGH: And, you know, the thing is, that's happened over the past couple of years. But this has been a problem for a long time. I'll just say it, brats who are protesting when, say, Christine Lagarde tries to speak at a graduation, or Condi Rice tries to speak at a graduation, or I think even Christine Todd Whitman one time was canceled from speaking at the graduation!  I gotta say, you're either the adult running the campus, or you're the child, that is incapable of controlling students. The students are there to learn. That means IIall the students are there to learn. Not just students who decide this one issue is the most important issue to them. And I certainly understand, if Gaza is the most important issue, especially to Palestinian students in America. But it goes well beyond that. You can't shut down an entire campus.Your right to free speech doesn't mean your right to impinge upon everybody else's free speech and their ability to unction in a university setting.

'Credit Where Due'—Scarborough Lauds Reaganesque Speaker Johnson On Ukraine

"Hear hear! Good on him. Credit where credit is due, and credit is definitely due with Speaker Johnson."  -- Joe Scarborough It's often said that it can be a kiss of death for a politician to be praised by a political opponent.  But that adage might not hold true in the case of Joe Scarborough's praise of Speaker Mike Johnson. Because on today's Morning Joe, Scarborough lauded Johnson not for agreeing with some liberal icon, but for upholding the principles of . . . Ronald Reagan. Scarborough's commending of Johnson came in the context of the Speaker's advocacy of aid for Ukraine.  And in doing so, Johnson described himself as a Reagan Republican, a believer in peace through strength, wanting to send a message to adversaries like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, and seeing the US as the greatest country in the world. Marjorie Taylor Greene and others will find a way to criticize Johnson's statement, but it's a tricky needle to thread. Does a Republican really want to speak out against Ronald Reagan? Note: Speaking of Johnson's stance, Scarborough called himself a Baptist, and thus as someone who embraces conversions. He even quoted from the Just As I Am hymn.The irony was lost on Scarborough that he's had quite the conversion himself. Going from being a hardcore pro-life, pro-Second Amendment congressman from Florida's conservative panhandle, to decrying the overturning of Roe and beating the drums for more gun control.  Scarborough's conversion has been so complete that he's become a Biden phone buddy and informal adviser. Just as you were, Joe Scarborough: please! Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 4/18/24 6:03 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: In a few minutes, Willie, we're going to be talking about Speaker Johnson and Ukraine. I must say, he has had a conversion. You know, it's, it's like A Christmas Carol. That the ghost of the Republican party past came to visit him in the middle of the night and said to him, [imitates voice of Ronald Reagan] "Well," and he said,"Yes, sir." MIKA BRZEZINSKI: No, I think -- SCARBOROUGH: No, listen. What do I say about conversions? MIKA: I'll take 'em. SCARBOROUGH: I'm a Baptist. MIKA: Yeah. SCARBOROUGH: We love deathbed conversions, we love midlife conversions. You want to convert? Just as I am, and waiting not, to cleanse my soul of one dark spot. Well, okay, we'll take Speaker Johnson, who sounds like Ronald Reagan. And I will say, in defense of some of the leaders in that House GOP, like some of those leaders that run important committees. It sounds like they're actually concerned about China, Iran, and Russia! WILLIE GEIST: And this might literally be a political deathbed conversion for Mike Johnson, as the threats to his job continue from that faction. But Joe, Speaker Johnson invoked Ronald Reagan's name -- SCARBOROUGH: Hear, hear. GEIST: -- finally said it out loud. It's something we've been talking about for months now on this show: the party of Ronald Reagan turning its back on Ukraine in a fight against Russia.  Speaker Johnson said yesterday, "I am a child of the '80s. I am a child of the Reagan era. We have to do what's right here. We have to give Ukraine what it needs." Where was that over the last couple of months? Unclear. But he's come around. The question will be, have enoug hother Republicans come around to that position to clear this funding and get it to Ukraine? Perhaps as early as Saturday night, when Speaker Johnson says there will be a vote. MIKA: Hope to see Democrats step up. SCARBOROUGH: Maybe he'll go to the floor. MIKA: No. SCARBOROUGH: Maybe he'll say -- MIKA: Listen -- SCARBOROUGH: MTG, tear down that wall! I mean, there's so many options now. MIKA: Yeah, there's a lot to say. SCARBOROUGH: He can borrow so much from Ronald Reagan. . . .  MIKAL And despite the threats from his Republican colleagues, Johnson is pushing forward. MIKE JOHNSON [speaking with Jake Tapper on CNN]: We're going to stand for freedom and make sure that Vladimir Putin doesn't March through Europe. We're an exceptional nation. We're the greatest nation on the planet, and we have to act like it. And we have to project to Putin and Xi and Iran and North Korea and anybody else that we will defend freedom. It doesn't mean boots on the ground. We're not the world's policemen, but we're going to do the right thing. And I think the Congress is going to take an important stand here. JAKE TAPPER: Are you going to have to rely on Democrats to pass the rule in order to bring these bills to the floor, and also the legislation itself? JOHNSON: Well, I hope not. I hope our Republican colleagues will stand together, stick together on this. I think we understand, look, I'm a child of the '80s. I regard myself as a Reagan Republican. I understand the concept of maintaining peace through strength. That's one of our guiding principles. It's a really important philosophy. And it's a big part of our party and our world view. And I think here is an opportunity to make that stand at a really critical time in world history. SCARBOROUGH: I mean, this is like a movie for me. I went to sleep last night, and we were living in the age of Trump. And I woke up this morning, and now we're in the age of Reagan again. Listen to this. Peace through strength. Huh. MIKA: That sounds good. SCARBOROUGH: And you knowm, a couple days ago, I kind of got heated up about how Republicans hate on America so much. I was talking about how horrible America is. And I said America is the greatest country in the world. And they need to start saying it. Well, the Speaker said, "We're the greatest nation in the world." Good on him. Like, we don't hear this from Republicans.  We certainly don't hear that we have to actually fund people who are fighting against Russian aggression much these days. Except from, again, those responsible leaders, whether you're talking about the chairman of the intel committee or the chairman of the foreign affairs committee, people who are actually talking like grown-ups. But I've got to say, give credit where credit is due, and credit is definitely due with Speaker Johnson talking like a Reagan Republican, talking about the need to protect freedom in this fight between western democracy and what's going on in Russia.  

