The A-block of MSNBC’s Morning Joe made clear on Monday that, even though the Biden administration had to backtrack on maintaining a refugee cap from the Trump administration, they’re still in tremendous shape and doing a fantastical job. Speaking for the panel, BBC’s Katty Kay emphasized the snafu over an immigration cap “was a kind of rare moment in what has been an impressively effective and efficient administration so far.”
And sounding more like Psaki-lite than Associated Press White House correspondent and MSNBC contributor, Jonathan Lemire did his best to cover for the Biden administration.
Co-host Joe Scarborough put the ball on the tee for Kay by playing a clip of President Biden admitting on Saturday that the border surge was indeed a “crisis” involving “young people”:
So, Katty, obvious fierce pushback from progressives. Not just really progressives in the Democratic Party, but a lot of Democrats, a lot of other outside groups that caused the Biden administration to reverse course quickly, in about 24 hours.
The disappointed Kay lamented that “it was a kind of rare moment in what has been an impressively effective and efficient administration so far, where the President and the White House was forced to do – turn back on itself and – and, as you say Joe, to do so very quickly.”
Presumably that didn’t include Press Secretary Jen Psaki’s numerous trips aboard the struggle bus during briefings, Psaki’s inability to grasp facts, President Biden’s inability to grasp facts, or their refusal to call the border situation a crisis to name a few.
Kay continued the pity party where the Biden administration let the world down by daring to follow something from Team Trump when it comes an orderly immigration process (click “expand”):
I've been speaking to human rights and refugee advocates over the last few weeks and they've been growing increasingly frustrated that the White House hasn't raised this cap from the Trump era. Then, when it was put out from the White House that it wasn't going to be raised, there was a massive amount of disappointment. You had Dick Durbin being, you know, actually vocally critical of the president, effectively. Something he really hasn't done so far, come out and say, you know, this can't stand, say it ain't so. And refugee advocates, as well, coming out and saying, this is not what America stands for. And it's not what the President had said he was going to do when he first came into office and it's not what Joe Biden had campaigned on.
I think the interesting thing here was the speed with which the White House changed its position, 24 hours. And the fact they made a misstep on this. They – they judged this one wrong. They seemed to think they could get away with keeping the levels the same because of the situation on the border. Perhaps they didn't want to be in a position to be criticized for raising refugee limits when you had the situation on the border. But it wasn't something that was tolerable, not just to progressives. This is not what the America was seen to have stand for during the Trump administration. They had a huge amount of criticism for it and they didn't want to see Joe Biden be in that same bucket.
Lemire came next and similarly was exasperated how “stunning” and “quick the reversal was.”
Referring to sources who told him of “some dissension” inside the administration and “a lot of second guessing,” he said they felt “really torched” from progressive allies and lawmakers before touting the White House’s dismissal of anyone using the word “crisis” to describe the scene at the border.
“[I]t is notable that [Biden] used the word ‘crisis’ to describe the situation at the border. I know it's this nomenclature in the White House that’s downplayed that it's a right-wing talking point, but it’s the first time we’ve heard someone from the White House use that word rather than ‘challenge,’” added Lemire.
A moment later, Lemire said that Vice President Kamala Harris is "planning her own trip to the border before long."
Earth to Jonathan: It's already been "long!" Biden put Harris in charge of the border a month ago! When will she go? Sometime after her 2024 presidential campaign, perhaps?
Before the first break, far-left Princeton professor and fellow MSNBCer Eddie Glaude insisted he was sad to see such “a very, very sad and tragic story” in “the devolution of the Republican Party” (click “expand”):
[T]here's a story to be told about the devolution of the Republican Party, the kind of metastasizing of a certain libertarian and nativist wing of the party that needs to be written. I think it's going to be a very, very sad and tragic story in some ways, but I also want to say this. There seems to be a through line and I would love to hear your thoughts about this, a through line over the last events from January 6th to voter suppression laws or voter laws to the attacks on Asian Americans to the debate around immigration.
(….)
And so, immigration debate – the immigration debate is weighted, it seems to me by this crisis around whiteness, this crisis around, who do we take ourselves to be as a country and it seems to me, if we make that explicit or maybe not, maybe we can get at the heart of what's blocking the away to – to serious immigration reform in the country. But as you say, though, there is a tragic story at the heart of this and that tragedy has layers, Joe, it seems to me.
This A-block suckup to the Biden administration was sponsored in part by Noom and USPS. Follow the links to see their contact information at the MRC's Conservatives Fight Back page.
To see the relevant MSNBC transcript from April 19, click “expand.”
MSNBC’s Morning Joe
April 19, 2021
6:17 a.m. EasternPRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: We’re going to increase the number. We had to – the problem was that the refugee part was working on the crisis that ended up on the border with young people. We wouldn’t do two things at once, but now we’re going to increase the number.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: So, Katty, obvious fierce pushback from progressives. Not just really progressives in the Democratic Party, but a lot of Democrats, a lot of other outside groups that caused the Biden administration to reverse course quickly, in about 24 hours.
KATTY KAY: Yeah, it was a kind of rare moment in what has been an impressively effective and efficient administration so far, where the President and the White House was forced to do -- turn back on itself and – and, as you say Joe, to do so very quickly. I've been speaking to human rights and refugee advocates over the last few weeks and they've been growing increasingly frustrated that the White House hasn't raised this cap from the Trump era. Then, when it was put out from the White House that it wasn't going to be raised, there was a massive amount of disappointment. You had Dick Durbin being, you know, actually vocally critical of the president, effectively. Something he really hasn't done so far, come out and say, you know, this can't stand, say it ain't so. And refugee advocates, as well, coming out and saying, this is not what America stands for. And it's not what the President had said he was going to do when he first came into office and it's not what Joe Biden had campaigned on. I think the interesting thing here was the speed with which the White House changed its position, 24 hours. And the fact they made a misstep on this. They – they judged this one wrong. They seemed to think they could get away with keeping the levels the same because of the situation on the border. Perhaps they didn't want to be in a position to be criticized for raising refugee limits when you had the situation on the border. But it wasn't something that was tolerable, not just to progressives. This is not what the America was seen to have stand for during the Trump administration. They had a huge amount of criticism for it and they didn't want to see Joe Biden be in that same bucket.
SCARBOROUGH: Jonathan Lemire, give us a look behind the scenes about what happened over that 24 hours.
JONATHAN LEMIRE: Certainly, Joe. Yes, it was stunning how quick the reversal was. The Friday morning, they put out the – the statement in terms of what the cap would be, that it wouldn't be lifted, that they were adhering to Trump-era policies. There's been some dissension, you know, within the west Wing as to, you know, how exactly to handle this, what would be the best messaging for it. Now, I will certainly say, over the weekend, there was a lot of second guessing as to how this came out and they were reactive. They saw immediately they were being really torched from lawmakers, like Senator Durbin, as Kathy just said, who have been largely positive of the administration. Progressive activists on the left. Liberals on social media with large followings really tearing into the President and saying, look, this is a broken promise. This is not what you said you would do last year during the campaign. And then we saw – we saw a hurriedly drafted statement by the White House released in the name of Press Secretary Jen Psaki, which blamed some confusion and sort of pointed the finger at the media for getting the number wrong. Well, that's simply not the case. They did, in fact, set the number there, at the lower mark. Now, they're saying they'll work to it. But it should be clear that 65,200 number – they’ve said what the President's original goal, that won't be met by the end of the year. They don't think that's realistic. They fanned out some advisers on the Sunday shows over the weekend to try to clarify this, including National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan who made a point of saying, look, refugees are in the air. The President is allowing those from the Middle East and Africa, some of these Muslim-majority countries that Donald Trump had banned them from coming. They are able to again, but acknowledged it would be a ramp up before they would initially hit the mark that the President had promised. So, this is being cited as somewhat of good news from activists, but they feel like he still has a long way to go. And just as a final point, I was part of those reporters who was with the President over the weekend after his first round of golf in office. And it is notable that he used the word “crisis” to describe the situation at the border. I know it's this nomenclature in the White House that’s downplayed that it's a right-wing talking point, but it’s the first time we’ve heard someone from the White House use that word rather than "challenge." And it speaks to the urgency that they recognize that they recognize the matter requires. Vice President Harris going to be talking about it again this week and planning her own trip to the border before long.
(….)
6:25 a.m. Eastern
EDDIE GLAUDE Jr.: Joe, I mean, there's a story to be told about the devolution of the Republican Party, the kind of metastasizing of a certain libertarian and nativist wing of the party that needs to be written. I think it's going to be a very, very sad and tragic story in some ways, but I also want to say this. There seems to be a through line and I would love to hear your thoughts about this, a through line over the last events from January 6th to voter suppression laws or voter laws to the attacks on Asian Americans to the debate around immigration. There is this crisis, and we saw it articulated in a very crude way in the America First Caucus document, or what was purportedly this document. There's this kind of crisis around American identity. Who do we take ourselves to be in this country? And so, immigration debate – the immigration debate is weighted, it seems to me by this crisis around whiteness, this crisis around, who do we take ourselves to be as a country and it seems to me, if we make that explicit or maybe not, maybe we can get at the heart of what's blocking the away to – to serious immigration reform in the country. But as you say, though, there is a tragic story at the heart of this and that tragedy has layers, Joe, it seems to me.
