Joe and Mika are butthurt by the backlash from them going to Mar-a-Lardo to slurp on trump’s tiny 🍄. “We went there to get the read of the man.” 🙄 What’s to read? We already know he’s a racist, fascist, criminal piece of shit. They can go fuck themselves.pic.twitter.com/N2hvBeVxla
— 😱 Scary Larry 😱 🇺🇦✊🏻🇺🇸🗽 (@aintscarylarry) December 5, 2024
In a classic example of platforming a demagogue and totalitarian whom pre-election they had labeled a "fascist," Joe Scarborough on Thursday morning
defended a meeting that he and Brzezinski had earlier this
month with Trump. Their revelation of the off-the-record visit to Mar-A-Lago
drew a backlash, as they had previously warned of Trump’s authoritarianism and
even compared him to a fascist.
He acknowledged that people were upset and that “maybe we should have given them more of a warning,” but “the main complaint was that we called Donald Trump’s rhetoric fascist during the campaign, and then we went down to have an off the record comment with him.” Brzezinski noted that other news outlets like The New York Times, The Washington Post and even The Atlantic have done the same.
When on November 18 the two revealed they had a chat with the President-elect
Scarborough said, “we didn’t see eye-to-eye on a lot of issues, and we told him so.” But “what we did agree on was to restart communications,” Brzezinski said, suggesting that their behavior should be a model for others..
Brzezinski said Trump was cheerful, upbeat and “seemed
interested in finding common ground with Democrats on some of the most divisive
issues.” She did not specify which ones.
In her explanation of the meeting, Brzezinski pointed to Trump’s election victory and said “Joe and I realized it’s time to do something different, and that starts with not only talking about Donald Trump, but talking with him.”.
Three+ weeks later
On Wednesday, during a segment on former Fox News host Pete
Hegseth’s teetering nomination as Trump’s next secretary of defense, (Atlantic writer David) Frum
quipped, “If you’re too drunk for Fox News, you’re very, very drunk indeed.”
That was in response to an NBC News report that colleagues on Fox & Friends
Weekend had concerns over Hegseth’s drinking.
With stick stuck squarely up her rear end
Brzezinski followed up the segment by telling viewers that Frum’s comment was “a little too flippant” and that “we have differences in coverage with Fox News, and that’s a good debate that we should have often, but right now I just want to say there’s a lot of good people who work at Fox News who care about Pete Hegseth, and we will want to leave it at that.
Frum responded
This morning, I had an unsettling experience.
I was invited onto MSNBC’s Morning Joe to talk from a studio in Washington, D.C., about an article I’d written on Trump’s approach to foreign policy. Before getting to the article, I was asked about the nomination of Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense—specifically about an NBC News report that his heavy drinking worried colleagues at Fox News and at the veterans organizations he’d headed. (A spokesman for the Trump transition told NBC, “These disgusting allegations are completely unfounded and false, and anyone peddling these defamatory lies to score political cheap shots is sickening.” )
I answered by reminding viewers of some history:
In 1989, President George H. W. Bush nominated John Tower, senator from Texas, for secretary of defense. Tower was a very considerable person, a real defense intellectual, someone who deeply understood defense, unlike the current nominee. It emerged that Tower had a drinking problem, and when he was drinking too much he would make himself a nuisance or worse to women around him. And for that reason, his nomination collapsed in 1989. You don’t want to think that our moral standards have declined so much that you can say: Let’s take all the drinking, all the sex-pesting, subtract any knowledge of defense, subtract any leadership, and there is your next secretary of defense for the 21st century.
I told this story in pungent terms. It’s cable TV, after all. And I introduced the discussion with a joke: “If you’re too drunk for Fox News, you’re very, very drunk indeed.”
At the next ad break, a producer spoke into my ear. He objected to my comments about Fox and warned me not to repeat them. I said something noncommittal and got another round of warning. After the break, I was asked a follow-up question on a different topic, about President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son. I did not revert to the earlier discussion, not because I had been warned, but because I had said my piece. I was then told that I was excused from the studio chair. Shortly afterward, co-host Mika Brzezinski read an apology for my remarks.
A little bit earlier in this block there was a comment made about Fox News, in our coverage about Pete Hegseth and the growing number of allegations about his behavior over the years and possible addiction to alcohol or issues with alcohol. The comment was a little too flippant for this moment that we’re in. We just want to make that comment as well. We want to make that clear. We have differences in coverage with Fox News, and that’s a good debate that we should have often, but right now I just want to say there’s a lot of good people who work at Fox News who care about Pete Hegseth, and we will want to leave it at that.
After the Wednesday incident and the responses to it, two additional things have become known while one thing remains unknown, despite speculation.
David Frum has never understood that the modern Republican Party, which he abhors, did not come out of thin air and had its antecedents at least as far back as the Reagan presidency. However, he obviously has a great deal of integrity, as his Hedgeseth remark, his willingness to move past it, and his written explanation evince.
We still cannot be confident of the reason for the visit by the Scarboroughs to Mar-a-Lago. It has seemed to me and to most observers that they were caving to Trump because they fear being among those who will be prosecuted and persecuted after January 20 for exercising their First Amendment rights. However, on Wednesday, Joe stated "Let me tell you something: You can talk to anybody that’s worked in the front office of NBC and MSNBC over the past 22 years, [they] will tell you I am not fearful. You talk to anybody who has served with me in Congress, they will tell you — not fearful of leadership.”
Times change, circumstances change, and people change and perhaps Joe and Mika- whatever Joe's past- are now scaredy cats, and justifiably so. Alternatively, they've read the tea leaves. Donald Trump is returning to the presidency, MSNBC is up for sale, and they may need an alternative in journalism or even a different career.
Currying favor with such a man, access journalism run amok, would be worse than merely acting out of fear. Interviewing Donald Trump on the latter's own turf, doing so without video, and choosing not to report the details of the chat are very bad indeed, made even worse when Brzezinski did Trump's bidding by claiming he was "cheerful, upbeat" and was "interested in finding common ground." Ms. Brzezinski is a fine stenographer but leaves unclear whether the President-elect played them or they're trying to play their viewers.
Yet, if their motive is not completely certain, the content of their character is. It's bad enough to suck up to Donald J. Trump. However, they exacerbated the situation when a flunky (with or without their direction) tells Frum not to repeat the comment. As requested, Frum avoids the subject, then is kicked out.
This is despicable behavior by the hosts and is making MSNBC look even worse than it has. And these days, that's difficult to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment