Patrisse Cullors is supposedly one of the founders of the “Black Lives Matter” hashtag along with two other women (yeah, it took THREE women to come up with a hashtag), and she’s is super angry about stuff and is gonna shut down the Republican convention. The threat was made on MSNBC this morning, and the hosts gleefully laughed.
Because they can’t persuade anyone of the rightness of their cause, they can only threaten violence.
A well-placed source tells me MSNBC will announce today major changes to its afternoon lineup…arguably the most significant revamp the network has made at one time in its 19-year history.
Out:The Cycle at 3:00 PM. Now with Alex Wagner at 4:00 PM. The Ed Show with Ed Schultz at 5:00 PM (all times eastern).
In:Chuck Todd at 5:00 PM. Similar to Jake Tapper at CNN doing both weekday afternoons (hosting The Lead) andanchoring Sunday morning’s State of the Union, Todd will also continue to work weekends as moderator of Sunday’sMeet the Press. Todd’s MSNBC show will likely take on its old name The Daily Rundown, but that is not a guarantee.
More interesting: Andrea Mitchell will keep her program at noon (Andrea Mitchell Reports). Thomas Roberts will continue to anchor his midday news program from 1:00-3:00 PM. The programs being cancelled at 3:00 PM (The Cycle) and 4:00 PM (Now with Alex Wagner) will be replaced by a straight news program (similar to Roberts’ two-hour newscast preceding it). Whether that 3:00-5:00 PM slot goes to Brian Williams is not known at this time, but it would certainly make the most sense to put Williams directly up against Fox’s Shepard Smith (Shepard Smith Reporting) and CNN’s Brooke Baldwin (CNN Newsroom) for the first hour in a similar format.
Since coming on four months ago, relatively new NBC News Chief Andy Lack is obviously making his presence felt. Ratings are in the toilet…it somehow finished 5th in a four-horse race recently. Staffers and talent are walking on eggshells. And unless your last name is Matthews, Maddow or your first name Joe or Mika, nobody appears safe, as Mediaite’s Andrew Kirell reported exclusively earlier this week.
Once self-dubbed The Place for Politics, MSNBC goes back to its 1996 roots: More news, less talk.
The place for politics pertains only to mornings and prime-time now. Lack quickly realized that the lack of balance via almost all opinion programming and very little hard news offerings was killing the network as audiences ran to CNN and Fox in droves when any big breaking story was happening. The good news for fans of the network is the Lack’s actually doing something about it…all while tapping resources from the NBC Mothership to help make it happen without breaking the bank.
Fixing dayside was a no-brainer. 6:00 PM and 8:00 PM are likely next. Some old faces may be returning. MSNBC will soon look very different, courtesy of the biggest change in its lineup in nearly two decades.
And Andy Lack isn’t done shaking things up at 30 Rock…not by a long shot.
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said that “five different sources” told him that Mexico’s government is sending people to the US on Wednesday’s “Morning Joe” on MSNBC.
Trump was asked, “Do you believe that Mexican immigrants are rapists and murderers?” He said, “Illegal immigrants are causing tremendous problem[s] coming in. I want legal immigrants, illegal immigrants are causing tremendous problems, Mika. There’s crime. It’s a crime wave. It’s a disaster. Do I believe many people — I mean, look, as far as I’m concerned, I hire, I have hundreds and hundreds of Mexicans working for me. I love Mexican people. I love their spirit. The problem we’re having with Mexico is that their government officials and negotiators are far smarter than ours, like from a different planet. And they are negotiating deals, trade deals, the border, everything else. We are getting the short end of the stick in every single instance. And we are having a big problem. Let me just tell you just to finish, Mexico is sending a lot of their people over that they don’t want. And that includes people that should be in Mexican prisons and you know it and I know it and nobody wants to talk about it.”
Trump was then asked how he knew the Mexican government is sending people to the US, he said, “Because I heard from five different sources. And if you speak to the border guards, who I’ve spoke to many of, if you speak to border guards, and these guys are terrific. They’re almost crying, they’ve almost got tears in their eyes when they explain that they’re not allowed to do their job.”
After he was asked by panelist Mark Halperin what these five sources were, Trump stated, “I’ll reveal my sources when you reveal your sources, Mark. I have a lot of information on it, and so does everyone else. And you probably do, too. And for some reason they don’t want to put out this information. Mexico — and if you remember, many years ago when Fidel Castro opened [his] prisons and sent the people over, and everybody knew it. We never sent them back. We took these — all of these prisoners. Mexico, in a far more sophisticated way, is doing something very similar. They’re sending tremendously — you look at the man that killed Kate. You look at Jamiel, Jamiel Shaw, you look at so many — thousands of instances where illegals are coming in, and it’s a crime wave. And, frankly, Mexico doesn’t care, from the standpoint that they don’t want to house these people for a long period of time in their prisons. They say, ‘Let the United States take care of them. Let the United States put them in their jails. Why should we pay for it?’ And believe me it’s happening, and it’s happening big league, and this country doesn’t know.”
Earlier, Trump said of the Iran deal, “It’s a ridiculous deal. Even a thing like, you know, nuclear’s so important, and stopping nuclear proliferation, which this deal, I think will enhance, but so important. But something like at the beginning, when they were discussing it, we had three prisoners. We now have four prisoners. Automatically you say, ‘Listen, not going to do you any good. Release the prisoners.’ We’d send a great signal to everybody, you don’t care about them, but we do, important for the United States, just release the prisoners. Now, if that’s delivered by right messenger, they would have done it a long time ago. Amazingly, they — I don’t even think that Kerry brought it up. It sounds like he never even brought it up. He said one thing has nothing to do with the other. The other thing is giving billions and billions of dollars to them, releasing the money before you even do the deal, where they’re getting billions of dollars, they are going to be so rich and so powerful. And when you talk about the deal itself, anytime, anywhere, you have to go in and inspect anytime anywhere. Now, they have a 24-day notice provision. Give a 24-day notice to go in and inspect? I think it’s made by people that are incompetent. And it might very well get by, because probably the veto is, you know, it’s going to be — he’s in pretty good shape in terms of that. But I think it’s a disgrace. And we should have doubled up the sanctions, and we should have made a deal where they caved. We were dealing from desperation. We look so desperate, and it’s a disgrace. … I love the idea of a deal, by the way, but it’s not a well-negotiated deal. We should have doubled up the sanctions and made a much better deal.”
Trump was then asked if he’d read the deal, he answered that he had “seen the deal,” had “seen it broken down in every newspaper you can imagine” and had read “the good points and the bad points. And the good points aren’t very strong.” Trump was then questioned about whether the US could have held the sanctions together, he responded, “If you had a president that was a leader, he would be able. He can’t even talk. When you look at where we are with countries, with — as an example, with Russia, they can’t even talk together. Putin can’t stand him, in all fairness, he can’t stand Putin. But Putin doesn’t respect him. It’s about leadership. You have to hold the sanctions together. And if they — if we had the right leadership, it would be something much different. You know, Russia is a big beneficiary of this deal. There are numerous places that are going to be big beneficiaries of this deal.”
The mother of Baltimore city state’s attorney Marilyn Mosby faced numerous disciplinary actions during her 20-year career as a Boston police officer, though the public wouldn’t know it based on the Freddie Gray case prosecutor’s public statements touting her family’s strong policing history.
The 35-year-old Mosby has used her family’s police ties to rebut critics who say she rushed to judgement and overcharged the six cops involved in Gray’s April 12 arrest. The 25-year-old Gray died a week later, touching off rioting in Baltimore and nationwide protests.
“Law enforcement is pretty much instilled within my being,” Mosby told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes on May 1, the day she publicly announced charges against the officers. “I come from five generations of police officers,” she added, pointing out that her mother, father, grandfather and uncles have all served as cops.
But there’s more to the story than Mosby has let on.
Personnel records obtained by The Daily Caller show that Mosby’s mother, Linda Thompson, first violated the Boston police department’s substance abuse policy in 2006. After serving a 45-day rehab stint, Thompson violated the drug code again and voluntarily resigned on Feb. 1, 2008, rather than be fired.
The early retirement allowed Thompson, now 52, to draw a $1,810.69 monthly pension.
