Joy Reid spars with Piers Morgan over 'race card'
'I think you were fired because your show got increasingly unpopular - it happens all the time in TV. That's why you got let go. Why play the race card?' Reid - who had just sat through a series of clips showing her on CUNY professor Mark Lamont Hill's podcast last week where she said 'white fragility shaped [MSNBC execs'] decisions' - responded by accusing Morgan of playing the race card.
A back-and-forth ensued, after which Reid took to her own YouTube to warn about the then yet-to-be released interview's contents, framing it as a 'race-baiting ambush'. In one the clips played, Reid had insisted that her ratings started to slump after she said on-air that Americans were more moved by the plight of Ukrainians than that of the Palestinians because they 'were white.'
After being confronted with the clips and Morgan's question, Reid appeared to deflect. 'First of all, I love the fact that your "play the race card" is your version of the race card. You literally are so fixated on trying to racialize conversations with me, Piers,' she said 'You play the race card!' Morgan yelled in more response, seemingly in disbelief. 'In more conversations in your ten years at MSNBC - come on!'
Both began to shout over each other as they tried to get their points across. 'All right. The bottom line is you take an entire conversation that I had with Mark Lamont Hill and picked the bits you can racialize,' Reid maintained. 'This is your shtick. And I get that this is your shtick.'
'Oh you racialize everything, Joy!' a now smiling Morgan shot back. 'I get it. I understand this is your shtick, Piers, and listen - game recognizes game,' said Reid. Morgan, laughing at this point, hurled the same accusation back.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
a few seconds ago
- The Independent
Democrats and advocates criticize Trump's executive order on homelessness
Leading Democrats and advocates for the homeless are criticizing an executive order President Donald Trump signed this week aimed at removing homeless people from the streets, possibly by committing them for mental health or drug treatment without their consent. Trump directed some of his Cabinet heads to prioritize funding to cities that crack down on open drug use and street camping, with the goal of making people feel safer. It's not compassionate to do nothing, the order states. 'Shifting these individuals into long-term institutional settings for humane treatment is the most proven way to restore public order,' the order reads. Homelessness has become a bigger problem in recent years as the cost of housing increased, especially in states such as California where there aren't enough homes to meet demand. At the same time, drug addiction and overdoses have soared with the availability of cheap and potent fentanyl. The president's order might be aimed at liberal cities such as San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York, which Trump views as too lax about conditions on their streets. But many of the concepts have already been proposed or tested in California, where Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic mayors have worked for years to get people off the streets and into treatment. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court made it easier for cities to clear encampments even if the people living in them have nowhere else to go. Still, advocates say Trump's new order is vague, punitive and won't effectively end homelessness. Newsom has directed cities to clean up homeless encampments and he's funneled more money into programs to treat addiction and mental health disorders. His office said Friday that Trump's order relies on harmful stereotypes and focuses more on "creating distracting headlines and settling old scores." "But, his imitation (even poorly executed) is the highest form of flattery,' spokesperson Tara Gallegos said in a statement, referring to the president calling for strategies already in use in California. San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie has also emphasized the importance of clean and orderly streets in banning homeless people from living in RVs and urging people to accept the city's offers of shelter. In Silicon Valley, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan recently pushed a policy change that makes a person eligible for jail if they reject three offers of shelter. Trump's executive order tasks Attorney General Pam Bondi and the secretaries for health, housing and transportation to prioritize grants to states and local governments that enforce bans on open drug use and street camping. Devon Kurtz, the public safety policy director at the Cicero Institute, a conservative policy group that has advocated for several of the provisions of the executive order, said the organization is 'delighted' by the order. He acknowledged that California has already been moving to ban encampments since the Supreme Court's decision. But he said Trump's order adds teeth to that shift, Kurtz said. 'It's a clear message to these communities that were still sort of uncomfortable because it was such a big change in policy,' Kurtz said. But Steve Berg, chief policy officer at the National Alliance to End Homelessness, called parts of the order vague. He said the U.S. abandoned forced institutionalization decades ago because it was too expensive and raised moral and legal concerns. 'What is problematic about this executive order is not so much that law enforcement is involved — it's what it calls on law enforcement to do, which is to forcibly lock people up,' Berg said. 'That's not the right approach to dealing with homelessness.' The mayor of California's most populous city, Los Angeles, is at odds with the Newsom and Trump administrations on homelessness. Mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat, opposes punishing sweeps and says the city has reduced street homelessness by working with homeless people to get them into shelter or housing. 'Moving people from one street to the next or from the street to jail and back again will not solve this problem," she said in a statement. ___
Reuters
a minute ago
- Reuters
White House seeks fines from other universities after Columbia deal
WASHINGTON, July 25 (Reuters) - The White House is seeking fines from several universities it says failed to stop antisemitism on campus, including Harvard University, in exchange for restoring federal funding, a Trump administration official said on Friday. The administration is in talks with several universities, including Cornell, Duke, Northwestern and Brown, the source said, confirming a report in the Wall Street Journal. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the administration is close to striking deals with Northwestern and Brown and potentially Cornell. A deal with Harvard, the country's oldest and richest university, is a key target for the White House, the official added. The universities did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Trump and his team have undertaken a broad campaign to leverage federal funding to force change at U.S. universities, which the Republican president says are gripped by antisemitic and "radical left" ideologies. Trump has targeted several universities since returning to office in January over the pro-Palestinian student protest movement that roiled college campuses last year. Columbia University said on Wednesday it will pay more than $200 million to the U.S. government in a settlement with the administration to resolve federal probes and have most of its suspended federal funding restored. The Trump administration has welcomed the Columbia deal, with officials believing the university set the standard on how to reach an agreement, the official said. Harvard has taken a different approach, suing the federal government in a bid to get suspended federal grants restored.
Daily Mail
a minute ago
- Daily Mail
Inside Ghislaine Maxwell's secret meeting with Trump's DOJ: Cuffed so tight her wrists were BLEEDING, she started to talk
It's the strange little details that give it away – the haste, the lack of planning and, dare I say it, the sheer incompetence behind the scenes when it comes to this week's meeting between President Trump's deputy Attorney General and Ghislaine Maxwell. I can disclose, for example, that the interview with Maxwell, one of the most high profile felons in the American penal system, was originally scheduled to take place inside the tough Florida jail where she is serving her 20-year sentence for child sex offences.
