ReportWire

Tag: 2024 election

  • Donald Trump Turns on Vivek Ramaswamy: “Don’t Get Duped”

    Donald Trump Turns on Vivek Ramaswamy: “Don’t Get Duped”

    [ad_1]

    With Iowa caucusgoers getting ready to head to the polls on Monday, former President Donald Trump lashed out for the very first time at biotech-entrepreneur-turned-GOP-candidate Vivek Ramaswamy.

    “A vote for Vivek is a vote for the ‘other side’ — don’t get duped by this,” Trump wrote on Truth Social Saturday evening, adding that Ramaswamy—who has made a clear play for Trump’s base—is “not MAGA.”

    Though Ramaswamy has lavished praise on Trump throughout the campaign season, the GOP frontrunner said the support was a “deceitful” and “sly” campaign trick.

    Trump’s post came in response to t-shirts the Ramaswamy campaign is distributing that read “Save Trump, Vote Vivek.” The line refers to an argument Ramaswamy has made on the campaign trail: that the “deep state” or the “regime” won’t allow Trump to become president for a second term.

    The former president reacted to a post in which Ramaswamy posed with supporters in Iowa wearing the shirts, Politico reported, citing an anonymous Trump campaign advisor. Trump advisor Chris LaCivita also responded to the post, calling Ramaswamy a “FRAUD” and a “FAKE.”

    “Vivek started his campaign as a great supporter, ‘the best President in generations,’ etc.,” Trump wrote. “Unfortunately, now all he does is disguise his support in the form of deceitful campaign tricks.”

    Throughout the campaign, Ramaswamy, who has said he’d pardon Trump on “day one,” has been a source of effusive praise for the former president, and Trump has largely returned the favor. In recent weeks, Ramaswamy had only escalated his support. After the Colorado State Supreme Court disqualified Trump from the state’s primary ballot in mid-December, the entrepreneur pledged to take his name off the ballot unless Trump was reinstated and called on the GOP field to follow suit. Last week, he filed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of Trump’s appeal of the Colorado ruling.

    It’s likely no coincidence that Trump’s attack comes just days before the Iowa caucuses, where the GOP frontrunner hopes to score an overwhelming victory and shut the door on the primary field. The change in tune possibly reflects the Trump campaign’s concern that Ramaswamy might peel off votes from Trump supporters and damper the extent of Trump’s likely victory.

    A new NBC News/Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll published Saturday has Ramaswamy polling at 8 percent among likely Iowa caucusgoers—up from 5 percent in December. Trump, meanwhile, is the first choice of just under half of the state’s GOP electorate; former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis were at 20 percent and 16 percent, respectively.

    “I respect the hell out of Trump. He’s the best President of the 21st century. I’ve defended him at every step against the unjust persecutions,” Ramaswamy said in a statement to Politico, in which he touted his amicus brief and promised to keep himself off the primary ballots in which Trump has been removed. “But OPEN YOUR EYES to the hard TRUTH: this system will stop at nothing to keep this man away from the White House.”

    In a video posted to X, formerly Twitter, on Saturday night, Ramaswamy argued that “the system” was angling to narrow the field to a Trump-Haley matchup, after which “they would trot their puppet”—Haley—“into the White House.”

    “They’re selling us a rope today that they’re going to use to hang us tomorrow,” he claimed.

    [ad_2]

    Jack McCordick

    Source link

  • Trump's Numbers Appear Inflated As Undecided Voters Don't Believe He'll Be The Nominee

    Trump's Numbers Appear Inflated As Undecided Voters Don't Believe He'll Be The Nominee

    [ad_1]

    Research from the Biden campaign reveals that undecided voters aren’t paying attention to the 2024 election. They don’t believe that Trump will be the nominee, which suggests that Trump’s current polling numbers are inflated.

    Undecided Voters Aren’t Paying Attention To The Republican Primary

    CNN reported:

    Even as the Biden reelection campaign forges ahead with preparations for another potential general election match-up between Biden and his predecessor, it is grappling with a stubborn reality: The majority of undecided voters simply do not seem to believe – at least not yet – that Donald Trump is likely to be the Republican presidential nominee.

    According to the campaign’s internal research, this is the case for most of the undecided voters that the campaign is targeting – nearly three-in-four of them, senior Biden campaign officials told CNN. Those officials said one of the biggest reasons driving this is the simple fact that many voters are not paying close attention to the election, including the ins and outs of the GOP nomination process.

    “You can’t conceive of how tuned out these folks are,” one senior campaign official said.

    The high support for Trump in polling appears to be a byproduct of the fact that the people who are most likely to respond to a poll are part of the roughly 20%-25% of voters who are paying attention to the Republican primary and the 2024 election.

    This reality lends credibility to the point that the polls are meaningless right now and not reflective of the electorate or what it will look like in the fall.

    Trump continues to spread his new big lie that he is leading in all of the polls, but if most of the electorate isn’t paying attention, then the polls have little to no value.

    It seems that undecided voters refuse to believe that Republicans would nominate Trump again, and when they realize that Trump is the Republican nominee, support for the former president and the GOP could sink like a rock.

    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

  • ‘Thinking Isn’t His Strength’: Critics Scorch Donald Trump Jr.’s Wild COVID Claim

    ‘Thinking Isn’t His Strength’: Critics Scorch Donald Trump Jr.’s Wild COVID Claim

    [ad_1]

    The former president’s son looked back on his father’s administration as he knocked “Bidenomics” at an Iowa campaign event.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump Gives Democrats A Gift By Doubling Down On Presidential Immunity Scheme

    Trump Gives Democrats A Gift By Doubling Down On Presidential Immunity Scheme

    [ad_1]

    Trump spoke after he left his fraud trial and doubled down on the idea that presidents should have total immunity that covers everything, including political assassinations.

    Trump was asked about his claim that presidents should have total immunity that covers political assassinations, and he answered:

    You’re talking about a totally different case. The immunity. I say this, on immunity, very simple. If a President Of The United States does not have immunity, he’ll be totally ineffective because he won’t be able to do anything because it will mean he’ll be prosecuted, strongly prosecuted perhaps, as soon as he leaves office by the opposing party.

    . .

    A President Of The United States, I’m not talking just me; I’m talking about any president has to have immunity…but you have to have immunity for the president, and I think most people are seeing that. I’ve read a lot of legal reports lately and scholarly reports that are saying you really have to have a president of this country has to have immunity, or they’re not going to be able to function in office.

    Video:

    Trump is handing Democrats a gift by doubling down on his claim that presidents should have total immunity. His argument has provoked both horror and laughter. No other president has ever argued for total presidential immunity, but no other former president has faced 91 felony criminal counts.

    The more Trump talks about unlimited immunity, the more he makes Biden’s case for him that Donald Trump wants to be a dictator who is above the law.

    Donald Trump is the gift that keeps on giving to Democrats, as as long as he keeps talking, Democrats have a good chance of winning.

    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

  • “A Pathetic Surrender”: Why Fox News Just Can’t Quit Donald Trump

    “A Pathetic Surrender”: Why Fox News Just Can’t Quit Donald Trump

    [ad_1]

    Move over, Sean, Donald wants your hour!

    With less than a week until the first votes are cast in the 2024 Republican primary, front-runner Donald Trump blew up Fox News’ prime time schedule on Wednesday. The former president and de facto programming executive booted his longtime ally Sean Hannity out of his 9 p.m. time slot and held a town hall with Iowa voters to compete with CNN’s debate between Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley.

    Fox executives were thrilled with the outcome. But the 9 p.m. time slot “was not our choice,” Fox News anchor Bret Baier told Axios beforehand. “This was a stipulation from the Trump folks to do it at that hour.” Or as he put it to the Deseret News, “It was the Trump campaign’s demand.”

    Baier had been wooing Tump for quite a while, and Trump suddenly agreed to participate after the CNN debate details were locked. “They would only do it if it was at that time,” he said. “We offered a number of different times. That was their stipulation.”

    It should go without saying that Trump, a creature of TV ratings, wanted to out-rate the CNN debate. And on Thursday the overnight Nielsen report card showed he succeeded: Fox and Trump averaged 4.3 million TV viewers, while CNN’s telecast with DeSantis and Haley averaged 2.5 million at the same hour.

    Before the numbers landed, though, I heard from a rival TV news executive who was flabbergasted by Baier’s admission that the Trump town hall timing was “not our choice.”

    “It’s their air!” the executive exclaimed. “Who is in control?”

    The answer is self-evident. Fox is falling in line just like most of the rest of the GOP.

    “Fox critics love to say Trump is the monster we created, okay, but we say it to ourselves too. We know it’s true,” a Fox correspondent said to me Thursday, sounding fatigued.

    So how does Frankenstein make peace with its monster? Slowly and inevitably.

    The history between Trump and Fox is so fraught, and the relationship is so convoluted, that writers typically spend several paragraphs explaining the complexities. But it is also, at a gut level, quite simple. The Fox brand and the Trump brand are both about defeating Democrats and exploiting the levers of power.

    Fox CEO Lachlan Murdoch, I’ve been told, keeps quiet when the topic of Trump comes up. Lachlan isn’t seeking a favor-trading, phone-calling relationship like his father, Rupert, once had with Trump; nor is he telling people that he is repulsed by Trump, the way Rupert freely does nowadays. “It’s just business” is his attitude, according to a confidant.

    Fox’s rah-rah pro-Trump commentary certainly benefits the bottom line, and it mirrors Lachlan’s openness to Trump, in stark contrast to Rupert’s contempt. In emails that were obtained by Dominion through litigation, but escaped attention when Fox paid Dominion $787.5 million last year, Lachlan was shown to be cheering for Trump on election night 2020, using exclamation points whenever Trump pulled ahead in swing states. In a 2024 rematch between Trump and President Joe Biden, the conservative Fox Corp CEO will undoubtedly vote for Trump.

    [ad_2]

    Brian Stelter

    Source link

  • Chris Christie, on a Hot Mic, Says There’s No Way in Hell Nikki Haley Beats Donald Trump

    Chris Christie, on a Hot Mic, Says There’s No Way in Hell Nikki Haley Beats Donald Trump

    [ad_1]

    Former New Jersey governor Chris Christie dropped out of the race for the Republican presidential nomination on Wednesday, a move that will likely improve Nikki Haley’s chances in the New Hampshire primary. But according to Christie, it won’t matter, because Haley has no shot of beating Donald Trump.

    Caught on a hot mic during his campaign’s livestream shortly before he announced his decision to bow out, Christie was heard telling someone, “She’s going to get smoked, and you and I both know it,” seemingly referring to the former governor of South Carolina. “She’s not up to this.” He added, “She spent $68 million, just on TV, spent $68 million so far…$59 million by DeSantis, and we spent 12. I mean, who’s punching above their weight and who’s getting a return on their investment?” Christie also claimed, “DeSantis called me, petrified.” The livestream was taken down shortly after that.

    In announcing his decision to drop out of the race, Christie told a crowd in New Hampshire, “I promise you this: I am going to make sure that in no way do I enable Donald Trump to ever be President of the United States again. That’s more important than my own personal ambition.” He chose not to endorse another candidate but took shots at his competitors for failing to go after Trump as a threat to the nation. “No one will tell the truth about Donald Trump,” he said. “No one will tell the truth about his divisiveness, his stoking of anger for his own benefit.”

    X content

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

    Just over a week ago, Christie released a video declaring he would not leave the race, saying, “Donald Trump is ahead in the polls, and so everyone says anyone who’s behind him should drop out, and we should make our choice Donald Trump versus Joe Biden. Well, Joe Biden has had the wrong policies, and Donald Trump will sell the soul of this country. Neither choice is acceptable to me, and it shouldn’t be acceptable to you.”

    X content

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

    [ad_2]

    Bess Levin

    Source link

  • Trump Claims He Won’t Have Time For Retribution – But Says ‘That’s Not So Bad’ If He Did

    Trump Claims He Won’t Have Time For Retribution – But Says ‘That’s Not So Bad’ If He Did

    [ad_1]

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump Insiders Say His 2024 Campaign Is More Disciplined: “This Time, He’s Not Talking to Randos”

    Trump Insiders Say His 2024 Campaign Is More Disciplined: “This Time, He’s Not Talking to Randos”

    [ad_1]

    With polls showing Donald Trump on track to handily win next week’s Iowa caucuses, the 2024 Republican primary is looking like a repeat of the 2016 race. GOP rivals like Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis have spent months attacking one another instead of rallying around a candidate with the best chance of beating Trump one-on-one. But the 2024 cycle has been starkly different in one respect: The Lord of the Flies–esque chaos and infighting that plagued Trump’s prior campaigns have been tamed. “This campaign is locked down,” a Republican close to Trump said.

    Republicans close to Trump said there are multiple reasons Trump is running a competent campaign. First, his tight inner circle is made up of veteran operatives Susie Wiles, Chris LaCivita, Jason Miller, and James Blair, who don’t play their agendas through the media. “You have experienced people who don’t leak,” Roger Stone told me. In previous cycles, Trump populated his campaigns with huge egos like Stone, Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Steve Bannon, Kellyanne Conway, Corey Lewandowski, and Brad Parscale, among others. (In August 2015, I wrote a piece headlined: “The Trump Campaign Has Descended Into Civil War—Even Ivanka Has Gotten Involved.” The tumult followed Trump to the White House, or rather, “the Westeros Wing.”)

    While Trump continues to stoke controversy with his baseless January 6 claims, incendiary rants, and authoritarian promises, his 2024 team is smartly keeping a low profile. “Everybody is mature enough that they want the president to win. The thinking is, let’s be organized, let’s get him in,” a veteran of Trump’s 2020 campaign said. This team has also been able to curb Trump’s habit of self-sabotage. Trump has committed fewer unforced errors like his indefensible decision to host white nationalist Nick Fuentes at Mar-a-Lago in the fall of 2022.

    Secondly, Trump trusts his senior team members to do their jobs. In prior cycles, Trump worked the phone constantly, soliciting advice from a wide circle of friends, family, Manhattan business associates, and media personalities. Trump’s style of pitting staffers against one another created an incentive to leak. “The side whose opinion lost would run to the media,” the 2020 veteran explained. “This time, he’s not talking to randos.” That said, Trump hasn’t totally quit his phone habit. According to sources, he speaks with Stone, Lewandowski, and 2016 campaign chairman Paul Manafort. (Trump pardoned both Stone and Manafort before leaving office.)

    Finally, Trump is disciplined because the stakes of this campaign are existential. Trump faces 91 felony counts across four criminal cases, the outcome of which could send him to jail for the rest of his life. Trump’s best chance at protecting his freedom is to win the presidency.

    [ad_2]

    Gabriel Sherman

    Source link

  • Nikki Haley Is Mad at Joe Biden for Calling Her Out Over the Civil War

    Nikki Haley Is Mad at Joe Biden for Calling Her Out Over the Civil War

    [ad_1]

    Joe Biden gave a speech in South Carolina on Monday, and Nikki Haley isn’t happy about it. Specifically, she’s not happy about the part where the president called her out for her extremely cringeworthy comments about the Civil War, saying, “Let me be clear, for those who don’t seem to know: Slavery was the cause of the Civil War.”

    X content

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

    Angrily responding during a town hall hosted by Fox News, Haley responded: “I don’t need someone who palled around with segregationists in the ’70s and has said racist comments all the way through his career lecturing me or anyone in South Carolina about what it means to have racism, slavery, or anything related to the Civil War.” (Biden was against the federal effort to use busing to desegregate schools in the 1970s.) Haley also claimed it was inappropriate to give a “political speech” at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, the Charleston church where nine Black people were murdered by a white supremacist in 2015.

    Last month, Haley found herself in the uncomfortable position of being called for failing to attribute slavery as the main cause of the Civil War. Asked about the matter at a CNN town hall, last week, the Republican presidential hopeful somehow made things worse by saying, “If you grow up in South Carolina, literally in second and third grade, you learn about slavery. You grow up and you have—you know, I had Black friends growing up. It is a very talked-about thing.”

    X content

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

    [ad_2]

    Bess Levin

    Source link

  • Trump Is Campaigning From Courtrooms Now

    Trump Is Campaigning From Courtrooms Now

    [ad_1]

    Donald Trump’s most unorthodox primary campaign persisted Tuesday, as the GOP front-runner chose to appear in a federal court, despite not being required to, rather than campaign in Iowa just days before the state’s first-in-the-nation caucuses. The former president, who possesses a more than 30-point polling advantage over his closest Republican rivals in Iowa, has sought to make his legal troubles inextricably linked to his presidential campaign. The strategy, at least in the primary, has worked. Republican voters have rallied around him, apparently viewing the scores of felony counts he faces as a form of political persecution.

    A three-judge federal appeals court panel in Washington heard arguments about whether, according to the US Constitution, Trump was immune from criminal prosecution for trying to overturn the 2020 election, and their responses appeared highly skeptical.

    Trump’s defense attorneys had contended that he was acting in his official executive capacity and was thus immune from prosecution. “During the 234 years from 1789 to 2023, no current or former president had ever been criminally prosecuted for official acts,” Trump’s attorneys argued in court filings, adding, “The indictment of President Trump threatens to launch cycles of recrimination and politically motivated prosecution that will plague our Nation for many decades to come.” In turn, the special counsel’s office has said that Trump’s executive privilege defense runs afoul of the “principle of accountability” and “threatens to license presidents to commit crimes to remain in office.”

    Meanwhile, federal appeals DC circuit court judge Karen Henderson, an appointee of President George H.W. Bush, seemed doubtful that the former president acted within his official duties. “I think it is paradoxical to say that his constitutional duty to take care of the laws be faithfully executed allows him to violate criminal law.” The panel’s judgment will likely see an appeal to the Supreme Court if the ruling goes against Trump, which will make the final decision on whether Trump’s criminal trial in Washington will happen.

    For Trump, the Tuesday appearance was voluntary. However, the former president used wildly different framing in a recent fundraising blast, falsely accusing Joe Biden of “forcing me into a courtroom in our nation’s capital” and plucking him off the campaign trail, according to The Washington Post.  

    Oscillating between the campaign trail and courtrooms in Washington—or in Georgia and New York, where he faces separate state charges—is a maneuver Trump will have to repeat in the coming months and even later this week. On Thursday, after a short visit to Iowa for a Fox News town hall the previous evening, he is expected to travel to New York for the closing arguments of his civil fraud trial.

    [ad_2]

    Caleb Ecarma

    Source link

  • Dean Phillips and Marianne Williamson Trash Joe Biden to a Room Full of 12-Year-Olds

    Dean Phillips and Marianne Williamson Trash Joe Biden to a Room Full of 12-Year-Olds

    [ad_1]

    Many people view Donald Trump as a major threat to democracy, mostly on account of the fact that he incited an insurrection when things didn’t go his way during the last presidential election—and has been pretty explicit about his plans to rule as an authoritarian should he get a second term in office. But you know who the true threat to democracy is, at least in Democratic primary hopeful Dean Phillips’s eyes? Current White House inhabitant and guy who has the distinction of never having incited an insurrection, Joe Biden.

    Yes, appearing at a debate in New Hampshire with self-help author and fellow candidate Marianne Williamson, Phillips claimed, to a “crowd of seventh graders and adults,” that Biden is a “risk to democracy” because “he is knowingly going into an election which his approval numbers and his poll numbers make it almost impossible to win,” according to Politico. “I know Marianne feels the same way,” Phillips said, adding: “We are the only two in the United States of America on the Democratic side of the aisle to stand up and tell you the truth: He’s going to lose, he’s going to lose.”

    During the same event, Phillips criticized Biden for campaigning in South Carolina, saying, “Joe Biden should have been right here with us. He is taking the Granite State for granted, he is taking this election for granted, and he is taking every single one of you and this entire country for granted,” Phillips said. (Williamson told the crowd she agreed.) They also both accused the Democratic Party of effectively engaging in voter suppression by not counting the New Hampshire primary because Biden and other Dems have opted for South Carolina to vote first, and argued that voters must not make the president the nominee—or disaster will strike come next November.

    Unfortunately for the duo, that appears unlikely to happen, with one recent poll showing Biden with a 40-point lead in New Hampshire—as a write-in candidate—over his competition. That situation was seemingly underscored on Tuesday, when no one showed up to a meet and greet with Phillips, despite the apparent promise of Dunkin’ Donuts:

    X content

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

    [ad_2]

    Bess Levin

    Source link

  • Jake Tapper: “I Reject the Premise” That a Trumpless Debate Is Futile

    Jake Tapper: “I Reject the Premise” That a Trumpless Debate Is Futile

    [ad_1]

    As a football fan, there is perhaps no worse feeling than surrendering your evening to a pathetic prime-time matchup. This is something millions of Americans experienced on New Year’s Eve, when the NFL pissed away the season’s penultimate Sunday Night Football game on a Green Bay Packers shellacking of the Minnesota Vikings. Maybe the Packers belonged—they are a wild card team. But their feeble opponent preemptively waved the white flag by starting a fifth-round rookie at quarterback, forcing announcers Chris Collinsworth and Mike Tirico to spend the subsequent three and a half hours hyping a dubious product. Over and over, couched in their commentary was a plea: Don’t turn us off just yet. This game isn’t finished.

    A few days later, while speaking to Jake Tapper and Dana Bash about moderating CNN’s upcoming Republican debate in Iowa, I couldn’t help but pick up on a similar sentiment. The primary is “actually a lot more fluid than people think,” Tapper assured me, adding that former UN ambassador Nikki Haley and Florida governor Ron DeSantis—the debate’s only participants—are both “credible candidates and serious people.”

    Donald Trump is once again ducking the stage to run counterprogramming on Fox News. He leads his primary rivals by at least 29 points in most recent polls, including those recorded nationally and in the early states of Iowa and South Carolina. New Hampshire, with its uniquely autonomous electorate, is another story; the former president leads there by an average of about 13 points.

    His absences notwithstanding, the seeming inevitability of a Trump renomination is likely to blame for dwindling public interest in debates this cycle. The last one, aired in early December on the fledgling NewsNation network and simulcast on the CW, drew a paltry 4.1 million viewers. The debate before that was hosted by NBC News and brought in 7.5 million viewers, still a conspicuous drop compared to the numbers that tuned in at this point in 2020 and 2016.

    By not joining the Wednesday contest, which will begin airing at 9 p.m., Tapper and Bash believe Trump is harming his election chances—and possibly American democracy. But the absences have no doubt helped Trump avoid difficult questions from moderators and attacks from other candidates regarding the 91 felony counts he faces. There is also an image consideration. Had he stood and scrapped in the same arena as Haley and DeSantis and the rest, he would have risked appearing like a fellow mortal rather than his current form: A near-godlike entity, always looming over the debate stage and the entire Republican Party.

    Still, to Tapper’s point, even the biggest leads don’t always hold. Rudy Giuliani entered the 2008 election with a sky-high approval rating and name recognition but failed to net a single primary victory. And last season, the lowly Vikings, staring down a 33-0 halftime deficit to the Indianapolis Colts, came back to pull off the largest comeback in NFL history.

    This conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

    Vanity Fair: If you’ll allow me to be blunt, I am curious what the point or function is of having a debate without Trump, especially at this later stage, when the novelty and interest in these new candidates have waned, and we know who the nominee most likely is going to be.

    Jake Tapper: Is that question premised on polls? Because it is true that polls are not always accurate, and they’re also not necessarily 100% good predictors of what’s going to happen. But if you’re suggesting that we shouldn’t have a debate because some polls are suggesting somebody’s at front-runner status, I guess I just reject the premise. Maybe if we were having this conversation in May I would accept it.

    Dana Bash: I was at all of the debates that were RNC-sanctioned, and I actually found them useful. I found it useful to see the way these candidates interact, to see how they answered questions, to see how they do or do not deal with the fact that Trump is not there and that Trump is the front-runner. You can also argue that if not for all of the debates without Trump, Nikki Haley wouldn’t be where she is today. And just to piggyback on what Jake said, I do believe this is a public service—that sounds corny, maybe, but it actually is true. We have enough experience with these that we take it seriously, to have a forum where voters can decide whether or not they like a candidate. Because there are a lot of undecided voters out there.

    Tapper: Just to go by the polling you’re referring to, roughly half of the Republican voters in Iowa and more in New Hampshire are looking for a non-Trump candidate. So I think it is a service to let the voters hear from them. Why are they better candidates? I know that there’s this kind of temptation to think that this race is over just because Donald Trump has been so dominant. There are still a lot of courtrooms that Donald Trump has yet to appear in. We don’t know how that’s going to affect what happens. Anyway, that’s an answer to your question, and sorry if I sounded defensive. It’s not aimed at you. It’s just more aimed at the idea that this is done. Hillary Clinton coming in third in Iowa in 2008 was not something that a lot of people predicted.

    [ad_2]

    Caleb Ecarma

    Source link

  • Joe Biden Is Somehow in a Better Place Today Than He Was Four Years Ago

    Joe Biden Is Somehow in a Better Place Today Than He Was Four Years Ago

    [ad_1]

    Are you better off than you were four years ago?

    It’s a question routinely posed to voters, deployed first and to great effect in 1980 by Republican candidate Ronald Reagan near the end of a debate with President Jimmy Carter. But as another unpopular Democratic incumbent wobbles into an election year, it’s worth asking whether the president is better off than he was four years ago.

    A whole lot has happened since January 2020. Back then, candidate Joe Biden was in deep trouble. His third bid for the Democratic nomination had been staggering for months: In October 2019, at the Jefferson–Jackson dinner, the traditional launching pad for the Iowa caucus campaign season, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders generated the most buzz. Biden’s cheering section was noticeably thin. Fundraising had been a problem and Biden was burning through cash. It all prefigured a dismal fourth-place finish in the February caucuses, behind Buttigieg, Sanders, and Warren. The punditocracy was declaring Biden’s campaign dead in the water; even many of his allies were deeply pessimistic. “Oh, it was dire,” a Biden 2020 insider says. “It almost seemed impossible, at that point, for him to get the nomination.”

    Then, things changed. Barely six weeks later, Biden had the Democratic nomination pretty much locked up. In November 2020, he won the White House, which makes the answer to the “better off” question seem easy and obvious. Of course Biden today, even with job approval numbers badly underwater and with many Democrats still pining for him to step aside, is better off politically now: He’s a president running for reelection instead of being one candidate in a talented field struggling to gain his own party’s nomination. “I would rather, for a whole host of reasons, be Biden now than then,” says Tim Hogan, who was a senior adviser to Amy Klobuchar’s 2020 presidential campaign. “Some of them are pretty basic, structurally: You’re an incumbent president running for a second term, likely against a guy who you’ve defeated previously and who has been vetted nationally so extensively. That’s a good place to be.” Add to the equation that the intervening four years haven’t been perfect for Biden’s likely general election opponent. Donald Trump has been held liable for sexual abuse and defamation, faces a total of 91 felony counts in four different cases, and is contending with a high-profile civil fraud lawsuit brought by the New York state attorney general.

    But four years ago, Biden had rabbits he could pull out of many hats. He changed campaign slogans, from the goofy “No Malarkey” to the more apt “Battle for the Soul of the Nation.” More substantially, in early February 2020, Biden shook up the leadership of his primary team, elevating Anita Dunn to run the operation and bringing in Jennifer O’Malley Dillon to implement the strategy. Then, crucially, Biden earned the endorsement of venerable South Carolina Democratic congressman James Clyburn, which helped swing Black South Carolina primary voters into his column and changed the trajectory of the entire race heading into Super Tuesday. Biden also benefited from the contrast with his Democratic primary rivals: A majority of voters believed Sanders and Warren were too far left and Buttigieg too untested to defeat Trump in the general election.

    This time around, fewer buttons appear available for Biden to push, internally. He’s likely to stay loyal to Dunn, O’Malley, Mike Donilon, and Steve Ricchetti, the quartet at the top of his political operation, no matter how rough the polling gets. The larger horse race dynamics seem calcified: Biden and Trump are extremely familiar to the electorate, and most voting minds are already made up. There are always wild cards, but the chances of Trump being convicted of anything by Election Day keep shrinking, and the general public so far seems staunchly unwilling to give Biden much credit for an improving economy. “There’s no question that there are headwinds,” says Maria Cardona, a former Hillary Clinton operative who is now a CNN commentator. “But four years ago, there was a real question mark whether Biden was going to be the nominee.”

    An incumbent typically runs on his record. Biden can point to a string of domestic successes; he will also be burdened with the feeling that the world, especially in the Middle East, is growing more volatile and deadly. But for all that has happened in four years, the president’s strongest argument remains the same one that boosted him in 2020: Trump would be worse. Biden began making that pitch in earnest last week, with a speech in Pennsylvania centered on the anniversary of the January 6 insurrection and Trump as an ongoing threat to democracy. But the next 10 months will be a slog, and even some supporters are skeptical about whether Biden, four years older, can sell the argument as effectively as he did in 2020. “All the energy is going to come from Trump, on both sides—he’ll energize us and he’ll energize the Republicans,” the Biden 2020 insider says. “In a weird way, so much of this, even though he is an incumbent president, is really out of the president’s control. So much of this will depend on how pumped up Republicans are, and how repulsed Democrats are, about Donald Trump.”

    [ad_2]

    Chris Smith

    Source link

  • Ex-U.S. Attorney Spots New ‘Nail In The Coffin Of Trump’s Intent’

    Ex-U.S. Attorney Spots New ‘Nail In The Coffin Of Trump’s Intent’

    [ad_1]

    “It is very, very powerful evidence if you look at it with the prism of what Jack Smith has to prove at trial,” said Harry Litman.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • There Is No “Both Sides” to Donald Trump’s Threat to Democracy

    There Is No “Both Sides” to Donald Trump’s Threat to Democracy

    [ad_1]

    On January 6, 2021, I watched CNN as thousands of Donald Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol. As someone well-versed in watching tragedy on television, I was struck by just how indisputable the facts were at the time: violent, red-hat-clad MAGA rioters, followed by Republicans in Congress, tried to stop democracy in its tracks. Trump had told his followers that the protest in Washington, DC, “will be wild,” and in the assault that followed his speech, some rioters smeared feces on the walls of the Capitol. Hundreds of them have since been convicted on charges ranging from assault on federal officers to seditious conspiracy. These are stubborn facts, the kind that do not care about your feelings. These facts include the inalienable truth that Trump is the first president in American history to reject the peaceful transfer of power.

    It never occurred to me that these facts could somehow be perverted by partisanship. But three years later, we are seeing just that, as Republicans cling to the lie that the 2020 election was “stolen” by Joe Biden and are poised to make Trump their 2024 nominee. And perhaps even more dangerous than the GOP ditching reality is the news media’s inability to cover Trumpism as the threat to democracy that it very much is.

    I had to read this headline last week from the Associated Press several times because I was sure I’d had it wrong: “One attack, two interpretations: Biden and Trump both make the Jan. 6 riot a political rallying cry.” Later in the piece appeared the line: Biden has “repeatedly characterized Trump as a threat to democracy.” Biden had characterized Trump that way? Well, there’s a reason for that! It’s because Trump is a threat to democracy. Meanwhile, The New York Times offered this headline: “Trump Responds to Biden’s Speech Calling Him a Threat to Democracy,” which was apparently changed—though not for the better—to “Trump Accuses Biden of ‘Fearmongering’ After Speech About Democracy.” And perhaps the most offensive headline both-sidesing reality was from USA Today: “Biden and Trump’s split over Jan. 6 is as divisive as it is for voters.”

    The facts of January 6 and its aftermath should be clear to any journalist who simply watched the events that day—and especially if they watched the damning House committee hearings or followed the exhaustive reporting since. It’s not Biden’s opinion that Trump is a threat. It’s not my opinion. It’s a fact. The guy who told Sean Hannity he wanted to be a “dictator” for his first day in office is, in fact, a threat to democracy. Liz Cheney warned that electing Trump again would be “sleepwalking into dictatorship,” and Chris Christie said that Trump “acts like someone who wants to be a dictator” because he “doesn’t care about our democracy,” adding: “He acts like someone who wants to be a dictator. He acts like someone who doesn’t care for the Constitution.”

    But the problem is, when all you have is conventional political framing, everything looks like politics as usual. One candidate makes a claim; the other disputes it. Two sides are divided, etc. This framing only works if both parties operate within the frameworks of a shared reality. But Trumpism doesn’t allow for the reality the rest of us inhabit. Trump’s supporters believe their leader’s reality and not, say, the reality the rest of us see with our eyes. As Trump once told a crowd: “Don’t believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news. What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.”

    Journalists may be well-intentioned in trying to be “objective,” or they’re simply afraid of being labeled partisan. Either way, coverage of January 6 that gives equal weight to both sides—one based in reality, one not—is helping pave the road for authoritarianism.

    History shows us that conventional framing enables extremism by making it seem like politics as usual; the Times infamously once ran this headline: “Hitler Tamed by Prison; Released on Parole, He Is Expected to Return to Austria.” Jason Stanley, a Yale professor and author of How Fascism Works, texted me: “Conventional political framing is by definition conventional. It is therefore totally inadequate for unconventional times. It makes a false presupposition of normality, that its audience is therefore invited to accept.”

    Trump is such a powerful figure in the Republican Party that he’s all but flattened his political rivals. Perhaps motivated by Trump’s popularity in polls, these political rivals have accepted Trump’s version of reality; with the notable exception of Christie, they have largely gone along with his lie that the election was stolen. The fact that so few of Trump’s primary challengers condemned his lies has created an entire ecosystem of Republican candidates occupying Trump’s bizarro Earth Two, all in the slim hope of lulling away Trump’s primary voters with their own muted version of Trump’s own autocratic impulses. I wondered months back if the 2024 pack would ever really take on Trump, and now a week before Iowa, it looks like that’ll never happen.

    In Iowa on Saturday, Trump said that the rioters acted “patriotically and peacefully” on January 6, and those in jail are “hostages.” He added, “They ought to release the J6 hostages. They’ve suffered.” I’m no criminal lawyer, but isn’t going to prison for crimes generally how all this works? Describing such people as “hostages” is the latest example of Trump pushing a version of events divorced from reality—one that some in his party were quick to promote. Like clockwork, Republican congresswoman (and veep contender) Elise Stefanik told NBC’s Kristen Welker, “I have concerns about the treatment of January 6 hostages.”

    Every time elected Republicans repeat a Trump lie, the schism between reality and Trumpian reality grows. By endorsing Trump’s unreality, Republicans are effectively endorsing Trump’s autocratic nature in which everything he says is to be believed, no matter how baseless or just plain bonkers. But of all Trump’s many lies, his bogus claims about the 2020 election and the events of January 6 are the most dangerous for the future of democracy.

    The current president, meanwhile, remains clear-eyed about this tragic day. 

    “We saw with our own eyes the violent mob storm the United States Capitol,” Biden said in a Friday speech pegged to the three-year anniversary. “It was almost in disbelief as you first turned on the television. For the first time in our history, insurrectionists had come to stop the peaceful transfer, transfer of power, in America. First time. Smashing windows, shattering doors, attacking the police. Outside, gallows were erected as the MAGA crowd chanted, ‘Hang Mike Pence.’ Inside, they hunted for Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi. The House was chanting as they marched through and smashed windows, ‘Where’s Nancy?’ Over 140 police officers were injured.”

    This isn’t Biden’s opinion, or his side. It’s what happened. 

    [ad_2]

    Molly Jong-Fast

    Source link

  • Missouri Sec. Of State Threatens To Remove Biden From The Ballot Then Promptly Falls Apart

    Missouri Sec. Of State Threatens To Remove Biden From The Ballot Then Promptly Falls Apart

    [ad_1]

    Missouri Sec. of State Jay Ashcroft (R) threatened to remove President Biden from the ballot for insurrection but fell apart when asked what Biden did.

    Ashcroft was asked on CNN,” I’m wondering though, what would then be your justification for removing Joe Biden from the ballot in Missouri? Has he engaged in your mind in some kind of insurrection?”

    The Missouri Secretary of State answered, “Uh, there have been allegations that he’s engaged in insurrection. How so? And all there have, no, please let me finish. There have only been allegations.”

    Ashcroft was asked for proof again, “You can’t say something like that and not back it up. What, what do you mean?”

    The Republican said, “I am continuing, but you interrupted me before I could back it up. Go ahead, sir. Are you scared of the truth?”

    CNN’s anchor did not back down, “Oh, I’m not terrified of the truth at all. It seems like you might be. Let’s see what you have to say.”

    Ashcroft kept fumbling, “There have only been allegations against President Trump. What allegations? President Trump has never been, um, uh, adjudicated guilty in a court of law.”

    The man in charge of Missouri’s elections was asked again, “What did Joe Biden do, in your mind, that equates to insurrection? What allegations are you talking about?”

    Ashcroft retreated to vague allegations, “I have seen allegations from the Lieutenant Governor of Texas. That has said that the, that Joe Biden has, has, uh, has, uh, been part of insurrection or rebellion. We’ve seen the president, uh, sorry, the governor of Florida say the same thing.”

    One last attempt was made to get a specific answer, “Insurrection over what? What would the governor of Texas say that Joe Biden was causing an insurrection over? If you’re going to make the claim, give me, give me some specifics. Are you just going to cite the governor of Texas or Florida and not actually say what they are arguing? Do you know what they’re arguing?”

    Ashcroft falsely claimed that Trump was kicked off the ballot for only allegations, “All what I’m telling you is this. They made allegations, and all it took for the president, for former president Trump to be taken off the ballot in Colorado and in Maine were allegations.”

    Video:

    Republicans keep trying to play tit-for-tat with Biden and Trump, but they are running into the same problem. President Biden hasn’t done anything wrong, and when reporters start asking questions, the allegations against Biden fall apart.

    Ashcroft tried all of the usual Republican tricks. He spoke in the vaguest of terms. He provided no details, and when he was pressed for facts, he attacked the motives of the questioner.

    None of it worked.

    Ashcroft’s performance also revealed why Republicans keep talking about taking Biden off the ballot but don’t do it.

    Trump was charged with crimes related to an attempted coup. If Republicans remove Biden from a ballot, Biden will sue. The President will win, and it will only harm the GOP.

    Republicans have nothing, and their efforts to make something up against Biden result in failure and embarrassment.

    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

  • Obama’s Campaign Manager Has Some Advice for Biden on America’s Youth: “Don’t Assume They’re Gonna Vote”

    Obama’s Campaign Manager Has Some Advice for Biden on America’s Youth: “Don’t Assume They’re Gonna Vote”

    [ad_1]

    It’s no secret that Joe Biden is wrestling with young voters. The 81-year-old president, who was first elected to the US Senate in 1972, has long struggled to excite Zoomers who feel the octogenarian is out of touch with their generation. Biden may have canceled a historic amount of student debt and taken bold action on climate change, but much of that is lost on young Americans, who think his policies haven’t gone far enough.

    All this was true before October 7, when Biden pledged unconditional support for Israel after it was brutally attacked by Hamas. However, a clear generational divide has opened up around the administration’s response to Israel’s devastating counteroffensive in Gaza. Poll after poll shows the president losing ground with young progressives ages 18 to 34 who are critical of him and his handling of the war in the region. Beyond all of that, young Americans loathe the idea of voting in a potential rematch between Biden and Donald Trump, as if political dynamics have not changed since 2020. Some have even expressed concerns their peers won’t turn out to vote in 2024 as a result.

    Still, there are glimmers of hope for Biden. Youth voters, who were quite skeptical of Biden in 2020, ultimately rallied behind him in high numbers. They also supported down-ballot Democrats and were credited with helping prevent a red wave in the 2022 midterm elections. But will they show up in 2024?

    Jim Messina has advice for the president on this front. Having served as the deputy chief of staff in the Obama White House and as former president Barack Obama’s reelection campaign manager in 2012, he knows a thing or two about how to win over jaded young people. In his current role as CEO of the Messina Group, he’s advised more than a dozen presidents and prime ministers around the world.

    Messina, 54, believes a lot has changed since 2012, like the advent of TikTok (which he says he’s “obsessed with”). However, in the following interview with Vanity Fair, he pointed to key campaign tactics Biden and his team can nevertheless lean on to convince skeptical young people that voting for Biden is vital in 2024. Our conversation below has been edited lightly for length and clarity.

    Vanity Fair: The world is in conflict. Given that the president is continuing to lose faith from young progressives over his support for Israel in the Israel-Hamas war, what can he do to gain it back while maintaining that allegiance to Israel? And has he been vocal enough about where he stands on the humanitarian side of the war in Gaza?

    Jim Messina: What I learned in the White House is—we went through some really tough moments like this as well—and part of the president’s job is to continue to talk through why he’s doing what he is doing. I thought his early [messaging] was very good on this. But let’s be honest, this is an incredibly important issue, and there’s probably no one issue other than maybe Roe that will sway this election either way. The people loudest on these issues aren’t a good representative of voters, and if you don’t love the way Biden’s handling the issue, you probably really hate Donald Trump’s Muslim ban. And so part of it is just the president saying, “Look,” to young voters, “This is why I’m doing what I’m doing.” And then number two is highlighting why Trump is so bad on these same issues, and having a really clear contrast. I’m a very big believer that campaigns have to have contrast.

    Why do you think that’s currently getting lost? Some of the polls have shown that the same people who are critical of the president’s support for Israel are saying that they would maybe even vote for former president Trump for how he would handle it.

    [ad_2]

    Rachel Janfaza

    Source link

  • Ex-Prosecutor Dismantles Trump’s Attack On Him In Most ‘Graceful’ Way

    Ex-Prosecutor Dismantles Trump’s Attack On Him In Most ‘Graceful’ Way

    [ad_1]

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Representative Elise Stefanik Refuses to Commit to Certify 2024 Results, Calls January 6 Prisoners “Hostages”

    Representative Elise Stefanik Refuses to Commit to Certify 2024 Results, Calls January 6 Prisoners “Hostages”

    [ad_1]

    New York Representative Elise Stefanik, the fourth-ranking member of House Republican leadership and a staunch defender of former President Donald Trump, refused to say whether she would certify the 2024 presidential election results.

    “We will see if this is a legal and valid election,” Stefanik told Kirsten Welker of NBC News’s “Meet the Press.” Stefanik went on to accuse Democrats of “suppression of the American people,” referencing the various legal efforts to keep Trump off the ballot in 2024.

    Welker pressed Stefanik on whether she’d “only commit to certifying the results if former President Trump wins.” “No, it means if they’re constitutional,” Stefanik replied. “What we saw in 2020 was unconstitutional circumventing of the Constitution, not going through state legislators when it comes to changing election law.”

    As the House Republican conference chair, she has repeated on numerous occasions Trump’s baseless claims of election fraud, and was one of 147 Republicans to vote on January 6, 2021 against certifying Biden’s victory.

    In an interview on NBC, President Joe Biden‘s deputy campaign manager, Quentin Fulks, refuted Stefanik’s claim that Democrats are attempting to subvert democracy. “I’m not sure that this ‘I know you are, but what am I’ situation is going to work when it comes to democracy,” he said.

    Stefanik’s interview aired a day after the third anniversary of the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol. Welker asked her whether the people who participated in the attack should be “held responsible to the full extent of the law.”

    The senior New York Republican replied that she had “concerns about the treatment of January 6 hostages,” using Trump’s favored term for the over 1,200 people arrested for their roles in the riot. “We have a rule in Congress of oversight over our treatments of prisoners, and I believe that we’re seeing the weaponization of the federal government against not just President Trump, but we’re seeing it against conservatives.”

    In an interview on CBS, former GOP Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, who served as vice chair of the House January 6 Select Committee, called Stefanik’s comments “outrageous” and “disgusting.” Stefanik replaced Cheney in the House leadership in 2021 after House Republicans removed the conservative from the Cowboy State from her position as conference chair for her refusal to back Trump’s election lies.

    “It’s disgraceful for Donald Trump to be saying what he’s saying, and then for those who are attempting to enable him or attempting to further their own political careers to repeat it,” Cheney said. “You cannot say you are a member of a party that believes in the rule of law, you cannot say you are pro-law enforcement, if you then go out and you say these people are ‘hostages.’”

    [ad_2]

    Jack McCordick

    Source link

  • Donald Trump rages at judge in flurry of posts

    Donald Trump rages at judge in flurry of posts

    [ad_1]

    Donald Trump raged at Judge Arthur Engoron in a series of posts on social media on Saturday.

    Engoron will decide the verdict in the New York civil fraud case that could see the former president barred from doing business in the state where he built his real estate empire.

    Before trial, he ruled in favor of the top claim in the civil lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, finding that Trump and his company deceived banks, insurers and others by massively overvaluing his assets and exaggerating his net worth on financial statements that he used to get loans and make deals.

    Closing arguments in the trial to decide the remaining claims of conspiracy, insurance fraud and falsifying business records are set for Thursday. Engoron will also decide on monetary damages.

    James is seeking more than $370 million in penalties—up from a pre-trial figure of $250 million.

    Donald Trump on January 6, 2024, in Clinton, Iowa. The former president has hit out at Judge Arthur Engoron in a series of social media posts.
    Scott Olson/Getty Images

    Trump and other defendants, including his sons Donald Jr. and Eric, deny wrongdoing. The former president, the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, has repeatedly blasted the case as a political witch hunt by James and other Democrats, aimed at derailing his chances of winning back the White House. He is also battling four criminal cases.

    On Saturday, Trump took to his Truth Social platform several times to denounce Engoron.

    Engoron “HAS SO DISRESPECTED THE COURT OF APPEALS, IN THAT HE CONSIDERS THIS BIGGEST OF ALL LEGAL EVENTS TO HAVE NEVER HAPPENED, THAT NEW YORK STATE, AND OUR NATION AS A WHOLE, CANNOT ALLOW THIS TERRIBLE WRONGDOING TO TAKE PLACE,” he wrote in one post.

    “THIS IS LAWLESSNESS BY A JUDGE THE LIKES OF WHICH OUR COUNTRY HAS NEVER SEEN BEFORE. A VICTORY IS A VICTORY! LET IT BE. FIGHT VIOLENCE ON N.Y. STREETS, AND STOP THE MASS EXODUS OF OUR PEOPLE, OUR BUSINESSES, & OUR WEALTH OUT OF OUR ONCE GREAT STATE, & INTO OTHER, FAR MORE HOSPITABLE ONES. MAKE NEW YORK STATE GREAT AGAIN!”

    Trump has said his financial statements actually underestimated the value of his properties, and that any overestimations were mistakes that made little difference to the overall picture of his wealth. He argued that disclaimers on the statements insulated him from liability for discrepancies or misstatements.

    He wrote on Truth Social that a “small piece” of his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida was valued by Engoron at $18 million in the “CORRUPT & RIGGED case against me, when it is worth 50 to 100 times that amount. No jury, No Victim, only profits and success. WITCH HUNT!!!”

    In another post, Trump also repeated the claim that Engoron had refused to honor an appeals court ruling that “this Witch Hunt should be dismissed on Statute of Limitations grounds.”

    The “whole HOAX should have been ended long before this pathetic excuse for a trial ever started,” he added.

    In another post, he wrote that the “Rule of Law in New York State will never recover if this partisan attack is not immediately squashed!”

    The Appellate Division of New York’s Supreme Court did not dismiss the case entirely, but ruled last year that claims against Ivanka Trump were barred under the state’s statute of limitations.

    Forbes reported that the court also ruled that the state could not bring claims regarding financial transactions that were completed before 2014 for some defendants bound by a tolling agreement, or before 2016 for other defendants.

    Trump also responded to state lawyers increasing the request for penalties, writing on Truth Social: “THE CORRUPT A.G. WANTS $370,000,000 AS BUSINESSES FLEE NEW YORK. THEY SHOULD PAY ME. THIS IS PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT—A DOJ WITCH HUNT!”

    Newsweek has contacted a Trump spokesperson for comment via email. James’ office has also been contacted for comment via email.