Thompson is not the only member of Mosby’s family to have had a rocky policing career. Mosby’s father was fired from the Boston police department in 1991 following accusations that he and his partner robbed drug dealers at gun point. Mosby’s uncle was fired from Boston PD in 2001 after testing positive for cocaine. Her grandfather was a well-respected Boston cop, but he ultimately and unsuccessfully sued the department for racial discrimination in the 1980s.
Mosby has not publicly mentioned any of that during her speeches when running for Baltimore state’s attorney or since taking on the Gray case.
“A majority of police officers are risking their lives day-in and day-out,” Mosby told Hayes during her interview. “Recognizing that, because that’s what my family did, I also recognize that there are those individuals that usurp their authority who will…go past the public trust.”
“When they do that, you have to hold those individuals accountable,” Mosby added.
On the July 1 edition of Hardball on MSNBC, Chris Matthews brought former Democratic senator and presidential candidate Gary Hart to the program to discuss his book and today’s politics. Matthews asked Hart about “the ideological direction of the party right now” and added that Bernie Sanders is bringing a kind of 1960s message to Democratic politics. The Hardball host then transitioned to discuss Hillary Clinton, making a dubious observation: “Hillary Clinton [is] more of a conservative in a sense of more of a traditional politician from the center, center.”
Matthews asked Hart how he would like to see this battle in the Democratic Party shake out. The former Colorado Democrat replied: "Today, I think Senator Sanders is rallying a base – a part of the Democratic base that has not been appealed to because of the so-called centrism that’s been going on and off in the Democratic Party. I've never quite understood what that was, but avoidance, I think, of controversial positions. Hart added that he thinks “there is a chance for a generational change here.” After Matthews questioned Hart on who he’d support in the Democratic primaries in 2016, the former presidential candidate named Martin O’Malley (D-MD) as his favorite candidate. Also wanting to get a word in about Donald Trump, Hart largely dismissed the billionaire as a product of high name ID. He noted that, right now, “all you hear about” is the media covering Trump. Hart elaborated: “[T]he polls...often reflect name recognition. You stop somebody on the street, you give them 10 or 15 names, half of those people will pick a name they've heard of. And who have they heard of recently but Donald Trump?”
During his podcast before his Thursday show on MSNBC, Ed Schultz offered his thoughts on the nationwide renewal of the controversy surrounding the Confederate flag. Schultz said that while he understood why people wanted to remove the flag from government buildings in wake of the Charleston shooting, “the attempt to erase American history as if it’s going to change our course as a nation” is an overboard response.
“The desecration of our nation’s history, I think, is dangerous and I think it’s unproductive,” Schultz said. He went on to defend the flag as a part of America’s roots, saying that eradication would not do as much good as putting the flag into a context that teaches and recognizes the historical progression of national values.
“I think its display in public places, number one, is misplaced and it should be corrected and it is being corrected,” Shucltz said. “But to erase the roots of our country serves no purpose for future generations.”
Schultz also took a moment to address the tragic irony that “it took the death of nine people for us to realize, you know, maybe that flag is the wrong message.” Schultz concluded that the Confederate flag still offers value by sending a message that “where we were as a country back then is not where we are today”:
“I think it serves no purpose to this country for future generations if we’re going to totally rewrite the history books and I see an avalanche starting with the removal of the Confederate flag. We have to do this in a smart way.”
As a senator from New York, Hillary Clinton was staunchly opposed to recognizing same-sex marriage. She expressed that sentiment clearly in this 2002 interview with TV host Chris Matthews (starting at 2:05 mark):
"Let me ask you this about some domestic issues in New York State. This state is always the sort of the social beginnings of so much in this country," liberal host Matthews started. "People come here, a lot of immigrants. The New York Times recently began posting the celebrations of gay unions. Not just straight people getting married, but gay people who want to announce their unions. Do you think New York State should recognize gay marriage?"
Clinton delivered a one-word response: "No."
The crowd booed in response.
Clinton flip-flopped on same-sex marriage in 2013 when she released a recorded video saying she now supported the policy switch.
Hillary Clinton spoke to Jon Ralston on Ralston Live Thursday night. Trade agreements, ISIS and many other likely “hot button” topics for the coming 2016 election came up, but considering Wednesday’s horrible events in Charleston, South Carolina, Ralston brought up President Barack Obama‘s comments about gun violence.
