MSNBC Hosts Clarify Their New Roles as the Network Announces The Weekend Co-Hosts
The two hosts addressed audiences on their respective programs, acknowledging the network's significant programming changes in the past week and announcing their roles as The Weekend co-hosts.
At the end of The Saturday Show, Capeheart said, "I want to share some news about this show and about my next assignment here at MSNBC. I've enjoyed bringing you the Saturday Show and The Sunday Show at 6 p.m. ET for just about over a year now, but come spring, I'll be moving back to mornings to co-host The Weekend on MSNBC from 7 a.m. until 10 a.m. on Saturdays and Sundays."
Capeheart informed viewers that current hosts Symone Sanders Townsend, Michael Steele, and Alicia Menendez will be moving to weeknights at 7 p.m. ET, the timeslot that Joy Reid previously occupied.
Mohyeldin also used his on-air opportunity on Saturday night to speak on his new assignment, anchoring an evening edition of The Weekend on Saturday and Sunday at 6 p.m. ET. In addition, Mohyeldin acknowledged Reid and other colleagues who lost hosting opportunities at the network and clarified misinformation surrounding the network as a result of programming changes from MSNBC president Rebecca Kutler.
"This week, several headlines claim that my show, this show, had been canceled and that I was leaving the network, and that incorrect news created a wave of commentary and criticism about which voices can be heard and which cannot on mainstream cable news, especially when it comes to coverage of the Middle East." Mohyeldin added, "It is important for me that I set that record straight. I'm not leaving the network."
He spoke on his commitment to continue important stories in his new role, saying, "One thing that won't change is my promise to you, the viewers, that I won't stop talking about the difficult stories and challenging topics that others don't cover."
MSNBC is moving quickly to fill the co-host role of the morning and evening editions of The Weekend. On Monday, the network announced that Eugene Daniels from Politico and the current White House Correspondent Association president will join Capehart in the mornings.
In addition, Jackie Alemany from The Washington Post will join the show, MSNBC announced on Tuesday. Alemany was previously a congressional reporter for the Post, and in addition to her cohosting duties, she will also serve as MSNBC's Washington correspondent.
Daniels and Alemany's additions to The Weekend were announced on Morning Joe on Monday and Tuesday, respectively.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
30 minutes ago
- Politico
‘I wouldn't want her in my district': Some Dems want Kamala Harris to sit the midterms out
After more than two decades serving in elected office — rising from San Francisco district attorney to California attorney general to senator and, ultimately, vice president and Democratic presidential nominee — Harris said she was eager to find a new way to be engaged, albeit one that would still maintain her profile with everyday people. 'I want to travel the country,' she told Colbert. 'I want to listen to people. I want to talk with people. And I don't want it to be transactional where I'm asking for their vote.' Her bearish assessment about the state of the country was, in Colbert's words, 'harrowing,' leading Harris, who is focusing on a book tour and potential non-profit initiative, to insist she was not disengaging from civic life entirely. 'In this moment where people have become so deflated and despondent and afraid, those of us who have the ability — which I do right now, not being in an office or in a campaign for that office, to be out there and to talk with folks and remind them of their power,' she added. A Harris spokesperson declined to comment for this story. While there is plenty of skepticism within the party's ranks about her viability in 2028, many prominent Democratic leaders still effuse praise for Harris and have touted her as a key asset for candidates in the midterms. Asked if he wants her to run in 2028, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, her former running mate, told POLITICO, 'I would welcome it. I think she was a great candidate. I think she would make a great president. I saw how she thinks. I saw how she cares about people. So if that's her decision, you know where my heart is.' Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, who's considered a potential presidential contender himself, boasted about Harris after a bill-signing ceremony this week, calling her a 'terrific spokesperson' with a storied career who can help Democrats speak to the economic challenges facing working people. 'Frankly, those of us who believe that we need change in this country right now, need all the help that we can get to try to overcome what's ahead and to win in the 2026 elections,' Pritzker told reporters. 'And so I welcome her to that fight.'
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Freshman Dem admits ‘voters feel like Democrats have sort of been a–holes to them'
Voters think Democrats are 'a–holes,' prominent freshman Rep. Sarah McBride said, blaming that perception for her party's electoral setbacks. 'I think voters feel like Democrats have sort of been a–holes to them,' McBride (D-Del.) told Politico's 'The Conversation' in an interview set to drop Sunday. Democrats, whose party symbol is a donkey, aka a jacka–, have been deep in soul-searching about how they were trounced across the board in the November election. McBride, the first openly transgender member of Congress, argued voters want 'respect,' and Democrats don't give it. 'I do think that a voter asks two questions when they're considering who to vote for. The first question is: Does this candidate, does this party like me? And by extension, do they respect me?' the Delaware Democrat told host Dasha Burns. 3 Rep. Sarah McBride wants her party to be less off putting to voters. Bloomberg via Getty Images 3 The November election marked the first time Democrats lost the popular vote in a presidential election in 20 years. TNS 'If you can't answer that first question to a voter's satisfaction, they won't even get to the second question, which is: What does this party think? What does this candidate think? And I think we lost that first question.' Other prominent Dems have raised similar concerns their party has become too elitist and engaged in excessive culture war battles which have repelled the working class. Following President Trump's win in November, for example, Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) contended many Dems came across as 'condescending' and had an attitude that working-class voters should be 'smart enough to realize they're voting against their interests.' Others have raised concerns that Democrats had been too hostile towards men, and some, such as Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), dinged the party for being too dismissive towards voters who had concerns about transgender competitors in women's sports. 'I do think that we have to basically create a tent that is united on three fundamental principles,' McBride continued. 'One is working people need more support and help. Two, democracy and freedom are good. And three, we're not going to be a‑‑holes to voters.' Much of the off-putting attitudes voters are reacting to aren't necessarily from elected Democrats, but rather from influencers and big-name commentators, she cautioned. 3 Democrats are scrambling to course correct ahead of the 2026 and 2028 elections. Getty Images 'The reality in today's environment is that your party ecosystem is defined not just by politicians or the party, but also some of the loudest voices online that in voters' minds reflect and represent that broader coalition,' the Delaware Democrat stressed. 'When we have an environment where we've got some very loud people who are shaming and calling people who disagree with them — even in rhetoric — bigots, when we have those folks saying that to a wide swath of voters, including voters we could win, and we aren't explicitly stating something to the contrary, then a voter will then just paint us all with one broad brush.' McBride also posited that Trump's rise to political power has been 'fueled by a frustration that government no longer works or delivers for people' — something she blamed on gridlock in Congress.
Politico
a day ago
- Politico
Why Trump's newly announced tariffs aren't a done deal
THE LAW ON LIBERATION DAY — On Thursday, Donald Trump announced sweeping new tariffs against U.S. trading partners that will go into effect next week. The announcement came on the same day that an appeals court grappled with the question of whether Trump's tariffs are even legal. Indeed, there is a strong argument that the tariffs are illegal and unconstitutional. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, which on Thursday held oral argument on two major tariff challenges — one from a group of small businesses and the other from a coalition of twelve states led by Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield — seems like it may ultimately agree. Rayfield was pleased with how it went. 'If you were an outside observer watching the hearing and you had to pick a party to stay in the shoes of, I think you would prefer to be in the state's shoes after Thursday's hearing,' Rayfield said in an interview with POLITICO this afternoon. That seems to be the consensus among close observers. 'Federal appeals court judges on Thursday sharply questioned President Donald Trump's authority,' POLITICO's Kyle Cheney and Doug Palmer wrote. Reuters put it similarly, while the Associated Press reported that the judges 'expressed broad skepticism' toward the government's arguments. The New York Times' account said that Brett Shumate, the lawyer arguing for the government, 'at times faced an icy reception.' This is not that surprising if you have been following this legal saga closely. The Constitution explicitly gives the power to impose tariffs to Congress. Congress has passed several trade laws that provide the president with the power to impose tariffs in certain circumstances, but they do not grant the sweeping and unreviewable power that the Trump administration has claimed — and indeed requires in order to support Trump's tariffs as a legal matter. Meanwhile, the statute that has actually been invoked by the Trump administration — the International Emergency Economic Powers Act — has never been used to impose tariffs over the course of the nearly half-century that it has been on the books, and it makes no mention of tariffs in the text. It was in fact passed to limit the president's emergency economic powers. On top of that, the key case cited by the government in its favor does not actually support their position (usually a bad thing). Thus far, two lower courts have ruled against the administration on this issue — a unanimous three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of International Trade and a federal district court judge in Washington, D.C. Both rulings have been stayed pending appeal. Thursday's argument concerned the first of those rulings and was conducted in the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. If the government loses in the Federal Circuit, it is still possible that the Supreme Court's conservative justices could agree to hear the case and ultimately rule in Trump's favor. On the merits, that outcome would be hard to square with the conservative majority's stated commitment to textualism as a mode of statutory interpretation, as well as the major questions doctrine that was developed in recent years by the conservative justices, who used it in 2023 to strike down much of the Biden administration's student-loan forgiveness effort. In the student-loan forgiveness case, the conservative justices relied crucially on the fact that the program was estimated to cost taxpayers roughly $500 billion, according to a budget model from the University of Pennsylvania. They concluded that this warranted a particularly rigorous and stringent mode of statutory interpretation. The estimated cost to taxpayers in that case pales in comparison to the estimated cost for Americans resulting from Trump's tariffs, according to a model at Yale University. That model currently estimates that Trump's latest tariff framework will result in an average per household income loss of $2,400 this year alone, that it will result in a 0.5 percentage loss in real GDP this year and next year, and that the economy will lose nearly half a million jobs by the end of 2025. None of this has stopped the administration from plowing forward. At this point, the administration may be hoping for a victory at the Supreme Court (assuming they lose at the Federal Circuit) or, perhaps, simply planning to do as much as they can to advance their tariff policy before a day comes when it is definitively thrown out by the courts. They have already been aided in this regard by the Supreme Court, intentionally or otherwise. In mid-June, the two businesses that prevailed in federal district court in Washington asked the Supreme Court to short-circuit the appeals process and take the case up immediately for review. 'In light of the tariffs' massive impact on virtually every business and consumer across the Nation, and the unremitting whiplash caused by the unfettered tariffing power the President claims, challenges to the IEEPA tariffs cannot await the normal appellate process (even on an expedited timeline),' the companies' lawyers wrote. The companies' request was far from crazy, particularly given the fact that the conservative justices have moved quickly in a variety of major court challenges to the Trump administration's actions since Trump's inauguration. Three days later, however, the Supreme Court denied their request, with no explanation. Perhaps not coincidentally, those expedited rulings have favored the Trump administration, while in the case of Trump's tariffs, a critical mass of conservative justices may ultimately be compelled to rule against Trump — if, that is, they actually adhere to the interpretive and constitutional principles that they claim to follow. In the meantime — and as the administration has been struggling in the courts to defend its policy — the Trump administration is evidently moving forward undeterred. Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@ Or contact tonight's author at akhardori@ What'd I Miss? — Trump demands firing of BLS chief after soft jobs report: President Donald Trump called for the ouster of the head of the Labor Department's statistical arm this afternoon after the latest monthly jobs report came in well under expectations. 'I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY,' Trump wrote in a social media post. 'She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified.' Trump reprised prior accusations that the Bureau of Labor Statistics under Commissioner Erika McEntarfer surreptitiously put out overly rosy jobs numbers at the tail end of the Biden administration that were subsequently revised in order to influence the election. Economists have roundly dismissed these claims as a misunderstanding of the agency's revision processes. — Huckabee, Witkoff visit US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation amid global outcry: Senior U.S. officials visited a distribution center for the American-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation today, pledging to report back to President Donald Trump about the foundation's operations and devise a plan to address starvation in the strip amid growing global outcry over the humanitarian crisis. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee and special envoy Steve Witkoff made a rare trip to Gaza today amid heightened pressure — including from within MAGA circles — to reconsider the administration's support for Israel's war on Hamas and intervene in Gaza's hunger crisis. — Corporation for Public Broadcasting shutting down: The Corporation for Public Broadcasting announced today it was shutting down its operations after President Donald Trump rescinded funding for the nonprofit, which it used to support public radio and TV stations around the country. The CPB — which was established by Congress decades ago as an independent nonprofit — said it will begin 'an orderly wind-down' after Trump signed a measure last month to claw back $1.1 billion in grants appropriated to CPB over the next two fiscal years. — Ghislaine Maxwell transferred to less restrictive prison after DOJ meeting: Days after sitting down with one of the highest-ranking members of the Justice Department, Ghislaine Maxwell has been transferred to a less restrictive minimum security federal prison camp in Texas, her attorney said. Maxwell's attorney David Oscar Markus said today she had been moved to Federal Prison Camp Bryan, a facility for female inmates in Southeast Texas. He declined further comment. Until this week, Maxwell, the onetime girlfriend of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, had been serving a 20-year sentence for her 2021 conviction for sex trafficking crimes in Florida, at FCI Tallahassee, a low-security prison. — Trump, escalating war of words with Russia's Medvedev, mobilizes two nuclear submarines: President Donald Trump said today he mobilized two nuclear submarines 'to be positioned in the appropriate regions' in response to threatening comments by Russia's former president Dmitry Medvedev. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said he was taking that action 'just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that. Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances.' Medvedev on Thursday referenced Russia's nuclear capabilities amid an escalating battle on social media sparked by Trump's latest efforts to increase economic pressure on the Kremlin in hopes of reviving diplomatic efforts to end the war in Ukraine. AROUND THE WORLD RAISING THE BAR — Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni reacted with fury today as the EU's top court raised the threshold for member countries to reject asylum-seekers. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) said EU nations may only create national lists of safe countries outside the bloc if they fully justify their assessments with public sources. According to the court, a country can only be considered 'safe' for repatriation if 'the entire population' is protected across all regions. Meloni called the court's decision 'surprising' and a power grab by EU judges. 'Once again, the judiciary, this time at the European level, claims spaces that do not belong to it, in the face of responsibilities that are political,' she said. SLOVENIA STEPS OUT— Slovenia became the first EU country to ban all weapons trade with Israel, citing the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The government also prohibited the transit of weapons to or from Israel through Slovenia, the administration in Ljubljana said in a statement Thursday. Slovenia said that it decided to act independently from the EU, as 'due to internal disagreements and disunity,' the bloc is unable to take action against Israel. Though the European Commission proposed partially suspending Israel's association agreement with the EU this week, member countries have yet to agree on it. Nightly Number RADAR SWEEP WEEKEND WARRIORS — Under the threat of Chinese invasion, more and more Taiwanese civilians are signing up for civil defense classes. US intelligence predicts that China will be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027 as China builds up its aircrafts and warships. Armed with airsoft guns that fire plastic pellets, men and women train on the weekends in converted garages and empty warehouses to prepare a civil resilience. Beyond armed defense, officials and private organizations have amped up drills for attacks on critical infrastructure and cyberattacks. Yian Lee reports on the 'soft militarization' of Taiwanese civilians for Bloomberg. Parting Image Jacqueline Munis contributed to this newsletter. Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.
