Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Feud Continues: Scarborough Taunts Trump as ‘Amnesty Don’

Feud Continues: Scarborough Taunts Trump as ‘Amnesty Don’

Scarborough Slaps Trump as ‘Amnesty Don’ 18 Times in 67 Seconds!

One week ago, a Twitter war erupted between Donald Trump and the hosts of Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski. Whereas the pair had been among the first in the media to take Trump’s chances seriously, in recent times they had become very critical of the Republican candidate.

On August 22nd, Trump tweeted that Mika was a “neurotic and not very bright mess!” He also threatened to some day tell the “real story” of Joe and Mika, whom he described as Scarborough’s “long-time girlfriend.” Scarborough responded with tweets telling Trump to “look in the mirror” if looking for someone who’s “neurotic and not very bright.” Scarborough added that the show was enjoying its best ratings ever “thanks to obsessed fans like you!”

The feud continued this morning. After an extended discussion of Trump’s mental health, with Scarborough suggesting that the Donald is a “sociopath” rather than the “psychopath” that former Obama adviser David Plouffe called him, Joe went on a riff, taunting Trump as “Amnesty Don” for his softening position on immigration. At one point, Scarborough deployed the “Amnesty Don” epithet no fewer than 18 times in 67 seconds.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: So think about this for 14 months, Amnesty Don. And a lot of people are calling him Amnesty Don.

JOHN HEILEMANN: People are saying it.

JOE: People are saying it. They’re calling him Amnesty Don. Amnesty Don, and that’s what people are calling him, I’m not calling him that. Amnesty Don, hashtag Amnesty Don

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: AmDon?

JOE: For 14 months Amnesty Don has been putting illegal immigration at the center of Amnesty Don‘s campaign. Right, John Heilemann?

HEILEMANN: Booyah.

JOE: And, yet, nobody in Amnesty Don‘s own campaign can tell you what Amnesty Don‘s position is after Amnesty Don won the primaries promising to deport 11 million, and telling Mika here, poor Mika, poor put-upon Mika. Telling poor put-upon Mika here that Amnesty Don was going to get a deportation force. But now Amnesty Don is softening.

MIKA: I thought he was kidding!

JOE: So now Amnesty Don this weekend, even Amnesty Don‘s own people–surrogates –don’t know what Amnesty Don‘s going to do on this.

HEILEMANN: What or when.

JOE: What or when. So, sort through Amnesty Don‘s statements on immigration and tell us what you think Amnesty Don‘s going to do.

HEILEMANN: I haven’t the faintest clue.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

legacyrepublican | August 29, 2016 at 8:47 am

This feud warrants a theme song.

Might I suggest Simon and Garfunkel’s Scarborough Fair

Der Donald told us all months ago that, “Everything in negotiable”.

Some of us listened and learned. This is no surprise.

Scarbough is a scum bag and Mika is the epitomizes the “dumb blonde”…

This does seem personal to be a personal conflict.

That said, the resolution to illegal immigration, excessive immigration, and refugee crises (from progressive wars), and the dysfunctional orientations and behaviors (e.g. abortion rites, redistributive change or trickle-up poverty) driving it, will require a bipartisan (e.g. America and Mexico, American and Somalia, America and Libya) effort.

People who take a Trump pledge seriously deserve the humiliation

Standard liberal voter demotivation tactics. Try to piss off the lower informed voter that supports / might support Trump because of immigration but still watches Morning Joe (are there any?) by calling into question his credentials on an important base voter topic.

Eh, I don’t see mattering a whole lot. Amnesty Don isn’t really catchy. Trump’s infinite flexibility on the topic looks like flip-flopping to those who dislike him, strategic ambiguity to the true believer, and reasonableness to the low informed who see him backing off his original “scary” position.

People going to confirm their biases, not a lot of movement on this messaging … Nice try, though, Joe.

Scarborough and Mika are purging themselves of the stain of all those early visits to Trump Tower. It’s purge or have no program with NBC.

Scarborough is a joke. But, the Trump campaign has placed their candidate in a precarious position with his “softening” on deportation.

Trump received the support that he did by claiming to be the anti-establishment candidate. A big part of that claim was based upon a promise that he would not embrace any scheme to reward people illegally in this country by allowing them to remain here and fast tracking their path to citizenship while imposing no, or ridiculously insignificant, penalties for violating the laws of the United States; which was exactly what the establishment was pushing. To float a trial balloon, at this point in his campaign, which advocates taking the establishment’s position, vis-a-vis the treatment of illegal immigrants, will lose him far more support, among his proven base, than he will gain from undecided and pro-amnesty voters.

This potential “position” on amnesty, will in no way control what he does as President. It is obviously designed to see how much additional support it will garner. Tactically, it is not a good move. And, strategically, it is even worse, as it opens the door to charges that Trump is not reliable, in his position on issues and is a flip-flopper. This undermines any attack against Hillary for here well publicized changes of position on issues over the years, as well.