Everyone from Fox News to MSNBC has already chimed in on the matter, but Clinton wasn’t about to miss her opportunity. She criticized the possible role that “hotter and more negative” public discourse plays in such events, pinpointing comments made by none other than Donald Trump as an example:
A recent entry into the Republican presidential campaign said some very inflammatory things about Mexico.
Clinton didn’t name Trump, of course, but “The Donald” wasn’t just going to sit idly by. He took to his#TrumpVlog (yes, that’s a thing) on Friday to chastise Clinton, saying “Wow, it’s pretty pathetic that Hillary Clinton just blamed me for the horrendous attack that took place in South Carolina.”
Check out the clip below, courtesy of Donald Trump’s Instagram account:
Someone inside the network must think: MSNBC’s schedule is fracturing and struggling, they want to have better breaking-news chops. Why not bring in the “news” man to make it less of a leftist talk-TV channel? Wemple won’t have it:
Putting aside the structural problem that liberals are splintered in their brand loyalties, MSNBC has caused a great deal of its struggles. Lifeless programming, tepid panel discussions, excessive liberal agreeing and the occasional nasty comment followed by an excellent apology — these are the dynamics that help to account for the cable channel’s worm-level ratings.
One problem it doesn’t need is Brian Williams. By one count, this is the guy who’s been busted by an internal investigation for 11 quite outrageous embellishments regarding his past. At the same time, Williams is a smooth news delivery vehicle with a high name recognition: If he is unloaded on MSNBC, how much worse can things get?
Considerably. MSNBC’s critics are a motivated bunch and are already busy enough with Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews & Co. Just watch what happens when Williams pilots a report having to do with Iraq or helicopters or Israel. Then again, there really aren’t a lot of places to hide a liability like Williams, whose six-month suspension is up in August. Newsrooms don’t designate set-asides for embellishers.
By exposing the limits of identity politics, you've revealed the absurdity of those who cling to it
GUTFELD: On MSNBC, whatever that is, Michael Eric Dyson said Rachel Dolezal is blacker than Clarence Thomas. Roll it, Francine.
GUILFOYLE: And you can make that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: You know those of us who talk about race as a social construct, that it is more complicated. Bill Clinton is the first black president, though, he didn't try to he was black. It means that, she may be not African-American, but she certainly could be black in a cultural sense. She's taken on the ideas, the identities, the struggles, she's identified with them. I bet a lot more black people would support Rachel Dolezal than with supports to Clarence Thomas.
MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry, who previously wondered whether it was possible that Rachel Dolezal actually was black, straightforwardly asked the former Spokane NAACP head in a recent interview whether or not she was a con artist.
“Are a con artist?” Harris-Perry asks, in a preview of the interview posted on MSNBC.com.
“I don’t think so, you know?” Dolezal responded. “I don’t think that anything that I have done with regards to the movement, my work, my life, my identity– I mean it’s all been very thoughtful and careful.”
Dolezal enigmatically added that some of her decisions were made for “survival reasons,” and that when it came to protecting her kids, “I will never stand down on that.”
MSNBC's Morning Joe welcomed Mary Katharine and me on-set today for a lengthy conversation about our new book, End of Discussion. Given our -- shall we say -- less than glowing assessment of the network in the book, we weren't quite sure how we'd be received. Judge for yourself, but we thought the panel agreed with our central thesis and were quite welcoming and gracious:
Scarborough was clearly on board, and Willie Geist thoroughly endorsed our premise as it pertains to the prevailing winds in academia. Mika, unsurprisingly, was the most skeptical segment participant, challenging us on whether the Right contributes to America's toxic Outrage Industry culture, as well. As we noted, it was a fair question, and one we anticipated. She seemed fairly satisfied with our answer. I'll leave you with another programming note: MKH and I will be guest-hosting the nationally-syndicated Hugh Hewitt radio show this evening from 6-9 pm ET. We hope you'll tune in! Via: Townhall Continue Reading....
In recent years a lot of attention has been placed on media bias. Those on the right of the political spectrum are always pointing out the left wing bias of the mainstream media such as the New York Times, CNN and no one’s favourite, MSNBC.
