MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski Smugly Predicts ‘Hillary Will Slaughter’ Trump

NewsBusters.org ^ | July 21, 2016 | Samantha Cohen

[Kaslin]

Thursday on Morning Joe, co-host Mika Brzezinski made a prediction about the presidential debates forthcoming this fall: Hillary Clinton will “slaughter” Donald Trump. The liberal host said this only moments after she expressed desire for a “nice, peaceful convention” for Democrats next week in Philadelphia, contrasted with the current Republican convention in Cleveland that she believes has been consumed with “horrible, despicable things.”

Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd began with a prediction of his own, that the DNC in Philadelphia is going to be “boring” and wondered what the Clinton folks are going to do “to make a little more drama.”

MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski Smugly Predicts ‘Hillary Will Slaughter’ Trump

CHUCK TODD: By the way, do you think we are going to have any drama next week? 

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: [Laughter]

TODD: I’m sitting here going. Next week is going to be so boring. I mean it’s just going to be—they’re going to do everything—

If the biggest event for the Democrats in the 2016 presidential election is “boring” perhaps that is indicative of their nominee. Sticking with the “boring” theme, Brzezinski wished for a “nice, peaceful” convention.

BRZEZINSKI: Let’s just have a nice, peaceful convention that's unified and doesn't have things like lock her up and horrible, despicable things being shouted from the audience, like, let's not get ahead of ourselves. This has not been pretty, at all. 

As for the highly anticipated presidential debates this fall, there were varied predictions around the table. Naturally, Brzezinski had to take it to the extreme, insisting Clinton will “slaughter” Trump.

MARK HALPERIN: You look at Trump's performance last night and if you're Clinton people and you’re thinking what do we need to be worried about? The debates. He showed last night his sense of how to dominate a room. Even under adverse conditions. In the debate, I think he could have more of that up his sleeve. 

BRZEZINSKI: I think she'll slaughter him.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: By the way, I do not. Oh come on you're not going to underestimate Donald at this point? 

BRZEZINSKI: Uh. You’re, oh come on. On policy? You're not going to underestimate Hillary Clinton. 

HALPERIN: They both had big moments. 

The rationale of Halperin and Scarborough is undeniable, Donald Trump has proved time and again he can dominate a stage. What is troubling about Brzezinski is her insistence that the RNC in Cleveland has been filled with “horrible” and “despicable” things, yet she audaciously predicts Hillary Clinton will “slaughter” Donald Trump in the fall.

This is a classic example of the hypocrisy at MSNBC, touting their liberal hosts who spew divisive, hateful rhetoric while they simultaneously accuse Republicans of the same behavior. Quite the double standard.

View Full Transcript Here:

07-21-16 MSNBC Morning Joe
07:18:45 AM – 07:21:28 AM

JOE SCARBOROUGH: He loved that Ted Cruz got booed offstage!

KATY TUR: No I'm not saying he didn't love it. But I’m saying he took the moment to needle Ted Cruz even more with that. 

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Right.

TUR: That wasn't trying to smooth things over with Ted Cruz.

BRZEZINSKI: No.

TUR: Then Donald Trump came out and coincidentally came out through - during Ted Cruz's speech, which is what the campaign is trying to say, is a little ridiculous. I mean I have other sources in the campaign who are saying that he came out because the speech went longer than they anticipated and also he was able to steal the moment and attention back to himself. 

WILLIE GEIST: That’s my point. That was part of his moment, that was his move. That was the production of it.

TUR: Oh absolutely. I’m not arguing. I think we’re not arguing we’re just.

BRZEZINSKI: But Eric Trump was next and he wanted to come out to get in place for the next speech. That’s, I mean like, Donald Trump Jr. was like, it's so funny, everyone thinks that he came out to make –he was coming out to see his son speak. 

TUR: Yeah but he could have waited a couple minutes for Ted Cruz to get off that stage and walked out while, before Eric took the podium.

BRZEZINSKI:  Okay. I'll remember to tell him that. 

CHUCK TODD: By the way, do you think we are going to have any drama next week? 

BRZEZINSKI: [Laughter]

TODD: I’m sitting here going. Next week is going to be so boring. I mean it’s just going to be—they’re going to do everything—

MARK HALPERIN: Bill Clinton's speech will be pretty—it won’t be boring.

BRZEZINSKI: Alright, let’s get to the Texas delegation.

TODD: Maybe. Maybe. What’s going to –there's no way Clinton is going to top Cruz. 

BRZEZINSKI: Um.

TODD: What do you expect to hear from Bill Clinton next week? 

HALPERIN: We just haven't heard him give a speech like that in a while. I agree with you but—Bill Clinton’s speech is pretty good.

TODD: I don’t know. All of a sudden, if you're the Clinton folks, what are you going to do to make it a little drama. 

HALPERIN: I'll tell you that story. You look at that—

SCARBOROUGH: Set the [inaudible] on fire?

BRZEZINSKI: No, I’m not worried.

TODD: [Laughing] That's what this week is about. 

GEIST: Pyrotechnics.

BRZEZINSKI: Let’s just have a nice, peaceful convention that's unified and doesn't have things like lock her up and horrible, despicable things being shouted from the audience, like, let's not get ahead of ourselves. This has not been pretty, at all. 

HALPERIN: You look at Trump's performance last night and if you're Clinton people and you’re thinking what do we need to be worried about? The debates. He showed last night his sense of how to dominate a room. Even under adverse conditions. In the debate, I think he could have more of that up his sleeve. 

BRZEZINSKI: I think she'll slaughter him. Go ahead, Willie. 

GEIST: Well we were just talking about some of the reactions, do we have the –

SCARBOROUGH: By the way, I do not. Oh come on you're not going to underestimate Donald at this point? 

BRZEZINSKI: Uh. You’re, oh come on. On policy? You're not going to underestimate Hillary Clinton. 

HALPERIN: They both had big moments. 

SCARBOROUGH: By the way. Let's talk about the most famous debate in history, if you're listening to Richard Nixon on the radio, Richard Nixon beats John Kennedy. If you're watching it on TV, John Kennedy beats Richard Nixon. Fast forward 60 years and, you know, she can talk policy. Donald Trump knows how to dominate a stage. 

BRZEZINSKI: Would you like to make a bet with me? 

SCARBOROUGH: A pickup truck? 

BRZEZINSKI: Well, I already got that. I already got that.

SCARBOROUGH: Where is Barnicle by the way?

BRZEZINSKI: Yeah, where is my truck? 

SCARBOROUGH: Yeah, Mike, Mika needs her truck. 

HALPERIN: Where’s the Barnicle cam?

BRZEZINSKI: Yeah, seriously.

SCARBOROUGH: Come on, man.

BRZEZINSKI: A bet is a bet is a bet.

[1217Chic]

Trump will toast her like a cheap slice of bread.....

[SERKIT]

She is about ready to prolapse her colon, straining to get Hillary’s carcass over the finish line. Otherwise, she may need to be placed on suicide watch.

[b4its2late]

Who the hell is MIKA BRZEZINSKI? And who cares what he thinks?

[RightGeek]

[goodwithagun]

She’s had a lot of practice #Benghazi

[castlegreyskull]

Hillary does know something about slaughtering.

[CodeToad]

This is just PMSNBC trying to say something outrageous to get attention. This type of attention seeking behavior is common with the liberals.

[JayAr36]

Great news, Mika is a dim bulb.

The mentally ill folk need a hero. They shouldn’t be picked on.

[laweeks]

These worthless, overpaid, libtards go smoked last night by Laura. That's why they're pouting like little babies. So, all they can hang their hat on is Laura's hand salute last night.

Oh, wait a minute . . . that's Hitlery!

[MayflowerMadam]

If this is what Mika says/believes, then she’s been clued in on the efforts of voter fraud and mass cheating. We know it’ll be there; we just aren’t sure about the extent of it. Apparently, Mika knows.

[Billthedrill]

I’ll take a hundred bucks of that action, Mika.

[Cowgirl of Justice]

C U November’s first Tuesday!!!

[Snowybear]

Newsbusters and the rest of you need to ignore this c*&^ and stop giving her press. Nobody watches the damn show. Knock it off.

[FreedomPoster]

‘I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theater I can feel them.’

— Film critic Pauline Kael, after McGovern was drubbed by Nixon in 1972.

The Actual Pauline Kael Quote—Not As Bad, and Worse
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/culture-civilization/the-actual-pauline-kael-quote%e2%80%94not-as-bad-and-worse/

[GOPJ]

Here’s what Mika’s missing:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/20/fbi-exoneration-of-hillary-clinton-raises-disturbi/

What if the folks who run the Department of Political Justice recently were told that the republic would suffer if Hillary Clinton were indicted for espionage because Donald Trump might succeed Barack Obama in the presidency? What if espionage is the failure to safeguard state secrets and the evidence that Mrs. Clinton failed to safeguard them is unambiguous and overwhelming?

What if President Obama never really liked his former rival whom he appointed as his secretary of state? What if he had no real interest in seeing her succeed him because he and his wife simply could never trust her?

What if, when Mrs. Clinton suggested to the president that the United States wage a secret, undeclared war against Libya, the president went along with it as a no-lose proposition? What if he assumed that if her secret war succeeded he’d get the credit, and if her secret war failed she would get the blame?

What if the means of fighting the secret war consisted of employing intelligence assets rather than the U.S. military? What if Mrs. Clinton concocted that idea because the use of the military requires a public reporting to the entire Congress but the use of intelligence assets requires only a secret reporting to a dozen members of Congress?

What if Mrs. Clinton expanded her war by permitting American and foreign arms dealers to bypass the NATO arms embargo on Libya by selling heavy-duty, military-grade arms directly to militias in Libya? What if this was Mrs. Clinton’s dream scenario — an apparent civil war in Libya in which the victorious side was secretly armed by the United States, with democracy brought to the country and Mrs. Clinton the architect of it all?

What if the CIA warned Mrs. Clinton that this would backfire? What if the CIA told her that she was arming not pro-Western militias but anti-American terrorist groups? What if she rejected all that advice? What if providing material assistance to terrorist groups is a felony? What if the Department of Political Justice actually obtained an indictment of an American arms dealer for going along with Mrs. Clinton’s schemes?

What if Mrs. Clinton’s secret war in Libya was a disaster? What if she succeeded in toppling the Libyan leader, Col. Moammar Gadhafi, only to have him replaced by feuding warlords who control anti-Western terrorist groups that not only failed to produce democracy but instead produced destruction, chaos, terror, torture and death?

(more at link)

[Captain Peter Blood]

Is this the great insight from Mika and Joe’s pillow talk?
Well after a year she has still learned nothing about Trump.
Wonder if Mika and Joe have broken in the bed on the pickup truck yet. Sadly no drive in movie theaters left to go to.

[GOPJ]

Here’s what Mika’s missing:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/20/fbi-exoneration-of-hillary-clinton-raises-disturbi/

What if the folks who run the Department of Political Justice recently were told that the republic would suffer if Hillary Clinton were indicted for espionage because Donald Trump might succeed Barack Obama in the presidency? What if espionage is the failure to safeguard state secrets and the evidence that Mrs. Clinton failed to safeguard them is unambiguous and overwhelming?

What if President Obama never really liked his former rival whom he appointed as his secretary of state? What if he had no real interest in seeing her succeed him because he and his wife simply could never trust her?

What if, when Mrs. Clinton suggested to the president that the United States wage a secret, undeclared war against Libya, the president went along with it as a no-lose proposition? What if he assumed that if her secret war succeeded he’d get the credit, and if her secret war failed she would get the blame?

What if the means of fighting the secret war consisted of employing intelligence assets rather than the U.S. military? What if Mrs. Clinton concocted that idea because the use of the military requires a public reporting to the entire Congress but the use of intelligence assets requires only a secret reporting to a dozen members of Congress?

What if Mrs. Clinton expanded her war by permitting American and foreign arms dealers to bypass the NATO arms embargo on Libya by selling heavy-duty, military-grade arms directly to militias in Libya? What if this was Mrs. Clinton’s dream scenario — an apparent civil war in Libya in which the victorious side was secretly armed by the United States, with democracy brought to the country and Mrs. Clinton the architect of it all?

What if the CIA warned Mrs. Clinton that this would backfire? What if the CIA told her that she was arming not pro-Western militias but anti-American terrorist groups? What if she rejected all that advice? What if providing material assistance to terrorist groups is a felony? What if the Department of Political Justice actually obtained an indictment of an American arms dealer for going along with Mrs. Clinton’s schemes?

What if Mrs. Clinton’s secret war in Libya was a disaster? What if she succeeded in toppling the Libyan leader, Col. Moammar Gadhafi, only to have him replaced by feuding warlords who control anti-Western terrorist groups that not only failed to produce democracy but instead produced destruction, chaos, terror, torture and death?

(more at link)

[I want the USA back]

Most predictions are wishful thinking.

[bella1]

The topic of conversation after the Dem convention is that Bill looks like he has 1 foot in the grave. And should Chelsea speak.... which is like listening to nails on a chalkboard... the contrast between her and the Trump children will be made and Chelsea will be on the losing end of that opinion.

[upchuck]

Just for the record, I cannot respect any journalist (and in Mika’s case that’s stretching) that abuses the word “like.”

Similar to beginning a paragraph with the word “So.”

Does not show professionalism.