ReportWire

Tag: 2024 election

  • Joe Biden Suggests Trump Talks Like He Should Be “Committed”

    Joe Biden Suggests Trump Talks Like He Should Be “Committed”

    [ad_1]

    Joe Biden has spent the last several months laying out the reasons why it would be a terrible idea to give Donald Trump a second term in office—reasons that include everything from Trump’s assault on reproductive rights to his pledge to be a dictator only “on day one.” And on Wednesday, the president added another entry to the list: the fact that his opponent appears to have completely lost touch with reality.

    Speaking to supporters at a fundraiser in San Francisco, Biden reportedly referred to Trump’s claim that he and Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny—who recently died in an Arctic penal colony—had suffered similar treatment, with the president remarking, “Some of the things that this fellow’s been saying, like he’s comparing himself to Navalny and saying that—because our country’s become a communist country, he was persecuted, just like Navalny was persecuted. I don’t know where the hell this comes from.” Biden added: “I mean, if I stood here 10, 15 years ago and said any of this, you’d all think I should be committed. It astounds me.”

    At the same event, Biden called Russian president Vladimir Putin a “crazy SOB,” a comment the Kremlin apparently didn’t appreciate, with a spokesman responding, “Clearly, Mr. Biden behaves in the Hollywood cowboy style to serve internal political interests.”

    Anyway, Biden wasn’t the only one who had thoughts to share re: Trump this week. On Wednesday, Florida governor Ron DeSantis told supporters that the ex-president accomplished almost nothing of note during his time in office, while New Hampshire governor Chris Sununu said Thursday that he’s optimistic about the future of the Republican Party—because Trump won’t rule it forever. “Let me put it a different way,” Sununu said. “Assholes come and go. But America is here to stay.”

    Fox News continues to dunk on…the Republicans trying to impeach Biden

    X content

    This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

    Lara Trump claims GOP voters are dying to pay Trump’s legal bills

    X content

    This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

    [ad_2]

    Bess Levin

    Source link

  • ‘Chicken Fingers And Pudding Cups’: Trump Campaign Hammers Ron DeSantis Over Private Call Saying He Won’t Be VP

    ‘Chicken Fingers And Pudding Cups’: Trump Campaign Hammers Ron DeSantis Over Private Call Saying He Won’t Be VP

    [ad_1]

    Opinion

    Screenshot: WYFF News 4

    The Donald Trump campaign put Florida Governor Ron DeSantis on blast after comments he made on a private call surfaced indicating that he had no interest in serving as Vice President.

    NBC News reported on the phone conversation with supporters in which DeSantis urged Trump to avoid “identity politics” in choosing a running mate while dismissing calls for him personally to join the ticket.

    “I would want somebody that, if something happened, the people that voted us in would have been pleased to know that they’re going to continue the mission,” DeSantis said.

    “I have heard that they’re looking more in identity politics. I think that’s a mistake,” he added. “I think you should just focus on who the best person for the job would be, and then do that accordingly.”

    That’s actually a reasonable concept and something Republicans have complained drives Democrats in their every decision – race and gender.

    RELATED: Trump Releases Wild New Campaign Ad Attacking ‘Pudding Fingers’ DeSantis

    DeSantis On Being Trump’s Veep: ‘I Am Not Doing That’

    According to the NBC report, DeSantis also squashed the idea of joining Trump’s campaign as his Vice President.

    “People were mentioning me. I am not doing that,” he said.

    DeSantis has long insisted that he would not join the Trump ticket even after leaving the presidential race. He also predicted that Trump would staff his White House with “yes men” who would do his bidding.

    “I think that how he staffs the White House, how he staffs the administration, will be really, really significant,” DeSantis said. “I think he likely is going to find people that are going to be more kind of yes men, rather than folks that are going to be pushing back.”

    RELATED: Donald Trump Teases Tim Scott As Running Mate

    Trump Campaign Fires Back

    To say the Trump campaign didn’t appreciate DeSantis’ comments would be a massive understatement.

    Campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt responded, “Ron DeSantis failed miserably in his presidential campaign and does not have a voice in selecting the next vice president of the United States.”

    “Rather than throw cheap shots from afar, Ron should focus on what he can do to fire [President] Joe Biden and Make America Great Again,” she added.

    Leavitt’s response was far more measured than that of one of Trump’s other aides, senior advisor Chris LaCivita.

    “Chicken fingers and pudding cups is what you will be remembered for you sad little man,” LaCivita wrote on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.

    Daily Beast report from last year claimed that DeSantis had a peculiar eating habit regarding pudding.

    Two unnamed sources for the leftist tabloid claimed that once, four years ago, “DeSantis enjoyed a chocolate pudding dessert—by eating it with three of his fingers.”

    Trump’s campaign turned it into a bizarre political ad against the Florida governor.

    Trump has offered up a few names to his list of vice presidential candidates, including Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, Florida GOP Rep. Byron Donalds, and South Carolina Gov. Kristi Noem.

    He did, actually also include DeSantis on that list during a Fox News town hall event earlier this week.

    During the private call, DeSantis refused to rule out another run for the White House in 2028.

    “Oh, I haven’t ruled anything out,” he said. “I mean … we’re still in this election cycle. So it’s presumptuous to say, you know, this or that. I think a lot happens in politics.”

    Let’s hope that he learns from the mistakes that he and his inept campaign strategists made throughout this past year.

    Follow Rusty on X

    ‘There’s Hope For Democrats’: Ted Cruz Shares Study About Scientists Growing A Pair Of Testicles In A Lab

    Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
    The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

    Rusty Weiss has been covering politics for over 15 years. His writings have appeared in the Daily Caller, Fox… More about Rusty Weiss

    [ad_2]

    Rusty Weiss

    Source link

  • Lawrence O’Donnell Destroys The Argument That Biden Should Step Aside

    Lawrence O’Donnell Destroys The Argument That Biden Should Step Aside

    [ad_1]

    MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell wrecked the argument coming from some circles that President Joe Biden should step aside as the Democratic nominee.

    How Did Lawrence O’Donnell Debunk The Dump Biden Fantasy?

    O’Donnell talked about the dump Biden fantasy and particularly Ezra Klein’s recent piece in The New York Times and said:

     I mentioned Joe Biden at a fund-raiser tonight, where he is crushing Donald Trump in the fundraising competition. The latest campaign finance report shows that the Biden-Harris reelection campaign has $56 million on hand at the end of January while the Trump campaign had only $30 million, President Biden is also raising money with and for the Democratic National Committee which has $24 million on hand at the end of January, the Republican National Committee has $8 million. At the end of January. In the month of January alone, the Trump campaign raised eight point eight million, and spend eleven point four million. Donald Trump has spent a total of $50 million on lawyers during the campaign, will spend much more. Other PACs and fundraising committees supporting the Biden-Harris ticket had a combined $117 million at the beginning of this year, and here is the part, right here.

    Here’s the part of the story that no one who has said Joe Biden should drop out or has written that Joe Biden should drop out has ever mentioned that every other Democrat whose name shows up in these articles as a substitute for Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee has raised exactly zero or money for a presidential campaign. No one has told you about the money, That means that none of them have thought for a second about the money, every series observer of presidential campaigns is supposed to know how important campaign money is, and not one of these people are telling you that it’s time to get rid of Joe Biden have given a thought to the money, so here is what they haven’t told you or simply do not know, not one penny Gavin Newsom has in his campaign treasury in California is usable in a presidential campaign,

    To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.

    Money raised for state elections for governors in California and other states are raised under different laws. Then the laws governing federal campaign money. Gavin Newsom has zero to spend on a presidential campaign as of tonight, Gavin Newsom knows that. Gavin Newsom,  if he can get the nomination would then leave the convention with no ability to even fly his way home. Let me say the number again, zero. That is how many dollars Gavin Newsome would have to spend, would have to spend on a presidential campaign leaving the Democratic convention, he would have zero.

    There is one other candidate, besides Joe Biden, who has raised money for presidential campaign and only that one candidate who’s done that is Kamala Harris, the money raised for the Biden Harris campaign was raised in the name of both candidates, so Kamala Harris has a legal claim on all of that money if Joe Biden were to drop out of that race.

     

    Video:

    Joe Biden isn’t going anywhere, because no one else can raise the money or build the massive organization needed to win an election against Donald Trump in the few months before election day, Getting rid of Joe Biden would hand the White House to Donald Trump.

    The only other option for Democrats is Vice President Harris, and the same mostly white male progressives who have been trying to get rid of Biden have also been trying to get rid of Harris.

    The “Biden Replacement Theory” is absolute BS, and the people pushing it, like Ezra Klein, are smart enough to know better, which makes me think that they know exactly what they are doing, and this is a play for their own relevance more than serious concern about winning in November.

    A Special Message From PoliticusUSA

    If you are in a position to donate purely to help us keep the doors open on PoliticusUSA during what is a critical election year, please do so here. 

    We have been honored to be able to put your interests first for 14 years as we only answer to our readers and we will not compromise on that fundamental, core PoliticusUSA value.

     

    [ad_2]

    Jason Easley

    Source link

  • The Millionaire LimeWire Founder Behind RFK Jr.

    The Millionaire LimeWire Founder Behind RFK Jr.

    [ad_1]

    Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at a rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan last week.
    Photo: Emily Elconin/Getty Images

    The commercial just before the Super Bowl halftime show urging millions of Americans to vote for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as an independent was a clever re-creation of his uncle John F. Kennedy’s presidential ad from 1960. But the comparison between the two politicians frustrated some family members whose name was sung repeatedly in the 30-second spot. Kennedy’s cousin Bobby Shriver wrote that his mother, whose image appears in the ad, would be “appalled” by the “deadly health care views” held by RFK Jr., who has spent decades promoting debunked claims about vaccines.

    Kennedy apologized, explaining that he was not aware of the ad’s contents as federal laws prohibit him from coordinating with the super-PAC that paid $7 million for the commercial. But Mark Gorton, the co-founder and co-chair of the PAC, American Values 2024, was not afraid to hit the Kennedy clan harder. “It’s really a shame that a bunch of them are caught so deeply in the Democratic censorship bubble that they don’t understand the real righteousness of the work that RFK Jr. has been doing,” Gorton says. “They are still following the big-pharma party line.”

    For almost three years, Gorton, a hedge-fund multimillionaire, has been one of the great boosters of Kennedy, the exiled member of an American royal family who’s crusading against the pharmaceutical industry and government-funded health programs. Since 2021, Gorton has reportedly donated over $1 million to Children’s Health Fund, the nonprofit chaired by Kennedy that has been accused of promoting disproven anti-vaxx ideas. In 2022, after a private dinner, Kennedy told his inner circle he was considering a presidential run. Gorton vowed to help in any way he could: “I was one of the early people that found out, and I said, ‘If you’re running for president, I’m all in.’”

    Kennedy, 70, has other wealthy backers from high society. Banking heir Timothy Mellon — the largest donor to Donald Trump’s super-PAC last year — has given $15 million to American Values 2024. Abby Rockefeller, the daughter of former Chase CEO David Rockefeller, has given $100,000. But few other donors have been as critical to the campaign as Gorton, who co-founded the PAC and pitched in $500,000 to support the campaign in its nascent days. (The other co-founder, Tony Lyons, is the publisher of the conservative book imprint Skyhorse Publishing, which has put out Kennedy’s most recent books.) Gorton says he was the de facto manager of the working group that got the campaign moving before its formal launch last year.

    Insurgent presidential campaigns are rarely smooth operations, and this one is no exception. Kennedy first ran for the Democratic nomination against Joe Biden, but after getting little traction in polls, he announced he would run as an independent. (He has also flirted with running for the Libertarian nomination to ensure that he got ballot access, which is considerably more difficult without a party.) Gaffes ensued. Epstein connections were revisited. Still, though, he has Super Bowl–level name recognition and is performing well enough in national polls to threaten Biden’s or Trump’s chances at retaking the White House. But Democrats seem more worried about Kennedy and are striking at him hard. Last week, the Democratic National Committee filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that American Values 2024 was illegally coordinating with the Kennedy campaign by spending $15 million to get him on the ballot in battleground states such as Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and Michigan.

    “They have hundreds of millions of dollars at their disposal and they’re willing to play dirty and they consider RFK Jr. to be a very significant threat and they’re desperate,” Gorton says of the DNC.

    He is also ready to defend Kennedy on more controversial matters, such as when the candidate was caught on tape at a private dinner last July saying that COVID was “targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people” and that the “people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese.”

    “I think there is some dream among the mad scientists inside the biowarfare Establishment to be able to develop targeted diseases that would only kill certain groups of people,” Gorton says, backing up the thrust of Kennedy’s claim. “And we know that that’s their dream. And we also know that the COVID disease was developed in a biowarfare lab in China. And so he was just making the observation that COVID seemed to target certain groups more than others.”

    For Gorton, the response to Kennedy’s COVID comment was a telling look inside the news business. “Here’s all sorts of people who are functionally paid operatives of the DNC who are seeded throughout the media, and they’re just happy to take any sort of story like that, whether it’s true or not, and blow it out of proportion,” he says. “There’s a giant political hit machine out there, and the Democrats are not staying in power by putting forward a superior candidate and doing a good job representing the American people. They’re staying in power by running a giant propaganda hit machine and trying to subvert the mechanisms of democracy and keep RFK Jr. off the ballot.”

    Gorton, who says he is involved in big-picture “strategic guidance” at the PAC, says it is committed to getting Kennedy on the ballot. That may involve spending more of his money. Gorton said in an interview last year that he did not plan on donating again to Kennedy, but he may have changed his mind on that front. “I think I might very well,” he says.

    Gorton is relatively new to politics, having started his career on Wall Street. In 1998, he founded Tower Research Capital, one of the first firms to focus on high-frequency trading. Within a decade, his firm reportedly had over $117 million in assets.

    Mark Gorton in LimeWire’s New York office in 2010.
    Photo: Ramin Talaie/Corbis via Getty Images

    He has extracurricular interests, too. A devoted bicyclist frustrated by car congestion in New York City, Gorton founded an urbanist nonprofit in 1999 that advocated for pedestrian safety and more bike lanes. The group eventually launched the popular transportation site Streetsblog, for which he remains the publisher.

    But Gorton would have been just another millionaire with a nonprofit if not for LimeWire, the peer-to-peer sharing service he founded in 2000. For tens of millions of young users of its free and premium services, it was a portal into a world of easily accessible music, movies, and pornography. It was also a preview of the streaming age to come. “I saw it very much as a First Amendment thing,” says Gorton. “We were creating a tool that let people share files, any sort of files, and that seems like a basic logical extension of the First Amendment.”

    According to the major record labels that sued him, LimeWire was also a massive exercise in copyright infringement. After a federal judge found the company and Gorton personally liable for violating copyright law, his attorneys settled. LimeWire would shut down and pay out $105 million in damages. “Through that experience, I saw that our legal system is not developed off of rational reasoning, based off of the Bill of Rights, but instead has been more or less constructed to support the property interests of large corporations,” Gorton says.

    He was learning other lessons at this time. Around 2007, after reading Robert Caro’s famous series of books on Lyndon B. Johnson, Gorton realized LBJ was behind the JFK assassination. “He describes the character of LBJ, and just how ruthless and power hungry he was, and how, even in college, he’s running fairly sophisticated political conspiracies,” says Gorton. “And through that, I was able to see or get hints that he was behind the Kennedy assassination. Then when I looked more deeply into it, sure enough, there was a mountain of supporting evidence for that.”

    Gorton has discussed this conspiracy theory with Kennedy but treads lightly: “For me, it’s a historical event. For him, it’s his dad and his uncle.” He also says Kennedy “really understands the depth and corruption of the deep state. And this includes the fact that the CIA and Lyndon Johnson and the political Establishment killed his uncle and killed his dad.” (Kennedy has maintained that Sirhan Sirhan, the man convicted of assassinating his father during his presidential run in 1968, is innocent.)

    Gorton says that he did not have a similar a-ha text for his realizations about the pharmaceutical industry’s influence over American politics, only that he has read widely in the field. “I have several shelves in my library filled with books about pharmaceutical-industry corruption,” he says. “Also, I read a lot of Substacks. I found that basically Substack is the place where I think some of the best independent voices are. And it’s a corner of the internet that is not completely dominated by corporate interests.”

    Gorton’s own Substack page provides a clue to his current beliefs on vaccines and the government’s response to COVID. “You can no more expect to hear the truth from the CDC than you could from a panel put together by Andrew Cuomo to look into workplace harassment or the NYPD to look into placard abuse,” he wrote in an open letter to an unnamed New York politician in 2022. He praised Alex Berenson, the former Times reporter whom Tucker Carlson referred to as his favorite “COVID contrarian.” He linked to a Joe Rogan episode featuring a vaccine scientist accused of spreading COVID disinformation. Much like Kennedy himself, he referred to the U.S. response to the pandemic as a “medical genocide” and a “state-sponsored crime” protected by “a massive cover up and disinformation campaign.”

    Like many of his supporters, Gorton sees Kennedy as a way out of this cycle of public-health failure and political corruption: the ostracized insider railing against the Establishment he grew up in. “The corruption is marbled into the very structure of the entire system,” Gorton says, referencing Kennedy’s books The Real Anthony Fauci and The Wuhan Cover-up. “You can see he has an encyclopedic knowledge of this corruption and how the system works.”

    Correction: A previous version of this article misstated the name of RFK Jr.’s nonprofit group.

    [ad_2]

    Matt Stieb

    Source link

  • Trump Can’t Use Campaign Funds, Super PACs, Or RNC To Pay $440 Million He Owes

    Trump Can’t Use Campaign Funds, Super PACs, Or RNC To Pay $440 Million He Owes

    [ad_1]

    Former president Donald Trump has to come up with $440 million to pay off the judgments against him, and he can’t use any of his political funding sources to do it.

    Can Trump Use Campaign Funds To Pay The Judgments Against Him?

    No. Trump can’t use campaign funds or his campaign fundraising apparatus to raise money to pay the judgments.

    Politico reported:

    Using his political vehicles to pay would be far trickier. There is a general ban on using campaign donations for personal uses unrelated to a campaign or the official duties of an officeholder. And as for his political action committees, Richard Pildes, a professor of constitutional law at New York University law school, said they can’t pay Trump’s judgments.

    To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.

    “Campaign funds cannot be used for that purpose regardless of whether the PAC is the decision-maker,” he wrote in an email.

    Even if the PACs could pay for it, they don’t have the money. Trump is using his super PACs to cover his legal bills, and they are virtually drained of cash.

    Can Trump Use The RNC To Pay The Judgments?

    The RNC is a non-profit and might lose its non-profit status if it tried to pay off the $440 million that Trump owes. A more significant issue for the RNC is that it is already virtually broke. Things are so bad at the RNC that they were discussing borrowing money to keep the organization afloat because it has seen a drop in donations with Trump at the helm and has also been paying Trump’s legal bills.

    Even with Trump’s daughter-in-law soon to become co-chair and the former president handpicking the next chair, the RNC ddoesn’thave the money, and trying to pay off TTrump’sdebts, even if it wouldn’t violate their non-profit status, might put the Republican Party organization out of business.

    How Can Trump Pay These Judgments?

    There has been a lot of talk about the Truth Social merger that could net Trump billions of dollars because it cleared an SEC hurdle, but that merger is mired in investigations and lawsuits. It is unclear if it will ever happen and will certainly not occur fast enough to get Trump out of his current situation.

    Since Trump has placed ownership of his assets in the Trump Organization, he will probably have to sell assets to pay what he owes. Trump can’t appeal these judgments without putting up a bond for the entire amount, so he is going to have to come with $440 million no matter what.

    A Special Message From PoliticusUSA

    If you are in a position to donate purely to help us keep the doors open on PoliticusUSA during what is a critical election year, please do so here. 

    We have been honored to be able to put your interests first for 14 years as we only answer to our readers and we will not compromise on that fundamental, core PoliticusUSA value.

     

    [ad_2]

    Jason Easley

    Source link

  • The Donald Trump Fire Sale Starts Now

    The Donald Trump Fire Sale Starts Now

    [ad_1]

    Photo-Illustration: Intelligencer; Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images

    Donald Trump’s companies have filed for bankruptcies six times, but now he may actually be about to go broke. On Friday, a New York judge penalized the former president $355 million after finding him liable for lying about his wealth and the value of his properties in New York — and that’s before interest charges, which could add another $50 million or so. Then there’s the $4 million owed by Eric Trump and Don Jr. each — which, come on, whose money is that really? The giant liabilities are due in part to Trump and his organization’s “complete lack of remorse,” Justice Arthur Engoron ruled, as well as for its deterrent effect: Trump and the Trump Organization’s officers were “likely to continue their fraudulent ways unless the Court grants significant injunctive relief.” Add this to the $88 million he owes writer E. Jean Carroll for defaming her, twice, and Trump owes roughly $500 million. That would wipe out almost his entire estimated cash pile and vaporize about a sixth of his total net worth.

    Trump can afford this, but he is probably going to have to sell something big. His net worth, according to both Forbes and Bloomberg, is between $2.6 and $3.1 billion, but most of that is tied up in his buildings and other properties. His cash pile is about $600 million, Bloomberg estimates, and he cannot use campaign or political-action-committee money to pay these fines. Some of his attorneys’ fees can be paid for with money that he’s raised from donors, but it’s not clear what money is paying for which lawyers between the four criminal cases he’s fighting off.

    There are very few workarounds available to him to get cash. According to Bloomberg, Trump’s businesses have been bringing in cash from renters, and he made about $100 million in profit after selling the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., in 2022, though it’s unclear how much of that money is left. The self-proclaimed “King of Debt” won’t be able to get a loan from a financial institution overseen or chartered by New York state regulators, Engoron ruled. While that doesn’t eliminate all the banks in the country, it does rule out a lot that could afford that kind of risk. (There are, of course, hedge funds and other shadow banks, but they’d likely charge him a lot more.) Trump is going to appeal the ruling, but that doesn’t really buy him a lot of time or give him any real relief. He will have to pay up or post a cash bond in 30 days, and delaying adds interest and other expenses to the money he already owes.

    Take a closer look at his holdings and it seems Trump might have bigger problems ahead. His largest holding, by value, is a minority partnership with Vornado at 555 California Street in San Francisco — a commercial office building in a city experiencing a “doom loop.” Microsoft, a former tenant, is trying to dump its office space there, and a neighboring building recently saw its value plunge by 80 percent. If you go down the list of Trump’s other holdings in New York, much of what his name is attached to are similar properties, but through deals that are not as cut-and-dried as somebody just holding the title to a property. At 40 Wall Street, for instance, he owns a ground lease — that is, he pays the building’s owners, the wealthy German Hinneberg family, for the right to lease it out. Since commercial real estate is in the throws of a valuation crisis, if Trump has to start selling any of these assets, he’ll likely be handing someone a fire-sale deal.

    [ad_2]

    Kevin T. Dugan

    Source link

  • Stephen Colbert Nails The Media For Treating Trump’s Crimes Like A Regular Political Story

    Stephen Colbert Nails The Media For Treating Trump’s Crimes Like A Regular Political Story

    [ad_1]

    Stephen Colbert called out the media for treating Trump’s crimes like a regular political story that is part of the horse race coverage of the election.

    Colbert said:

    Those three are just today and tomorrow. He’s also facing the January 6th trial in Washington D.C., the classified documents case in Florida, Colorado trying to throw him off the ballot for insurrection, and his appeal of the verdict in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case, in which a jury has already found that Trump committed sexual assault. And yet, people want to hire this maniac to be president.

    In light of all of that, I’d like to make a brief public service announcement: This is [f-ed] up. I know we’ve become numb to it. And is not normal. No other candidate for the presidency has had to end himself in multiple courts. And I’d like to point out that in all seven of his cases, no one doubts that he did these things. We’re just sitting around patiently waiting to find out if the wheels of justice will grind fast enough for there to be any consequences.

    To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.

    And the media is covering it like any other political story – it’s all horse race. But in this horse race, one of the horses is old, while the other one is old, has hoof-in-mouth disease, and keeps quoting horse Hitler!

    Video:

    Stephen Colbert was right. One of the reasons why the election coverage is so frustrating is that the media continues to minimize or ignore Trump’s criminal trials as a part of the campaign. It is as if the press decided that the criminal trials are just another facet of an election.

    When they are the opposite of normal. The United States has never had a former president plot a return to the White House while they are facing 91 criminal felony counts. None of this is normal and should not be covered as normal.

    The press is doing a disserve to democracy and the nation. Trump’s alleged crimes are not business as usual, and the press needs to stop treating Trump like he is any other candidate.

    A Special Message From PoliticusUSA

    If you are in a position to donate purely to help us keep the doors open on PoliticusUSA during what is a critical election year, please do so here. 

    We have been honored to be able to put your interests first for 14 years as we only answer to our readers and we will not compromise on that fundamental, core PoliticusUSA value.

    [ad_2]

    Jason Easley

    Source link

  • Nearly 20% of Americans Think Taylor Swift Is Part of “a Covert Government Effort” to Reelect Joe Biden

    Nearly 20% of Americans Think Taylor Swift Is Part of “a Covert Government Effort” to Reelect Joe Biden

    [ad_1]

    Is Joe Biden going to be reelected in November? Obviously, at this point, nobody knows. But should the president go on to win another term, a not-insignificant number of Americans will believe there was one reason and one reason alone for the victory: a secret government plot involving—you guessed it—Taylor Swift.

    A Monmouth University poll released on Wednesday shows that a disturbing percentage of Americans—18%—believe “a covert government effort for Taylor Swift to help Joe Biden win the presidential election actually exists.” Eighteen percent! Sure, 73% don’t think this secret effort exists (and 9% answered “don’t know”). But 18% is much higher than you’d expect for a sane society, which, based on the results of this poll, is something we clearly do not live in. “The supposed Taylor Swift psyop conspiracy has legs among a decent number of Trump supporters. Even many who hadn’t heard about it before we polled them accept the idea as credible. Welcome to the 2024 election,” Patrick Murray, director of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute, said Wednesday. On that note, in case you were wondering:

    Fully 71% of those who believe this identify with or lean toward the Republican Party, and 83% indicate they are likely to support Donald Trump in the fall. Also, nearly three quarters (73%) of those who believe the Swift conspiracy also believe the 2020 election outcome was fraudulent.

    Unhinged conspiracy theories involving Swift and the 2024 election began circulating earlier this year, with one Fox News host notably declaring, “Around four years ago, the Pentagon’s psychological operations unit floated turning Taylor Swift into an asset during a NATO meeting.” In the run-up to the Super Bowl, right-wing conservatives claimed that, as part of the government plot, the game would be rigged in favor of the Kansas City Chiefs. Apparently not worried about adding fuel to the forest fire of crazy, the Biden campaign posted this on Sunday night after the Chiefs won:

    X content

    This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

    Georgia DA Fani Willis makes important clarification

    X content

    This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

    [ad_2]

    Bess Levin

    Source link

  • What’s at stake in Trump’s hush-money criminal case? Judge to rule on key issues as trial date nears

    What’s at stake in Trump’s hush-money criminal case? Judge to rule on key issues as trial date nears

    [ad_1]

    By MICHAEL R. SISAK (Associated Press)

    NEW YORK (AP) — Former President Donald Trump is expected in court Thursday for an important hearing in his New York hush-money criminal case, which now appears increasingly likely to go to trial next month.

    Judge Juan Manuel Merchan is set to rule on key pretrial issues and say for certain if the trial will begin as scheduled on March 25. If that happens, the New York case will be the first of Trump’s four criminal indictments to go to trial.

    Trump’s lawyers have asked Merchan to dismiss the case entirely. The judge’s recent activities suggest that’s unlikely to happen. In recent weeks, court records show, Merchan has been communicating with defense lawyers and Manhattan prosecutors to plan jury selection for a March trial.

    A delay might cause conflicts in Trump’s crowded legal calendar.

    Trump, the Republican front-runner in his quest to return to the White House, has not been in court for the New York case since his arraignment last April, though he did appear by video for a hearing in May where the judge warned him against posting evidence to social media or using it to attack witnesses.

    Here’s a refresher on where the case stands.

    WHAT IS THIS CASE ABOUT?

    Trump’s New York case involves an alleged scheme to prevent potentially damaging stories about his personal life from becoming public during his 2016 presidential campaign.

    Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump last year with falsifying internal records kept by his company, the Trump Organization, to hide the true nature of payments made to his then-lawyer Michael Cohen, for helping bury stories alleging Trump had extramarital sexual encounters.

    The case centers on payoffs to two women, porn actor Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal, as well as to a Trump Tower doorman who claimed to have a story about Trump having a child out of wedlock. Trump says he didn’t have any of the alleged sexual encounters.

    Cohen paid Daniels $130,000 and arranged for the publisher of the National Enquirer supermarket tabloid to pay McDougal $150,000 in a practice known as “catch-and-kill.”

    The Trump Organization then reimbursed Cohen at an amount far more than what he’d spent, prosecutors said. The company logged the payments — delivered in monthly installments and a year-end bonus check — as legal expenses, prosecutors said. Over several months, Cohen said he got $420,000.

    The records at issue include general ledger entries, invoices and checks that prosecutors say were falsified.

    WHAT IS TRUMP CHARGED WITH?

    Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records. The charge is a Class E felony in New York, the lowest tier of felony charges in the state. It is punishable by up to four years in prison, though there is no guarantee that a conviction would result in jail time.

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Jill Biden’s Email Blasting the Special Counsel Report Raised a Ton of Money for Joe: Report

    Jill Biden’s Email Blasting the Special Counsel Report Raised a Ton of Money for Joe: Report

    [ad_1]

    One of the most bizarre subplots of the 2024 presidential race is that being charged with dozens of felonies has helped Donald Trump raise money off of being an accused criminal. Joe Biden, meanwhile, has zero indictments to his name. And while that should be a good thing, it doesn‘t exactly get the people revved up like an all-caps subject line à la “THEY’RE TAKING MY FREEDOM AND YOU COULD BE NEXT UNLESS YOU DONATE BELOW NOW!”

    Still, the president did just rake in a large amount of cash—thanks to special counsel Robert Hur’s decision to describe him as an “elderly man with a poor memory,” and Jill Biden’s decision to give the guy a piece of her mind.

    Per NBC News:

    First lady Jill Biden was deeply offended and personally motivated to issue a response after special counsel Robert Hur released his report last week alleging that the president could not remember when their son died and struggled to recall other key details, according to two people familiar with the discussions…Biden’s message Saturday quickly raised more money than any other email the campaign has sent out since the president launched his re-election campaign in April, a campaign official said. The person would not disclose how much it raised.  

    The lengthy statement did not include a specific financial ask to supporters, but it did include a donate button at the end of the note, which was signed: “Love, Jill.”

    In her message, the first lady said the notion that the president has memory problems is “inaccurate,” and that Hur’s claims to the contrary are clearly “personal political attacks.” Responding to the special counsel’s assertion that Joe Biden had difficulty remembering exactly when his son Beau died, Jill Biden wrote: “I don’t know what this Special Counsel was trying to achieve. We should give everyone grace, and I can’t imagine someone would try to use our son’s death to score political points. If you’ve experienced a loss like that, you know that you don’t measure it in years — you measure it in grief. May 30th is a day forever etched on our hearts. It shattered me, it shattered our family.” 

    As a senior campaign adviser told NBC News, “If the special counsel is going to use [the first lady’s] dead son as a political weapon, she’s going to have something to say about it — so she said it.”

    Shortly after Hur’s report was released, the president told reporters his memory is “fine,” adding, of the special counsel’s claims re: Beau Biden’s death, “How in the hell dare he raise that?” Democrats have called the report a politically motivated smear job.

    [ad_2]

    Bess Levin

    Source link

  • Trump Has A Second Severe Cognitive Episode In Less Than 24 Hours

    Trump Has A Second Severe Cognitive Episode In Less Than 24 Hours

    [ad_1]

    For the second time in less than 24 hours, Trump had a serious cognitive episode while campaigning.

    And then I hear that they like Obama better. They should like Obama better. You know why? Because he didn’t ask for anything. We were like the stupid country of the world, and we’re not going to be the stupid country of the world any longer. We’re not going to be. Got bad under, under this guy.

    So he now wants to send them 50, 60 billion dollars. I have to say one thing.

    Video:

    To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.

    In less than 24 hours, Trump didn’t know what day it was or what time it was, slurred his words, and now thinks that Barack Obama is still president.

    Media like The New York Times and Chris Wallace continue to look the other way as Trump shows signs at every speech he gives of having serious cognitive issues.

    Trump is making more mistakes on the campaign trail and is more out of touch with reality than second-term Ronald Reagan, and former president Reagan had Alzheimer’s.

    Donald Trump’s mental decline is evident and anyone in the media who insists on talking about Biden instead is revealing their bias.

    A Special Message From PoliticusUSA

    If you are in a position to donate purely to help us keep the doors open on PoliticusUSA during what is a critical election year, please do so here. 

    We have been honored to be able to put your interests first for 14 years as we only answer to our readers and we will not compromise on that fundamental, core PoliticusUSA value.



    [ad_2]

    Jason Easley

    Source link

  • Trump Colorado ballot case goes before seemingly skeptical US Supreme Court

    Trump Colorado ballot case goes before seemingly skeptical US Supreme Court

    [ad_1]

    The Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday about whether Donald Trump can remain on the 2024 ballot for president in Colorado, and it sounds like the justices were skeptical of the state’s effort to keep him off the ballot. 

    Referencing the January 6 Capitol riot, the Colorado Supreme Court already ruled that the former president violated a constitutional provision known as Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which targets those who “engaged in insurrection.”

    It’s the first time in history that the nation’s highest court heard a case on Section 3, which was used to keep former Confederates from holding government offices after the amendment’s 1868 adoption. It fell into disuse after Congress granted an amnesty to most ex-rebels in 1872.

    RELATED: Supreme Court grapples with Trump’s eligibility to be president again after Capitol insurrection

    Why does this matter?

    A definitive ruling for Trump would largely end efforts in Colorado, Maine and elsewhere to prevent his name from appearing on the ballot for president this year.

    A decision upholding the Colorado decision would amount to a declaration from the Supreme Court that Trump did engage in insurrection and is barred by the 14th Amendment from holding office again. That would allow states to keep him off the ballot and imperil his campaign.

    The justices could opt for a less conclusive outcome, but with the knowledge that the issue could return to them, perhaps after the general election in November and in the midst of a full-blown constitutional crisis.

    The court has signaled it will try to act quickly, dramatically shortening the period in which it receives written briefing and holds arguments in the courtroom.

    Demonstrators outside the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, Feb. 8, 2024. (Nathan Howard/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

    What happened in court Thursday?

    In arguments ticking past 90 minutes, both conservative and liberal justices raised questions of whether Trump can be disqualified.

    Concerns included whether Congress must act before states can invoke Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to prevent former officeholders who “engaged in insurrection” from holding office again. There also were questions about whether the president is covered by the provision.

    Without such congressional legislation, Justice Elena Kagan was among several justices who wanted to know “why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States.”

    Eight of the nine justices suggested that they were open to at least some of the arguments made by Jonathan Mitchell, Trump’s lawyer at the Supreme Court. Trump could win his case if the court finds just one of those arguments persuasive.

    Only Justice Sonia Sotomayor sounded like she might vote to uphold the Colorado Supreme Court ruling that found that Trump “engaged in insurrection” and is ineligible to be president. 

    There was little talk of whether Trump actually “engaged in insurrection” following the 2020 election, though Mitchell argued that the Capitol riot was not an insurrection and, even if it was, Trump did not participate.

    Chief Justice John Roberts worried that a ruling against Trump would prompt efforts to disqualify other candidates, “and surely some of those will succeed.”

    – Mark Sherman, Associated Press

    What is Section 3 of the 14th Amendment?

    Section 3 of the 14th Amendment prohibits anyone who swore an oath to support the Constitution from holding office if they’ve engaged in an insurrection. 

    It was written to keep former confederates from returning to government office.

    It reads: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

    The provision was used often in the years immediately after the Civil War. The only record of it being used in the 20th century, according to legal scholars, was as justification in refusing to seat a socialist congressman in 1919 because he opposed U.S. involvement in World War I.

    A historic first for SCOTUS 

    It’s the first time in history the provision has been used to prohibit someone from running for the presidency, and the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to have the final say on whether the ruling will stand in Trump’s case. 

    If it does — which many legal experts say is a long shot — it’s the end of Trump’s campaign because a Supreme Court decision would apply not just in Colorado, but to all states. It also could open a new world of political combat, as politicians in the future fish for judicial rulings to disqualify their rivals under the same provision.

    Before the violent Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol, even many constitutional lawyers rarely thought about Section 3, a provision that isn’t taught at most law schools and hadn’t been used in court for more than 100 years. 

    The Supreme Court has never ruled on the meaning of Section 3. 

    The high court could rule in a variety of ways — from upholding the ruling to striking it down to dodging the central questions on legal technicalities. But many experts warn that it would be risky to leave such a vital constitutional question unanswered.

    Law enforcement officers outside the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, Feb. 8, 2024. Photographer: Nathan Howard/Bloomberg via Getty Images

    Law enforcement officers outside the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, Feb. 8, 2024. Photographer: Nathan Howard/Bloomberg via Getty Images

    Jan. 6, 2021: The Capitol riot

    Hundreds of people have been convicted in the massive prosecution of the Capitol riot in the past three years. 

    Cases from members of the far-right extremist groups such as The Proud Boys, former police officers and current members of the U.S. military have kept Washington’s federal courthouse flooded with trials, guilty plea hearings and sentencings that stemmed from what has become the largest criminal investigation in the country’s history. 

    And Trump isn’t immune to the investigation. 

    In 2023, Trump was indicted on felony charges for working to overturn the results of the 2020 election in the run-up to the violent insurrection carried out by many of his supporters on Jan. 6, 2021. 

    The four-count indictment, the third criminal case against Trump, provided deeper insight into a dark moment that has already been the subject of exhaustive federal investigations and captivating public hearings. It chronicles a months-long campaign of lies about the election results and says that, even when those falsehoods resulted in a chaotic insurrection at the Capitol, Trump sought to exploit the violence by pointing to it as a reason to further delay the counting of votes that sealed his defeat.

    Trump claims he did nothing wrong and has said this case was concocted as an attempt to hurt his 2024 presidential campaign. His lawyers have argued the case should be dismissed because Trump is immune from prosecution for actions they said were taken in his official role as president. The defense has also argued Trump was within his First Amendment rights to challenge the outcome of the election and to allege that it had been tainted by fraud. 

    Courts across the country and Trump’s own attorney general found there was no widespread fraud that would have changed the results of the election.

    The Associated Press contributed to this report. This story was reported from Los Angeles. 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Marianne Williamson drops out of 2024 presidential race

    Marianne Williamson drops out of 2024 presidential race

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Gage Skidmore, Flickr Creative Commons

    Marianne Williamson campaigning in 2019.

    Marianne Williamson, the former Detroit-area spiritual leader and bestselling author who was the first Democrat to challenge President Joe Biden in the 2024 primary, has suspended her campaign.

    Williamson announced the end of her White House bid in a YouTube video posted on Wednesday.

    “Particularly those of you who are young, who felt that in this campaign you saw hope, I want you to remember that that which is most important does not end on this day,” Williamson said in the video. “The story itself is so long, the American story, the arc of history is what matters, and the ideas that we stood for … anytime we put out that ripple of hope, anytime we put out any good idea, any time we shed light on a darkened sky, that light will remain and that darkness shall be less.”

    Williamson made the announcement after earning 2% of the vote in the South Carolina primary on Tuesday.

    As she did in her 2020 campaign, Williamson enchanted many with her message of love and peace, this time aided by TikTok, where she amassed a large following. But it was always going to be an uphill battle for her campaign, with the Democratic National Committee declining to host any primary debates and Biden, polling high, declining to engage with his competitors.

    Williamson’s campaign was also reportedly marred by dysfunction, including staff turnover and fundraising issues. (Williamson denied the claims.) Some former staffers accused Williamson of being more interested in building an audience to promote her upcoming book The Mystic Jesus: The Mind of Love.

    The book is scheduled for release in May.

    Williamson gained fame in the 1990s as a spiritual leader for celebrities in Los Angeles and New York. In the late ’90s and early 2000s, she led the Church of Today, a Macomb County megachurch.

    Subscribe to Metro Times newsletters.

    Follow us: Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter



    [ad_2]

    Lee DeVito

    Source link

  • Andrew Yang Probably Won’t Accept RFK Jr.’s VP Offer: Report

    Andrew Yang Probably Won’t Accept RFK Jr.’s VP Offer: Report

    [ad_1]

    Will Andrew Yang join Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s ticket as the third-party hopeful’s VP? Probably not, but that apparently hasn’t stopped Kennedy from trying.

    Puck News reports that at the end of January, Kennedy called Yang and asked if he would want to be his number two. According to the outlet, Yang was “noncommittal on the call,” and is extremely unlikely to team up with Kennedy for a couple pretty big reasons. For starters, Yang has been a vocal proponent of Dean Phillips, and endorsed the Democratic candidate last month. Then there’s the fact that Kennedy is famously anti-vaccine—and once claimed that Anne Frank had more options than anti-vaxxers—whereas Yang was a major advocate of COVID vaccines and vaccine passports.

    According to Puck, though, Kennedy has cast a wide net for a number two, and has been “calling everyone.” And while Yang appears likely to say no, the Kennedy scion very much needs someone to say yes, as a number of states require candidates to have a VP nominee in order to get on the ballot.

    In an interview with NBC News that aired on Monday, Kennedy said he would announce a running mate within 30 days. He also said he will not drop out even if polls show him drawing considerable votes from Joe Biden or Donald Trump. “I’m not going to bow out of the race,” he declared. “I think Americans should have a choice—that they shouldn’t be forced to choose the least of two evils. That they should be able to vote in a democracy, or for candidates that they like, that inspire them and who they want to run.”

    Area Republican says the quiet part out loud

    X content

    This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

    Mike Johnson is not blaming himself

    X content

    This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.



    [ad_2]

    Bess Levin

    Source link

  • How the Gun-Reform Movement Can Finally “Break” the Grip of the Firearm Lobby

    How the Gun-Reform Movement Can Finally “Break” the Grip of the Firearm Lobby

    [ad_1]

    “I see it as an extension of the fight to save our country and our democracy from extremism,” Emma Brown told me over the phone recently. She had just taken over as executive director of Giffords, the key gun-reform organization founded by former representative Gabby Giffords a little more than a decade ago, and we were talking about what the next 10 years of the movement might look like.

    Brown was optimistic, especially after recent legislative wins, like 2022’s Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which would have seemed “impossible” just a handful of years ago. But Brown—a veteran of both Democratic senator Mark Kelly’s 2022 campaign and Joe Biden’s 2020 team in Arizona—was also clear-eyed about the challenges that lie ahead: “The stakes couldn’t be higher” for the November election, she said.

    In a conversation, which has been edited for clarity and length, Brown sounded off on the apparent weakening of the NRA, the next big priorities of the gun-reform movement, and the importance of broadening the push beyond Democrats: “We really believe that we have to expand our coalition.”

    Vanity Fair: You’re taking over Giffords at an interesting moment for the movement. Several years of uphill fighting have seemed to pay off with some real wins recently, at the federal level, with the Safer Communities Act, as well as with some action in the states. At the same time, we’ve seen some new challenges arise—I’m thinking of Bruen [the Supreme Court decision that did away with the legal requirement to show “proper cause” when applying for a concealed carry license in New York], for instance*.* If you had to take the temperature of the current state of the movement, where would you say we are right now compared with, say, 10 years ago?

    Emma Brown: It’s a good question. So first, a lot of people look at this issue and feel like we’re trying to push a boulder. But I think if you step back on it, it has been a tremendous amount of success in a short period of time. In the last 10 years, we have gotten from a place where guns were really on the third rail of politics to a place where it is a major component of the Biden-Harris reelection campaign. I have seen that evolution myself, up close in battleground states across the country over the last 10 years. So there’s really been a significant political development.

    Secondly, we’ve passed over 600 gun-safety laws during the time that Giffords has existed, really improving the strength of safety laws across the country. And then obviously, in 2022, we saw the major federal gun-safety law passed, the first one in 30 years, breaking a big logjam. So I think when you look at all of that, and the history of social movements in the United States, this one is relatively young—and the gun lobby had a century head start, but we are making legal and policy strides. And the cultural and political progress, which is part of what we’re really after, is not far behind. That’s obviously thanks to the groups that have been organizing for many decades—our law center being one of them, along with some of the more recent groups like March for Our Lives and Mothers of the Movement. I think we have supercharged in the last decade.

    The gun lobby was obviously once seen as a kind of Goliath figure on this issue, but it has seemed somewhat chastened recently. We’ve seen the resignation of Wayne LaPierre at the NRA, but we’ve also seen just kind of the culture shift around this issue. Is it right to see the gun lobby as being in retreat? Or is that wishful thinking a little bit? Is there danger of spiking the ball too early on that?

    No doubt, thanks to the work of the larger gun-violence-prevention movement and Giffords, the NRA and the lobby’s influence has significantly decreased. That is how we have been able to pass all those laws at the state level. It’s how we were able to pass the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. I will say that I think it would be a mistake to assume that the lobby’s grip is not strong on state legislatures and Congress. A big part of where I think we are going as an organization, and as a movement, is looking to finally break that grip. I think if you step back, there is a big gulf in America, as you know, between public opinion and public policy on guns—and you ask yourself, If Americans believe that gun violence is a very big problem, and nearly all of Americans—90% of Republicans—support the same safety measures, how are these not law?

    [ad_2]

    Eric Lutz

    Source link

  • Kellyanne Conway: Trump Should Pick a Person of Color for VP and Then Pretend It Has Nothing to Do With Race

    Kellyanne Conway: Trump Should Pick a Person of Color for VP and Then Pretend It Has Nothing to Do With Race

    [ad_1]

    At some point in the near future, Donald Trump will likely win the Republican nomination for president and need to pick someone as his running mate. (The position is available following a disagreement between Trump and the last guy to hold the job regarding whether the vice president of the United States has the power to steal an election and Trump’s contention that refusal to do so should result in one being hanged.) Who should get the nod this time around? According to former senior adviser Kellyanne Conway, her ex-boss should pick a person of color—but not in the sordid, “identity politics” way Democrats would do it.

    In a deeply baffling op-ed for The New York Times, Conway—who notes that she recommended Mike Pence in May 2016 and therefore knows what she’s talking about—writes:

    The most popular suggestion I’m hearing is that Mr. Trump do as Mr. Biden did four years earlier and pick a woman as his running mate. But Mr. Biden—and the country—suffers daily the consequences of embracing identity politics. [Kamala] Harris has hemorrhaged senior staff members and been largely sidelined on important issues. As someone who has seen the work and pressures inside the White House, I don’t think she takes her job seriously, and a strong majority of voters don’t think she’s doing a good job. She has not appreciably helped Mr. Biden govern and is viewed by many as an overall political liability in 2024. (Or perhaps Mr. Biden was brilliant, choosing one of only a handful of people in the country who could not upstage him.)

    Having sufficiently insulted Harris, implied Biden made a catastrophic mistake when he picked her for his ticket, and blamed the blunder on the idea that Biden did not choose the best person for the job but picked a woman to appeal to women voters, Conway then makes the following suggestion:

    …If I were advising Mr. Trump, I would suggest he choose a person of color as his running mate, depending on vetting of all possibilities and satisfaction of procedural issues like dual residency in Florida. Not for identity politics à la the Democrats but as an equal helping to lead an America First movement that includes more union workers, independents, first-time voters, veterans, Hispanics, Asian Americans and African Americans.

    At this time, you might be wondering how it would be “identity politics” for Biden to specifically pick a woman as his running mate and not identity politics for Trump to specifically pick a person of color as his. Unfortunately, Conway does not explain this, though we can reasonably assume she’ll come up with some word-salad argument soon, on par with her infamous claim that lies out of the Trump White House were not lies but rather “alternative facts.”

    Of course, it’s not hard to see why Conway would want to preemptively lay down the claim that, should Trump select a person of color as his running mate, he did so without even considering how a non-white VP could help him win the election. Last summer, a poll showed Republicans believed racism in America was worse for white people than Black people, and conservatives are currently obsessed with the idea that diversity and inclusion efforts are evil, racist, and must be stopped.

    [ad_2]

    Bess Levin

    Source link

  • Trump Supreme Court hearing live stream: Time, how to watch Colorado case

    Trump Supreme Court hearing live stream: Time, how to watch Colorado case

    [ad_1]

    The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Thursday on whether Donald Trump can be reinstated to the primary ballot in Colorado.

    Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, faces legal challenges that seek to remove him from the ballot in several states, with two having already barred his name from primary voters’ consideration. The lawsuits argue that Trump is ineligible to run under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which bars officials who have sworn an oath to the U.S. Constitution from holding office if they engage in insurrection.

    Colorado’s highest court ruled in December that Trump had participated in an insurrection, relating to the events of January 6, 2021, when his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol during the certification of the results of the 2020 presidential election. However, the ruling is on hold pending the appeal in the Supreme Court as oral arguments will be heard on Thursday to determine if Colorado has the power to strike Trump from the 2024 ballot.

    Trump has maintained his innocence and said that he did not engage in an insurrection, accusing those filing lawsuits against him of attempting election interference.

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump on January 27, 2024, in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Thursday on whether Trump can be reinstated to the primary ballot in Colorado.

    David Becker/Getty Images

    Oral arguments for the landmark decision are scheduled for Thursday, February 8 at 10 a.m. ET and an expedited ruling could come within days or weeks.

    The hearing will be live-streamed via the C-Span website and PBS News’ YouTube and website.

    The core of the Supreme Court decision is expected to be the interpretation of a small part of the 14th Amendment under section three that says that no person can enter Congress, become an elector “or hold any office, civil or military” who engaged in insurrection.

    Newsweek has reached out to Trump’s campaign and the Supreme Court via email for comment.

    In response to the initial ruling in the case in December, Steven Cheung, a spokesman for Trump’s campaign, said: “Unsurprisingly, the all-Democrat appointed Colorado Supreme Court has ruled against President Trump, supporting a Soros-funded, left-wing group’s scheme to interfere in an election on behalf of Crooked Joe Biden by removing President Trump’s name from the ballot and eliminating the rights of Colorado voters to vote for the candidate of their choice.”

    Meanwhile, former federal prosecutor and legal analyst Glenn Kirschner said last week that the Supreme Court is “likely” to allow Trump to be removed from state ballots.

    In an interview on The Stephanie Miller Show on the Political Voices Network, Kirschner, a former assistant U.S. attorney and frequent Trump critic, discussed how the Supreme Court may rule in the effort to remove Trump from the ballot, adding that he believes the Court’s “likely result” is that the former president is disqualified.

    “I have a feeling they will find a way to say, ‘You know what this really is a states’ rights issue. This really is an original construction and textual issue and he’s disqualified.’ I think that is the more likely result,” Kirschner said.

    He said: “What I believe motivates the right-wing block of the Supreme Court is self-preservation. They want to remain above the executive branch, above the president, and they know if they do anything to facilitate Donald Trump’s return to the Oval Office, he’s already announced he’s going to be a dictator day one, and a dictator has absolutely no use for a Supreme Court. So they’re thinking that in the back of their heads, if not in the front of their heads.”