Those on the left deny such bias because they are incapable of seeing it. To them, left wing views are not biased but merely the truth. Divergent views are wrong and those who accuse the media of a progressive bias are morons who simply do not understand what the truth is.
If last week is any indication, there is a more serious problem with the media than just the run-of-the-mill bias; it is the absolute stupidity of some of those who appear on major networks.
Diane Rehm
NPR’s Diane Rehm was interviewing Sen. Bernie Sanders who is seeking the Democrat nomination for president. Rehm didn’t ask but stated as a fact that Sanders, who is Jewish, is both a citizen of the United States and Israel.
Sanders responded he is not an Israeli citizen and has never lived in that country although he has visited there. According to Rehm, she has a “list” that clearly shows Sanders as well as other Jews are citizens of Israel.
The “list” Rehm spoke of was provided by an anti-Semitic group. It is nothing more than a Jew-hating conspiracy that every Jewish person is automatically a citizen of Israel and therefore should not hold elective office, especially the presidency, because they have divided loyalties.
It has been seven years since President Obama first thrilled MSNBC's Chris Matthews — and it looks like the thrill is not gone.
"I'm a political romantic, as many of you know now, I love stories of the Kennedys and Franklin Roosevelt," Matthews said this week.
The MSNBC host's remarks came during a larger discussion with panel guests on the friendship between Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Matthews and his guests also touched on the recent death of the vice president's son, Beau, who died in late May of brain cancer.
"Winston Churchill and Charles deGaulle and yes, I got a thrill from the early speeches of Barack Obama. But nothing in that was as human as what we witnessed this weekend [at the vice president's son's funeral]," he said.
Since 2008, Matthews has battled constant mockery over his claiming once that a speech by Obama sent a "thrill" up his leg.
"I have to tell you, you know, it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech," he said during an evening newscast. "My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often."
MSNBC’s Ed Schultz continued his critique of President Barack Obama’s push for Fast Track Authority on trade Friday by invoking the president’s race as he looks to push through a deal against Democratic opposition.
In his opening monologue, Schultz wondered why Democrats should “give the president fast track authority,” before going on to invoke Obama’s ethnicity into the debate
“Why give the president fast track authority? Because he’s African-American? I don’t think so,” Schultz said. “I don’t care if the president’s Asian, African-American, from Nigeria, if he’s a fat white guy from Minnesota, it doesn’t matter.”
ED SCHULTZ: The bottom line in all of this is that we have a track record of trade agreements that have gutted American jobs. In fact, we have seen the Chinese cheat when it comes to trade agreements. We have seen them dump stuff on our market. And the trade agreements aren’t set up where we can recoil fast enough and straighten things out. By that time, the jobs are lost down the road. So this is more of the same.
So why give the president fast track authority? Because he’s African-American? I don’t think so. I don’t care if the president’s Asian, African-American, from Nigeria, if he’s a fat white guy from Minnesota, it doesn’t matter. The fact is, this is a bad deal for America. And no one’s telling the truth exactly what is in this. And why do we have to have a trade deal with Brunei? Sharia law. Really? That’s going to make our economy better? No. This is a Wall Street deal. This is a corporate deal. It’s not for the betterment of raising wages in this country.
Kathleen Matthews, the wife of MSNBC personality Chris Matthews, has entered the Democratic primary to replace Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who is running for Senate.
Matthews on Wednesday launched her campaign for Maryland’s 8th District House seat from downtown Silver Spring, vowing to fight for a litany of liberal causes, including equal pay for women, abortion rights, and raising the minimum wage, according toTheWashington Post.
Matthews is a former local news anchor. She most recently served as an executive for Marriott Hotels but stepped down from that position last month as she geared up for the House race.
Matthews’s name recognition, and her family’s deep political ties, could help her stand apart from the huge field of Democrats seeking to replace Van Hollen.
Still, she’s never run for elected office before and faces a deep field of experienced state-level officials in the primary.
So far, Maryland Dels. Kumar Barve and Ana Sol Gutierrez are in the race, along with Will Jawando, a former aide to President Obama, and state Sen. Jamie Raskin.
A handful of other Maryland delegates and county officials are also believed to be eyeing the race in a safe Democratic district.
Van Hollen cannot run for reelection to the House because he is seeking the Senate seat left open by the retirement of Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.). Maryland law prevents candidates from running for both.
Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina argued that “titles are just titles” and Hillary Clinton’s “track record” includes the collapse of the Middle East and the failed Russian reset on Wednesday’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” on MSNBC.
Fiorina said, “I come from a world where titles are just titles, and talk is just talk. It’s only in politics where titles and words mean a lot. In the rest of the world, it’s actually about what have you done, actions speak louder than words. People want to know are your words and your actions consistent and are they consistent over time. And so, I think when 82% of the American people now believe that there is a professional political class more interested in preserving its own power and privilege than it is in serving the American people, people expect basic questions to be asked of anyone running for president. ‘What have you done, are you trustworthy, are you transparent, will you answer questions?'”
Fiorina said that while Hillary Clinton has said some “wonderful things” as Secretary of State, “it’s also true that as Secretary of State she took women’s rights and human rights off the table for discussion with China. It’s also true as Secretary of State that she called Bashar al-Assad a positive reformer. It’s also true that in 2011, when she was Secretary of State, she said that Iraq was a free, stable, sovereign nation. And now we have a nation falling apart, Iranian influence growing, ISIS growing. It’s true that she said that she could reset our Russia — our relationship with Russia and Vladimir Putin is on the march. So, I think all of those things I just named go fundamentally to what is her track record.”
After host Andrea Mitchell stated, “You could also argue that a lot of Republicans in the White House and in Congress supported those policies –” Fiorina responded, “absolutely, that’s right. And by the way, every single Republican candidate has been asked about their vote for the war in Iraq. The one person who’s not been asked that question, because she won’t answer the question is Hillary Clinton. One person who was on the job in 2011, when Iraq started to fall apart, was not the Republican nominees or — candidates for president, it’s Hillary Clinton. she hasn’t been asked yet. What would she do now in Iraq?”
So it makes perverse sense that the deposition of MSNBC President Phil Griffin turned into a show and tell exhibit, with the MSNBC president forced to read back all the emails Schultz sent his ex-business partner Michael Queen promising him a piece of the pie.
And that was even before Griffin volunteered that he was just so impressed with Schultz when he thought he saw him ask a question at Barack Obama’s first presidential news conference.
The Mirror has exclusively obtained the video of Griffin’s deposition on September 4, 2014 at NBC headquarters in New York. Lawyers presented Griffin with email after email that Schultz wrote to Queen making clear they had partnered to get Schultz a TV show.
Abbott had Griffin read the emails aloud and then asked if Schultz ever discussed them with him.
The point was that Schultz deliberately cut Queen out of the loop when he inked a deal with Griffin. About 15 minutes into the deposition, Catfish Abbott, the trial lawyer for Queen, gave Griffin a June 7, 2008 email from Schultz to Queen about the show pilot.
Like a chastened schoolboy, Griffin [at 14:30 on the video] dutifully read it aloud.
Putting aside the structural problem that liberals are splintered in their brand loyalties, MSNBC has caused a great deal of its struggles. Lifeless programming, tepid panel discussions, excessive liberal agreeing and the occasional nasty comment followed by an excellent apology — these are the dynamics that help to account for the cable channel’s worm-level ratings.
One problem it doesn’t need is Brian Williams. By one count, this is the guy who’s been busted by an internal investigation for 11 quite outrageous embellishments regarding his past. At the same time, Williams is a smooth news delivery vehicle with a high name recognition: If he is unloaded on MSNBC, how much worse can things get?Considerably. MSNBC’s critics are a motivated bunch and are already busy enough with Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews & Co. Just watch what happens when Williams pilots a report having to do with Iraq or helicopters or Israel. Then again, there really aren’t a lot of places to hide a liability like Williams, whose six-month suspension is up in August. Newsrooms don’t designate set-asides for embellishers.
MSNBC's Morning Joe welcomed Mary Katharine and me on-set today for a lengthy conversation about our new book, End of Discussion. Given our -- shall we say -- less than glowing assessment of the network in the book, we weren't quite sure how we'd be received. Judge for yourself, but we thought the panel agreed with our central thesis and were quite welcoming and gracious:
