Media

‘Okay Mika, You Don’t Have To Dart Your Eyes Around’: Visibly Aggravated Scarborough Calls Out His Wife Live On Air

[Screenshot/MSNBC: Morning Joe]

Nicole Silverio Media Reporter
Font Size:

MSNBC anchor Joe Scarborough became visibly aggravated at his wife, Mika Brzezinski, for making facial expressions during a discussion about former President Donald Trump.

The Colorado Supreme Court disqualified Trump from the state ballot in the 2024 presidential election in a 4-3 decision, alleging the former president violated the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban.” Brzezinksi’s eyes bulged and moved side to side when Scarborough raised the question as to whether Trump incited an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021.

“Donald Trump committed insurrection. We of course all believe it, I said —” Scarborough said. “Okay, Mika, you don’t have to dart your eyes around.”

“I was like —” Brzezinski said.

“You don’t have to dart your eyes around, I said on January the 7th, Donald Trump should be arrested and tried and sent to jail, but the question is under the law, due process under the law, do judges randomly decide that he’s an insurrectionist? Or do people on cable news shows decide that he’s an insurrectionist? Or does he actually be convicted of insurrection by federal prosecutors?” Scarborough finished.

The Atlantic staff writer David Frum said Republican candidates are “too scared” to stand up to Trump and are “too weak” to win in the primary. He suggested if the U.S. Supreme Court rules in Trump’s favor on the Colorado case, it will hurt the “better Republicans” challenging Trump. (RELATED: ‘Please Don’t’: Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski Argue Over Using Swear Word To Describe Trump) 

Attorney George Conway, who supports the state Supreme Court’s decision, argued the U.S. Constitution does not say anything about an individual having to be convicted of insurrection to be banned from serving in office. He said since there is no provision about conviction in the Constitution, it is the responsibility of the states and the courts to make these decisions.

“There’s no basis to challenge the findings. When you go to the majority opinion and you read the 30 or 40 pages, I don’t know how many there are, on what happened on January 6th and what Donald Trump did during January 6th, there’s no dispute. I mean, we saw it on television, we know what happened. He fomented, he engaged in an insurrection,” Conway argued. “He wanted this to happen. And not only that, there’s another provision in the 14th Amendment that talks about giving aid and comfort to enemies of the Constitution. Well, he did that. He was an enemy to the Constitution.”

Many have argued the state’s decision is likely unconstitutional and claimed voters, rather than the courts, should decide who they want to serve the country. Republican Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance called the decision “a dangerous moment for our country,” and Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy called it “un-American.”