I would expect to see Trump strongly reiterate his previous position on illegal immigrants, which requires all those here illegally to leave and file for re-admittance. This will reduce the damage which this trial balloon has already done to his campaign. This is not the time for Trump to be swerving off his existing positions in an attempt to woo additional voters.

    Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | August 29, 2016 at 11:41 am

    “I would expect to see Trump strongly reiterate his previous position on illegal immigrants, which requires all those here illegally to leave and file for re-admittance.”

    But that’s an implicit lie.

    That was Romney’s position in 2012, which Mr. Establishment called “maniacal”.

    Der Donald’s “previous position” was mass deportation, along with “embargoed remittances” to pay for it all. We were assured that could EASILY be done by T-rump suckers, which was stupid nonsense.

    I wonder if you can still find that published position on the internet, or if it’s been “disappeared” for convenience?

      I love the way you spin things.

      By deporting people living in this country illegally, with a subsequent reduction in the likelihood that they would be allowed to legally reenter, it encourages people to self-deport. Those who do not leave will be officially deported and such forced deportation could result in negating a chance at reentry. Now, those two situations run at the same time. It takes a finite amount of time to physically identify, locate and apprehend a person illegally in this country. And, our resources for doing this are finite. So, 11-40 million illegal aliens are not going to be deported overnight. To think otherwise is stupid. Trump never said that he was going to prosecute illegal aliens. That would not only slow down the process to an incredible degree, but would also place an impossible burden upon the taxpayers of this nation.

      Now Mitt Romney stated that he was opposed to a preferential pathway to citizenship or permanent residency for those who were in this country illegally. However, he turned right around and said that he hoped that a comprehensive immigration reform package got done. At the time a “comprehensive immigration reform package” consisted wholly of a “preferential pathway to permanent residency or citizenship for those illegally in this country”.

      Here is the Wall Street Journal, on 09/11/2015, with the following quote from Trump, regarding how he would handle the removal of illegal immigrants and their re-admittance to the US:

      http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/09/11/donald-trump-says-immigrant-deportations-done-in-two-years/

      “We have to get them out. If we have wonderful cases, they can come back in but they have to come back in legally,” Mr. Trump said in an audio clip posted on YouTube Thursday night by a person on the call.

        Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | August 29, 2016 at 12:42 pm

        I love how you rely on staw-man arguments.

        Nobody EVER said “over-night”.

        But Der Donald DID say this…

        On the call, Mr. Trump was asked for details about how long it would take to round up illegal immigrants living in the U.S., with the questioner asking if five or ten years was an appropriate timeframe. Mr. Trump said his two year benchmark could be met with “really good management.”

        “We have to get them out. If we have wonderful cases, they can come back in but they have to come back in legally,” Mr. Trump said in an audio clip posted on YouTube Thursday night by a person on the call.
        ==============================================

        I said all along that what T-rump proposed was bogus; it couldn’t happen. It WAS boob bait for boobs.

        I was called everything but a chile of gawd, and referred to “Operation Wetback”, which has NO relation to current law, political will, or current logistical requirements in REALITY.

          So what is your point? First you are arguing that Trump specifically said that he was only going to DEPORT illegals and not allow them to return. I just provided you with a source, form approximately a year ago where all he said was that we have to get them out [of the country] and that in certain cases they could be fast tracked on reentry.

          Now you are trying to argue that Trump’s position is all wrong because he might not be able to accomplish it in two years, but rather in four or five? I am having a hard time following your argument here. Perhaps if you stuck to a single point, and proved it, it might work out better for you.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | August 29, 2016 at 12:57 pm

          And for well over a year, I’ve been pointing out that Der Donald was an advocate of “touch-back amnesty”.

          I was called by you T-rump suckers a liar.

          Now, here you are, confirming EVERYTHING I’ve said for over a year, and pretending this NEW T-rump is who he’s always been.

          There isn’t a position T-rump holds that “he’s always held”. As truthful people know and recognize.

        Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | August 29, 2016 at 12:49 pm

        However, he turned right around and said that he hoped that a comprehensive immigration reform package got done. At the time a “comprehensive immigration reform package” consisted wholly of a “preferential pathway to permanent residency or citizenship for those illegally in this country”.
        ————————————————

        Bullshit. I’m in favor of “comprehensive immigration reform”, which would help to de-kludge legal immigration bureaucracy, end “anchor-baby” policy, and give real teeth in laws respecting employment of illegals and their access to American welfare benefits, etc.

          However, at the time that Romney said this, the evolving “comprehensive immigration reform” package called for none of those things. It was solely an amnesty policy including a fast track to citizenship for illegal aliens.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | August 29, 2016 at 12:58 pm

          Provide a link with Romney explicating what you attribute to him.

Joe who?

Ah yes, today’s iteration of Joe’s standard “people are saying” shtick. I suppose it’s intended to lend gravitas to a statement which lacks any concrete factual virtue on its own. In the vein of “eat —-, fifty billion flies can’t be wrong!”

Though the way he’s going about it makes me suspect that he’s caught a bit of whatever Hillary’s having, when she does that compulsive head-bob thing. Eighteen iterations is a tad excessive, even for somebody who has nothing more substantive to say.

