On Friday morning, MSNBC host Willie Geist was stunned and appalled after watching a clip of a Texas Republican get into a screaming match with acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe during a hearing on Thursday.

The hearing on the Donald Trump assassination attempt in Pennsylvania, which the the Washington Post's Jackie Alemany stated was productive until the altercation, descended into chaos as Rep. Pat Fallon (R-TX) bellowed and pointed his finger at Rowe who returned fire.

Following sharing the clip, a stunned Geist uttered, "Good lord, what's going on here?

"Yeah, Willie, it's actually, I have to say, up until that moment I was in the room I was thinking to myself, 'Wow, this is really such a substantive congressional hearing that we're having,' there were a lot of productive exchanges between Republicans and Democrats until that moment," the Washington Post reporter responded.

"Actually the exchange began with Pat Fallon asking Rowe why, as the second in command to [ex-CIA director] Kimberly Cheatle at the time of the assassination if he was aware of some of the heightened threats against Donald Trump... and more proactive in terms of deploying counter-surveillance units and counter-assault units to try to ultimately prevent the assassination attempt on Donald Trump," she elaborated.

"Basically insinuating that Rowe was in a position as the number two at the agency at the time to try to have the knowledge to prevent something like that," she continued. "And then from there it devolved into Fallon accusing Rowe of trying to position himself for personal gain, that he was essentially auditioning for a job for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris by trying to get in the back of this photo op."

Geist then noted that Republican lawmakers, under Donald Trump, have become notorious for using hearings to get attention for themselves.

'I think some of those members of Congress, as you know Jackie, are used to using those hearings to grandstand, maybe raise some money, get some clips online," he observed. "Not always used to getting it back as good as they gave in that hearing."

You can watch below or at the link right here.

On his Substack platform on Thursday afternoon, former fU.S. Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman announced he has resigned as a contributor to the L.A. Times editorial page in protest over the paper's owner for his unabashed support for Donald Trump.

The Times has been in turmoils since billionaire owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong refused to let the editorial board of the venerable paper publish an editorial endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris.

On Wednesday, Litman joined the exodus from the paper that included editorials editor Mariel Garza in protest over Soon-Shiong's increasing interference that has now grown to him trying "to force the paper, over the forceful objections of his staff, into a posture more sympathetic to Donald Trump," as he wrote on Thursday.

Writing he has been associated with the paper for fifteen years, serving as the Senior Legal Columnist for the past three years, Litman announced he has parted ways.

"I have written my last op-ed for the Times. Yesterday, I resigned my position. I don’t want to continue to work for a paper that is appeasing Trump and facilitating his assault on democratic rule for craven reasons," he wrote before explaining his departure is the result of an "... existential stakes for our democracy that I believe Trump’s second term poses, and the evidence that Soon-Shiong is currying favor with the President-elect, they are repugnant and dangerous."

Regarding the spiking of the pro-Harris editorial, he wrote, "By far the most important problem with Soon-Shiong’s scrapping of the editorial was the apparent motivation. It is untenable to suggest that Soon-Shiong woke up with sudden misgivings over Harris’s criminal justice record or with newfound affection for Trump’s immigration proposals. The plain inference, and the one that readers and national observers have adopted, is that he wanted to hedge his bets in case Trump won—not even to protect the paper’s fortunes but rather his multi-billion-dollar holdings in other fields. It seems evident that he was currying favor with Trump and capitulating to the President-elect’s well-known pettiness and vengefulness."

He added, "Trump has made it clear that he will make trouble for media outlets that cross him. Rather than reacting with indignation at this challenge to his paper’s critical function in a democracy, Soon-Shiong threw the paper to the wolves. That was cowardly."

Litman, a regular presence on cable TV as a legal commenter, added, "I don’t pretend that my resignation is any kind of serious counter-blow to the damage of Soon-Shiong’s cozying up to Trump.... But the cost of alliance with an important national institution that has such an important role to play in pushing back against authoritarian rule, but declines to do so for spurious and selfish reasons, feels too great. And Soon-Shiong’s conscious pattern of détente with Trump has in fact recast the paper’s core identity to one of appeasement with an authoritarian madman. I am loath to affiliate with that identity in any way."

You can read more here.

Should ex-Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-D FL) make it through a Senate hearing and then a vote of the Senate floor to be the next attorney general, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) could be putting her political future on the line.

