MSNBC host Joe Scarborough came under fire this week from Wall Street Journal Editor-at-Large Gerry Baker after the host criticized the publication for running an opinion piece written by Republican Sen. J.D. Vance. The op-ed, which took aim at the Biden-Harris administration’s handling of Hurricane Helene’s aftermath in the southeastern U.S., particularly in North Carolina, ignited a back-and-forth that further fueled the debate over disaster response and media responsibility.
During Wednesday’s episode of Morning Joe, Scarborough slammed the Wall Street Journal for allowing Vance, who is also the GOP’s vice-presidential nominee, to openly criticize the federal government’s response to the storm. Scarborough, a former Republican turned vocal critic of the Trump-aligned GOP, accused the paper of giving a platform to what he deemed baseless attacks on the Biden administration’s relief efforts. This, however, didn’t sit well with Baker, who appeared later on Fox News to respond.
Appearing on America Reports with Fox News co-host Sandra Smith, Baker did not hold back in his defense of Vance’s piece or his critique of Scarborough’s comments. The veteran journalist quickly turned the tables, calling out Scarborough’s history with spreading disinformation, specifically related to President Joe Biden’s health.
“It’s hard to be lectured by MSNBC on disinformation,” Baker quipped, accusing Scarborough of promoting misleading narratives in the past. He specifically referenced Scarborough’s defense of Biden’s health during the 2020 presidential campaign. According to Baker, Scarborough had been vocal in dismissing concerns about Biden’s fitness for office, even as signs of cognitive decline were becoming evident.
Baker elaborated, “This is the same Joe Scarborough who told us, I think, days or weeks before that infamous… presidential debate that Biden was in incredible shape. He attacked The Wall Street Journal for suggesting Biden was slipping. Scarborough said Biden was as sharp as ever—brilliant.” Baker recalled that it was only weeks later that Scarborough shifted his tone, particularly after a June 27 debate where Biden stumbled through several moments, freezing and making notable verbal gaffes. Scarborough eventually admitted that Biden might not be up to the demands of the presidency.
At the center of this media clash is J.D. Vance’s op-ed, in which the Ohio senator criticized the federal government’s disaster response following Hurricane Helene, a devastating storm that wreaked havoc across parts of the southeastern U.S., especially western North Carolina. The storm claimed the lives of at least 227 people and left entire communities grappling with the aftermath.
Vance’s piece argued that the Biden-Harris administration, along with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), failed to provide adequate relief to the region, exacerbating the suffering of those affected by the storm. He drew attention to what he saw as delays in delivering aid and a lack of urgency in addressing the needs of hurricane victims. Scarborough took issue with these claims, accusing Vance of distorting the facts to score political points.
However, during the America Reports segment, host Sandra Smith noted that Fox News had fact-checked Vance’s op-ed, comparing his claims to official announcements from both the White House and FEMA. According to Smith, Fox’s research team found no significant discrepancies between Vance’s assertions and the federal government’s actual relief efforts. “We had our research team compare the Vance editorial to all the announcements regarding relief efforts from both the White House and FEMA,” Smith explained. “They could not find claims in that J.D. Vance editorial that stood out as false.”
Baker reiterated this point, suggesting that Scarborough’s attacks were not based on factual inaccuracies in Vance’s piece but rather on a broader political agenda aimed at shielding the Biden administration from criticism.
This exchange between Scarborough and Baker highlights the ongoing tension in the media over how the federal government’s disaster response is portrayed. FEMA, in particular, has come under increasing scrutiny, with critics pointing to slow response times and mismanagement in several recent crises. While the Biden administration has defended its handling of Hurricane Helene, arguing that aid was distributed as quickly as possible given the scope of the damage, many Republicans, including Vance, remain unconvinced.
For his part, Vance has positioned himself as a fierce critic of what he sees as bureaucratic inefficiency and a lack of accountability in federal agencies like FEMA. His op-ed was not just an attack on Biden’s handling of Hurricane Helene but also part of a broader Republican effort to cast doubt on the administration’s competence ahead of the 2024 election.
As the political landscape heats up in the lead-up to 2024, these media clashes are likely to become more frequent. Republicans like Vance will continue to scrutinize the Biden administration’s actions, while media figures like Scarborough may find themselves increasingly on the defensive as they work to counter these critiques.
The public spat between Scarborough and Baker is emblematic of the wider divide in media coverage of the Biden-Harris administration. As each side seeks to shape public perception, debates over what constitutes fair criticism and what amounts to disinformation will continue to dominate the airwaves.
For now, Baker’s sharp rebuttal of Scarborough’s disinformation claims, combined with Fox News’ fact-checking of Vance’s op-ed, suggests that the debate over disaster response and media narratives is far from over. With the 2024 election on the horizon, the stakes are only getting higher, and figures like Vance and Scarborough are likely to remain central players in this ongoing media battle.