Mark,

Thank you for watching and posting about that miserable show, so I don’t have to.

Here is some sounder commentary by someone who has been following the immigration issue for quite some time, and in detail.

Ruben Navarrette Jr.: Trump’s evolving immigration plan is no ‘flip-flop’

http://www.vcstar.com/opinion/columnists/ruben-navarrette-jr-trumps-evolving-immigration-plan-is-no-flip-flop–3ae8cfdf-7a19-58f1-e053-010000-391462851.html

    Ragspierre in reply to Valerie. | August 29, 2016 at 11:32 am

    Michelle Malkin is a toughie. She’ll grab you by the jugular and sink in.

    “Donald Trump’s new campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, says the presidential candidate is now going to focus on a “fair and humane” immigration agenda. At the same time, she claims Trump isn’t changing anything.

    Bullcrap alert. “Fair and humane” is Washington code for the same old open borders amnesty policies championed by Hillary Clinton, Jeb Bush, John Kasich, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan, the Chamber of Commerce, and Facebook’s lobbying arm, FWD.US. FWD.US, by the way, is the same left-wing group that Kellyanne Conway co-authored a polling memo for in 2014 arguing for a path to citizenship for millions of illegal aliens.

    Which Trump is supposed to oppose.

    Let’s get something straight. America’s immigration policy is already fairer and more humane than any other country in the world.”

    =snip=

    Newsflash: If Trump plans to keep his promise to get rid of these “bad ones,” he will need both a dramatically larger deportation force AND greatly expanded detention centers — both of which Trump has now backed away from.

    America’s immigration policies are generous to a fault. Putting our own interests last proved fatal. That was supposed to be the lasting lesson of 9/11.

    Either American workers and citizens are Donald Trump’s top priority or they aren’t. Choose.”

    – See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/08/trump-must-choose-open-borders-amnesty-or-american-workers#sthash.BSWHpZDH.dpuf
    – See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/08/trump-must-choose-open-borders-amnesty-or-american-workers#sthash.BSWHpZDH.dpuf

    But T-rumpian apologists will simply lie in support of the Great God Cheeto.

      Valerie in reply to Ragspierre. | August 29, 2016 at 2:13 pm

      I stopped reading Michelle Malkin after watching her orchestrate the last immigration debacle. Suddenly everything, everything, was AMNESTY!!!!!!!!

      It was a huge failure to capitalize on a huge win.

    Mac45 in reply to Valerie. | August 29, 2016 at 1:00 pm

    Any approach, that Trump takes to illegal immigration, which involves anything which even vaguely resembles rewarding illegal immigrants for violating the laws of the US, some for decades, will result in a significant loss among his base voting membership. Most of the people who comprise his base voting block see illegal immigrants as being law breakers; period. If we are going to reward illegal aliens for violating the law, then it is a short step to excusing the illegal actions of our elected officials [think email-gate here] to early release for violent felons. The largely law-abiding people who make up Trump’s support, are fed up with these types of practices. And, they are unlikely to vote for a man who would condone such actions.

    Ruben Navarrette, Jr:

    “A few journalists are part of a network, a closed loop, if you will, of radical left-wing, open borders, amnesty-seeking advocates. One of them is a columnist by the name of Ruben Navarrette, who knows, really, in my opinion, nothing about the issue of illegal immigration or the economics of it and certainly even less about journalism. He attacked me in a column, titled Stirring up Anti-Latino Sentiment. This is the kind of nonsense you get from these ridiculous, small-time, closed-loop journalists seeking amnesty and open borders.”

    – Lou Dobbs on CNN’s ‘Lou Dobbs Tonight’

There’s gold in them thar illegal beaners and none of the vested interests want the boat rocked all that much. The cheap labor migration that fueled Chins’a resurgence is being knocked off in Europe and in the Estados Unidos. The Trump “movement” was stillborn to anybody paying attention per the de facto demographic changes successfully effected by Mr Hopey-Changey himself with the enthusiastic help of uber quislings like Ryan. So, at best it is/was driven by a need to not have to prolong the driveling from the vanquished 16. The demographic has passed the tipping point and anybody trying to become chief of New Brazil will need to issue some flavor of “if you’re brown, stick around”. One consoling factor is that the section 8 housing will grow like mushrooms in the rain behind the gates of the #nevertrumpers and in the burbs of their fellow travelers, and it will be Mexicans who build them.
Anyway Joe-the Muppet and Zika are as good a brand as any for heroes of the stupid.

JackRussellTerrierist | August 29, 2016 at 11:42 pm

Mark, is Joe’s show the only topic that holds your interest? Are YOU really Joe and that’s a photo of your brother-in-law on the editor’s list? If not, why is this guy with this itty-bitty morning show almost the only topic you post about?

This isn’t a criticism, just curiosity.

Trump voter here.

Wall plus e-verify solves 90% of the problem. I really don’t care about what else happens. Even better, Trump says he’ll continue existing policy with regard to the illegals in the country. That’s not immediate deportation, but not amnesty either.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend