MS Now host Jonathan Capehart did not appreciate the idea that certain Democratic politicians making a video urging the military to disobey President Trump was a problem. During PBS News Hour’s Friday weekly news recap, Capehart condemned the American Enterprise Institute’s Matthew Continetti for declaring that “both sides” disgraced themselves with the video because, in his mind, only President Trump’s reaction to it was worth discussing. Host Amna Nawaz began with Continetti, “I want to ask for your response to the video, but also to put to you that Senator Slotkin, who's in that video, said she and other members of the video have gotten close to 1,000 threats since it was posted. Congressman Crow posted some of the threats he's been receiving calling for his family to be killed. It's chilling stuff. But how dangerous is the president's rhetoric on this?”     Continetti condemned everyone involved, “I think a lot of the rhetoric has been very dangerous. I think both sides here have been not covering themselves in glory. On the one hand you're calling the president a fascist, a dictator in training, someone who's going to issue unlawful orders, even though they can't name a single unlawful order that the president has given. And then, of course, you have the president himself calling this sedition, treason, punishable by death.” He further added, “If we want to lower the temperature, it will take responsibility on every party. But what has struck me about this is how it's a partisan split screen. Both parties are playing to their bases here. The Democrats are rallying behind these congressmen, and the Republicans almost uniformly are rallying behind President Trump. So, I don't think that this is going to have a long-term effect politically on the president.” Nawaz then turned to Capehart but refused to ask him about the idea that Democrats are urging the military to disobey illegal orders while not providing any examples of those illegal orders, “Jonathan, you want to respond?” Capehart began by huffing, “I sort of bristle at the idea that this is a both sides thing. What we have here in terms of the threats, particularly against these members of Congress, it's that you have the president of the United States retweeting, or whatever you want to call it, threats against members of Congress. He is the one who in language and in — if you want to go back to January 6, in deeds who is fanning, fomenting the nastiness that is out there.” For Capehart, the avoidance of inflammatory political rhetoric isn’t a matter of personal responsibility, but rather, something that starts with Trump, “If we want to lower the temperature, if we want to change the way we do politics in the country, it has to start with the chief executive. It has to start with the president. And he has shown an unwillingness to do that.” Viewing that as an excuse, Continetti rebutted, “And it also has to be followed through by all of us, including people who are betraying him — portraying him as an authoritarian who poses an existential threat to this country.” A displeased Capehart replied, “There's lots of evidence that it's not unwarranted.” The last time Continetti subbed for New York Times columnist David Brooks, he did a good job getting Capehart to show that his concern about presidential abuse of power revolves not around the means, but the ends. Now, Capehart has shown his concern about political rhetoric operates in the same way. Here is a transcript for the November 21 show: PBS News Hour 11/21/2025 7:39 PM ET AMNA NAWAZ: I want to ask for your response to the video, but also to put to you that Senator Slotkin, who's in that video, said she and other members of the video have gotten close to 1,000 threats since it was posted. Congressman Crow posted some of the threats he's been receiving calling for his family to be killed. It's chilling stuff. But how dangerous is the president's rhetoric on this? MATTHEW CONTINETTI: I think a lot of the rhetoric has been very dangerous. I think both sides here have been not covering themselves in glory. On the one hand you're calling the president a fascist, a dictator in training, someone who's going to issue unlawful orders, even though they can't name a single unlawful order that the president has given. And then, of course, you have the president himself calling this sedition, treason, punishable by death. If we want to lower the temperature, it will take responsibility on every party. But what has struck me about this is how it's a partisan split screen. Both parties are playing to their bases here. The Democrats are rallying behind these congressmen, and the Republicans almost uniformly are rallying behind President Trump. So, I don't think that this is going to have a long-term effect politically on the president. NAWAZ: Jonathan, you want to respond? JONATHAN CAPEHART: I sort of bristle at the idea that this is a both sides thing. What we have here in terms of the threats, particularly against these members of Congress, it's that you have the president of the United States retweeting, or whatever you want to call it, threats against members of Congress. He is the one who in language and in — if you want to go back to January 6, in deeds who is fanning, fomenting the nastiness that is out there. If we want to lower the temperature, if we want to change the way we do politics in the country, it has to start with the chief executive. It has to start with the president. And he has shown an unwillingness to do that. CONTINETTI: And it also has to be followed through by all of us, including people who are betraying him — portraying him as an authoritarian who poses an existential threat to this country. CAPEHART: There's lots of evidence that it's not unwarranted.