Last Thursday afternoon the Wall Street Journal reported Israel had shared intelligence with the U.S. that Iran had a new plan to assassinate President Trump, and CNN's online story about the revelation, added speculation from an unnamed source, that the Israeli report is viewed as part of an effort to influence Trump’s decision making on Iran. Even though the same source indicated that, "Some in the intelligence community are always skeptical of Israeli reporting," CNN's Wolf Blitzer made it the centerpiece of his coverage of the story Friday on The Situation Room. Blitzer opened the first hour of the two hour show with, "Breaking news, assassination plot....New warning of an Iranian plot to kill the President....Why some intelligence experts are skeptical." He soon threw it to a report from his co-Host Pamela Brown, reporting from the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Middle East, who continued to raise doubt, "And one source we spoke to did express some skepticism that this particular intelligence about a specific plot coming from Israel, they do question that, given the fact that they believe that Israel may be trying to influence President Trump." CNN White House Correspondent Betsy Kline repeated: "Some skepticism, as Pamela mentioned, that Israeli report is viewed in part as an attempt to influence President Trump's decision making on the future of this conflict."  Blitzer asked CNN National Security Analyst Alex Plitsas: "Could this be an effort by Israel to try to influence U.S. decision making?" But Plitsas wasn't buying what Blitzer was selling: "It's certainly possible that it's an effort. But to present false evidence that was easily discernible as not being credible would be catastrophic to a relationship... So I suspect this is true at this point and no reason not to believe." Hour number two was more of the same from Blitzer, who featured CNN pundit Sabrina Singy, a former Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary in the Biden administration, and CNN global affairs analyst Brett McGurk,  both of whom tore down Blitzer's theory. SINGH: I think these are very credible reports that we're seeing. Iran has made it no secret that President Trump potentially other members, are on their target list....So I think these threats are credible.... You have to take it seriously. And after surprisingly admitting that it shouldn't be a surprise that the Iranians would like to plot to kill Trump, Blitzer turned to McGurk. McGURK: We used to cover it every day in the Biden administration. There's a record from official warnings to DOJ indictments of Iran hiring agents to kill senior officials here on U.S. soil, including President Trump. This is real credible.  But Blitzer's quest to destroy Israel's credibility continued, as he played a recent clip from Hillary Clinton, which he called, "relevant to this current discussion."  CLINTON CLIP: One day I was on the phone for hours with Ehud (former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak), with Bibi....and they would say things like, our planes are on the tarmac. And I'd say, well, good luck. I mean, great, why are you doing this?... CLINTON INTERVIEWER: You're saying you were being played? CLINTON CLIP: All the time. That clip was totally without any context, so of course Blitzer played it and pursued it. BLITZER: What do you think? SINGH: I think what she's saying is that, the Israeli government and particularly Netanyahu, likes to project that they are under a threat. There was a credible threat from Iran, but they really wanted to force the U.S. hand under different administrations.  Blitzer addressed McGurk, who really stuck a pin in Blitzer's balloon. BLITZER: When the U.S. Government receives sensitive intelligence information from the Israelis, what's the reaction? MCGURK: Our intelligence cooperation between Israel and the U.S. is extraordinary, exquisite. And we generally trust what they give us. They trust what we give them.  But let's make one thing clear,  Iran is determined... to eliminate Israel.... Are threat perceptions different between Israel....and here in Washington? Absolutely.... But these threats from Iran are real. Blitzer teased the next segment, which was more of the same. BLITZER:  Up next, some U.S. officials are skeptical of Israel's new warning for President Trump about a possible assassination plot by Iran. Kevin Liptak is live for us from the White House. And Liptak's tease could have been written by Blitzer. LIPTAK: Israel is sharing this intelligence, but could they be looking to influence President Trump's decision making?  Even when CNN's own security experts repeatedly threw cold water on his narrative, Blitzer didn't stop pushing it, at Israel's expense. This is CNN! 

Joe Scarborough phoned in to Sunday's edition of The Weekend on MS NOW to share remembrances of the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who passed away suddenly Saturday at age 71. Scarborough and Graham both entered Congress as part of the historic 1994 Republican Revolution class that reclaimed the House majority for the GOP. But Scarborough couldn't resist the opportunity to burnish his liberal street cred—while inserting a self-serving anecdote about Iran policy. Liberal Street Cred Maintenance: "I often would disagree very strongly with his policy positions, especially after he became such a close ally to President Trump... I've been less than gracious with him on the air time and time again as it related to his alliances with Donald Trump." Bragging on Warning Trump on Iran: "I remember calling President Trump, on the Friday before we went in, and I don't talk to him often, but I just got the sense that, that he was going to be going in soon, based on my contacts. "And I just, you know, tried to do a little bit of reporting, and then just as the guy who had known him for twenty years, I said, 'Mr. President, I just want to warn you. Iran's not gonna be as easy as Lindsey says it's gonna be. Just beware.'" Classic Scarborough. He nodded to Graham's personal qualities and their shared history while making clear he had repeatedly slammed the senator's support for Trump.  Then he used the tribute segment to highlight his own supposed wisdom and access, claiming he personally warned Trump that military action against Iran would prove more difficult than Graham suggested. In reality, Graham — a longtime hawk on Iran — did not predict an effortless walk in the park. He emphasized U.S. and Israeli military superiority and the need for decisive action to degrade the regime's capabilities. On that score, even critics of the broader conflict have acknowledged that American and Israeli forces performed with remarkable effectiveness, rapidly degrading Iran's military infrastructure and eliminating key leadership, including the Ayatollah, early on. Scarborough Uses Graham Tribute to Burnish Liberal Street Cred—And Brag About Warning Trump on Iran pic.twitter.com/jBTctvBwwZ — Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) July 12, 2026 Where post-war analysis has raised legitimate questions is the apparent underestimation of Iran's ability to exploit its influence over the Strait of Hormuz, and related asymmetric responses.  But Scarborough's framing turned Graham's calls for strength into naive over-optimism while positioning himself as the prudent voice who tried to steer Trump away from it. In an era when media figures love to lecture others about "not politicizing" deaths, Scarborough turned a remembrance into another chance to reinforce his brand and settle old policy scores.  Graham's sudden passing is still fresh, with tributes coming in from across the political spectrum. But Scarborough exploited it to advance his own interests. Here's the transcript. MS NOW The Weekend 7/12/26 7:01 am EDT JACKIE ALEMANY: Joining us now on the phone is Joe Scarborough, host of Morning Joe, who served in Congress with Lindsey Graham. Good morning, Joe. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Good morning, good morning. Yeah, we, we, we came in at the same time, in fact, in January of 1995, we were both part of that large, class of 1994, Contract with America, class of' 94, so yeah, I got to know Lindsey very early and, got to know him pretty well. ALEMANY: Yeah, and I saw that you just posted on X, actually, that you saw him not so long ago. SCARBOROUGH: Yeah, I did. We, you know, we would pass each other, from time to time. I often would disagree very strongly with his policy positions, especially after he became such a close ally to President Trump. And he would, you know, zing back here and there, but, you know, we never had any, any tough words with each other personally. And we had just gotten together, like, for the thirtieth anniversary of our 1994 class. It was a huge class, and was the first one that had taken over the majority for the Republicans in 40 years. And so, 60, 70 of us had come together, we, and just to meet back and brought our -- I thought I'd bring my family along because my younger children, were, were not born when all that was going on.  And, so we met up with Lindsey, and it was just like, the first day I met him, he was laughing, he had very, you know, he's had a very self-different, self-deferential [sic, self-deprecating] way about him. Always joking about himself, always making himself the butt of the joke.  So, when we saw each other, he laughed, smiled, hugged, and, made some self-deferential joke about himself, and then talked to my family. Mika was there and, a couple of my kids. Very, very kind.  We had very kind words, despite the fact, again, that, you know, I, I've been less than gracious with him on the air time and time again as it related to his alliances with Donald Trump. . . .  Interesting, policy, interesting policy positions, I, I will say, I, and I've said it on my show, I, I, you know, Iran's gonna be part of his legacy, that war.  I remember calling President Trump on the Friday before we went in, and I don't talk to him often, but I just got the sense that, that he was going to be going in soon, based on my contacts. And I just, you know, tried to do a little bit of reporting, and then just as the guy who had known him for twenty years, I said, "Mr. President, I just want to warn you. Iran's not gonna be as easy as Lindsey says it's gonna be, just, just beware." And of course, he didn't, didn't agree with me on that one and went on with that war.

After an ICE-involved shooting in Houston, Friday’s Morning Joe returned to the issue of immigration and deportation in coverage that harkened back to the Minneapolis unrest earlier this year. Co-hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski opened the show with talk of ICE, as Scarborough yelled at people who use “Don’t Tread On Me” license plates in Florida amid immigrant enforcement, and screamed about funding for ICE while Brzezinski helped his rant along the way. Amid the ICE Houston shooting discussion, MS NOW contributor Eugene Robinson called agents “stormtroopers.” He then made a connection back to America 250 celebrations as he remarked: “It's incomprehensible that this takes place in the United States of America, which just celebrated 250 years of freedom, but seems to really want to go back on that now.”   On Friday's Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough screamed at ICE after an ICE-involved shooting death in Houston and insinuated there was a cover-up. Reminder: Scarborough has previously labeled ICE as "Secret Police" and compared them to the KKK. pic.twitter.com/L8gXnUyhQv — Nick (@nspin310) July 10, 2026   Scarborough followed Robinson with an obsessive dislike for those who have “Don’t Tread on Me” license plates in Florida amid immigration enforcement: Where are all these hedge fund guys in their Maseratis that have “Don't Tread On Me” like license plates in the state of Florida? Where -- don't tread on me? What are you talking about? (...) Like, isn't the time to say ‘Don't Tread on Me’ when Americans and other people who have been here for 30, 35 years are getting gunned down in the streets by federal troops? Brzezinski interjected and called the ICE-involved Houston shooting a “crime,” before she complained about the use of the term “Criminal illegal alien.” Scarborough then told, seemingly, those who support immigration enforcement, to read the Constitution: “You should really, like, read the Constitution. You should read. But I know you don't want to. I know, it hurts your head to do that.”   In the same segment on ICE, Scarborough was obsessed with Florida's "Don't Tread on Me" license plates and told conservatives, "You should really, like, read the Constitution. You should read. But I know you don't want to. I know, it hurts your head to do that." https://t.co/AcXAT2to7u pic.twitter.com/d8m76X3tEF — Nick (@nspin310) July 10, 2026   Scarborough continued with comparisons of the Houston shooting to Minneapolis and returned to his newfound obsession with “Don’t Tread on Me” license plates before his voice began to rise as he complained about ICE’s funding and body cam footage: I thought we had seen the end of this. I thought we were going to have body cam footage. I thought with all of the money, of all of the billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars shoved down ICE’s throats. I thought we had enough money that body cam footage on every ICE agent out there for the next time, and it's fair to say, as an American, the next time they killed somebody! The married Scarborough and Brzezinski then screamed back and forth about the Houston shooting, as they claimed there was “No body cam footage,” “no body,” and “no witnesses” in some sort of ICE conspiracy: SCARBOROUGH: Well, that next time has come. And there's no body footage,  BRZEZINSKI: Body cam footage. SCARBOROUGH: No body cam footage. And I want to know!  BRZEZINSKI: No body! SCARBOROUGH: And no body! BRZEZINSKI: No evidence. And no witnesses! SCARBOROUGH: No evidence! BRZEZINSKI: They have to deport? Scarborough closed, as Brzezinski seemed to briefly move away from him due to his yelling, and warned, “And I'm sorry, but I don't think we've moved anywhere from Minneapolis!” After months of war coverage and obsessions on items like the reflecting pool, the Morning Joe crew may have found their new hit for the summer in a callback to their attacks on ICE, whom hosts and guests on the show have previously labeled as “paramilitary” and “secret police.” The transcript is below. Click "expand": MS NOW’s Morning Joe July 10, 2026 6:19:52 AM Eastern (...) EUGENE ROBINSON: So, you know, it's, it's infuriating to see people gunned down in our streets in this way. I just hope that, soon, like in five minutes, there has to be some federal judge who's going to order that witnesses and evidence be preserved, at least kept in the United States, until this is properly investigated, let alone adjudicated, because you cannot believe a single word ICE says, just not a single word, including ‘a’ and ‘the.’ It's completely - they just lie. They lie. And. And do we accept this? As Sam Stein said, you know, it's just another Friday, right? We accept stormtroopers seizing and - not just seizing, but killing people in the streets of one of our major cities for no reason. The wrong person. It's incomprehensible that this takes place in the United States of America, which just celebrated 250 years of freedom, but seems to really want to go back on that now. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Where are all these hedge fund guys in their Maseratis that have “Don't Tread On Me” like license plates in the state of Florida? Where - don't tread on me? What are you talking about? Don't tread on like - don't don't borrow our driver. Is that what you mean, or don't, don't tax me at 34 or 38 percent instead of - like, what do you mean they don't tread on me? Like, isn't the time to say don't tread on me when Americans and other people who have been here for 30, 35 years are getting gunned down in the streets by federal troops? MIKA BRZEZINSKI: And if I could just add for those- SCARBOROUGH: With masks, usually? BRZEZINSKI: - who are taking time to understand: If you're a migrant, if you're documented, if you're undocumented, if you're gunned down in the streets of America, it's still wrong, and it's still a crime.  SCARBOROUGH: Yeah.  BRZEZINSKI: Okay? There's no difference. There’s no difference. It’s important to understand. SCARBOROUGH: I know you don't want to read. I know that reading sometimes makes the tips of your teeth hurt, but you should read what Antonin Scalia, the conservative legal guide, said about this. He said the United States Constitution doesn't just apply to U.S. Citizens. The United States Constitution applies to anybody that is in the United States of America and applies to Americans anywhere they are across the globe. So, if you're sitting there thinking, “well, it's okay to just gun down somebody in the streets of Houston.” BRZEZINSKI: They like to call them ‘Criminal Illegal Aliens’ to make them sound extremely - SCARBOROUGH: You should really, like, read the Constitution. You should read. But I know you don't want to. I know, it hurts your head to do that.  But, Jonathan Lemire, they're gunning down people in the streets of America. They gunned down U.S. citizens in the streets of Minneapolis, gunning down a father and a guy who has been in America for over 30 years. Doing all of this, despite the fact that you and I both know that a couple of months ago, after Minneapolis, Trump was like, “No mas. No mas.” To borrow the immortal words of Roberto Duran, like, let's stop this.  And remember, they went to the Republicans and said, “Stop using the term mass deportation.” They understood it was a political loser. We heard about Stephen Miller being pushed to the side, because these quotas that were leading to these killings, that were leading to this abuse of American citizens on the street. “Don't tread on me.” Federal agents treading on the rights of Americans, First Amendment rights of Americans to peacefully protest.  The White House, I thought, had had enough. I thought they were turning a page. I thought we had seen the end of this. I thought we were going to have body cam footage. I thought with all of the money, of all of the billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars shoved down ICE’s throats. I thought we had enough money that body cam footage on every ICE agent out there for the next time, and it's fair to say, as an American, the next time they killed somebody!  Well, that next time has come. And there's no body footage,  BRZEZINSKI: Body cam footage. SCARBOROUGH: No body cam footage. And I want to know!  BRZEZINSKI: No body! SCARBOROUGH: And no body! BRZEZINSKI: No evidence. And no witnesses!? SCARBOROUGH: No evidence! BRZEZINSKI: They have to deport? SCARBOROUGH: They're trying to deport people that were witnesses there. And I'm sorry, but I don't think we've moved anywhere from Minneapolis! I think we're back in the same spot that made the White House freak out months ago! So what's going on inside the white house, and why do they keep doing this?

The left’s response to President Trump has involved tearing up anything even remotely connected to him. From firebombing Teslas to ripping down Trump’s name on the Kennedy Center, the rule still stands: if the orange man touched it, they hate it. The most egregious example of this new left-wing phenomenon is the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, which Trump had renovated earlier this summer. After its completion, several arrests were made when people allegedly tore off chunks of American-flag-blue paint from the side of the pool. Clearly, those were acts of vandalism, but on Thursday’s The 11th Hour, MS NOW guest host Symone Sanders-Townsend somehow came to a different conclusion: the administration arrested those poor people for living ordinary lives. The Justice Department just charged three people, including former Olympic canoeist David Hearn, with misdemeanor destruction of property. According to Hearn’s charge, he allegedly caused about $1,000 worth of damage to the Reflecting Pool’s new coat of paint. But the arrests of Hearn and other accused vandals, according to Sanders-Townsend, had a “chilling effect,” because “any American can be arrested for just about anything."     Wrong. The police can’t arrest anyone for “just about anything.” They can only arrest if they have a reasonable suspicion that you committed a crime. Besides, in what world are people going about ripping paint off pool walls as part of their everyday routine? But, guest panelist and Syracuse University professor Nayyera Haq provided a slightly different reason for arrests and minor charges: Like, that's how low they are going to make - continue the story that D.C. is crime-ridden to also justify the National Guard still sitting here. You’d be hard-pressed to find someone who’s lived around D.C. over the past couple years who would say that the city hasn’t vastly improved since Trump began his second term. Crime is down, the Metro is rideable again, and the fountains flow graffiti-free. But the America-hating leftists and their media just can’t seem to appreciate the good things Trump does for the country. Co-panelist and legal analyst Ankush Khardori also added: So, every time we see, you know, these sort of piddly little misdemeanor charges, which will result in nothing, even if there's a conviction, maybe, I don't know, 50 bucks or something on - something like that. It may come as a surprise to Khardori, but not every crime prosecuted by the federal or state government has to be as big as diamond-heisting or murder. Even unpaid parking tickets can be prosecuted. It all goes back to the basic structure of the American government: the legislature passes laws, and the executive enforces them.  The Code of Federal Regulations classifies vandalism as “Destroying, injuring, defacing, or damaging property or real property,” and since the reflecting pool is federal property, the federal government has a clear basis to prosecute those arrested at the pool with this exact crime. They’re not going after these people just to “preserve the President’s vanity,” as Sanders-Townsend suggested. Crime is crime and should be prosecuted and punished according to U.S. law. But it’s not surprising to see the Democratic media, who have spent years defending criminals of all types, continue that streak as they gripe on about the reflecting pool. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: MS NOW's The 11th Hour 7/9/26 11:11:32 p.m. Eastern SYMONE SANDERS-TOWNSEND: Ankush, the Justice Department just charged three people today for misdemeanor destruction of property.  This was about, allegedly - and let me just read this, “removing peeling paint from the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool.”  This is the criminalization of, just, ordinary life, and also lies because the administration has yet to provide any evidence that the individuals that they charged actually peeled the paint from the reflecting pool.  But also, is this a crime? I don't understand. ANKUSH KHARDORI: Well, look, we'll find - you know, it's unclear to me that it's actually criminal conduct. It'll - it's going to depend on the facts.  To me, I think the striking thing is, remember, for weeks Trump was saying that there was a giant gash that had been put into the cover like 250, then it was 300, then 350 feet. And why have they not charged that case? My guess is, because nobody did that, and they're unable to substantiate those claims. And you notice he stopped talking about it.  So every time we see, you know, these sort of piddly little misdemeanor charges, which will result in nothing, even if there's a conviction, maybe, I don't know, 50 bucks or something on - something like that. SANDERS-TOWNSEND: But isn't the point that it's a chilling effect because now any American can - the message that I gleaned from it is that any American can be arrested for just about anything.  The government could make it up. They can try to cobble together some explanation, and you will have to pay, whether it's $50  or $100, five days in jail, or just your reputation. NAYYERA HAQ: Well, Jeanine Pirro went, had a huge press conference last week talking about the crime of vandalism at national monuments. And the person that she was like, case number one and criminal number one, was somebody who talked back to a park police officer.  Like, that's how low they are going to make - continue the story that DC is crime-ridden to also justify the National Guard still sitting here. KHARDORI: Remember, sometimes, and more frequently than should be the case in this administration, they flop on these cases.  Remember the sandwich guy? Jeanine Pirro did a whole big thing where she put out a video, says, “We're coming after you.” They couldn't get felony charges from the grand jury and they couldn't even convict him on a - on the misdemeanor counts.  So I don't know who these folks are, but I would not assume that they're going to be convicted based on what we've seen from this U.S. attorney's office.  And to your point, what seems to be a - an enforcement priority only to sort of preserve the President's vanity, right, because he's upset about the mess that he created at the reflecting pool.

So who will vet the vetters? Certainly not Matthew Yglesias who had an opinion piece in the New York Times less than a month ago, June 17, in which he enthuses so much over the one who supposedly vetted Graham Platner, Daniel Moraff (pictured), that it comes off as The Adoration of the Moraff as you can read in "The Democrats Need Better Candidates. This Guy Knows How to Find Them." Love is in the air as Yglesias merrily gushes over Moraff, the one whom many/most Democrats are furious at for perhaps ruining their chances of taking the Senate in the midterm elections. You’ve probably never heard of Daniel Moraff. He went to Brown and was excited by Senator Bernie Sanders’s 2016 presidential campaign and spent years as a local organizer in Pittsburgh and New York while involved with the Democratic Socialists of America. Today he’s emerging as a new force in politics specializing in populist outsiders. He discovered Dan Osborn and Graham Platner, showing a knack for finding unlikely politicians with real charisma and skills. As we now know, Mr. Platner also comes with a somewhat checkered past and real, potentially costly flaws. But Mr. Moraff, in contrast to his somewhat bombastic candidates, is quiet and unassuming in person and approaches his job like a casting director. He looks for a particular type: military veterans with blue-collar jobs and no electoral experience but an interest in politics and (typically) labor unions. You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out this guy absolutely does not take the task of vetting candidates seriously as you can tell by the following interview in which Giggles Moraff and his smirking companion laugh mockingly at the notion of conducting thorough background checks of candidates such as Platner. Daniel Moraff gives off a vibe of self-satisfied cleverness, a confidence that he is more clever than everyone else, and that his cleverness alone will be sufficient to avoid error. pic.twitter.com/DWoOotMfFQ — The Patriarch Tree (@PatriarchTree) July 8, 2026 Yglesias provided the inadvertent service of identifying other candidates Moraff hand-picked besides Platner such as Dan Osborn, who is running for the U.S. Senate from Nebraska supposedly as an independent (but really as a Democrat). Here are a couple more candidates that need to get a real vetting from professionals based on Moraff's underperformance of this task with Platner. Mr. Moraff himself is not a Democratic insider or a strategist. In the terms popular with the Silicon Valley types whom he doubtless hates, Mr. Moraff is “high agency.” He saw a void and moved into it. He doesn’t accept the view that good candidates need to have a traditional résumé, or that to be the guy behind the guy in a critical Senate race, you need to pay your dues by managing House campaigns or toiling for multiple cycles at the national party committees. Mr. Moraff is also working with House candidates like Brian Poindexter in Ohio and Nate Powell in Washington State, who are cut from a similar labor-populist ideological cloth. Attention Democrats! Possible vetting cleanup alerts for Ohio and Washington State based on the toxic legacy Moraff left behind in Maine with his personally picked Graham Platner.