That is the opinion of MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, who pointed out that the Maine Republican has survived controversial votes before –– notably putting Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court despite allegations of sexual assault — but Gaetz, facing even worse accusations, would be a bridge too far for voters if she gives him a pass too.

Speaking with his panel, the "Morning Joe" host pointed out that Collins is facing re-election in 2026 and her Gaetz vote, should it come to pass, would likely be central to her re-election hopes.

For Collins, who would be 79 at the end of her term if she wins re-election in 2026, Scarborough stated she could be forced into retirement if she approves the embattled Florida Republican.

"Two years from now, Susan Collins will either be re-elected, or she will be retired," he began. "And if anybody thinks that Susan Collins can win in Maine, when she rolls over –– I'm not saying she is, she's been very critical –– but if the Senate says, 'Oh, yeah, we're going to just give up our constitutional prerogative,' Susan Collins has to run in Maine and a lot of other Republicans have to run in Senate re-elections two years from now."

"Does he really want to have a guy that has a 17-year-old junior saying she was raped at a drug-fueled orgy or the things over Tulsi Gabbard?" he asked. "I'm saying Susan Collins, because to be honest with you, I don't know who else is running two years from now, but I know she is and in pretty deep blue state."

"These senators understand that they're going to be a lot of twists and turns," he pointed out. "Donald Trump elected in '16, Democrats great year in '18. Barack Obama swept in '08, and then the Tea Party, and you can go back to Ronald Reagan."

"These senators know this and so, I just don't know they're going to go, 'No mas, we're scared of you,' because what people are feeling today is not what they're going to be feeling two years from now," he warned.

You can watch below or at the link.

According to former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, the slate of Donald Trump's personal lawyers who are being lavished with jobs in his administration have already been warned by one former DOJ official turned member of the House that their every move will be scrutinized.

Appearing on MSNBC's "The Weekend", Vance was asked for her reaction to the president-elect appointing three of his criminal defense lawyers, Todd Blache, Emil Bove and Dean John Sauer, to top DOJ posts.

With MSNBC host Michael Steele noting that Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) has stated, "Donald Trump has been clear that he intends to weaponize the DOJ for his partisan interests,” Goldman added, “but I expect Todd and Emil to adhere to those principles and the rule of law in the face of any pressure to do otherwise,” Vance was asked what the lawmaker was implying.

"I read Dan's comments a little bit differently, and our friend Mimi Rocha who's also in that office and is now the D.A. in Westchester County made similar comments to that," she explained. "I think what Dan is doing, he's level-setting expectations. He's talking to two of his former colleagues and he is saying, 'I know you. We were raised in the same Justice Department. We understand the rules. We get the importance of the rule of law. We don't let the political folks direct criminal prosecutions and my eyes are on you.'"

"I read his comments very clearly, as talking to two former colleagues and saying, you will not get a pass from me," she added. "So, I think that's frankly what a lot of former dDOJ people are doing."

"Look, there is no reason to have confidence in anyone who would agree to work for Donald Trump," she warned.

Watch below or at the link.

- YouTube youtu.be

According to a former Donald Trump White House official, anyone believing the president-elect will allow GOP lawmakers to block any of his cabinet nominees will be sorely surprised.

Calling the incoming president's efforts so far a "generational stress test for the system" Baker wrote, "If Republicans bow to his demand to recess the Senate so that he can install appointees without confirmation, it would rewrite the balance of power established by the founders more than two centuries ago."

Reacting to the nominees that Trump has put forward, including embattled ex-Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Robert F. Kennedy Jr., former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and Fox News personality Peter Hegseth, David Marchick, co-author of “The Peaceful Transfer of Power,” remarked, "This is like the ‘Star Wars’ bar scene of nominees,” before suggesting, “it’s a serious strategy to blow out the government as an institution because of their belief that it’s become too big, too powerful and represents the deep state.”

With regard to Gaetz, who is moving forward to a Senate confirmation hearing under the cloud of a reportedly highly damaging House Ethics Committee report, former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) claimed, "Gaetz won’t get confirmed. Everybody knows that.”

Sarah Matthews, who served in the first Trump administration, disagreed.

“That’s not what’s happening,” she said in a recent interview. “He is drunk on power right now because he feels like he was given a mandate by winning the popular vote.”

You can read more here.

The cold open started with Donald Trump, portrayed by cast member James Austin Johnson, sitting down with Dana Carvey's President Joe Biden as they exchanged pleasantries in the White House.

That, in turn, led Trump to boast, "I am very vastly picking the most epic cabinet of all time. They are some of the most dynamic, free-thinking, animal killing, sexually criminal, medically crazy people in the country.”

He then added, "We’ve got Elon and Gaetz. That’s an alien vs. predator.”

A disturbing Rep. Matt Gaetz, played by Sarah Sherman, made an appearance, telling Trump and Biden, "I’m going to do a great job. If anyone tries to break the law, I’ll tell them what I told my eyebrows — freeze!" adding, "Of course I had to resign from Congress because the confirmation process comes at the busiest time of the year for me: girls volleyball season.”

Baldwin, who earlier this SNL season portrayed Brett Baier of Fox News , entered and announced, "Americans need to someone to teach them how to be healthy, someone like me: a 70-year-old man with movie star looks and a worm in his brain.”

Referencing reports that RFK Jr. left a dead bear cub carcass in Central Park and once took a chainsaw to a dead whale, Baldwin stated, "I just wish people would take my appointment more seriously. Alright, I gotta go. I got a dead dolphin in my car. I think I might saw it in half and dump it in Central Park.”

Watch below or at the link.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

During an appearance on "The Katie Phang Show" on MSNBC, former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade suggested that departing special counsel Jack Smith has an opportunity to hand the incoming Donald Trump administration a mess long after he is gone.

Speaking with host Phang, McQuade proposed two paths for Smith to take.

"I have heard from a number of people saying, why should Jack Smith pull the plug on his own case, why not just let Trump just fire him, make him go through that exercise, so that people can see that it was Trump who ended this?" she began. "And I think it is because Jack Smith can have a lot more control if he ends it on his own terms."

ALSO READ: Why Trump voters should be held accountable for their choice

"There are a couple things he can do," she elaborated. "One, as you say, is to issue a full-throated report on both of the cases; the January 6th election interference case, as well as the documents case in Florida ––those two things. The other thing he could do, Katie, and I don't know if this would withstand all of the machinations that Trump will certainly try to put up against it –– to dismiss the cases without prejudice, and make the argument later that the statute of limitations is tolled during the Trump presidency and revive the cases in 2029."

"I think there is a 50-50 shot that succeeds, so if he ends it now with prejudice, that keeps those cases alive," she explained. "It would put the Trump administration in the untenable spot of either accepting that, or having to refile the cases just so they can dismiss them with prejudice."

"So, we will see how that goes, but I think this keeps Jack Smith's hands in control rather than leaving it in the hands of the next Department of Justice," she added.

Watch below or at the link.

House Speaker Mike Johnson's protestations that it would be unprecedented to release what is expected to be a damning House Ethics Committee report on now ex-Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) was demolished on MSNBC on Saturday morning.

During a panel discussion on "The Weekend" the Louisiana Republican's dismay that the report may be made public before Donald Trump's attorney general candidate faces a Senate confirmation hearing led him to state, “I’m going to strongly request that the Ethics Committee not issue the report because that is not the way we do things in the House, and I think that would be a terrible precedent to set.”

Former Republican National Committee chair Michael Steele, from his perch as co-host on "The Weekend," wasn't having it on Saturday morning.

The video player is currently playing an ad.

ALSO READ: Why Trump voters should be held accountable for their choice

"Do you think we will see this report?" co-host Symone Sanders Townsend asked guest ex-Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) before adding, "I know the Senate has asked for it but it would be unprecedented to release a report about a member who is no longer a member."

"Actually, it's not," Steele interrupted.

"Really?" she asked.

"Actually, it would not," he repeated, "because the House has done this before on a number of occasions in the past where reports have been released, when the member has subsequently left the House."

"And the fact that the speaker would stand there and say just a few days before, there is reporting in the Washington Post, the New York Times reporting on this very point. So the fact that you would sit here and say, 'Oh, well, I just can't, that is the precedent, that is the history,' no, that is not the precedent."

"And I think it is important for people to understand that we're getting into a rope a dope, you are getting a lot of crazy noise that is misdirecting the fact that Ethics Committee as you know has the power to release it if they so decide. Period," he added.

Watch below or at the link.

Confronted on CNN on Sunday morning, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) didn't have much to say when asked what happened to Republican party accusations that the 2024 election would be rife with fraud –– until Donald Trump won.

Speaking with host Dana Bash, the verbose Jordan continuously changed the subject after she pointed that, on election night, former president Trump was still claiming the the election was going to be stolen from him.

"Let's talk about the election," Bash began. "In the run-up to the election, even on election night itself, Donald Trump baselessly accused Democrats of cheating. As soon as a results started to come in and show it going his way he stopped – nothing about that. I haven't seen you or your colleagues claiming any election irregularities , no rampant voting brought this time. It seems to me that Republicans claim voting fraud and election integrity when you lose and not when you win."

"No, I mean, again, as I said before, this election I think was the greatest political comeback we've ever seen," he replied while grinning. "He [Trump] did something that even Teddy Roosevelt could not do for goodness sake and the country--"

"But you think it was a free and fair election?" Bash cut him off.

Jordan replied by pointing to a interview with a Latino voter who chose Trump because he didn't believe the Democrats were in his corner.

That led Bash to follow up with, "But last time around he claimed –– your leader claimed that there were problems with fraud," as Jordan talked over her.

"But last time around it wasn't so much about the policy differences or the personality differences, there were false claims about election fraud when Donald Trump lost" Bash lectured him "This time Donald Trump won and you think the election was free and fair. You see there is a little bit --"

"I think the Democrats have to ask why we go from getting anyone 81 million to 71 million. What happened to those 10 million people. Maybe it's not smart to run an election where you have no policies, " he replied.

The persistent Bash asked, "Why was it different from 2020 when he lost? Is that the only difference?"

"There were concerns about 2020 with all the mail-in voting that happened in Pennsylvania, they came in without any signature verification which is require," the Ohio Republican attempted. "There were all kinds of concerns with how the 2020 election was run but—"

"There was no widespread fraud," Bash shot back, cutting him off.

Watch below or at the link.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

The chairman of a conservative think tank stepped in it more than once during a visit to MSNBC's "The Weekend" and found himself on the receiving end when he tried to blow off Donald Trump's relationship with Vladimir Putin.

Speaking with co-hosts Symone Sanders Townsend and Michael Steele, Michael Needham of the conservative American Compass was pressed on how President-elect Donald Trump should deal with Putin's continuing war with Ukraine.

After watching a clip of the former president boasting he could end the war immediately, MSNBC's Steele remarked, "Okay. I will set aside the idea that it's going to be settled in 24 hours, but there's a lot of Republicans in the House and Senate who are not aligned with the president on Ukraine."

"How do you see narratively and geopolitically navigating the Republicans like [Republican Sen.] Marco Rubio on the record strongly supporting Ukraine in the face of the reality that, you know, Trump has much more of an alignment with Putin than U.S. senators and Republicans?"

"I think that's a ridiculous way to frame the issue," Needham shot back.

"Why is that ridiculous?" Steele returned.

"President Trump has more alignment with Putin?" the conservative replied.

"I think he says that because Donald Trump said some of the things Putin has said about letting Russia keep some of Ukraine, so that's why he said that," co-host Sanders Townsend explained.

"So the number one geostrategic challenge that the United States faces, that the world faces right now, is a mercantilist country in Chinawhich is a cancer on the world system," he replied. "Everybody going back to the Obama administration said pivot to Asia. The Trump administration says we need to pivot to Asia, the Biden administration says we need to pivot to Asia."

'Right now the war in Ukraine is a gigantic use of resources and weapons," he added. "We are running low on weapons that are critical to be able to actively deter China from going across the Taiwan Strait. We need to find a way to end the war in Ukraine. President Trump is correct about that. ––it will be negotiated settlement."

When Needham attempted to ask if the US should be defending Ukraine, Steele bluntly told him, "We should be supporting an ally."

After a comparison was made to Mexico invading Texas to reclaim territory, Needham replied, "We do not live in the 1990s. If America doesn't choose, if America doesn't prioritize, a dangerous world will end up with the United States --"

"You would let Mexico keep part of Texas?" he was pressed.

"We could handle Mexico," he replied.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Members of Congress bent on getting revenge for the way they think Donald Trump was treated after he left office may be stepping into precarious territory — particularly if they make good on threats to go after special counsel Jack Smith.

In a column for MSNBC, attorney Shan Wu noted a post on X from owner Elon Musk –– now a staunch Trump ally –– that threatened "Jack Smith’s abuse of the justice system cannot go unpunished."

Combined with rumblings that GOP lawmakers are threatening hearings on Smith's prosecutions that could compel him to testify, Wu pointed out those hearings could blow up the GOP's face.

Noted demands made by reps. Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) he wrote, "Investigations carried out by Congress, however, can be a double-edged sword for Republicans."

"A probe in this case will involve testimony about and the disclosure of that evidence Jordan and Loudermilk want preserved," he elaborated. "Such a proceeding may not be what Trump wants, given that it puts a renewed focus on acts that resulted in dozens of criminal charges against him, both federal and state."

You can read more here.

Donald Trump reverted back to form on Friday morning, just days after he won re-election, by running to his Truth Social platform and raging about rumors about that very same platform.

Now that he will assume the bully pulpit the White House will afford him in January, there is a growing belief he won't need his Truth Social platform going forward and might sell off a major portion of his stock, thereby reaping billions while the stock is high after his win, and then stop using it and thereby cause it to spiral further into irrelevance.

On Friday morning he began making threats.

"There are fake, untrue, and probably illegal rumors and/or statements made by, perhaps, market manipulators or short sellers, that I am interested in selling shares of Truth. THOSE RUMORS OR STATEMENTS ARE FALSE. I HAVE NO INTENTION OF SELLING!" he wrote in his familiar style.

"I hereby request that the people who have set off these fake rumors or statements, and who may have done so in the past, be immediately investigated by the appropriate authorities. Truth is an important part of our historic win, and I deeply believe in it. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" he concluded Friday.

A refusal to answer a question about what to expect from Donald Trump now that he has been re-elected led "Morning Joe" co-host Joe Scarborough to admonish famed journalist Bob Woodward on Friday morning.

Woodward, who has a history of being criticized for sitting on bombshell stories and saving them for his books, was asked by the MSNBC host, "Right now you have people in and out of government trying to figure out, was that just Donald Trump on the campaign trail talking, or should he be taken at his word? His own supporters say, 'Oh, he doesn't mean any of that, he's just saying that to rev up the crowd.' Based on your knowledge, if you were Mark Milley or Liz Cheney or CBS News, would you be worried right now?"

"Well, of course you're going to be worried," Woodward replied. "Trump hasn't changed. I spent the last year of his presidency interviewing him for nine hours, how he handled the coronavirus and it was tragic. He doesn't understand lots of things, he likes to smash things up. So he's in for a fight."

He then changed the topic, telling Scarborough, "There's a lot of hand wringing in the Democratic party now. The Democratic party needs to come back to life. The news media is going to be there, there's going to be that tradition of accountability. I know your network, the other television networks, so we're going to have a fight, but let's keep it factual."

"So, Bob, you say you had time and that's why I'm asking you these questions," the MSNBC host pressed. "So, again, when Donald Trump says that he's going to put the military and the national guard out to arrest people like Nancy Pelosi and the next senator from the state of California. Is that, again, based on your knowledge of Donald Trump, is that a credible threat? Is that a credible concern or is this just hyperbole, as a lot of Trump supporters say, oh, he just says that, he doesn't really mean it?"

"Well, there are a lot of people in that example in the military who are just not going to do it. They will not go along with --," Wooward parried which led Scarborough to tersely interrupt, "I'm asking about Donald Trump."

"If you don't want to state an opinion, I can move on, Bob. I'm asking you based on your knowledge of Donald Trump. I'm asking you to just report the news here, to give us insight, because you have better insight. Are these credible threats at this point, or was that just Donald Trump trying to whip up his crowd by talking about the military arresting Democrats? "

"But, Joe, you're asking me to predict the future," the Watergate reporter protested.

"No. I'm asking for your insight," Scarborough shot back.

Watch below or at the link here.

Appearing on MSNBC just 24 hours after Donald Trump was declared the next president of the United States, presidential historian Michael Beschloss ticked off the many ways that Trump could abuse his powers with the approval of a compliant Supreme Court.

Speaking with "Way Too Early" host Jonathan Lemire, the noted historian pointed to a comment the president-elect made that he said should alarm everyone.

"Abroad I think people will wonder about the stability of our society and there's likely to be a lot of protests at home," he told the host. "The question is how much will people take if, let's say he uses as he has discussed in the past, the Insurrection Act? The Insurrection Act is used, for instance, to send federal army soldiers into a city that he deems full of unrest and up rising and that state says he or she can't handle it."

ALSO READ: Ecstatic J6 offenders look forward to pardons from 'Daddy Trump' — and retribution

"There's a prospect that if a president comes in and pushes presidential power to the maximum, you know, we could see if not a breaking point, at least a crisis of a kind that we've never seen before," he darkly added. "Remember, Jonathan, you've written about it. When he was president, he used to talk about the presidential power that he had that was almost sacred. He said some of my powers are so awesome, that I don't even talk about those."

"And now he has, as you noted, a Supreme Court that's more or less a president can do anything he or she --," Lemire replied only to be interrupted by the historian who stated, "We've never seen that in all of American history."

"That's right there are examples across this world where democracies backslide," Lemire added.

Watch below or at the link.

As part of the post-mortem following Donald Trump's victory over Vice President Kamala Harris to become the 47th president of the United States, one Democrat appeared on MSNBC early Wednesday morning to point to what he believes helped the former president return to the Oval Office.

Sitting down with MSNBC host Jen Psaki, Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX), the lawmaker was asked, "You're the only person sitting here who's run for office and won. All this data, all these exit polls, all the margins surprising and disappointing to some, what are your big takeaways on what we know so far?"

"I think Trump helped that along, right?" he replied. "If he has a superpower, it's marketing. In every single speech over the last few years, he would say we had the greatest economy, we had the greatest economy and I think a lot of people really believed that in the end."

"And they remember those times more fondly probably than they were, right, and compared that to high inflation over the last couple of years," he added. "So there's that. It's an extraordinary comeback, I don't know if we can I call it the greatest American comeback."

You can watch below or at link here.

Early Sunday morning, Donald Trump jumped on his Truth Social platform and fired back at a poll coming out of Iowa showing him now losing to Vice President Kamala Harris which shocked political observers late Saturday.

With just two days to go before voters head to the polls, the Des Moines Register released a poll from highly-regarded pollster J. Ann Selzer that showed Harris with a 2-point lead in the solidly conservative state.

With Trump once holding a 18-point lead when it appeared President Joe Biden was the presumptive Democratic Party nominee, Selzer admitted, "It’s hard for anybody to say they saw this coming,” before adding, "She has clearly leaped into a leading position.”

On Sunday morning, Trump fired back, "No President has done more for FARMERS, and the Great State of Iowa, than Donald J. Trump. In fact, it’s not even close! All polls, except for one heavily skewed toward the Democrats by a Trump hater who called it totally wrong the last time, have me up, BY A LOT. I LOVE THE FARMERS, AND THEY LOVE ME. THE JUST OUT EMERSON POLL HAS ME UP 10 POINTS IN IOWA. THANK YOU!"

You can watch pollster Selzer defending her findings below:

According to "Morning Joe" co-host Jonathan Lemire, there is good reason for panic within Donald Trump's inner circle that his re-election, which they recently felt so confident about just weeks ago, is falling apart.

On MSNBC on Friday morning, co-host Joe Scarborough prompted his panel by observing that, "You have people like Charlie Kirk freaking out now, telling the truth. Saying the numbers are looking terrible in Pennsylvania, that right now, Trump is on his way to losing."

"The Trump campaign has two things happening: one, Donald Trump is starting –– you know things are going well in Pennsylvania for [Kamala] Harris because he is starting to claim, 'Oh, my gosh, they're stealing the vote from me,'" he continued. "That's one hand. On the other hand, Charlie Kirk and other people attached to the Trump campaign, are literally freaking out, saying publicly, we're going to lose if the voting patterns continue this way."

ALSO READ: Donald Trump believes he’s going to lose

"Yeah, you're seeing a false confidence being put forward by the Trump campaign," Lemire agreed. "In part, because they want to appease the candidate who doesn't like to hear bad news. Behind the scenes, there is growing worry. I've talked to people connected to the campaign in the last day or two and the Trump folks were feeling much better a couple weeks ago than they are today."

After pointing out that the Harris campaign has grown "increasingly confident" but still expect a close race, he added, "Joe mentioned his Truth Social post the other day, claiming fraud in Pennsylvania –– no evidence of that."

"I think we're seeing Trump's outbursts and violent rhetoric increase more and more. What does that usually show us?" he asked. "Behind the scenes, that means he is getting worried. The Truth Social is a window into his soul, what he really thinks and there is a growing anxiety at Mar-a-Lago that this might be slipping away from him."

"Were he to lose, suddenly, the criminal cases come back –– that's adding to the pressure, I'm told," he reported.

Watch the video below or at this link.

With the presidential election just a little over two weeks away, there is a growing sense of alarm that Donald Trump will definitely launch a multi-prong attack on the results should he lose that will, once again, plunge the country into chaos.

According to a deep dive report from Politico, it is widely expected that the former president will copy and expand upon his efforts from 2020 when he claim the election was stolen from him and will set that in motion by declaring himself the winner not long after the polls start closing.

Outside of the chaos, there are worries the former president will make enough "noise" that it may provide a path for Trump partisans in key states to either refuse to certify the vote totals or, as was attempted in 2020, offer up as alternate set of electors who will try and hand their state's electoral votes to the former president.

That, the report warns, could hand him the presidency.

According to the report, "Overturning a Kamala Harris victory would require an enormous amount of help from Republican power brokers in statehouses and Congress, some of whom spurned him four years ago," adding, "But Trump is heading into the 2024 election informed by his failure to overturn the results four years earlier. And his incentive to obtain the powers and protections of the White House is likely stronger than ever: If he loses, Trump will face an avalanche of criminal proceedings that could last the rest of his life. If he wins, they are likely to go away."

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) was blunt in admitting, "No one knows exactly what Trump’s attack on the electoral system will be in 2024.What will he do this time?”

In one scenario, Politico is reporting, "A key swing state takes several days to finish counting votes. Harris edges Trump by a few thousand ballots, appearing to clinch the election. Trump then blankets the state with ads exhorting officials to “stop the steal,” sends top allies to rail daily outside counting facilities about a crooked process, files a blizzard of litigation urging judges to throw out ballots being counted after Election Day and spreads claims that the vote was swung by non-citizens. Threats rain down on election officials and vote counters, with protests driving up the local and national temperature. Then, Trump allies on a handful of county election boards resist certification, threatening to disenfranchise thousands of voters and disrupt the state’s effort to finalize an accurate count."

According to a former senior adviser to the Jan. 6, the threat of violence against electors is a very real possibility.

“Anybody involved in certifying Trump’s defeat should he lose is a potential target,” explained Tom Joscelyn, “The extremists or even just rabid wackadoodles firmly believe it’s being stolen yet again.”

You can read much more here.

Saturday Night Live kicked off the last episode before going on hiatus until the last weekend before the election with a surprise appearance of Alec Baldwin portraying Bret Baier of Fox News who caused a ruckus this week with his hectoring of Vice President Kamala Harris in an interview.

With Baldwin's Baier admitting he looks like a "businessman made in Minecraft," he began aggressively peppering Harris, played by Maya Rudolph, with inflammatory questions about immigrant "murderers," interrupting her repeatedly after only a few words or so.

"Bret, I'm glad you up the topic of immigration..." Harris began.

A million, two million?' he interrupted.

"Okay, the first thing we did in office was to introduce a bill..." Harris attempted only to have him interject, "Ten million? Give me a number."

"That was followed with a rapid fire, "May I please finish?"

"I'm asking you to."

"Then you have to listen."

"Well I can't because I'm talking."

"When will you stop?"

"Maybe when I go to bed," Baldwin's Baier smirked.

In another exchange, he attempted to get her to criticize Trump's MAGA supporters by providing a litany of slurs, telling her, "So, you're telling me Trump voters are misguided – are they stupid? Are they idiots who can't think for themselves? Morons, slack-jaws, stump-humpers, cross-eyed meatheads?"

"Bret, you're trying real hard to make me say something bad," she protested.

"But they are at least fat, right? Some of them are very fat," he offered.

"Bret, lets move on," Rudolph's Harris suggested.

"So you're not denying that they're fat?" he attempted once more to which she replied, "Oh my dear god!"

"You're very sexy when you're angry, you know that?" he replied.

"Yes, I do," she shot back.

You can watch below or at the link.