Metaphor Amnesia? Morning Joe Calls Trump an 'Animal,' Ready to 'Lash Out'

When Donald Trump referred to the illegal immigrant accused of killing 22-year-old Laken Riley on the University of Georgia campus as an "animal," the liberal media went aflame with outrage. Thus on MSNBC, Joy Reid condemned Trump's "dehumanizing and degrading" language [see clip at 2:00.] So, surely, no one on MSNBC would ever use the a-for-animal word in describing Donald Trump! Oh, wait. On today's Morning Joe, Mara Gay, an MSNBC analyst and member of the editorial board of the New York Times, said of Trump: "He's like a caged animal. And that's a dangerous situation. He's feeling very threatened. He's out of control. And so we do expect him to lash out." Oh no! Not just an animal, but an out-of-control animal! Creating a "dangerous situation" in which "we expect him to lash out." Yet for some reason, no one on the panel castigated Gay for her use of such "degrading and dehumanizing" language. Huh! Remind me to tune into Joy Reid's show later. Surely she will apply the same standard to Trump critics as she did to Trump himself! Or not. Notes: Gay's calling Trump an "animal" was preceded by a discussion of Trump's reported lack of discipline. Jonathan Lemire noted one exception to that rule -- that in the days prior to the 2016 election, Trump was persuaded to stay off Twitter and stay on message, which helped him win the election. But Lemire managed to work in a dig, saying that in addition to Trump's discipline, what contributed to his victory was "an assist from FBI Director Comey." That was a reference to the letter Comey sent days before the allegation saying that some of Hillary's emails had come to light that were pertinent to the FBI's investigation. Some in the liberal media blame Hillary's loss on that letter.  Scarborough admitted that, like Trump, he too finds it difficult to sit for hours on end, and that therefore "Mika lets me talk all the time to stay awake!" That might have been a peace offering from Joe toward Mika, who is reportedly fed up with his constant big-footing of her on the show.  Amateur psychiatrist Mika diagnosed Trump with an "ADD mentality." Here's the transcript. MSNBC Morning Joe 4/17/24 6:18 am EDT JOE SCARBOROUGH: Jonathan Lemire, obviously you've been covering Donald Trump a very long time. You understand that his lack of discipline is legendary. His [in]ability to sit still, legendary. He wrote, even in "The Art of the Deal" that, basically, that he didn't have the discipline to sit down and make plans for a day. He just kind of showed up in the office, answered phones, moved around, did things. Drudge puts it this way, "Don in Hell," [Mika laughs] with a picture of Donald Trump inside the courtroom. And for anybody that knows him, reported on him, that's been around him. The fact that this guy has to sit in a courtroom, six, seven, eight hours a day. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Oh, that's not good for him. SCARBOROUGH: Required to. It's just, it's something he has never done his entire life. JONATHAN LEMIRE: He has a legendary short attention span, ricocheting from one thought to the next, would always frustrate his business advisers, and certainly his White House staff. He's been, best I can tell, disciplined, only a handful of times in his life. Once, famously, in the last week or so of the 2016 election. The one time he was convinced to stay off Twitter, and he, mostly, stayed on message at rallies, and we know that helped him win there in those last few days—with an assist from FBI Director Comey. But that is certainly the exception rather than the rule.  SCARBOROUGH: And I will just say, yeah, anybody sitting six, seven, eight hours. You know me: if I were sitting somewhere for eight hours, I would, I would be falling asleep. I would be -- MIKA: You can't even get through four! [A reference to the daily length of Morning Joe.] SCARBOROUGH: I would be writing songs! Yeah, it's hard to even get through four, and Mika lets me talk all the time to stay awake! So I can't imagine: what a, what a physical toll for anybody. MIKA: This is where also it helps to have real firsthand knowledge of Donald Trump over the course of over a decade. And the guy has no attention span. We've seen it up front, and how we've known people who've worked for him, and they have to work around this sort of ADD mentality that he has, and the need for attention. Constant attention. Making moments. . . .  MARA GAY: And you saw yesterday that the judge recognized that concern in admonishing him and saying, I'm not going to have, you know, mumblings in my courtroom that could intimidate potential jurors. So, obviously that is a concern shared by many. I do agree with George [Conway.] I think that his pr capabilities are going to be somewhat limited in New York City, or maybe it was Jon that mentioned that a moment ago. That's absolutely true.  It's an ongoing concern. Because essentially, he's like a caged animal. And that's a dangerous situation. He's feeling very threatened. He's out of control. And so we do expect him to lash out. Anybody who has covered him over the past decade can expect that.