title
stringlengths 6
298
| body
stringlengths 275
67.7k
| label
stringclasses 1
value |
|---|---|---|
Joe Biden Endorses Kamala Harris: Could She Beat Donald Trump? - Revista Merca2.0 |
|
In a separate post on his personal social media accounts, Biden voiced his full support for Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee
President Joe Biden officially endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic candidate for the 2024 presidential election. This decision comes amidst weeks of speculation regarding Biden's ability to continue serving due to concerns over his age and mental acuity.
Biden's Decision to Step Down
In a heartfelt letter posted on his social media, Biden expressed his decision not to seek re-election. "Although my intention has been to run for re-election, I believe that the best course of action for my party and the country is to step aside and focus solely on fulfilling my duties as President for the remainder of my term," Biden stated. He promised to provide more details about his decision later this week.
Biden's announcement included a message of deep gratitude towards his campaign team, highlighting the pivotal role of Vice President Kamala Harris, whom he described as an "extraordinary partner in this work."
In a separate post on his personal social media accounts, Biden voiced his full support for Harris as the Democratic nominee. He wrote:
"My fellow Democrats, I have decided not to accept the nomination and to focus all my energies on my duties as President for the remainder of my term. My very first decision as the party nominee in 2020 was to pick Kamala Harris as my Vice President. And it's been the best decision I've made. Today I want to offer my full support and endorsement for Kamala to be the nominee of our party this year. Democrats -- it's time to come together and beat Trump. Let's do this."
With Biden's endorsement, Harris now stands as a prominent figure to potentially face Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, in the upcoming election. Recent surveys shed light on the Democratic base's view of Harris. According to a poll by the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, approximately 6 out of 10 Democrats believe Harris would perform well in the nation's highest office. However, 2 out of 10 Democrats are skeptical, and another 2 out of 10 feel they lack enough information to form an opinion.
A recent CNN poll conducted by SSRS indicated that three-quarters of U.S. voters think the Democratic Party would have a better chance of holding the presidency in 2024 with someone other than Biden as the candidate. The same poll revealed a tight race between Trump and Harris, with 47% of registered voters supporting Trump and 45% backing Harris, a difference within the margin of error.
Harris' performance in the hypothetical matchups against Trump shows promise, particularly among women and independent voters. CNN's polling data highlighted that 50% of female voters preferred Harris over Trump, compared to 44% for Biden against Trump. Among independents, 43% favored Harris, while only 34% supported Biden.
However, Harris faces significant competition within her party. Other potential Democratic candidates like California Governor Gavin Newsom, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer also trail Trump in voter support, reflecting the steep challenge ahead.
As the election season progresses, the Democratic Party will need to unify behind Harris and leverage her strengths to overcome the formidable opposition posed by Trump. The coming months will be crucial in determining whether Harris can galvanize the Democratic base and appeal to undecided voters, potentially leading to a historic victory.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Senior Democrats, including Nadler, Call for Biden To Drop Out
|
Rep. Jerry Nadler is one of four senior House Democrats who are now calling for President Joe Biden to drop out of the 2024 election.
Politico reports that Nadler, Mark Takano, Joe Morelle and Adam Smith are now calling for Biden to withdraw.
The four senior politicians made their position clear during a phone call with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.
At present, nine House Democrats have voiced their opposition to Biden running for re-election in November. In addition to Nadler, Takano, Morelle and Smith, Lloyd Doggett, Raul Grijalva, Seth Moulton, Mike Quigley and Angie Craig have also spoken out.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Huffpost Calls For Biden Campaign to Fool Public With AI Videos That Make Sleepy Joe Look Younger & Healthy
|
"How many times have we heard voters and pundits alike gripe that 'Biden would be the perfect candidate if he were just 10 years younger?' With modern technology, this exact deliverable is possible."
An op-ed published by Huffpost calls on the Biden campaign to launch a disinformation effort by disseminating AI-enhanced videos that make Joe Biden look younger and healthier.
In the article titled, "It's Time For The Biden Campaign To Embrace AI", Kaivan Shroff argues that a potential Trump victory is so great that the Biden campaign should push fake content to dupe the public into supporting Biden, claiming refusing to do so "is akin to entering the boxing ring with one hand tied behind your back."
"The stakes of the 2024 presidential election cannot be overstated. With Donald Trump promising to act as a dictator 'on day one,' it is not hyperbolic to say the future of American democracy hangs in the balance," Shroff wrote Wednesday.
"Against this backdrop, the Biden campaign faces a critical challenge: conveying a strong and effective image of President Joe Biden to a population and media ecosystem increasingly focused on optics over substance. Given the president's concerning performance last week, it's time for the Biden campaign to consider leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) to effectively reach the voting public."
"Modern technology offers a clear solution. AI can be used to polish how the president comes across, allowing voters to focus on his substance. How many times have we heard voters and pundits alike gripe that 'Biden would be the perfect candidate if he were just 10 years younger?' With modern technology, this exact deliverable is possible."
Shroff went on to justify the "dishonest and deceptive" practice of AI manipulation for political purposes, arguing the current media environment is no better, citing the recent videos of Biden wandering around and freezing up that the media falsely dubbed as "cheapfakes."
"Reasonably, some may challenge the use of AI as dishonest and deceptive, but the current information ecosystem is arguably no better. It may even be worse," he wrote. "Media outlets like the New York Post have engaged in sharing deceptively cropped viral clips of the president, dubbed 'cheapfakes,' to make him appear confused or weak."
Shroff went on to complain about the unfettered information landscape facilitated by Elon Musk's X amid the constellation of social media platforms that have rigorous censorship policies.
"Social media outlets like Instagram and TikTok have cracked down on political content, while rightwing billionaire Elon Musk has used Twitter to amplify false information about the election and boost Republicans. Even once great institutions like The Washington Post have transitioned into Murdoch-style tabloids," he wrote.
"We must ask the question, are augmented AI videos that present Biden in his best form -- while sharing honest and accurate information -- really more socially damaging than our information ecosystem's current realities? I think not."
Shroff concluded by saying Trump's probability of retaking the White House is enough justification to leverage the use of AI to improve Biden's image by any means necessary.
Until now, it has been almost taken as a given that using AI renderings of the president would violate some ethical baseline of campaigning. In an ideal world that may be so. Yet, what last week's debate made clear is just how far from any such ideal our current reality is. The greatest moral and ethical imperative for those who care about American democracy should be keeping the man who tried to overthrow it as far away from the White House as possible.
Equivocating over the use of AI will do nothing to stop its abuse and misuse should Republicans regain power this November. It is incumbent upon the Biden campaign to use every tool available to make sure the president's reelection bid is successful. Instead of a new candidate, AI allows Democrats to address the main vulnerabilities of our current standard bearer while embracing an inevitability of modern politics.
The Democrats have become so desperate to prop up Joe Biden that they're openly scheming how to gaslight the American people even harder going into the presidential election.
After all, the Democrats already tried every other ridiculous lie in the book to excuse Biden's disastrous debate performance, such as that he had jet lag, and that he had a cold.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Celebrity News | Entertainment News | TMZ.com - Page 2
|
Common has a common view on the 2024 presidential election -- he's not happy with the choices.
We got the rapper in New York City on Thursday and our photog asked about celebs like George Clooney voicing concerns about President Biden's chances of beating Donald Trump.
Common -- who campaigned for fellow Chicagoan Barack Obama back in the day and Biden in 2020 -- admits he's disheartened about the nominees for president but says that's not an excuse to sit out this election cycle.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Election 2024 live updates: Harris and Trump both on the campaign trail in Pennsylvania
|
Nancy Pelosi's phone lit up the night of President Joe Biden's debate performance with a question that has yet to be fully resolved: Now what?
The uproar that has shaken the 2024 election, and siphoned attention away from Trump and his MAGA agenda, leaves Democrats at a painful standstill, at odds over whether to stick with Biden as their presumptive nominee or press on with the once-unthinkable option of trying to persuade the president to end his reelection campaign.
Pelosi as the former House speaker, along with Rep. Jim Clyburn, a veteran leader of the Congressional Black Caucus, are playing oversized roles as generational allies of the 81-year-old president but also trusted voices from Capitol Hill who can bring frank concerns to Biden. Their work, in public and private, is giving space to the current congressional leadership headed by House Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to navigate the Biden question and the party's political future.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
The Gunman and the Would-be Dictator
|
Violence stalks the president who has rejoiced in violence to others.
When a madman hammered nearly to death the husband of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Donald Trump jeered and mocked. One of Trump's sons and other close Trump supporters avidly promoted false claims that Paul Pelosi had somehow brought the onslaught upon himself through a sexual misadventure.
After authorities apprehended a right-wing extremist plot to abduct Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, Trump belittled the threat at a rally. He disparaged Whitmer as a political enemy. His supporters chanted "lock her up." Trump laughed and replied, "Lock them all up."
Fascism feasts on violence. In the months since his own supporters attacked the Capitol to overturn the 2020 election -- many of them threatening harm to Speaker Pelosi and Vice President Mike Pence -- Trump has championed the invaders and would-be kidnappers and would-be murderers as martyrs and hostages. He has vowed to pardon them if returned to office. His own staffers have testified to the glee with which Trump watched the mayhem on television.
Now the bloodshed that Trump has done so much to incite against others has touched him as well. The attempted murder of Trump -- and the killing of a person nearby -- is a horror and outrage. More will be learned about the man who committed this appalling act, and who was killed by the Secret Service. Whatever his mania or motive, the only important thing about him is the law-enforcement mistake that allowed him to bring a deadly weapon so close to a campaign event and gain a sight line of the presidential candidate. His name should otherwise be erased and forgotten.
It is sadly incorrect to say, as so many have, that political violence "has no place" in American society. Assassinations, lynchings, riots, and pogroms have stained every page of American political history. That has remained true to the present day. In 2016, and even more in 2020, Trump supporters brought weapons to intimidate opponents and vote-counters. Trump and his supporters envision a new place for violence, as their defining political message in the election of 2024.
Fascist movements are secular religions. Like all religions, they offer martyrs as their proof of truth. The Mussolini movement in Italy built imposing monuments to its fallen comrades. The Trump movement now improves on that: the leader himself will be the martyr-in-chief, his own blood the basis for his bid for power and vengeance.
Christopher R. Browning: A new kind of fascism
The 2024 election was already shaping up as a symbolic contest between an elderly and weakening liberalism too frail and uncertain to protect itself and an authoritarian, reactionary movement ready to burst every barrier and trash every institution. To date, Trump has led only a minority of U.S. voters, but that minority's passion and audacity have offset what it lacks in numbers. After the shooting, Trump and his backers hope to use the iconography of a bloody ear and face, raised fist, and call to "Fight!" to summon waverers to their cause of installing Trump as an anticonstitutional ruler, exempted from ordinary law by his allies on the Supreme Court.
Other societies have backslid to authoritarianism because of some extraordinary crisis: economic depression, hyper-inflation, military defeat, civil strife. In 2024, U.S. troops are nowhere at war. The American economy is booming, providing spectacular and widely shared prosperity. A brief spasm of mild post-pandemic inflation has been overcome. Indicators of social health have abruptly turned positive since Trump left office after years of deterioration during Trump's term. Crime and fatal drug overdoses are declining in 2024; marriages and births are rising. Even the country's problems indirectly confirm the country's success: Migrants are crossing the border in the hundreds of thousands because they know, even if Americans don't, that the U.S. job market is among the hottest on earth.
Yet, despite all of this success, Americans are considering a form of self-harm that in other countries has typically followed the darkest national failures: letting the author of a failed coup d'état return to office to try again.
One reason this self-harm is nearing consummation is that American society is poorly prepared to understand and respond to radical challenges, once those challenges gain a certain mass. For nearly a century, "radical" in U.S. politics has usually meant "fringe": Communists, Ku Kluxers, Black Panthers, Branch Davidians, Islamist jihadists. Radicals could be marginalized by the weight of the great American consensus that stretches from social democrats to business conservatives. Sometimes, a Joe McCarthy or a George Wallace would throw a scare into that mighty consensus, but in the past such challengers rarely formed stable coalitions with accepted stakeholders in society. Never gaining an enduring grip on the institutions of state, they flared up and burned out.
Trump is different. His abuses have been ratified by powerful constituencies. He has conquered and colonized one of the two major parties. He has defeated -- or is on the way to defeating -- every impeachment and prosecution to hold him to account for his frauds and crimes. He has assembled a mass following that is larger, more permanent, and more national in reach than any previous American demagogue. He has dominated the scene for nine years already, and he and his supporters hope they can use yesterday's appalling event to extend the Trump era to the end of his life and beyond.
The American political and social system cannot treat such a person as an alien. It inevitably accommodates and naturalizes him. His counselors, even the thugs and felons, join the point-counterpoint dialogue at the summit of the American elite. President Joe Biden nearly wrecked his campaign because he felt obliged to meet Trump in debate. How could Biden have done otherwise? Trump is the three-time nominee of the Republican Party; it's awkward and strange to treat him as an insurrectionist against the American state -- though that's what Trump was and is.
David Frum: Biden's heartbreaking press conference
The despicable shooting at Trump, which also caused death and injury to others, now secures his undeserved position as a partner in the protective rituals of the democracy he despises. The appropriate expressions of dismay and condemnation from every leading voice in American life have the additional effect of habituating Americans to Trump's legitimacy. In the face of such an outrage, the familiar and proper practice is to stress unity, to proclaim that Americans have more in common than divides them. Those soothing words, true in the past, are less true now.
Nobody seems to have language to say: We abhor, reject, repudiate, and punish all political violence, even as we maintain that Trump remains himself a promoter of such violence, a subverter of American institutions, and the very opposite of everything decent and patriotic in American life.
The Republican National Convention that opens this week will welcome to its stage apologists for Vladimir Putin's Russia and its aggression against U.S. allies. Trump's own infatuation with Russia and other dictatorships has not dimmed even slightly with age or experience. Yet all of these urgent and necessary truths must now be subdued to the ritual invocation of "thoughts and prayers" for someone who never gave a thought or uttered a prayer for any of the victims of his own many incitements to bloodshed. The president who used his office to champion the rights of dangerous people to own military-type weapons was grazed by a bullet from one such assault rifle.
Conventional phrases and polite hypocrisy fill a useful function in social life. We say, "Thank you for your service" both to the decorated hero and to the veteran who barely escaped dishonorable discharge. It's easier than deciphering which was which. We wish "Happy New Year!" even when we dread the months ahead.
Adrienne LaFrance: Thoughts, prayers, and Facebook rants aren't enough
But conventional phrases don't go unheard. They carry meanings, meanings no less powerful for being rote and reflexive. In rightly denouncing violence, we are extending an implicit pardon to the most violent person in contemporary U.S. politics. In asserting unity, we are absolving a man who seeks power through the humiliation and subordination of disdained others.
Those conventional phrases are inscribing Trump into a place in American life he should have forfeited beyond redemption on January 6, 2021. All decent people welcome the sparing of his life. Trump's reckoning should be with the orderly process of law, not with the bloodshed he rejoiced in when it befell others. He and his allies will exploit a gunman's vicious criminality as their path to exonerate past crimes and empower new ones. Those who stand against Trump and his allies must find the will and the language to explain why these crimes, past and planned, are all wrong, all intolerable -- and how the gunman and Trump, at their opposite ends of a bullet's trajectory, are nonetheless joined together as common enemies of law and democracy.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Biden to push for constitutional amendment next week to reverse Trump immunity decision: report
|
GWU Law Professor Jonathan Turley reacts to former President Trump's sentencing being delayed until September 18 following the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity on 'The Story.'
President Biden is set to propose several changes to the U.S. Constitution on Monday to make good on his promise to reform the Supreme Court, according to a report.
In a reversal from the president's longstanding resistance to changes to the high court, Biden said on Wednesday that Supreme Court reform would be among his top priorities for the remainder of his term in office. Biden announced Sunday that he would not seek re-election after mounting pressure from Democratic Party officials who asked him to step aside after his widely panned debate performance in June.
The president is expected to propose setting term limits for justices on the Supreme Court, which would require a constitutional amendment, and establishing an enforceable code of ethics, which could be enacted by Congress, Politico reported.
BIDEN TO ANNOUNCE SUPPORT FOR MAJOR CHANGES TO SUPREME COURT AMID OUTRAGE OVER RECENT DECISIONS: REPORT
Biden is also likely to voice support for a constitutional amendment that would limit immunity for presidents and certain other officeholders after the court ruled in July that presidents cannot be prosecuted for "official acts" during their time in office. The court's ruling stemmed from a case concerning former President Trump.
The framers of the Constitution intentionally made it difficult to amend. A two-thirds majority of both the House and the Senate needs to pass any proposed amendment, which is then sent to the states for ratification. It must be approved by three-fourths -- 38 -- of the 50 states to become the supreme law of the land.
"This decision today has continued the court's attack in recent years on a wide range of long-established legal principles in our nation, from gutting voting rights and civil rights to taking away a woman's right to choose, to today's decision that undermines the rule of law of this nation," Biden said in public remarks after the court handed down its opinion.
TRUMP IMMUNITY CASE: SUPREME COURT RULES EX-PRESIDENTS HAVE SUBSTANTIAL PROTECTION FROM PROSECUTION
Politico reported the specifics of the proposal have not been finalized and could still change. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Biden said Supreme Court reform is "critical to our democracy" in an Oval Office address Wednesday explaining his decision to drop out of the 2024 election.
HARRIS VS. TRUMP: 100 DAYS FROM ELECTION, IT'S A DRAMATICALLY ALTERED PRESIDENTIAL RACE
"Over the next six months, I'll be focused on doing my job as president. That means I'll continue to lower costs for hard-working families, grow our economy. I'll keep defending our personal freedoms and our civil rights, from the right to vote to the right to choose. I'll keep calling out hate and extremism, make it clear there is no place, no place in America for political violence or any violence ever, period. I'm going to keep speaking out to protect our kids from gun violence, our planet from climate crisis, is the existential threat," Biden said.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
"And I will keep fighting for my for my cancer moonshot, so we can end cancer as we know it because we can do it. And I'm going to call for Supreme Court reform because this is critical to our democracy, Supreme Court reform. You know, I will keep working to ensure America remains strong and secure and the leader of the free world."
Fox News Digital's Louis Casiano contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
How an Elon Musk PAC is using voter data to help Trump beat Harris in 2024 election
|
The ad shows a young man lying in bed late at night when someone else texts him, "Hey you need to vote," and then sends the man a video of the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump. The man can hear the gunshots and people screaming in the background.
As Trump is rushed off stage with blood pouring down his face, the man watching the video types in response, "This is out of control. How do I start?"
The ad then displays a website for a group called America PAC.
The website says it will help the viewer register to vote. But once a user clicks "Register to Vote," the experience he or she will have can be very different, depending on where they live.
If a user lives in a state that is not considered competitive in the presidential election, like California or Wyoming for example, they'll be prompted to enter their email addresses and zip code and then directed quickly to a voter registration page for their state, or back to the original sign up section.
But for users who enter a zip code that indicates they live in a battleground state, like Pennsylvania or Georgia, the process is very different.
Rather than be directed to their state's voter registration page, they instead are directed to a highly detailed personal information form, prompted to enter their address, cell phone number, and age.
If they agree to submit all that, the system still does not steer them to a voter registration page. Instead, it shows them a "thank you" page.
So that person who wanted help registering to vote? In the end, they got no help at all registering. But they did hand over priceless personal data to a political operation.
Specifically, a political action committee created by Tesla CEO Elon Musk, one aimed at giving the Republican presidential nominee Trump an advantage in his campaign against Vice President Kamala Harris, the de facto Democratic nominee.
"I have created a PAC, or a super PAC ... the America PAC," Musk said in a recent interview.
Musk also owns the social media platform X, and has a net worth of over $235 billion, according to Forbes.
The combination of owning a social media company that gives him an enormous platform to push his political views, and creating a PAC with effectively unlimited resources, has made Musk, for the first time, a major force in an American presidential election.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Netflix's Reed Hastings Backs Kamala Harris With $7M Donation
|
Reed Hastings has come out big for Kamala Harris, cutting the vice president's 2024 election campaign a check for $7 million.
The Netflix co-founder and executive chairman revealed the massive donation to the tech-focused site The Information on Tuesday. "After the depressing debate, we are in the game again," Hastings told The Information. He added that it was the largest donation he had ever given to a single candidate.
Earlier this month, in the aftermath of Joe Biden's disastrous first presidential debate performance, Hastings went public with his frustrations with the president running for re-election. "Biden needs to step aside to allow a vigorous Democratic leader to beat Trump and keep us safe and prosperous," Hastings told the New York Times.
Hastings' comments at the time were part of a growing chorus from big Democrat donors, particularly those from Hollywood, who called on Biden to step aside. Per NYT, Hastings and his wife, Patty Quillin, have donated more than $20 million to the Democratic Party in recent years.
On Tuesday, Hastings tweeted, "Congrats to Kamala Harris -- now it is time to win."
The Information reported that Hastings donated to a Harris-linked super PAC on the recommendation of billionaire venture capitalist and fellow Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman.
Since Biden revealed his shock decision to end his re-election campaign, Democrat power brokers, donors and supporters have coalesced around Harris, who secured the majority of delegates on Monday to officially become the party's nominee for president.
After an outpouring of enthusiasm, in less than a week, the Washington Post reported that Harris had raised over a record $250 million for her campaign in just over two days. The Hollywood Reporter revealed earlier this week that the news of Biden stepping aside in favor of Harris had energized Hollywood donors, who were lining up to shower millions on the former California senator.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Vice President Kamala Harris on Being 'Momala'
|
Vice President Kamala Harris was sworn into office in 2020 beside her running mate, Joe Biden. Now, as the 2024 election approaches, she could be the potential Democratic nominee following Biden's announcement he is stepping down from his campaign. In 2019, she delved into another important role in a piece for ELLE.com, writing about being a stepmom to her husband Doug Emhoff's children, Cole and Ella. In honor of Mother's Day, Vice President Harris writes about what it's like to be a stepmom -- or, as her kids call her "Momala."
When I met Doug, the man who would become my husband, I also met a man who was a divorced father of two children, Cole and Ella, named after John Coltrane and Ella Fitzgerald. As a child of divorce, I knew how hard it could be when your parents start to date other people. And I was determined not to insert myself in their lives until Doug and I had established we were in this for the long haul. Children need consistency; I didn't want to insert myself into their lives as a temporary fixture because I didn't want to disappoint them. There's nothing worse than disappointing a child.
So, we took it slow, and Doug and I put a lot of thought into when and how I would first meet the kids. And that meant waiting. As we waited, anticipation grew. When the day finally came, I had butterflies in my stomach. The plan was to go to a seafood hut off the Pacific Coast Highway called the Reel Inn, a favorite of the kids.
On my way to meet Doug, I picked up a tin of cookies and tied a ribbon in a bow around them. I took a few deep breaths. I was excited, and I was nervous. I rehearsed what I would say. Would the kids think the cookies were really nice or really weird? Was the ribbon too much? (The ribbon was probably a little extra, but over the years Cole and Ella have spared me by not telling me that.)
Cole and Ella could not have been more welcoming. They are brilliant, talented, funny kids who have grown to be remarkable adults. I was already hooked on Doug, but I believe it was Cole and Ella who reeled me in.
To know Cole and Ella is to know that their mother Kerstin is an incredible mother. Kerstin and I hit it off ourselves and are dear friends. She and I became a duo of cheerleaders in the bleachers at Ella's swim meets and basketball games, often to Ella's embarrassment. We sometimes joke that our modern family is almost a little too functional.
A few years later when Doug and I got married, Cole, Ella, and I agreed that we didn't like the term "stepmom." Instead they came up with the name "Momala."
Our time as a family is Sunday dinner. We come together, all of us around the table, and over time we've fallen into our roles. Cole sets the table and picks the music, Ella makes beautiful desserts, Doug acts as my sous-chef, and I cook.
Flash forward two years -- and it truly felt like a flash -- I was being sworn into the United States Senate. Cole had already graduated and was off at college, but Ella was just entering her senior year of high school in Los Angeles. This new job meant that I would be splitting time between California and Washington, D.C., and the hardest part was going to be being away from my Ella. I knew I was inevitably going to miss more than a few swim meets.
And as you might guess, it ended up being more than swim meets.
On June 8, 2017, FBI Director James Comey was asked to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee about his firing and the Russia investigation. It was the same day as Ella's high school graduation, a scheduling conflict that I was acutely aware of, but that the Senate Intelligence Committee -- and for that matter the rest of the country -- was not.
I agonized over the scheduling conflict and ultimately took a deep breath and called Ella from D.C. She could not have been more understanding when I told her I wouldn't be able to make it back in time, but I still felt awful about it.
I sought the advice of my female colleagues in the Senate. And it was Maggie Hassan, the senator from New Hampshire, who offered me some sage wisdom. "Our kids love us for who we are and the sacrifices we make," she said. "They get it."
I believe you don't have to be a U.S. Senator or a candidate for President of the United States for that to ring true. Time is precious, and so many of us understand the struggle to seek balance.
I ended up missing the graduation ceremony during the day but made it home in time for our time: Family dinner that night.
And Maggie was right. Fortunately for me, both Ella and Cole do get it. They are my endless source of love and pure joy. I am so thankful to Doug, to Kerstin, and most of all, to Ella and Cole. And as our family embarks together on this new journey -- one that has taken me to South Carolina, Iowa, New Hampshire, Ohio, Nevada, and Michigan in the last few weeks alone -- I can say one thing with certainty, my heart wouldn't be whole, nor my life full, without them.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Trump Tells Christians 'You Won't Have to Vote Anymore' If He's Elected
|
Donald Trump, after lamenting that conservative Christians are not "big voters," urged the religious right to turn out for him "just this time."
In the closing minutes of his speech to a gathering of religious conservatives on Friday night, former President Donald J. Trump told Christians that if they voted him into office in November, they would never need to vote again.
"Christians, get out and vote. Just this time," he said at The Believers' Summit, an event hosted by the conservative advocacy group Turning Point Action, in West Palm Beach, Fla. "You won't have to do it anymore, you know what? Four more years, it'll be fixed, it'll be fine, you won't have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians."
Mr. Trump, who never made a particular display of religious observance before entering politics, continued: "I love you, Christians. I'm a Christian. I love you, you got to get out and vote. In four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good, you're not going to have to vote."
Mr. Trump's comments came at the end of a nearly hourlong speech in which he appealed to religious conservatives by promising to defend them from perceived threats from the left. Earlier in his remarks, he lamented that conservative Christians do not vote in large numbers, a complaint he had made repeatedly on the trail.
"They don't vote like they should," Mr. Trump said of Christians. "They're not big voters."
Mr. Trump's suggestion that Christians would not have to vote again if he is elected quickly spread across social media. Some argued that it was a threat that the 2024 election could be the nation's last if he were to win and claimed it was further evidence of an authoritarian, anti-democratic bent he has displayed throughout his political candidacy.
The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment to clarify Mr. Trump's intent.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Trump tells Christians 'you won't have to vote anymore' if he's elected
|
In the closing minutes of his speech to a gathering of religious conservatives Friday night, former President Donald Trump told Christians that if they voted him into office in November, they would never need to vote again.
"Christians, get out and vote. Just this time," he said at The Believers' Summit, an event hosted by conservative advocacy group Turning Point Action, in West Palm Beach, Florida. "You won't have to do it anymore, you know what? Four more years, it'll be fixed, it'll be fine, you won't have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians."
Trump, who never made a particular display of religious observance before entering politics, continued: "I love you, Christians. I'm a Christian. I love you, you got to get out and vote. In four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good, you're not going to have to vote."
Trump's comments came at the end of a nearly hourlong speech in which he appealed to religious conservatives by promising to defend them from perceived threats from the left. Earlier in his remarks, he lamented that conservative Christians do not vote in large numbers, a complaint he had made repeatedly on the trail.
"They don't vote like they should," Trump said of Christians. "They're not big voters."
Trump's suggestion that Christians would not have to vote again if he is elected quickly spread across social media. Some argued that it was a threat that the 2024 election could be the nation's last if he were to win and claimed it was further evidence of an authoritarian, anti-democratic bent he has displayed throughout his political candidacy.
Asked to clarify Trump's intent, Steven Cheung, a spokesperson for his campaign, said in a statement: "President Trump was talking about uniting this country and bringing prosperity to every American, as opposed to the divisive political environment that has sowed so much division and even resulted in an assassination attempt."
The former president -- who continues to falsely insist the 2020 election was rigged, a claim that inspired some of his supporters to storm the Capitol in a bid to keep him in power in 2021 -- has raised alarm from Democrats and some Republicans. He has compared his political opponents to "vermin"; said he would have a prosecutor investigate President Joe Biden and his family; and framed his campaign as one of retribution.
James Singer, a spokesperson for Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign, criticized Trump in a statement, pointing to the Capitol attack and accusing him of an "assault" on democracy.
"After the last election Trump lost, he sent a mob to overturn the results," Singer said. "This campaign, he has promised violence if he loses, the end of our elections if he wins, and the termination of the Constitution to empower him to be a dictator to enact his dangerous Project 2025 agenda on America."
Since his 2020 loss, Trump, who often praises strongmen leaders on the trail, has further embraced a brand of conservatism that experts on autocracy have said veers toward totalitarian.
Trump provoked further outcry when, in an interview with Sean Hannity, he said he would not categorically dismiss concerns that he might abuse presidential power but instead said he would not be a dictator "other than Day One."
Trump added: "We're closing the border. And we're drilling, drilling, drilling. After that, I'm not a dictator."
Trump and his allies have long dismissed the criticism as alarmist political attacks from liberals. They argue that Democrats have been anti-democratic, labeling the criminal cases brought against Trump as an effort to weaponize the justice system.
The Harris campaign -- and the Biden campaign before that -- have consistently attacked Trump as a threat to democracy. More recently, Democrats and their allies have highlighted Project 2025, a set of conservative policy proposals developed by a group that includes former Trump advisers and that would bring about a radical shift to the federal government.
Trump himself was not behind Project 2025, and he has repeatedly tried to distance himself from it. But The New York Times has reported on his plans for a second term, which would include casting aside the norm that gives the Justice Department independence from the White House; appointing ideologically aligned lawyers who would be less resistant to Trump's policies; and a vastly expanded crackdown on immigration that would involve scouring the country for immigrants living in the U.S. without legal permission and deporting millions of people annually.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Google feature omits search results for failed Trump assassination, big tech accused of election manipulation
|
Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind., provides insight on growing fears over the technology on 'The Evening Edit.'
Google users searching for the attempted assassination of former President Trump were miffed when the desired results failed to populate on the search engine.
Instead, the website autocomplete feature omitted the results of the July 13 shooting, drawing criticism from social media users who accused the big tech giant of trying to influence the presidential election.
Screenshots from Google instead showed reccommended search results of the failed assassination of Ronald Reagan and the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, whose death sparked World War I, the shooting of Bob Marley and the failed attempt on former President Gerald Ford.
META ADDING AI DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT FOR 2024 ELECTION ADS
Even the keywords "Trump assassination attempt" yielded no additional terms from Google, according to users.
"Big Tech is trying to interfere in the election AGAIN to help Kamala Harris," Donald Trump Jr., wrote on X. "We all know this is intentional election interference from Google. Truly despicable."
A Google spokesperson told FOX Business that there was no "manual action taken on these predictions."
"Our systems have protections against Autocomplete predictions associated with political violence, which were working as intended prior to this horrific event occurring," the spokesperson said. "We're working on improvements to ensure our systems are more up to date."
GOOGLE TO REQUIRE POLITICAL ADS TO DISCLOSE USE OF AI DURING 2024 ELECTION CYCLE
The company spokesperson said the autocomplete feature is "just a tool to help people save time" and they can still search for anything they want.
"Following this terrible act, people turned to Google to find high quality information - we connected them with helpful results, and will continue to do so," the company said.
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
Big tech companies have been accused by conservatives in the past of silencing conservative voices and omitting search results harmful to Democratic figures.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
What did White House reporters know and when did they know it?
|
What did reporters who cover the White House know, and when did they know it?
As President Biden lurches toward a withdrawal from the 2024 election that seems likelier by the hour, the question of the media's role in hiding his mental decline is taking center stage.
The greatest loser from Biden's catastrophic meltdown during his debate last week with Donald Trump is not Biden himself.
GREG GUTFELD: MEDIA'S SHOCK OVER BIDEN'S DEBATE PERFORMANCE SEEMS LIKE ANOTHER COVER-UP
Somewhere deep inside, Biden may actually be relieved that he may soon be free of the obligation to perform (or pretend to perform) the world's most important job.
No, the greatest loser is the media, specifically elite news organizations like the New York Times that have teams of reporters covering the White House. These teams either entirely missed Biden's sharp cognitive decline - or, worse, actively covered it up.
Either way, a reckoning for the way media outlets have turned into spear-carriers for the Democratic Party may be coming. I hope it will be. It is long overdue.
On Thursday afternoon, New York magazine published a long article about Biden's decline by Olivia Nuzzi, a Washington correspondent who is its top reporter. Nuzzi wrote in the piece, headlined "The Conspiracy of Silence to Protect Joe Biden," that top Democrats had talked about Biden's worsening memory and cognitive problems at least since January.
"Following encounters with the president, they had arrived at the same concern: Could he really do this for another four years? Could he even make it to Election Day?" But the worriers did not want to talk publicly, Nuzzi said. "They were scared and horrified."
Okay. Those folks want Biden to be president. Their allegiance is to him, not the truth. Thus, the conspiracy. And Nuzzi wrote she could not get these high-ranking Democrats on the record - though it is not clear how hard she tried.
Then, late in the piece, Nuzzi made an extraordinary admission - one whose importance she seems not to have recognized.
She, too, had seen Biden's decline up close. So had much of the Washington press corps.
KARINE JEAN-PIERRE ANSWERS POINT-BLANK IF BIDEN SUFFERS FROM DEMENTIA AFTER DISASTROUS DEBATE
As hard as Biden's courtiers try to protect Biden, they cannot keep him from every public interaction. The White House Correspondents' Association Dinner is Washington's premier annual social event, its so-called "nerd prom."
Nuzzi met Biden, whom she had covered closely and extensively during the 2020 campaign, at a photo session and reception before the dinner. Here is how she describes the encounter:
My heart stopped as I extended my hand to greet the president. I tried to make eye contact, but it was like his eyes, though open, were not on... I said "hello." His sweet smile stayed frozen. He spoke very slowly and in a very soft voice. "And what's your name?" he asked.
Exiting the room after the photo, the group of reporters -- not instigated by me, I should note -- made guesses about how dead he appeared to be, percentage wise. "Forty percent?" one of them asked.
Try to wrap your head around what happened that night - April 27, 2024, exactly two months before Joe Biden's infirmities exploded for the world to see.
The reporters who cover the president, who are the eyes and ears of the world on a man who controls a nuclear arsenal capable of killing billions of people, saw his cognitive decline face-to-face.
They didn't write about what they had seen. They didn't investigate it.
They joked about it. With each other. Privately. Nuzzi and the rest were part of the "conspiracy of silence" as much as any Democratic donor.
And in June, when even the most tightly controlled public events could not hide Biden's infirmities, they wrote of "cheap fakes" (meaning, accurate and real videos) and "misinformation." Only now that the world knows have they turned on Biden - viciously, as I wrote Wednesday.
Every last one of them should be ashamed. And wondering how they allowed their Democratic partisanship and hatred for Donald Trump and in-group thinking to overcome their most basic instincts to chase the truth and give it to the readers and viewers who pay their bills.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
I almost died working as a foreign correspondent for the New York Times in Iraq 20 years ago. That's not an exaggeration. I cannot believe what the Times and the rest of the elite media have become. I am heartbroken today.
This is the last and greatest in a series of media catastrophes over the last several years. They all have in common an unwillingness to admit, much less investigate, hard truths that Democrats find unpleasant.
If it does not provoke a reckoning, nothing will. And places like the Times will lose whatever shreds of credibility they have left.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
55 Things to Know About J.D. Vance, Trump's VP Pick
|
That is the question that has dogged the 39-year-old senator from Ohio along his peculiar path to power, which began in 2016 with the publication of his best-selling memoir Hillbilly Elegy and
culminated this week when Donald Trump selected him as a running mate for the 2024 election.
During those eight years, Vance has undergone a dramatic -- and, in the eyes of his critics, highly dubious -- political transformation: from blue-collar bard and self-described "Never Trump" conservative to hard-edged MAGA loyalist and dogged defender of the former president. Vance says he's had a genuine change of heart about Trump; his critics say he's cynically molded himself to the times.
Now, Vance is stepping into a role that has at times seemed un-fillable: the political partner to a man who considers himself to be politically peerless. In the Senate, Vance has cultivated a dual identity as key Trump ally and leader of the GOP's populist-national wing. But who will he be as a vice-presidential candidate?
Here -- culled from his memoir, his writing and public remarks, his voluminous tweets and an extensive series of interviews he conducted with POLITICO Magazine earlier this year -- are some clues.
1.
"I'll be the first to admit that I've accomplished nothing great in my life," Vance wrote in the introduction to Hillbilly Elegy, his best-selling 2016 memoir about his life growing up in a working-class family in post-industrial Ohio. "I am not a senator, a governor, or a former cabinet secretary. I haven't started a billion-dollar company or a world-changing non-profit."
2.
In 2015, two years after graduating from Yale Law School, Vance joined Mithril Capital, a venture capital firm run by the silicon-valley scion Peter Thiel.
3.
In 2016, he announced his plans to move back to Ohio from California to start Our Ohio Renewal, a nonprofit dedicated to "mak[ing] it easier for disadvantaged children to achieve their dreams."
4.
In November 2022, he was elected to the United States Senate from Ohio with the help of over $10 million in donations from Thiel. It was his first public office.
Reflecting on his first encounter with Thiel in 2011, Vance wrote: "[Thiel] articulated a feeling ... that I was obsessed with achievement in [itself] not as an end to something meaningful, but to win a social competition. My worry that I had prioritized striving over character took on a heightened significance: striving for what?"
7.
He was born James Donald Bowman on Aug. 2, 1984, in Middletown, Ohio, an industrial city 30 miles north of Cincinnati and 20 miles south of Dayton.
8.
His maternal grandparents, Jim and Bonnie Vance -- known as "Papaw "and "Mamaw" -- moved to Middletown in the late 1940s from Jackson, Kentucky, a holler in the heart of southeastern Kentucky's coal region. Jim was 16; Bonnie was 13 -- and pregnant with Jim's child. They were unmarried at the time.
9.
Vance is descended from "hillbilly royalty" on his father's side: His grandfather's distant cousin -- also named Jim Vance -- married into the Hatfield family and is rumored to have committed the murder that instigated the legendary Hatfield-McCoy feud.
10.
Vance's biological parents, Donald Bowman and Bev Vance, divorced when he was a toddler. He was later adopted by his mother's new husband, Bob Hamel, and changed his name to James David Hamel. The name change preserved his nickname, J.D.
11.
Bev and Bob later divorced, and Bev struggled with drug addiction. Vance was raised primarily by his grandparents -- who were, he wrote in Hillbilly Elegy, "without question or qualification, the best things that ever happened to me."
12.
Mamaw and Papaw were union Democrats (except in 1984, when Papaw voted for Ronald Reagan). In Hillbilly Elegy, Vance described their political outlook as: "All politicians might be crooks, but if there were any exceptions, they were undoubtedly members of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal coalition."
13.
Growing up, Vance spent his summer vacations visiting his great-grandmother and extended family in Jackson. "I always distinguished 'my address' from 'my home,'" he wrote in Hillbilly Elegy. "My address was where I spent most of my time with my mother and sister, wherever that might be. But my home never changed: my great-grandmother's house, in the holler, in Jackson, Kentucky."
14.
"To understand me, you must understand that I am a Scots-Irish hillbilly at heart," he wrote in Hillbilly Elegy. This Scots-Irish legacy entailed "many good traits ... but also many bad ones. We do not like outsiders or people who are different from us, whether the difference lies in how they look, how they act, or, most importantly, how they talk."
15.
After graduating from Middletown High School in 2003, he enlisted in the Marine Corps and served in Iraq as a corporal with the Public Affairs section of the 2 Marine Aircraft Wing. "I served my country honorably, and I saw when I went to Iraq that I had been lied to -- that the promises of the foreign policy establishment were a complete joke," he has said.
16.
He graduated from Ohio State University with a degree in political science and philosophy, before enrolling at Yale Law School in 2010.
17.
While at Yale, he attended a talk by Thiel about technological stagnation and the decline of American elites: "He saw these two trends ... as connected," Vance later recalled of his first encounter with Thiel. "If technological innovation were actually driving real prosperity, our elites wouldn't feel increasingly competitive with one another over a dwindling number of prestigious outcomes." Vance has called Thiel's talk "the most significant moment" of his time at Yale.
Another significant moment of his time at Yale: meeting Usha Chilukuri, his future wife and the mother of his three children. The couple married in 2014 and held a separate ceremony where they were blessed by a Hindu pundit.
20.
Chilukuri went on to clerk for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and then-D.C. Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh. She is now a litigator at the white-shoe firm Munger, Tolles & Olson. "I joked with a buddy that if she had possessed a terrible personality, she would have made an excellent heroine in an Ayn Rand novel, but she had a great sense of humor," Vance wrote in his memoir. Despite her conservative clerkships, colleagues described her as "liberal or moderate."
21.
Vance's memoir, Hillbilly Elegy was published on June 28, 2016. The book argued that the decline of post-industrial America was due in large part to the social pathologies of the white working class, rather than the decline of the industrial economy in the U.S. "There is a lack of agency here [in Middletown] -- a feeling that you have little control over your life and a willingness to blame everyone but yourself," Vance wrote.
22.
In a review, the New York Times called the book "a compassionate, discerning sociological analysis of the white underclass that has helped drive the politics of rebellion, particularly the ascent of Donald J. Trump."
The New Republic trashed it as "little more than a list of myths about welfare queens repackaged as a primer on the white working class."
"I go back and forth between thinking Trump is a cynical asshole like Nixon who wouldn't be that bad (and might even prove useful) or that he's America's Hitler," he wrote to a friend in February 2016. He ended up voting for independent Evan McMullin.
During the Trump years, Vance says, he came to support Trump's policies -- and was radicalized by liberals' angry reaction to Trump. "If you even acknowledged that there were reasonable things that Donald Trump was saying, there was this complete overreaction," he has said.
31.
He was baptized into the Catholic church in August 2019. At the time, he credited his conversion to his exposure -- via Thiel -- to the writings of the French philosopher René Girard, whom Thiel studied under at Stanford University. Girard is most famous for his theory of "mimetic desire": that human beings imitate the desires of their peers, ultimately giving rise to rivalries and violent conflicts that are resolved by "scapegoating" a common enemy.
"He is thoroughgoingly illiberal in his instincts," a friend of Vance's from Yale has said. "I don't mean it as a slur. I mean it in a technical sense. He is skeptical of the political project of enlightenment liberalism, like, We're all just autonomous individuals trying to self-actualize and maximize our own interests."
In November 2020, one week after the presidential election, Netflix released a film adaptation of Hillbilly Elegy, directed by Ron Howard and starring Gabriel Basso as Vance, Glenn Close as Mamaw and Amy Adams as Bev Vance. The movie was widely panned, with the New Yorker calling it "a libertarian's fantasy." Friends of Vance have said that the negative reaction to the film was the "last straw" of Vance's estrangement from elite liberal society.
"I regret being wrong about the guy," Vance said about Trump several days later on the campaign trail. "I think he was a good president, I think he made a lot of good decisions for people, and I think he took a lot of flak." He later added: "He's the best president of my lifetime.
In his victory speech, he thanked his Mamaw: "You're not always going to agree with every vote that I take, and you're not going to agree with every single amendment that I offer in the United States Senate, but I will never forget the woman who raised me," he told the audience.
43.
In the Senate, he has emerged as a dogged defender of Trump and the standard-bearer of the "New Right," a loose movement of young conservatives trying to push the Republican Party in a more populist, nationalist and culturally conservative direction.
44.
His most ambitious legislative initiatives have arisen from partnerships with progressive Democrats: a sweeping railway safety reform bill co-authored by Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and an executive pay claw-back provision drafted with Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). Neither bill has received a vote on the Senate floor.
45.
He is a leading critic of U.S. support for Ukraine. "I got to be honest with you, I don't really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another," Vance told Steve Bannon in an interview in 2022.
46.
He has suggested that the Biden administration is allowing fentanyl to cross the Southern border as part of a deliberate strategy to kill Republican voters: "If you wanted to kill a bunch of MAGA voters in the middle of the heartland, how better than to target them and their kids with this deadly fentanyl. . . . It does look intentional. It's like Joe Biden wants to punish the people who didn't vote for him."
47.
In June 2023, he put a hold on all Biden administration appointments to the Justice Department to protest the indictments of Donald Trump. He has called Trump's hush-money trial in New York a "threat to American democracy."
48.
He believes that "the culture war is class war" -- that pushing back against the cultural values of progressive elites is necessary to advance the economic and political interests of the working class. In the Senate, his culture war initiatives include a bill criminalizing gender-affirming care for transgender kids, a ban on federal mask mandates, and crack-down on affirmative action policies at colleges and universities. He public supports a 15-week abortion ban with exceptions for rape, incest and threats to the life of the mother.
He has compared the current moment in American history to the end of the Roman Republic. "We are in a late republican period" in America he said on a podcast appearance in 2022. "If we're going to push back against it, we're going to have to get pretty wild, and pretty far out there, and go in directions that a lot of conservatives right now are uncomfortable with."
51.
He has said that if he had been in Mike Pence's shoes in 2021, he would not have certified the results of the 2020 election: "If I had been vice president, I would have told the states, like Pennsylvania, Georgia and so many others, that we needed to have multiple slates of electors and I think the U.S. Congress should have fought over it from there," he said in February.
52.
He has encouraged Trump to defy the Supreme Court if the justices prevent him from firing executive branch officials.
"Trump will, at most, serve four years in the White House," Vance has said. "There is a big question about what comes after him."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Republicans say Schumer must act on voter proof of citizenship bill if Democrat 'really cares about democracy'
|
Reps. Claudia Tenney and Anthony D'Esposito, both from New York, and Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen spoke to Fox News Digital at the Republican National Convention about the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act.
Republicans have been urging Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to pick up a key legislative proposal that would require states to verify proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections.
They argue the bill is critical to ensuring election integrity in November, but it has so far stalled in the upper chamber.
Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., co-chair of the House Election Integrity Caucus, spoke to Fox News Digital about this on the sidelines of the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wis.
She described election integrity as the "premiere issue" of the 2024 election cycle, noting that only five Democrats voted in favor of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which was introduced by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah. The bill aims to require states to obtain proof of citizenship - in person - when registering an individual to vote and require states to remove non-citizens from existing voter rolls.
"Everyone should be talking about the SAVE Act and the fact that 198 Democrats voted for non-citizen voting in our elections," Tenney said. "Nothing interferes more with our elections and our democratic process than to allow people who have not created and given up the responsibilities of citizenship, but are receiving the benefits of citizenship. And I think that's really important. One citizen, one vote."
5 KEY TAKEAWAYS OF BIDEN'S ADDRESS TO THE NATION FROM THE OVAL OFFICE
"Make sure that no one's vote is diluted, that that's sacred, the right to vote. The most profound expression of our self-governance is that sacred right to vote," she said.
Rep. Anthony D'Esposito, R-N.Y., also criticized Schumer for not calling the bill for a vote in the Senate given there have been more than 10 million known encounters of people illegally crossing American borders during the Biden administration and another estimated 2 million known "got-a-ways" who evaded Border Patrol and escaped into the U.S. interior.
"We've been urging Chuck Schumer to take a lot of Republican legislation up over the 118th Congress. I mean, you rewind back to last April when we passed H.R.2, the Secure the Border Act. It would have given us the ability to secure our border. It was a border security bill. And it would have, probably avoided the over 10 million people that have come into this country illegally, the over 2 million known got-a-ways that are now in this country and millions more," said D'Esposito, who sits on the House Administration Committee, which oversees the Federal Elections Commission and got the SAVE Act to the floor to pass.
"That is sitting on Chuck Schumer's desk collecting dust," D'Esposito said. "The SAVE Act says it all. And, you know, if there's people that are wondering and they lay in bed at night as so often I do and think to yourself, 'Well, why do the Democrats keep allowing all these people to come into this country illegally?' Well, the fact that nearly 200 people voted against the SAVE Act, the fact that Chuck Schumer still has yet to take it up in the Senate and probably won't, is an indicator as to exactly why that border's wide open."
Democrats have been scrambling after President Biden made the bombshell announcement Sunday that he was discontinuing his bid for a second term and endorsing Vice President Harris.
As Harris heads out on the campaign trail for the first time since entering the race, and with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressing Congress last week, the election integrity bill has fallen to the back burner.
"My senator, one of my senators, Sen. Chuck Schumer, should be taking this bill up immediately," Tenney told Fox News Digital. "If he really cares about democracy, and he really cares about the rule of law, and he really cares about the citizens that we represent in the state of New York and across this nation. He should tell every Democrat to vote for the SAVE Act in the Senate."
Fox News Digital reached out to Schumer's office seeking comment, but they did not respond.
Schumer, who initially held off on doing so when the charges were first brought, called on Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., to resign after being convicted in a federal corruption case, and Menendez complied on Tuesday, revealing he would resign from the upper chamber after Aug. 20. Tenney suggested that the change in balance of power could result in the SAVE Act coming to a vote after all.
"That could tip the balance of power in the Senate and could maybe make Chuck Schumer recognize that a couple of vulnerable Democrats are not going to want to vote against the SAVE Act," Tenney said.
Biden had promised to veto the legislation if it passes. Doing so, Tenney argued, would be the "death knell" for the election of Democrats. "If you're going to undermine citizens of this great country by saying that their vote is not important in a democracy, which the Democrats decry all the time, then you are going to undermine our system of government," she said.
DEMOCRATS TO CONFIRM NOMINEES BY VIRTUAL ROLL CALL WEEKS BEFORE DNC IN CHICAGO TO AVOID LEGAL CHALLENGES
President Biden in 2021 signed Executive Order 14019, which was billed by the White House as "promoting access to voting." But Republicans argue the order's broad interpretation of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993 essentially mobilizes the federal government apparatus to become voter registration agencies.
"That executive order tasked federal agencies to become vote collection sites," Tenney said. "I think it's a violation of the Hatch Act, which is undermining an election as well."
Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen, a Republican, has been sounding the alarm about how state agencies receiving federal funding are required under Biden's executive order to send out voter registration information to anyone who comes into contact with those agencies without any verification of citizenship.
Essentially, Allen told Fox News Digital at the convention, the order "really weaponizes and federalizes the entire federal government apparatus to be voter registration agencies."
"I just don't believe the federal government has any role in voter registration that should be left to the states," he said. "Voter file maintenance is the foundation of election integrity."
"We have reached out to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services and asked them, please send us a list of your legal non-citizens that you have on file so we can run them against our voter file to make sure no one slipped through the crack," he said. "But unfortunately, they have denied access to that data. But we're going to keep pushing. I think there's a crack in the door, hopefully, for us to get our hands on that data. That's data that is funded by you as a taxpayer, me as a taxpayer. Everyone funds those lists. And it just makes common sense that only American citizens should be voting in our American elections."
Allen said he had a chance to visit with House Speaker Mike Johnson while at the convention to discuss the SAVE Act.
"That 198 Democrat members of Congress would vote against giving us, as secretaries of state around the country, the tools to verify citizenship is just beyond me. I don't understand it. But I told Speaker Johnson, keep pushing. That's why we need to get Trump back in the White House. That's why we need to have a Senate GOP majority and a House GOP majority," Allen said.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
As for Schumer, Allen urged the Senate majority leader to reconsider calling the bill up for a vote.
"Only American citizens should be voting in our elections," Allen said. "Give us the tools, the secretaries of state around the country, to verify citizenship. Allow us to do that, and to make sure we have clean voter files."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Trump did something he's never done before with RNC speech. Now, the election may already be over
|
By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News' Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.
Donald Trump may well have sealed the outcome of the 2024 election with a performance on Thursday night in Milwaukee that has largely been unmatched in recent American political history.
The former president eschewed the polarization and division that has marked much of his rhetoric in the past. In his speech officially accepting the Republican Party's nomination there were only a couple of references to the 2020 election. Trump was able to hit on key messages when speaking about topics like inflation, and especially immigration, in ways that were compelling and arguably responsive to the fundamental concerns of Americans.
I say this not to engage in hyperbole, as I have never been -- and am not now -- a Trump supporter. But as a political analyst, you have to acknowledge reality. And the reality of this speech was simple: Trump spoke of the American Dream, he spoke of bringing people together, he spoke of helping African-Americans, Hispanics and those who have been left behind.
In short, Trump did something he has virtually never done before: speak to all the American people. As he said, he wanted to speak not to 50 percent but to 100 percent of the American people.
TRUMP PREACHES UNITY AS HE ACCEPTS GOP PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION DAYS AFTER SURVIVING ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT
Trump also understood that this was not a time to attack President Joe Biden personally or even by name. His one reference to Biden was an aside to let the crowd in Milwaukee, and indeed around the country, know what he was thinking at a time when the incumbent president is still reeling from his poor debate performance and from COVID, not to make him appear like a victim. Rather, Trump was able to compellingly crystallize the challenges the American people have with the current administration and offer a degree of reassurance that things would be different under his leadership.
To be sure, Trump did not offer specific policy recommendations in his speech beyond closing the border and cutting taxes. But rather there was a degree of optimism and confidence in his remarks that has been noticeably absent from the darker and more pessimistic speeches the 45th president of the United States has delivered over the years.
DONALD TRUMP OFFICIALLY ACCEPTS GOP NOMINATION FOR POTUS, RECOUNTS ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT
He also, in a way that was tasteful and empathetic, spoke about what happened to him last Saturday in Butler Township, Pa. He discussed his experience of the assassination attempt in a way that had me on the edge of my chair, even though I knew the story quite well and had seen the video many times.
Put another way, the entire speech and its production made Trump much more likable and much more sympathetic than he's ever been before.
To be sure, circumstances, however difficult and challenging they may have been to get to this point, worked to help the former president. But, by any measure, he rose to the occasion and offered the American people something profound that has been missing under the current administration: hope, strength and a sense that the best was yet to come for our nation.
EMOTIONAL TRIBUTE TO COREY COMPERATORE DURING RNC SPEECH: 'SPIRIT THAT FORGED AMERICA'
I fully expect Trump to increase his standing in the polls as a result of this week. I say that not only because of his Thursday night address, but also because of the entire convention. It was among the best, if not the best, choreographed and produced shows I have seen in 50 years of watching American political conventions.
The effort to reach working people and those who enjoy sports like pro-wrestling and the UFC spoke to the Republicans' desire to broaden their constituency and solidify their position as the party of working Americans.
I also believe that, if I am right, and Trump does go up in the polls after the GOP convention, the support that has been steadily eroding for Joe Biden since his terrible debate performance just three weeks ago, will only increase and the pressure on him to quit the race will be inexorable. Indeed, it already appears now to be inevitable.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
It's hard to see how Joe Biden, Kamala Harris or whoever the Democratic nominee is will compete with this speech and the events of this week. And I fully expect that the division inside the Democratic Party will only increase as a result of the success of the Republican convention.
As an American, I'm pleased, indeed proud, that the Republicans explicitly and I think, for the first time, are seeking to unify the entire country and put aside the bitterness and resentment that has so frequently been evident.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
As a Democrat, I'm not sure I know how my party will respond in a month or so to the Trump candidacy. For now, it's enough to say that the challenges it is facing have only grown larger and more substantial after this week after a speech and convention that could only be called an unqualified success. The events and address in Milwaukee will stand up well to whatever attempts the mainstream media make to discredit Trump and his speech. (And they have already begun.)
Some may say that Trump's speech went on too long on Thursday night. And that may be true. But the American people, unlike political commentators, simply turn the television off, they don't give the candidate demerits for being long-winded.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Netflix Co-Founder Hastings Gives $7 Million to Pro-Harris PAC, Source Says
|
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings has donated $7 million to a super PAC that supports Vice President Kamala Harris' run for U.S. president, a source close to Hastings said on Tuesday.
The source was confirming a report published by The Information earlier in the day.
It is the largest political donation by Hastings to a single candidate, the publication said.
Hastings congratulated Harris on Monday after she received the support of a majority of Democratic delegates to become the party nominee against Republican Donald Trump in November.
"Congrats to Kamala Harris -- now it is time to win," he wrote in a post on social media platform X.
President Joe Biden stepped aside as the Democratic candidate for the 2024 election and endorsed Harris on Sunday following pressure from Democrats in Congress and donors including Hastings.
Harris' campaign raised $81 million in the 24 hours following Biden's exit, the most for a single day in the 2024 campaign for either party.
Hastings co-founded Netflix in 1997 and stepped down as CEO in 2023. He now serves as executive chairman of the Netflix board.
(Reporting by Lisa Richwine in Los Angeles and Gursimran Kaur in Bengaluru; Editing by Leslie Adler)
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Iran trying to sabotage Trump's presidential campaign: US intelligence
|
The FBI on Monday shared new details regarding their investigation into an assassination attempt against former President Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13.
U.S. intelligence officials believe that Iran is trying to sabotage former President Trump's presidential campaign through online influence operations, according to a press briefing on Monday.
Speaking to reporters, an official with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) said that U.S. spy agencies "observed Tehran working to influence the presidential election," likely because Iranian leaders want to avoid increased tensions with the U.S.
The official didn't directly say that Iran was trying to undermine Trump, but that American spies "haven't observed a shift in Iran's preferences" since 2020, meaning that Iran was still targeting Trump.
During the briefing, an intelligence official also said that Iran is utilizing "vast webs of online personas and propaganda mills to spread disinformation," in addition to different online campaigns.
TRUMP TELLS JESSE WATTERS THAT HE WAS NOT WARNED ABOUT GUNMAN, DESPITE REPORTS
Earlier in July, Tehran was accused of plotting to kill Trump after a gunman shot the former president at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13. Iran's Permanent Mission to the United Nations told Fox News Digital that the claims were "unsubstantiated and malicious."
"From the perspective of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Trump is a criminal who must be prosecuted and punished in a court of law for ordering the assassination of General Soleimani," the permanent mission said in a statement. "Iran has chosen the legal path to bring him to justice."
Iran is not the only foreign adversary accused of meddling with the 2024 presidential election. On July 10, ODNI officials called Russia the "preeminent threat" to the election.
Russia is "undertaking a whole-of-government approach to influence the election, including the presidential race, Congress and public opinion," an intelligence official said during the July 10 briefing, adding that Russia has grown "more sophisticated" in election interference. The country generally targets the Democratic Party in U.S. elections.
WATCH: THOUSANDS DESCEND ON MICHIGAN TOWN FOR FIRST TRUMP RALLY SINCE FAILED ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT
According to the Director of National Intelligence's latest report on Russia, the Kremlin targets the Democratic Party to diminish U.S. support for Ukraine, among other reasons.
"We assess that the Russian government and its proxies sought to denigrate the Democratic Party before the midterms and undermine confidence in the election, most likely to weaken U.S. support for Ukraine, and to erode trust in U.S. democratic institutions," the report reads.
Per the July 10 ODNI briefing, Russia is reportedly also using artificial intelligence to mimic American Southern and Midwestern accents on social media.
"Foreign adversaries continue to experiment with and have adopted at least some generative AI tools to more quickly and cheaply generate authentic looking content tailored primarily for social media platforms that can target specific audiences including in the U.S.," an ODNI official said.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Fox News Digital reached out to the Trump campaign for comment.
Fox News Digital's Michael Dorgan, Louis Casiano and David Spunt contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Trump urges Christians to vote, says they won't have to again if he wins 2024 election
|
WASHINGTON - Former President Donald Trump implored Christians attending a summit hosted by the conservative group Turning Point Action to vote in November, saying they wouldn't have to cast a ballot again if he wins the presidency because "it'll be fixed."
"I don't care how, but you have to get out and vote," Trump told the crowd at Turning Point Action's Believer's Summit. "Christians get out and vote. Just this time. You won't have to do it anymore."
"In four more years, you know what? It'll be fixed. It'll be fine. You won't have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians," Trump added during his 70-minute long speech. "We'll have it fixed so good. You're not going to have to vote."
He delivered the comments during a keynote speech at Turning Point Action's Believers' Summit in West Palm Beach, Fla. The event was aimed at "empowering attendees with practical knowledge and strategies to live out their faith boldly and counteract the prevailing 'woke' narratives with grace, truth, and conviction, rooted in the Gospel," according to the group's website.
Politically conservative Christian voters are a key segment of Trump's base that he must turnout in order to prevail in November's election.
Recent polls published since President Joe Biden exited the 2024 race show Trump's lead in the race slipping. He is now neck-and-neck with likely Democratic nominee Vice President Kamala Harris.
In the aftermath of the assassination attempt against him, Trump has also emerged as an unlikely spiritual figurehead. During a speech at the Republican National Convention in mid-July, Trump said he felt like he had God on his side as bullets whizzed by, coming within inches of killing him.
If he wins the 2024 election, Trump won't be able to run for the presidency again. The 22 Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prevents presidents from serving more than twice.
But the GOP presidential nominee also has a history of using authoritarian rhetoric on the campaign trail. In December, he suggested that he would be a dictator for "one day" if elected again.
At a rally in Michigan last weekend, Trump hailed Xi Jinping of China as a "brilliant man" for ruling "with an iron fist" over the countries 1.4 billion people. He also praised Hungary's Viktor Orbán and Russia's Vladimir Putin as "tough" and "smart" leaders.
Trump is facing multiple felony charges for allegedly conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The ex-president has spread false claims that widespread voter fraud led him to lose the race to President Joe Biden. There is no evidence to back the claims.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Biden announces cap on rent prices
|
President Joe Biden has announced a new plan to halt rent increases in the US, as Americans battle soaring housing prices.
Mr Biden's proposal - which requires congressional approval - would cut off tax credits for landlords who try to raise rent by more than 5%.
The policy would apply to landlords who own more than 50 units, comprising about 20 million rental units across the country, according to the Biden administration.
Mr Biden said he hoped this plan would send a "clear message to corporate landlords".
"Rent is too high and buying a home is out of reach for too many working families and young Americans, after decades of failure to build enough homes," the president said in a statement. "I'm determined to turn that around."
The proposal does include an exception for new construction and buildings undergoing substantive renovations. As the US faces low housing stock, this carve out is aimed at encouraging new rental property construction to increase the number of apartments and homes available.
The announcement comes as Mr Biden is set to make a campaign stop in Las Vegas, Nevada, while Republicans gather in Milwaukee, Wisconsin for the party's national convention.
His proposal faces an uphill battle for approval in Congress, with administration officials reportedly acknowledging the president would have to focus on fighting for the housing plan during a second term.
The plan is aimed at stopping corporate landlords who are seeking to take advantage of the US housing shortage by raising rents at a higher rate than their own costs have increased, Mr Biden said.
Nationwide, rent prices have risen by 21% since January 2021, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis.
Home prices are on the rise, too.
In early 2024, home prices hit an all-time record, rising 6.4% from February 2023 to 2024, according to a new report from the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies.
Mr Biden's plan to lower housing costs come as recent polls show he is trailing his rival, former President Donald Trump, in the 2024 presidential race.
Surveys show the economy is top of mind for voters in the 2024 election, with rising housing costs and ongoing inflation pressures among the top concerns.
As a part of his housing announcement, Mr Biden said he would also direct federal agencies to assess whether public land could be repurposed to build affordable housing options.
In Nevada, where Mr Biden is set to speak on Tuesday, the federal government is looking at 562 acres of public land in the Las Vegas Valley that could be used for affordable housing, according to a White House fact sheet.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Rishi Sunak: A quick guide to the UK's former prime minister
|
Rishi Sunak resigned as prime minister on Friday 5 July after losing the 2024 election. Here's what you need to know about him.
Rishi Sunak was appointed as leader of the Conservative Party on 25 October 2022. In the 2024 election, Labour won the most seats in Parliament, meaning they will form the next government.
Mr Sunak won in his constituency of Richmond in North Yorkshire, where he told supporters: "The British people have delivered a sobering verdict tonight, there is much to learn... and I take responsibility for the loss."
He then resigned as prime minister and leader of the Conservative Party but will remain an MP.
Mr Sunak lost to Liz Truss in a Conservative Party leadership race in September 2022, after Boris Johnson resigned as prime minister. But Truss also resigned, just six weeks after becoming PM, following her decisions which damaged the economy.
Mr Sunak quickly secured the support of his fellow Conservative MPs to secure his place at No 10.
Shortly after becoming PM, Sunak promised to halve inflation, grow the economy, reduce government debt, cut NHS waiting lists, and stop illegal immigrants coming to the UK in small boats across the Channel.
He succeeded in the first two promises, but the other three all got worse during his time in charge.
His parents came to the UK from east Africa and are both of Indian origin. Mr Sunak was born in Southampton in 1980, where his father was a GP and his mother ran a pharmacy. He went to the boarding school Winchester College, then studied Philosophy, Politics and Economics at Oxford, and business at Stanford in America. He is now the first British Asian prime minister.
Mr Sunak was first elected as an MP in 2015. But he rose quickly through the Conservative Party and was made finance minister - or chancellor - in February 2020 under Boris Johnson.
As Mr Johnson's chancellor, Mr Sunak was behind the financial aid during lockdowns - including furlough payments and the "Eat Out to Help Out" scheme for restaurants.
His wife is Akshata Murty, the daughter of Indian billionaire Narayana Murthy. Mr Sunak himself worked for investment bank Goldman Sachs and at two hedge funds before becoming an MP.
The Sunday Times Rich List estimated the couple's fortune to be worth about £651m in 2024, making them richer than the king. They have two daughters.
In 2022, it emerged Akshata Murthy paid no UK tax on big earnings abroad, which is legal as an Indian citizen. Mr Sunak defended his wife saying: "to smear my wife to get at me is awful".
Eventually she agreed to start paying the taxes. We also found out he temporarily had a US green card, allowing him to live permanently in America while he was the UK's chancellor.
In 2016, he told a group of schoolchildren that he originally wanted to be a Jedi Knight when he grew up. His favourite Star Wars film is The Empire Strikes Back.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
MAGA makes racist attacks against JD Vance's Wife
|
Extremist figures and members of the Make America Great Again movement have criticized the wife of Ohio Senator JD Vance after former President Donald Trump named him as his running mate in the 2024 election.
Usha Vance, the daughter of Indian immigrants, was raised in San Diego before meeting her husband at Yale Law School. They were married in 2014 and later blessed by a Hindu pundit in a separate ceremony, The New York Times reported.
In the wake of Trump's vice presidential announcement on Monday, numerous conservative and far-right figures have taken to social media to launch racist attacks against Usha Vance because of her Indian heritage and the assumption that her influence on her husband's political career means the Republican Party will be softer on immigration.
"I'm sure this guy is going to be great on immigration," Jaden McNeil, a far-right activist and the founder of America First Students, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, while sharing a picture of the Vances with their newborn baby.
Nick Fuentes, a white supremacist who visited Trump at his Mar-a-Lago home along with rapper Kanye West in November 2022, suggested that Vance would not be a "defender of white identity" because of his wife's Indian heritage.
"Who is this guy, really?" Fuentes said on his podcast. "Do we really expect that the guy who has an Indian wife and named their kid Vivek is going to support white identity?"
Vincent James Foxx, who was present at the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, wrote on X: "JD Vance gets tapped as VP and immediately there's a Hindu prayer at the RNC. Next we'll see Sen. Mike Lee and JD Vance team up to convince Trump to let in 10 million Indian immigrants. Green cards on diplomas!"
Conservative commentator Stew Peters wrote, "There is an obvious Indian coup taking place in the US right before our eyes," while sharing a screenshot of an article about the Vances' three children.
Saira Rao, a progressive activist and former Democratic congressional hopeful, also attacked Usha Vance on X.
"Usha Vance, the latest Indian American woman delighted to do the bidding of white supremacy. Who needs white women when brown ones are ready to serve," Rao wrote.
Newsweek contacted JD Vance's office for comment via email.
After graduating from Yale in 2013, Usha Vance worked as a clerk for Brett Kavanaugh, now an associate justice on the Supreme Court, when he served as an appeals court judge in Washington, D.C. She also worked as a law clerk to Chief Justice John Roberts.
Usha Vance went on to work as an attorney at Munger, Tolles and Olson, a prestigious law firm. She left the firm following Trump's announcement that her husband would be his new running mate.
"Usha has informed us she has decided to leave the firm," Munger, Tolles and Olson told the Associated Press. "Usha has been an excellent lawyer and colleague, and we thank her for her years of work and wish her the best in her future career."
Florida Representative Anna Paulina Luna was among the MAGA figures who praised Usha Vance as "extremely impressive."
"Mom of 3, met JD at Yale Law School, degrees from Yale and Cambridge, corporate litigator, clerked for Supreme Court justices," Luna wrote on X.
JD Vance's confirmation as the Republican Party's vice presidential nominee on Monday caps off a major rise that has seen the Hillbilly Elegy author move, in two years, from political novice to potentially in line for the presidency.
In his bestselling memoir, JD Vance praised his wife. "Even at my best, I'm a delayed explosion -- I can be defused, but only with skill and precision," he wrote. "It's not just that I've learned to control myself but that Usha has learned how to manage me."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Trump's 'secretary of retribution' has a 'target list' of 350 people he wants arrested
|
Ivan Raiklin takes the stage to speak at a New Hampshire Election Security Seminar presented by the New Hampshire Voter Integrity Group in Manchester, New Hampshire, U.S., November 19, 2021. REUTERS/Brian Snyder
Retribution is at the center of Donald Trump's third presidential election campaign.
"I am your warrior," Trump proclaimed earlier this year. "I am your justice, and for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution."
Trump's loyal surrogates have duly embraced the project -- perhaps no one more zealously than Ivan Raiklin, a retired Army Reserve lieutenant colonel and former U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency employee, who bills himself as the former and would-be president's "future secretary of retribution."
Raiklin is seeking to enlist so-called "constitutional" sheriffs in rural, conservative counties across the country to detain Trump's political enemies. Or, as he says, carry out "live-streamed swatting raids" against individuals on his "Deep State target list."
"This is a deadly serious report," Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) told Raw Story. "A retired U.S. military officer has drawn up a 'Deep State target list' of public officials he considers traitors, along with our family members and staff. His hit list is a vigilante death warrant for hundreds of Americans and a clear and present danger to the survival of American democracy and freedom.
READ: Trump's far-right army is threatening bloodshed -- believe them
Raskin called on House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to "denounce this dangerous plot and to repudiate threats of, and planning for, political violence from any quarter. Bipartisan opposition to vigilante violence and assassination plots is essential for American government to continue."
The list Raiklin has been circulating since January is extensive.
It includes numerous Democratic and Republican elected officials; FBI and intelligence officials; members of the House Select January 6 Committee; U.S. Capitol Police officers and civilian employees; witnesses in Trump's two impeachment trials and the Jan. 6 committee hearings; and journalists from publications ranging from CNN and the Washington Post to Reuters and Raw Story -- all considered political enemies of Trump.
Julie Farnam, a former U.S. Capitol Police employee named on the list who as assistant director of intelligence and interagency coordination warned about the potential for violence in advance of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack, said she would not be intimidated by the list.
"Any hit list is designed to impart the silence and fear of those named on it," Farnam told Raw Story. "But silence is victory for those who write such lists. Conversely, speaking the truth without fear will always be the undoing of those who seek to intimidate and spread hate in our world. I can never be silenced."
In addition to Farnam, the list includes nine current or former U.S. Capitol Police employees. The agency declined to comment for this story.
Raw Story is not publishing the full list given the potential risk posed to people unaware that they're on it.
One individual named on the list who spoke on condition of anonymity noted that Raiklin is associated with retired Lt. General Michael Flynn.
"And Trump himself has repeated on dozens of occasions calls for revenge, retribution and retaliation," the person told Raw Story. "This is another example of that broader phenomenon of revenge against political enemies that animates the former president and his entire movement, and for that reason should concern us all."
The Trump campaign did not respond to emails requesting comment for this story.
'Attack on our democracy'
The accusations of "treason" and other imagined offenses leveled by Raiklin against these individuals are typically based on fanciful legal theories and outlandish factual claims, if anything at all.
For example: Raiklin, in a podcast, suggested without evidence that the unidentified person responsible for setting pipe bombs outside the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee on Jan. 6, 2021, was "a subordinate-surrogate of the Capitol Police Board," which oversees the Capitol Police.
But Raiklin is nothing if not self-assured that the "evidence" he's gathering on anti-Trump "deep state" plotters is real. So real, it seems, that Raiklin claims the material -- fully revealed -- would establish probable cause for county sheriffs across the nation to issue arrest warrants for various high-ranking officials who have, in one way or another, run afoul of Trump.
Under Raiklin's objectively bizarre plan, the sympathetic sheriffs would deputize some 75,000 military veterans -- veterans he claims have been pushed out of service because they refused to comply with COVID-19 vaccine mandates -- to carry out the arrests.
Raiklin has gone so far as to pitch his plan to a group of far-right sheriffs who met in Las Vegas in April.
Public records requests filed by Raw Story with dozens of county sheriff offices reveal that word of Raiklin's efforts has reached the email inboxes of sheriffs from Wisconsin to Oklahoma.
But Raiklin's effort to enlist these sheriffs appears to be foundering: Not one has openly signed on, and even some who are sympathetic to his cause publicly warn that his plan violates due process.
Undaunted, Raiklin has attempted to build relationships with conservative members of Congress, and aides to two Republican lawmakers who chair influential House committees confirmed to Raw Story that they are familiar with him.
An overriding reason for why Raiklin hasn't been entirely marginalized or relegated by fellow conservatives to the realm of kooks and gadflies?
Raiklin uses the kind of hyperbolic language that Trump himself uses -- and that Trump's base eats up.
He gives federal agencies and media outlets Trump-like nicknames such as "FB-Lie," "Faux-litico" and "National Poison Radio."
"My nickname is the Deep State marauder, aka the mauler," Raiklin told a group of election deniers in New Jersey earlier this year. "And I like using ice picks instead of poking the bear."
In a video posted in May to X, which now accrued more than 10 million views, Raiklin said, "Expect to see live-streamed swatting raids of every single individual on that Deep State target list, because the precedence has already been set."
Notwithstanding Raiklin's claim that his plan would be "legal, moral and ethical," swatting -- the false reporting of an emergency to garner a response from law enforcement for the purpose of harassing a target -- is illegal.
Raiklin has nevertheless promoted the idea in podcast interviews, multiple posts on X, a press conference and conversations with prominent far-right extremists.
In recent days, Raiklin's rhetoric has escalated beyond setting out future hypothetical scenarios for retribution.
He mocked one former federal employee blocking him on X while suggesting that the targeted individual "wants me to speak to him in person" and asking him for his "preferred punishment for committing treason."
And during a podcast, he claimed to be surveilling a U.S. Capitol Police employee, whom he mentioned by name, "both physically and digitally."
Experts worry that provocative rhetoric from figures such as Raiklin could impose a climate of fear on civil servants simply trying to do their jobs. Even worse, Raiklin's rhetoric could inspire violence against them.
"The idea that you would target anyone that was there on the basis of allegiance to the rule of law and the Constitution is really scary," Max Stier, president and CEO of the Partnership for Public Service, told Raw Story.
Stier's organization promotes professional, merit-based civil service as a pillar of good governance -- a notion that he said is being increasingly challenged.
"This represents, in my view, an attack on our democracy," Stier said. "We have a rule of law. If any civil servants are violating the law, there are mechanisms in place to hold them accountable. Vigilantism is not the way to have a society function."
Raiklin responded to a phone call requesting comment by posting a recording of the voicemail on his X account on Tuesday, while commenting: "Looks like Elements of the Deep State Target List have asked @jordangreennc of Raw Sewage to try to find out more about my list...."
Later, he acknowledged a set of written questions submitted by Raw Story but didn't answer them, while accusing Raw Story and "domestic terrorist leftists" of hounding him.
"Look at my entire Deep State target list," Raiklin said. "That is the beginning. This is the scratching of the surface of who is going to be criminalized for their treason, okay?"
One prominent media organization named on Raiklin's "target" list expressed concern for its journalists, five of whom also appear on the list by name.
"The conspiracy theories underpinning this list are baseless, and the calls for targeted harassment are dangerous," Charlie Stadtlander, a spokesperson for the New York Times, told Raw Story. "The Times reporters on the list are simply professional journalists doing their jobs. Swatting is a criminal offense, and in the event of any instances directed at our employees, the Times will work with law enforcement to prosecute those responsible."
Said Raw Story Publisher Roxanne Cooper: "Purposefully threatening and endangering the safety of working journalists is both reprehensible and illegal, and the American public should reject and denounce anyone who engages in such behavior."
CNN, Reuters, the Atlantic and American Oversight declined to comment on Raiklin. Emails to the Washington Post, Politico, ABC News, NBC News and MSNBC, whose journalists are also named on the list, went unreturned.
Who is Ivan Raiklin?
As the 2020 election approached, conspiracy minded Trump supporters with active Twitter accounts were in abundance. Most never broke through the incessant MAGA noise, or merely added another note to its election denialism dissonance.
Raiklin was different.
He was a seasoned veteran with a background in military intelligence who wound up playing a small but significant role in the effort to overturn the 2020 election in Trump's name.
Following a distinguished career in the U.S. Armed Forces in which he served as a military attaché to the former Soviet Republic of Georgia and foreign affairs specialist assigned to the Ukraine Crisis Team, Raiklin left the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2017 to run for U.S. Senate in Virginia, according to the Washington Post.
At the time, Raiklin's candidacy in 2018 provided little indication of the MAGA loyalist relishing the destruction of Trump's enemies that he would become.
If anything, Raiklin fashioned himself as a force of apolitical positivity.
"The reason I'm running is that we've had such a negative political atmosphere the past couple years," Raiklin told the Courier in Iowa. "I want to inject a 'positive disruption' in the political conversation. Being a veteran of 20 years, I'm pretty much a political agnostic."
But Raiklin didn't get far: He failed to garner a sufficient number of signatures to make it onto the Republican primary ballot. And when he sued the Virginia GOP and the state Department of Elections, claiming that he was unfairly excluded, a federal judge tossed out the suit.
Following his disappointing foray into electoral politics, Raiklin began his turn toward Trump's MAGA movement.
In 2019, he appeared at a QAnon-themed fundraiser for retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Trump's former national security adviser, whom Raiklin met in 2010. (Flynn and Raiklin have become close in recent years, with Raiklin urging Trump to select Flynn as his vice presidential running mate and Flynn featuring Raiklin in his current speaking tour.)
Roughly a week after the 2020 election, when major media outlets had called the election for Democratic candidate Joe Biden, Raiklin went on Alex Jones' conspiracy theory show InfoWars and confidently predicted that Trump would ultimately obtain the necessary number of electoral votes to secure reelection.
"I absolutely guarantee it," he said. "One hundred percent. Unequivocally. Full stop. There is no possibility that he does not reach 270."
It's a classic example of how Trump's followers often act on Trump's wishes or anticipate his desires without receiving specific directives.
For months, Trump had been saying that the only way he'd lose the election is if Democrats stole it through fraud. Now, Trump had lost, and Raiklin was arguing that Trump was winning, against all evidence.
Raiklin, in essence, operates as an agent of Trumpism independent of Trump.
And as the 2024 election nears, the same dynamic is apparent: Trump articulates the broad themes, and his supporters scramble to put them into practice.
"Stand back and stand by" set the stage for the Jan. 6 insurrection in 2021, and now, "I am your retribution" serves as a solicitation to supporters such as Raiklin to put together specific plans for retribution against Trump's political enemies.
'Operation Pence Card'
Raiklin's primary contribution to the effort to overturn the 2020 election is a memo he drafted for the benefit of Trump's presidential campaign.
Entitled "Operation Pence Card," it proffered a novel legal argument that Vice President Mike Pence held the authority to set aside electoral votes from states narrowly carried by Biden.
The plan is widely associated with attorney John Eastman, who now faces charges of racketeering and conspiracy in Georgia, and with conspiracy, fraud and forgery in Arizona.
But Raiklin actually tweeted out his plan one day before Eastman drafted his now-infamous stop-the-steal memo. And Raiklin wielded enough influence that Trump himself, on Dec. 23, 2020, retweeted Raiklin's "Operation Pence Card" tweet to his tens of millions of followers.
Around the same time, Raiklin dined with then-Rep.-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), who attended a meeting at the White House along with other House Republicans to discuss plans to object on Jan. 6 to the congressional certification of the presidential election -- the final, generally ceremonial step before a presidential inauguration.
On Jan. 4, 2021, Raiklin had told Jerome Corsi, a longtime conspiracy theorist, that with regard to Trump supporters descending on Washington, D.C. en masse: "I am not calling for any violence, but at the same time, I can't stop people from committing it."
Raiklin was present at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 when a pro-Trump mob breached Congress' defenses and temporarily stopped lawmakers' electoral vote certification. Raiklin has not been charged with any crime related to the attack.
Following the Jan. 6 attack, the Army Reserve opened an investigation into whether Raiklin violated its rules against partisan political activity, but by early 2022, the service had cleared him of wrongdoing.
Raiklin has said the U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Homeland Security have also investigated him, but those investigations likewise concluded without formal accusations of wrongdoing against Raiklin.
"So what does that trigger me to do?" Raiklin said during a presentation to a group of election deniers in New Jersey in February. "It weaponizes me against them. And so, since they haven't found anything, and you're investigating me, sir, I have the capability and capacity to start digging into you, your family, your friends, your associates -- every single thing that you do in your life."
Whitewashing the crimes of violent J6 rioters
While avoiding prosecution himself, Raiklin has eagerly taken up the cause of defendants who claim they were wrongfully prosecuted for their role in the Jan. 6 attack.
In June, Raiklin held a press conference in Detroit to promote his "live-streamed swatting raids" scheme. He did so alongside Treniss Jewell Evans III, who served a 20-day prison sentence for illegally entering the Capitol. Also speaking at the press conference: Sarah McAbee, the wife of a former sheriff's deputy who is currently serving a 70-month sentence for assaulting a Washington, D.C., metropolitan police officer.
Ronald Colton McAbee, Sarah McAbee's husband, wore patches with the word "SHERIFF" and the emblem of the anti-government Three Percenter movement on his clothing while taking part in an hours-long battle at the mouth of the Lower West Terrace Tunnel on Jan. 6.
A GiveSendGo campaign to support his wife applauds McAbee for answering "the call to stand up for our nation," but following his conviction the Department of Justice described him as witnessing rioters knock an officer defending the U.S. Capitol to the ground. McAbee's response was the opposite of rendering aid, according to the government.
After the officer was kicked and stripped of his baton by rioters, the government contends that "McAbee stepped into the archway, grabbed the officer's leg, and pulled him further toward the crowd. When a second MPD officer stepped off the police line to assist the downed officer, McAbee stood up, yelled at the officer who had stepped out to assist, and then swung his arms and hands towards the officer's head and torso. McAbee made contact with the officer and was wearing the reinforced gloves at the time of the assault."
In the run-up to Jan. 6, Raiklin had baselessly ascribed the legitimate election of Joe Biden to "domestic fraud" committed by people "potentially under foreign actors' payroll." Now, at the press conference in Detroit in June 2024, Raiklin was inverting the violent crimes committed by Trump supporters to portray them, not the officers defending the Capitol, as the victims.
"You need to know who is coming after us," Raiklin said, naming two people who are part of the U.S. Capitol security apparatus. Without presenting any evidence, Raiklin accused one of the men of "weaponizing and working with the DOJ... to criminalize against Sarah's husband."
Cultivating relationships with House Republicans
All the while, Raiklin is forging ties with Republican lawmakers who are sympathetic to the Jan. 6 rioters.
While leveling outlandish charges of criminal misconduct at federal civil servants, Raiklin has become a familiar presence at congressional committee hearings controlled by Republican lawmakers eager to downplay the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, or, alternately, shift blame to Democrats for the violence.
Raiklin has sat in the gallery behind the witnesses in at least five House committee hearings over the past year.
Among them: the House Administration Oversight Subcommittee chaired by Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), the House Oversight and Accountability Committee chaired by Rep. James Comer (R-KY) and the House Judiciary Committee chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH).
"I don't just sit back behind the witnesses when I'm in the House," Raiklin said on a podcast in May. "For 15 months, I've been grinding day in and day out talking to dozens of members of Congress giving ideas on what needs to be done."
On another podcast, Raiklin said: "The only person that understands this is a guy by the name of Barry Loudermilk.... Why? Well, because he's doing the right thing. And I get an opportunity to explain this to him and his staff regularly."
Nick Petromelis, an aide to Loudermilk, told Raw Story he, Petromelis, is "familiar" with Raiklin.
Loudermilk ignored a request from the now-defunct House Select January 6 Committee to explain a tour he gave to constituents on the eve of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. His committee deposed Farnam, the former U.S. Capitol Police intelligence leader who is on Raiklin's target list, last month.
Austin Hacker, an aide to Comer, likewise said he, Hacker, was aware that Raiklin had attended House Oversight and Accountability Committee hearings.
Despite promising in late May that he would find out whether Comer had personally spoken to Raiklin, Hacker stopped responding to follow-up messages from Raw Story.
Raiklin said on a podcast in May that he has sent his "Deep State target list" to Comer, Jordan and the Administration Oversight Subcommittee chaired by Loudermilk.
Hacker told Raw Story that Comer, his boss, does not have the "target list" document. Aides to Jordan and the House Administration Oversight Committee did not respond to emails from Raw Story seeking confirmation that they received copies of the list.
None of the three House members responded to requests for comment about whether they support Raiklin's antics.
Raiklin has singled out other members of Congress for praise. Of Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL), who filed legislation to hold U.S. Attorney Merrick Garland in "inherent contempt," Raiklin said she "has exhibited the maximum courage that her position allows."
Luna's legislation would hold the attorney general in "inherent contempt" for refusing demands to turn over audio of Special Counsel Robert Hur's interview with Biden, related to Biden's retention of classified documents in the garage of his Delaware home. "Inherent contempt" is a tool that would allow the House sergeant-at-arms to take Garland into custody and compel him to sit for a congressional proceeding. Raiklin told one podcaster that he "saw" Luna at a congressional hearing in May.
Luna's office did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
'Go to the maximum level'
While cultivating ties with members of Congress, Raiklin has been lobbying sheriffs -- with mixed results -- to join his effort.
To reach potentially sympathetic sheriffs, Raiklin has focused on an organization called the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association.
Under the leadership of Richard Mack, a former sheriff from Arizona, the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association has promoted the controversial view that county sheriffs are the highest law in the land and are within their rights to ignore any federal and state laws that they deem to be unconstitutional.
But Mack told Raw Story he has severed ties with Raiklin since talking with him in early June, and that he disapproves of Raiklin's rhetoric.
During the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association's annual convention during April in Las Vegas, Raiklin asked a panel of sheriffs if they would "be willing to go to the maximum level to create consequences for these federal actors" whom he claimed had committed "seditious conspiracy."
The response was less than promising.
Still, the potential for violence should not be discounted, according to Devin Burghart, executive director of the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights and someone who has been monitoring the far right for more than three decades.
"It is certainly not out of the realm of possibility to see them using the office of the sheriff and posses they wish to create to start rounding up political opponents," Burgart told Raw Story. "Right now, in the far right, the promotion of post-election violence and bloody political retribution has become disturbingly commonplace. In that context, the results of the election are almost an afterthought -- only important in determining whether their murderous rage will have state sanction."
While the far-right's willingness to escalate may increase as the election approaches, at the time of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association convention in April, the two elected sheriffs on the panel were taking a cautious approach.
Sheriff Bob Songer from Klickitat County in Washington state told Raiklin that much as he might want to help, he doubted many prosecutors would be willing to press charges.
Sheriff Dar Leaf from Barry County in Michigan, put it more forcefully.
"We're not going to be able to just go out and arrest," he said. "We've got to do a grand jury indictment, just like the Constitution says."
Leaf's far-right credentials would seem to make him a prime candidate for Raiklin's project. He gained national notoriety in 2020 when he suggested that members of an anti-government militia accused of attempting to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer might have been trying to carry out a citizen's arrest.
Leaf has falsely claimed that there was widespread fraud in the 2020 election, and a lawyer representing Leaf reportedly sought evidence from an ad hoc group organized by lawyer Sidney Powell and Michael Flynn in December 2020 that could be used to justify "issuing probable cause warrants to sequester Dominion voting machines."
But if Raiklin and his allies were discouraged by Leaf's response at the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association convention, they haven't given any indication of it.
During a podcast appearance with Mark Finchem, a former Arizona state representative who took part in the effort to overturn the 2020 election, Raiklin said he was certain that the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association could help "identify which county sheriffs would be clamoring, clamoring to prosecute these scum."
"I know one," Finchem replied. "Dar Leaf in Barry County, Michigan."
Reached by Raw Story earlier this month, Leaf said that despite fielding a question from him at the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association convention, he doesn't know who Raiklin is.
Leaf reiterated his rejection of Raiklin's plan by expressing an aversion to politically motivated prosecutions.
Furthermore, Leaf warned that if indictments were obtained through grand juries "stacked" with Trump supporters, any criminal activity uncovered through depositions would be thrown out "because we started out breaking the law."
Among dozens of other sheriff's offices across the country contacted for this story, two in Wisconsin -- Burnett County and Polk County -- confirmed receiving an email with the subject heading: "Ivan Raiklin Requests Deputization of 80K Veterans" that linked to Raiklin's video and encouraged them to get in contact.
"Please Watch this viral video that has garnered 9.8M views in 5 days," it reads. "Important you understand. Remember your Oath."
Raiklin's name landed in one other sheriff's inbox through a subscription to the "General Flynn Newsletter," which is promoting the documentary about the former national security adviser.
The email, received by Tulsa County Sheriff Vic Regalado in Oklahoma, describes Raiklin as a member of a team "hand-selected" by Flynn to provide event attendees "with an informative and unforgettable experience."
The email describes the "General Flynn was Framed Evidence Wall," a visual prop that Raiklin uses prior to each film screening that presents "an exhaustive timeline and link analysis of all the major political and government officials at the most senior levels that weaponized against General Flynn to prevent him from exposing their corruption."
During his months-long campaign, Raiklin has continuously referenced Mack and the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association in an effort to build credibility for his plan.
During his press conference with Treniss Evans in Detroit, Raiklin mentioned that the previous evening he'd "had a very long conversation with a guy by the name of Sheriff Mack" on the topic of "vetting and communicating with sheriffs."
On a livestream of the press conference, Raiklin displayed a photo of the two men huddling over a laptop, suggesting a collaborative effort.
In a recent interview, Mack told Raw Story at the time that he had been "getting all sorts of calls" about Raiklin.
But since that meeting, Mack said he has soured on Raiklin's plan.
"I'm afraid I don't approve of some of his language, the hyperbole, the rhetoric," Mack said.
For the same reason, Mack said, he resigned from the Oath Keepers. Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the far-right group that recruited from the ranks of retired law enforcement and military veterans, is currently serving an 18-year prison sentence for seditious conspiracy at a federal prison in Cumberland, Md.
"It's not where CSPOA can go," Mack said, adding that he and Raiklin "are not working together at all."
Since early June, Mack said that the two men have not spoken or exchanged any emails.
"Quite frankly, he talks about that list of 350 people -- I'm sure they can afford lawyers," Mack said. "It reeks of lawsuits, and it doesn't follow due process."
During his press conference with Evans, Raiklin said the two men are planning to attend the Sheriffs Association of Texas' annual conference in Fort Worth, Texas, this month and pitch their plan.
"I would say that my inbox has been interesting lately with the amount of sheriffs that have an interest in seeing Texas uphold the United States Constitution, and preserve the way of life that we've come to expect as constitutionally guaranteed," Evans said during the press conference.
But Mack said Raiklin's score is currently 0.
"I know a lot of sheriffs, especially in Texas," Mack told Raw Story. "I do not believe he has a single sheriff aligned with him. He's never been able to give me a name."
'It's so easy to learn where they live'
While cultivating relationships with members of Congress, lobbying sheriffs and recruiting volunteers to join posses tasked with detaining political enemies, Raiklin has also forged relationships with other extremists, seeming to cast about for a legal rationale in support of his scheme.
Over the past six months, Raiklin has appeared on at least three podcasts with Dr. Pete Chambers, who helped organize a "Take Our Border Back" convoy earlier this year to support Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's defiance of the federal government.
Like Raiklin, Chambers is a retired lieutenant colonel who formerly served in the Army Special Forces. Following his retirement from the military and later, in 2022, from the National Guard, Chambers joined the "sovereign citizen" group Republic of Texas, whose members shot a man and took him hostage in 1997.
Chambers said when he watched Raiklin's viral video outlining his plan to carry out "live-streamed swatting raids" against his "Deep State target list," he recalled that he said to himself: "Ivan, you've just kicked open the door, and we're going to have to back your play. And we can. And we've got the receipts to do it."
During the conversation between the two men, Chambers referenced something called "the doctrine of lesser magistrates." Although the term is rooted in the 16th century Protestant Reformation in Europe, it was more recently popularized by Matthew Trewhella, a Wisconsin pastor who has advocated killing abortion doctors.
Michael Flynn has recommended Trewhella's 2013 book, The Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrates: A Proper Resistance to Tyranny and a Repudiation of Unlimited Obedience to Civil Government, as "a masterful blueprint showing Americans how to successfully resist tyranny."
Trewhella's book also received a plug at the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association convention where Raiklin attempted to sell the sheriffs on his "live-streamed swatting raids" plan.
Chambers seemed to acknowledge the improvisational nature of applying a 16th century religious doctrine to an ideological battle with Trump's political adversaries in the United States of America in 2024.
"We're building a plane and flying it here, I would say," he said. "However, it is legal, moral and ethical.... If we can get together and develop the alliances of these sheriffs, then we decrease the space that these people can then maneuver."
'Gonna face those guns'
Next week, barring something cataclysmic, Trump will officially become the Republican Party's 2024 presidential nominee.
Trump will become the nominee despite being convicted of 34 felonies in the Stormy Daniels hush-money case in Manhattan, and he still faces dozens of additional federal and state charges despite a recent Supreme Court ruling that granted Trump -- and any future president -- immunity from criminal prosecution for "official acts" they took as president.
Trump is as defiant as ever.
"I did nothing wrong. We'd have a system that was rigged and disgusting. I did nothing wrong," Trump said June 27 in his debate against Biden.
On a parallel track, Raiklin's embrace of lawlessness appears to be growing stronger.
In June, Raiklin published a 76-minute video of himself speaking with Cliven Bundy, a 78-year-old Nevada rancher who is perhaps the ultimate icon of the far-right anti-government movement. In 2014, Bundy's refusal to pay grazing fees to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management led to an armed standoff between the FBI and militia members, along with other supporters, including Richard Mack from the CSPOA.
Raiklin flattered Bundy during the exchange as "quite the legend," while describing the federal government as "the most corrupt institution on the planet." The two men agreed that "the militia" -- a term used to describe armed citizens -- "puts a check on the federal government."
