The occasional dust-ups between Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski on the Morning Joe set seem largely made-for-TV. But there appeared to be some authentic antagonism on today's show on the issue of the motivations of those who oppose the Iran deal.

Joe passionately condemned supporters of the deal who cynically suggest that opponents are controlled by the Jewish lobby. "Why don't you guys talk about the Elders of Zion?" suggested Scarborough sarcastically at one point.  When Mika tried to shut Scarborough down, claiming "we get the point," Scarborough shot back "you're the last person on the face of the earth who appears to get the point."  Later, Mika walked right into it, saying that in opposing the deal, Chuck Schumer "did what he had to do, and it's perfect for him." Scarborough pounced: "there you go. There's the cynicism I talked about."

If a woman announced on live national TV that she had shoplifted an iPhone, there'd presumably be a cop at the studio door to greet her.  So why is it that someone can blithely announce on national TV that she's in the country illegally, and far from fearing any repercussions, have her views on the American presidential election respectfully solicited?

It happened this morning, when MSNBC invited Erika Andiola, who described herself as "an undocumented Mexican woman," onto the Up show to give her take on the GOP candidates' comments on immigration during Thursday's debate. Andiola was disappointed in general that the candidates didn't stand up to Donald Trump's remarks on immigration. In particular, she jabbed Jeb Bush for continuing to express opposition to sanctuary cities. That doesn't "make the cut" as far as Andiola's concerned, adding that Bush needs "to push back stronger." Good point, Ms. Andiola. I mean, without sanctuary cities, where is poor Francisco Sanchez supposed to hang out?

Strange new respect? Two days after the New York Times labeled real estate mogul and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump a racist on its front page based on thin evidence, the Times is suddenly treating one of his Twitter pronouncements as newsworthy, with Ashley Parker devoting an entire story to Trump's tweet. Perhaps because he's attacking his fellow GOP candidates as "puppets" of the libertarian Koch Brothers, themselves a frequent target of the Times.

How can Judd Apatow, once ranked the smartest guy in Hollywood be so . . . ? On today's With All Due Respect, big comedy macher [credits include Lena Dunham's Girls] Apatow said it was "ridiculous that anyone thinks that rich people care about other people.  When the Koch brothers give a billion dollars, it is not out of a great concern for the masses."

To his credit, Mark Halperin twice pressed Apatow as to whether his notion that the rich don't care about others also applies to rich Hollywood liberals.  Apatow eventually asserted that there's a difference: "Hollywood liberals would be willing to change the entire system if all would get the money out of it, and I don't think conservatives would do it."  Hmm.  Who was the guy who, realizing he could get untold millions from Hollywood among other places, broke his pledge to limit himself to public financing?  That would be Barack Obama.  

Appearing on the Thursday edition of MSNBC’s The Last Word, The Nation's Katrina vanden Heuvel suggested that money in politics is discriminatory toward African-Americans: “Fifty years ago, African-Americans were discriminated against by poll taxes, literacy tests. Today, the skyrocketing costs of campaigns, including the super PACs you mentioned, these billionaires, have made everyday Americans rightful vote mean not a enough, mean too little.”