Who got to Joe Scarborough?
The question arises in light of Scarborough's stunning flip flop over the Colorado Supreme Court decision kicking Donald Trump off the ballot.
Yesterday, we caught Scarborough expressing surprising skepticism over the court's ruling. Scarborough dubiously asked whether the decision should be made by "people on cable news," or by state judges "randomly" deciding. Scarborough suggested that a prerequisite to barring Trump should be a conviction for insurrection in a D.C. court.
What a difference a day makes! Twenty-four hours later, there was Scarborough this morning, praising the Colorado decision to the heavens as "the most pro-democratic thing that can be done." Scarborough even approvingly cited former judge Michael Luttig, who, on Nicolle Wallace's MSNBC show yesterday, praised the Colorado decision as "a masterful judicial opinion. It is unassailable and irrefutable in every single respect."
So, seriously: who got to Scarborough? Wife and co-host Mika Brzezinski? MSNBC suits? Someone from the Biden campaign? We certainly hope Joe didn't wake up with a horse head in the bed!
Note: Scarborough even managed to work into his rant yet one more Trump-Hitler analogy. Trashing those who find the Colorado decision undemocratic, Scarborough said:
"I'm sure people who were following Hitler were talking about democracy a lot, I don't know, Mussolini. I guess they can go wave the banner of democracy around when it's actually the opposite of democracy."
Like people who wave the banner of democracy as they remove people from the ballot? Here's the transcript.
MSNBC
Morning Joe
12/21/23
6:03 am ETJOE SCARBOROUGH: We all saw it with our own eyes. This is, this is one of those moments where, are you going to believe me or are you going to believe your lying eyes?
Americans saw this with their eyes. They understand that Donald Trump did, in fact, take part, lead, encourage an insurrection to take place. They know that he told people that they needed to storm the Capitol, they needed to stop the count.
He got extraordinarily angry with the Secret Service when they stopped him from going up there because he wanted to march on the floor. He wanted, he wanted to be in the center of the insurrection.
. . .
So, yeah, yeah, he committed insurrection. Yes, if there were justice already, he'd be a lot more concerned about things than jus tnot being on the Colorado Republican ballot. He'd be concerned, because he should be in jail!
. . .
We either have a Constitution or we don't have a Constitution. Here's the factual question: Did Donald Trump commit insurrection?
MIKE BARNICLE: Yes.
SCARBOROUGH: If Donald Trump committed insurrection, then, as Judge Luttig said yesterday, it's not anti-democratic to follow the Constitution of the United States and section 3 of the 14th Amendment. That's, in fact, the most pro-democratic thing that can be done. Stay with me. Because if, in fact, he committed insurrection against the United States, this is the ultimate protectorate of that democracy.
I understand, it's sad and it's pathetic that people will say, Oh, Trump Derangement Syndrome. Oh, this. Oh, that, on other networks. They're going to be trying to confuse you. They're going to be trying to move the ball. They're going to be trying to confuse their own viewers, which they do quite regularly, quite often.
The fact is, the Constitution is crystal clear. If a court finds, as a Coloradoc ourt found, Donald Trump committed insurrection against a United States government, then you either follow the Constitution or you don't.
And you can talk about democracy all you want. I'm sure that people who were following Hitler were talking about democracy a lot, I don't know, Mussolini. Everybody can -- I guess they can go and wave, wave the banner of democracy around when it's actually the opposite of democracy. Actually the opposite of democracy. Committing insurrection against the United States Constitution. Trying to actually steal a presidential election: the antithesis of democracy.
You see what's going on right there [video rolls of crowd storming Capitol]? These people want you to believe that if the Constitution of the United States is followed, that's anti-democratic. They want you to believbe that the 14th amendment is anti-democratic. They want you to believe that section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which is crytal clear, is anti-democratic.
The fact is, what it does, the 14th Amendment, Section 3, protects us against those people and protects us against the, the, the thug that sent those people to Capitol Hill.
