Former MSNBC Host: Trump ‘Supposedly’ in Ear; Tim Walz not running 2028; Elizabeth Warren price

Four cable-news moments, each revealing. On CNN, podcaster Touré — a former MSNBC host — claimed Trump “supposedly got shot in the ear” in Butler, Pennsylvania, saying “we never heard from his doctors on that.” CNN’s Scott Jennings was visibly incredulous: “Whoa! Whoa! Did you say supposedly?” Gov. Tim Walz formally announced he will not run for president in 2028 — “I am not … I am doing all I can to help build the party.” Joe Scarborough asked Rep. Jamie Raskin why Democrats did not call for Epstein file release during 2021-2025 when they controlled DOJ: “It was a crisis then. It’s a crisis now. Why didn’t Democrats call for it from 21 to 25?” Raskin’s extended “uh … I mean … I don’t know” answer went viral. And Senator Elizabeth Warren publicly endorsed Zohran Mamdani’s plan for government-run grocery stores in New York City as “a new and fresh plan."

"Supposedly Got Shot in the Ear”

The CNN segment opened with Touré making a claim that, by the time it escaped his mouth, the other panelists recognized as over the line. “He supposedly got shot in the ear. We never heard from his doctors on that. Oh, right, I know. When did we hear from his doctors? Guys, when did we hear from his doctors?”

“Supposedly” is doing a lot of work there. The Butler shooting was captured on live television. The shooter’s projectile grazed Trump’s ear in visible real time. Trump bled on stage. Trump’s ear was bandaged in the days that followed. A rally attendee, Corey Comperatore, died shielding his family from the same shooter’s fire. A counter-sniper neutralized the shooter. These are facts established with a level of documentation few events achieve.

Touré’s “supposedly” inserts doubt into a factual record that is not in dispute. The immediate reaction of the other panelists — including CNN’s Scott Jennings — was escalating objection.

”Whoa! Did You Say Supposedly?”

“Hold on, if y’all stop screaming at the table, maybe I can actually respond. Supposedly. Hold on. Supposedly. That’s where we are now.”

Touré tried to hold his ground, but the table was not having it. “Hold on a second, hold on a second. Tare, he was shot in the ear. Thank you for wearing that out. But we can’t hear from the doctors. We would always hear from his doctors when we get shot.”

“We would always hear from his doctors when we get shot” is Touré’s pivot argument. Not that Trump wasn’t shot, he now suggested, but that standard protocol in past presidential injuries has included public medical briefings, and the absence of equivalent briefings on Trump’s ear injury is, in Touré’s framing, suspicious.

The argument is weak on its face. The Butler shooting was on a rally stage, not in the White House. Trump received immediate medical attention on the scene, was examined after reaching a medical facility, and made public appearances with the visible injury days later. A formal public medical briefing is not a universal protocol for every presidential injury, especially for a rally incident.

”Did You Hear From His Doctors?”

“Did we hear from his doctors? Is this really your argument? I mean, is this the best argument you have? I mean, did we hear from his doctors?”

That cross-talk reveals the panel dividing. Some panelists are now attacking Touré’s logic directly. Others are trying to move on.

“I mean, all I know is I went to the Republican National Convention and he had a bandage on his ear.”

That is Touré trying to concede ground — yes, Trump had a bandage — without conceding the underlying point that he was shot. It is a classic retreat move, accepting the physical artifact while questioning its cause.

“All right, I don’t… He had blood on his face? He was not shot. Where did it come from?"

"Let Me Settle It”

The panel’s anchor, Abby Phillip, eventually stepped in. “Gentlemen, thank you. Tare, gentlemen, just one second. I think this is like a total off the, you know, this is not really what we’re talking about.”

Phillip is trying to move the conversation back to its intended topic, likely Trump’s health broadly. But the “supposedly” comment has hijacked the segment.

“Did he get shot? I hope that he did get shot or not. You’re saying you think he did get shot? Scott, I know that you wanna revisit this issue. I think it’s an important question. But are there still people that are truthers on this? Tare, did he get shot?”

“I wasn’t there.”

That is Touré’s answer to the direct question. “I wasn’t there.” That response is extraordinary. The question was not whether he was personally present. The question was whether Trump was shot. The rally was televised live, replayed endlessly, studied forensically. Whether Touré “was there” is irrelevant to whether the event happened. The refusal to answer directly reveals the position: Touré is not willing to affirm the factual record on camera.

“That’s a long pause, bro. I don’t know. I would like to hear from his doctor.”

“Let me settle it. Donald Trump was shot in the ear. We did not hear from his doctors. That’s all we have time for tonight, guys.”

Abby Phillip’s closing is exhausted. She has had to formally resolve, on the record at the end of her show, that Trump was shot in the ear. That a CNN anchor needed to settle the factual predicate on air is the kind of moment that will be cited repeatedly.

Tim Walz: “I Am Not” Running in 2028

The segment cut to Gov. Tim Walz. “Things differently. Last two quick questions. First question, that people would kill me if I didn’t ask. You think about running in 2028?”

“I am not. I am not. And my job, and I say that, I am doing all I can to help build the party and make sure whoever that person is wins.”

“I am not” twice — unambiguous. Walz, who was Kamala Harris’s running mate in the 2024 general election, is closing the door on his own 2028 candidacy. That is a significant data point for the Democratic primary-field shape. It narrows the field of likely entrants and frees Walz to play the role he is describing — institutional party work aimed at supporting whichever nominee emerges.

“I think we need to flood the zone with people.” Walz’s framing — flooding the zone with candidates — is the big-field Democratic primary theory. Rather than coalescing early around a single candidate, Walz is advocating for a crowded primary that tests multiple potential nominees.

Scarborough on Epstein Timing

Joe Scarborough delivered a pointed question on Morning Joe. “21 to 25 when Democrats controlled the DOJ. Why? It was a crisis then. It’s a crisis now. Why didn’t, why didn’t Democrats call for it from 21 to 25?”

That is the question that Democrats supporting Epstein-file release have been trying to avoid. From 2021 through 2025, the Biden administration’s Department of Justice held the files. Democratic senators and members of Congress who are now aggressively demanding release did not make equivalent demands during that four-year window.

Raskin’s Answer

Rep. Jamie Raskin’s response was extended and halting. “So, I mean, you have to go back and look specifically at particular prosecutorial decisions and what was taking place in terms of the other cases. So, I don’t know. We could try to reconstruct that record.”

“I don’t know” is the operative phrase. Raskin — an experienced attorney and constitutional scholar — could not, on camera, articulate why Democrats did not push for file release during Democratic control of DOJ. That is a tell.

“But the point is, is that Donald Trump is the one who has led the crusade to say that Epstein, who was his very close friend, and there’s all kinds of pictures of them.”

Raskin’s pivot is the standard Democratic pivot: acknowledge Trump’s friendship with Epstein (which is documented) and the existence of photographs (also documented), and use those to attack the messenger rather than engage with the timing asymmetry. Whether Trump was a close friend of Epstein during some period of their social overlap is a separate question from whether the Biden-era DOJ should have pursued a different approach to the files.

Warren on Government Groceries

Senator Elizabeth Warren endorsed Zohran Mamdani’s plan for municipal government-run grocery stores. “Grocery stores, said, I’d like to take a look at whether or not we can have some kind of, like we do on military basis. You have some kind of support from the city government that says we’re gonna get some food grocery stores in areas that right now are food deserts.”

That is a specific policy endorsement. Warren is not merely supporting Mamdani politically. She is endorsing his signature economic proposal for government-operated groceries in food-desert neighborhoods.

“And by the way, it’s a new and fresh plan for New York City, but it’s been tried in other cities around the country and has had some real successes.”

The “tried in other cities with real successes” claim is a stretch. Municipal grocery experiments in other cities have produced mixed results at best — Kansas City’s operation struggled with sustainability; Atlanta-area municipal markets have faced operational challenges; a cooperative model in Baldwin, Florida closed after several years. Whether any of these constitute “real successes” at a scale relevant to New York City’s food-desert challenge is a contested empirical question.

”I Support That”

“So, what I hear Mom Dami say is I wanna try things to make it work for working families. And you know what? This is how democracy works. A lot of people in New York City said, that sounds good to me. I’d rather try that than any of the other alternatives available to me. I support that.”

Warren’s “I support that” closes the endorsement. She is backing Mamdani’s plan, using the “try things” framing that sounds reasonable — but the specific thing being tried is government operation of grocery stores in a private-sector grocery market, with all the operational complexity that implies.

The politics of Warren’s endorsement are significant. Warren has been the leading progressive voice in the Senate for more than a decade. Her endorsement of Mamdani’s program — together with Jayapal’s, Khanna’s, Carson’s, and others — positions Mamdani’s radical platform as the expansion direction for the national Democratic coalition’s left wing.

Four Stories, Multiple Credibility Questions

Touré claiming Trump was “supposedly” shot. Walz closing his 2028 candidacy. Raskin unable to explain why Democrats did nothing on Epstein for four years. Warren endorsing municipal grocery stores. Four items, each raising a credibility question for the Democratic coalition.

The administration and its allies are not manufacturing these moments. The Democrats are producing them. The editorial decision is which moments to clip and share. The cumulative effect, over many such cycles, is what will define the electoral landscape heading into the midterms.

Key Takeaways

• Former MSNBC host Touré said on CNN that Trump “supposedly got shot in the ear” and “we never heard from his doctors” — forcing anchor Abby Phillip to formally settle: “Donald Trump was shot in the ear. We did not hear from his doctors. That’s all we have time for tonight.”
• Gov. Tim Walz formally announced: “I am not” running in 2028 — “I am doing all I can to help build the party and make sure whoever that person is wins” — and called for Democrats to “flood the zone with people.”
• Joe Scarborough pressed Rep. Jamie Raskin: “It was a crisis then. It’s a crisis now. Why didn’t Democrats call for it from 21 to 25?” — Raskin’s extended “I don’t know … we could try to reconstruct that record” answer went viral.
• Sen. Elizabeth Warren endorsed Zohran Mamdani’s plan for government-run grocery stores as “a new and fresh plan for New York City … I’d rather try that than any of the other alternatives available to me. I support that.”
• Warren’s framing of Mamdani: “I wanna try things to make it work for working families. And you know what? This is how democracy works.”