- YouTube youtu.be

Reacting to an early morning report from Politico Playbook that Donald Trump is nixing interviews because he is "exhausted," one of the former president's longtime associates dating back to his days as a Manhattan real estate developer told an MSNBC panel that something is up.

Appearing on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," branding expert Donnie Deutsch called the news alarming for the Trump campaign.

According to Politico, the former president's people alerted the hosts of The Shade Room podcast that, Trump is “exhausted and refusing [some] interviews but that could change.” In lieu of Trump, the hosts were reportedly offered Trump supporter Waka Flocka Flame as an alternative.

As MSNBC host Jonathan Lemire told the panel, "Let's get you in on this, the Playbook just now talks about how Trump has been canceling interviews. They've got reporting that he was in sit-down conversation with a podcast called 'The Shade.' The people at the podcast say that the reason why Trump's campaign said he'd have to cancel it was, indeed, exhaustion, which the Trump campaign now disputes. But they have multiple sources saying that's why they were told they can't do it."

That led Deutsch to interject, "I think people really should focus on his state of strength, state of weakness, state of well-being, of non-well-being."

"Something is off," he added before elaborating, "He is addicted to crowds, to media, and he is pulling back. They're seeing something internally, and they're feeling something. I think the spotlight should be on that."

Watch below or at the link here.

As part of a "Morning Joe" discussion on Donald Trump's refusal to answer questions at a Pennsylvania town hall on Monday – instead playing music for 39 minutes while he stood on stage swaying – MSNBC host Joe Scarborough noted the former president had more problems speaking on Tuesday night.

Speaking with co-host Willie Geist, Scarborough said the former president's inability to get through a rally cleanly is a sign of his advanced age.

"He's slurring so many words," he began. "Even in his speech last night, I think it was 'insurrection,' just slurring through words. I know people get exhausted in a long campaign and I think that we are really seeing signs of a 78-year-old man who, obviously has been through a trial, been through an attempted assassination, going through the rigors of this campaign and, right now, he is becoming more erratic by the day."

"We have seen, you know, on Saturday nights when he gets exhausted, you know, end of weeks when he has been doing things, we see him start confusing Joe Biden with Barack Obama and World War II for World War III and making one mistake after another," he later added. "My best guess he figured this was the safest thing to do, that he wasn't feeling it. Again, just very strange."

Watch below or at the link.

With close to thirty days before American voters head to the polls to select a new president, there is a growing concern among political observers that Donald Trump's well-documented "incoherence" on the stump is accelerating.

In interviews with the Guardian's David Smith, critics of the former president are raising alarms that the former president's penchant for slurring and rambling during his now-frequent rallies indicate he is "in the throes of a final meltdown," as Smith put it.

According to American University history professor Allan Lichtman, “He’s definitely more undisciplined, unhinged and deranged. He’s always had these tendencies but, as he’s gotten older, they’ve become much greater. The Hannibal Lecter stuff or the shark versus electrocution stuff is just insane, just crazy and should be discussed on that basis."

“But it’s a big mistake just to talk about Trump being unhinged or insane," he added. "You’ve got to talk about also how dangerous and retrograde what he’s saying is. We also ought to stress the extreme racism and misogyny.”

For evidence, the Guardian's Smith noted, "Trump, 78, increasingly slurs or stumbles over his words, raising fears over cognitive decline. He is slipping in polls against Kamala Harris and knows that defeat could lead to criminal trials and even prison," before adding that a recent Associated Press report stated, "Trump shifted from topic to topic so quickly that it was hard to keep track of what he meant at times."

Elaine Kamarck of the Brookings Institute suggested, "He has definitely lost a step, as they say. He is less coherent than he was certainly four years ago," and then added that his speaking style at his rallies has undergone a metamorphosis, telling the Guardian, "He reminds you of a sixth-grade boy having read something out loud at the front of the class who’s generally pissed off that he’s there and not on the soccer field.”

Former Republican and noted Trump critic Tara Setmayer warned, "We’re being tested and our democracy is on the line because what Donald Trump is saying is not just crazy batsh---ery. It’s dangerous. It’s authoritarian. It’s anti-democratic. It’s the ideology of hostility toward others. In Trump’s mind we’re not all equal and American voters need to make a decision about the type of country they want to live in and what kind of future they want to leave for their children.”

You can read more here.