The rhetoric used by the two men became increasingly confrontational, with Bundy accusing the federal government of plotting to kill Americans. Cliven Bundy noted that his son, Ryan Bundy, was wounded, and a friend, LaVoy Finicum, was killed during a traffic stop during the Malheur National Forest occupation in Oregon in 2016.
"They don't have those bullets to fight our enemy across the border," Bundy charged. "They've got those bullets to kill us in America."
Raiklin then quoted the Bible to suggest the proper response was "an eye for an eye."
Bundy lamented that sheriffs across the country did not heed his call in 2014 for them to disarm federal agents in their jurisdictions.
"I said, 'If you don't disarm them, one of these days you're going to face those guns,'" Bundy recounted.
"Now, we're getting closer," he quickly added. "Gonna face those guns."
Raiklin, in response, appeared to advocate for doxing federal agents.
"Oh yeah, we're not only going to do that," he said. "Again, they're going to experience the most peaceful, legal and moral, ethical and patriotic endeavor they've ever experienced in their life. Every one of them. Because we have tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people that will facilitate them experiencing that.
"Because it's so easy to learn where they live," Raiklin continued. "Each one. Where their homes are. Who they're related to. Where they frequent. What kinds of vehicles they own. What kinds of devices they own and that they emit GPS geo-tracking data. Which social media apps they use. We monitor all their communications."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
This is a misogyny emergency. A huge outpouring is coming in the runup to the US election
|
This time Kamala Harris will be the target for the social media platforms that promote prejudice
In 2016, a historically unprecedented incident took place. And yet, barely anyone even noticed. Even years later, we've failed to acknowledge it or to have begun the process of understanding it. Because we still can't even see it.
And that's because this incident involved a woman. And she was asking for it.
The woman was Hillary Clinton. What she was asking for was votes. And what she got was the single biggest outpouring of misogyny in human history.
We can now say that. Although no one ever does. But this was an unprecedented previously unimaginable event. Because 2016 was when the world's first global instant mass communication technology - social media - crashed up against the most ancient of prejudices - misogyny.
And the result was an earthquake: Donald Trump.
In 2016, we weren't prepared for it. We didn't see it coming. We didn't understand how these same social media platforms that have enabled us to share our thoughts instantly at a global scale also facilitate the worst kinds of human communication. How they are engineered to cater to our basest instincts and reward the clickiest, most hateful content.
But eight years on, we haven't even begun to understand that lesson. We didn't listen to Hillary. We haven't yet realised that misogyny is one of the most dangerous weapons on Earth. The best friend of authoritarians and oligarchs. The handmaiden of tyrants.
Worst of all, we haven't yet realised that misogyny represents the most urgent and pressing threat to global security.
Because it's misogyny - networked misogyny across multiple global platforms that will earn their tech bro owners billions upon billions of dollars - that is going to decide the 2024 election.
And it's misogyny that's going to dictate the future of Nato, the outcome of the war in Ukraine, whether we have peace in Europe or more war. And because this is going to be a firehose that will be directed at a single woman - Kamala Harris - it will be misogyny multiplied: misogyny plus racism, the most toxic combination of all.
This week comments resurfaced that Trump's newly appointed running mate had made about the woman who looks certain to be the next Democrat candidate. Comments from 2021, in which JD Vance dismissed Kamala Harris as a "childless cat lady". If that sounds vaguely familiar, you may recognise those exact words from the attacks that Brexiteers directed at me. In my case, it was an assault that went on for years and created the permission for the same man who seeded the narrative to sue me in court.
I was gagged, the necessities of the court case silenced me. Sticks and stones will break my bones etc. But this was never about me. I was just the access point, a way to shut the story down, a viable target. And this was an attack that achieved its goal. Overnight, all reporting on the subject stopped dead.
But there are things that only veterans of the childless cat lady wars can know. They used to call us witches because we knew shit. We still do. That's what makes us so powerful. And dangerous. That's what JD Vance understands: our cat lady energy. We've lived through culture wars before they even had that name, before they invented memes and when they just burned us at the stake.
So, here's what I need you to do now: to shut up and sit down and listen. You are at risk. We are all at risk. Because this is what I know: bad things are coming. We are in a code red emergency.
Because misogyny isn't bad people saying bad things that may hurt your feelings. (Though it might.) And misogyny isn't about silencing women. (Though it does.)
Misogyny is now one of the deadliest weapons on Earth. Misogyny is a dirty bomb in the heart of our information system. Misogyny is electoral interference. Misogyny is a national security threat so lethal we can't even see it.
Because misogyny is invisible. It's never about all women, it's always just about one particular, disagreeable woman who just happens to not be very likeable. Or competent. Who is loud or "shrill" or annoying or who got the job because she slept with a man. Or because she was a diversity hire. A woman who can't even run her own house let alone a country. A woman who is "nasty". A woman who isn't and cannot be the strong leader a nation needs.
Enjoy the sunshine of the Kamala moment. Breathe in the clean fresh air of facts, of evidence, of information. Of hope. Before the toxic social media chimneys crank up the content. Because shortly, the particulates will arrive, will silently and stealthily and invisibly start clogging our bronchial pathways even as the billionaire bros who own the platforms rake in record profits. It's not so much surveillance capitalism as disaster capitalism.
It took years for us to learn some of the basic facts of what happened in 2016 and it's still just a partial view. But we now know: Russia attacked Clinton in exactly the same way that Trumpworld attacked Clinton, in exactly the same way that they are attacking Kamala.
We now know how the Kremlin actually paid in roubles for Facebook to pump those messages out across US social media. We now know that Cambridge Analytica, on behalf of the Trump campaign, created an anonymous Crooked Hillary campaign that it fed into the "bloodstream of the internet".
But neither invented misogyny. They just used it. These were narratives the bros of the broverse were already spreading, which the invisible hand of the social media algorithms were pumping into people's feeds. The same zombie narratives that have risen again for Kamala and are already being stoked not just by YouTube edgelords and JD Vance fanboys but Russia and China too.
Soon, we won't even notice. It'll just be part of the air that we breathe. A choking toxic misogynistic stew that will silently pour over the culture war trenches like mustard gas. Darkness is coming. This is the world social media created. And we're much further out than we thought.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Facebook admits 'mistake' in censoring iconic Trump assassination attempt photo: 'This was an error'
|
Vaynermedia CEO Gary Vaynerchuk reacts to Metas political ad rules on The Claman Countdown.
Facebook wrongly called the popular image of Donald Trump pumping his fist in the air after an assassination attempt against him an "altered photo," a spokesperson admitted Monday.
Users across X shared reports that their Facebook accounts were labeling the image as "altered", explaining "Independent fact-checkers reviewed a similar photo and said it was altered in a way that could mislead people."
Meta Public Affairs Director Dani Lever later explained on X it was done in error as the systems were meant to detect a separate version of the image.
"This was an error. This fact check was initially applied to a doctored photo showing the secret service agents smiling, and in some cases our systems incorrectly applied that fact check to the real photo. This has been fixed, and we apologize for the mistake," Lever wrote.
META ADDING AI DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT FOR 2024 ELECTION ADS
Lever confirmed the mistake when Fox News Digital reached out for a comment.
The altered image Lever referenced featured the Secret Service members surrounding Trump smiling. USA Today and AFP United States previously fact-checked the images as "altered," though it confirmed the accuracy of the original image.
"None of the agents in the original image are smiling as they surround Trump, who has blood on his face and his right arm in the air. The image - which was captured by Associated Press photographer Evan Vucci and distributed by the AP - appeared with coverage of the shooting by CNN, The Atlantic, Business Insider and many other legitimate news outlets," USA Today explained.
USA Today's fact-check on the altered photo was used as a "third-party fact-checker" when Facebook corrected the photo.
Backlash against Meta and Facebook come as concerns over Big Tech companies taking part in election manipulation to help Democrats. On Monday, Google users were surprised to find the website's autocomplete feature omitting references to the July 13 assassination attempt.
Instead, it recommended other search results, such as the failed assassination of Ronald Reagan. The keywords "Trump assassination attempt" also did not offer any additional results.
ZUCKERBERG SAYS TRUMP FIST PUMP REACTION TO SHOOTING WAS 'BADA--'
A Google spokesperson later told FOX Business that there was no "manual action taken on these predictions."
"Our systems have protections against Autocomplete predictions associated with political violence, which were working as intended prior to this horrific event occurring," the spokesperson wrote. "We're working on improvements to ensure our systems are more up to date."
The company spokesperson added the autocomplete feature is "just a tool to help people save time" and they can still search for anything they want.
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
Fox Business' Louis Casiano and Christina Wurm contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Trump allies at Heritage declare 2024 election illegitimate in advance
|
"To put it simply, the federal government should have a very limited role in our election systems. They should be left to the states to decide," he said.
Get live updates from President Biden's press conference as four more House Democrats joined the list of 17 lawmakers who have called on him to drop out of his reelection race.
The latest on President Biden: A defiant Biden doubled down on staying in the race, rejecting calls to withdraw after his debate performance.
Presidential election polls: Check out The Post's presidential polling averages of the seven battleground states most likely to determine the outcome of the election.
The first debate: Biden and Donald Trump faced off in the first presidential debate of 2024. Here are takeaways and fact checks from the debate.
Key dates and events: Voters in all states and U.S. territories have been choosing their party's nominee for president ahead of the summer conventions. Here are key dates and events on the 2024 election calendar.
Abortion and the election: Voters in about a dozen states could decide the fate of abortion rights with constitutional amendments on the ballot in a pivotal election year. Biden supports legal access to abortion, and he has encouraged Congress to pass a law that would codify abortion rights nationwide. After months of mixed signals about his position, Trump said the issue should be left to states. Here's how Biden's and Trump's abortion stances have shifted over the years.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
JD Vance's hometown state senator says civil war may be needed to 'save our country'
|
JD Vance's hometown state senator says civil war may be needed to 'save our country'
Victoria Moorwood and Sharon Coolidge, Cincinnati Enquirer
July 22, 2024 at 8:10 PM
Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance's hometown state senator said at his rally Monday that if Republicans don't win the 2024 election it could lead to a civil war to "save the country."
The comments came from Ohio state Sen. George Lang, R-West Chester, right after he took the stage at Vance's first rally in Middletown, Ohio, since becoming former President Donald Trump's running mate and chanted, "Fight! Fight! Fight!"
Live updates: JD Vance returns to his hometown for first time after being nominated for VP
"If it comes down to a civil war... we are the last stand to save it," Lang said at a Middletown High School auditorium, less than an hour before Vance was set to take the stage. The crowd cheered in response. Vance graduated from the high school in 2003.
Lang quickly segued into touting other Ohio-born politicians from Butler County, name-checking former Speaker of the House John Boehner and Ohio Supreme Court Justice Sharon Kennedy, and even noting former 2024 presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, who grew up in Cincinnati.
Who is George Lang?
Lang represents Ohio's 4th state senate district, which includes Butler County.
He was elected senator in 2020. He served as a West Chester Township trustee and served two terms in the Ohio House of Representatives before he was elected to the Ohio Senate.
He is running for reelection in November after winning a three-way primary in March.
This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: George Lang references civil war to 'save' country at JD Vance rally
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Exclusive--GOP Rep. Cloud: Homeland Security Agency Is Interfering in House's Assassination Investigation
|
The agency run by impeached migration czar Alejandro Mayorkas is interfering with the House's investigation into the attempted murder of President Donald Trump, Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas), told Breitbart News.
The shooting was "an epic failure," Cloud told Breitbart News during an interview at the GOP's national convention, adding, "It is very concerning that right off the bat, we see DHS [Mayorkas' Department of Homeland Security] obfuscating as opposed to being transparent. This should be something that, regardless of party, we don't allow this kind of thing in our country."
The Secret Service agency is part of Mayorkas's DHS. It is run by sociology graduate Kimberly Cheatle.
Cloud is a member of the House's oversight committee, which is chaired by Rep. James Comer (R-KY).
"We were scheduled for a first briefing today, just on the facts of the case, what's going on, what they know now, and DHS has stepped in between the communications now of the Secret Service and the Oversight Committee, and are now trying to control the communication between the two committees," Cloud told Breitbart News during an interview at the GOP's national convention.
Mayorkas is now rushing to pick people within "days" for a supposedly independent review of the agency's failure.
Since 2021, Mayorkas has used his independent power within President Joe Biden's administration to promote the interests of migrants and to aid the migration of roughly 10 million migrants into Americans' communities, homes, and workplaces throughout the United States. That elite-backed agenda led to his impeachment by the House in February 2024 and has crashed Biden's polls in the 2024 election.
Cloud continued: "So Chairman Comer is issuing subpoenas to make sure that the Secret Service director does appear [at a hearing]. Right now, we have a committee scheduled for the day we go back next week, on Monday, to make sure that she does appear and that we are being able to begin this investigation."
"Already they're obfuscating it, it would seem," Cloud said, adding, "We should be able to get that preliminary information out, realizing that, okay, this is going to take more than one briefing ... But you know, this is coming from the same administration who was labeling Catholics as terrorists, people who go to school board meetings as terrorists, yet they fail to protect a former president of the United States and a political opponent. We've seen this administration target political opponents before, and then now fail epically in protecting a former president -- and we will say, future -- President of the United States. And so this is extremely concerning."
Congressman Cloud continued.
"I'll say this right off the bat: [With] any failure like this of the Secret Service ... the honorable thing [for the director] to do is to resign at this point. She'll talk about, 'Well, we need to make sure this never happens again.' That's not the job description. The job description is to make sure that this never happens, period.We got to take the 'again' out of that. You should not get two assassination attempts under your belt as director of the Secret Service."
"So we're going to have to continue to look into this as the information becomes available," Cloud added.
On Tuesday, Mayorkas again reaffirmed his support for Cheatle, even after her Monday admission that Secret Service agents were deliberately not posted on the roof from which the sniper almost killed Trump.
"That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point," Cheatle told ABC News on Monday. "And so, you know, there's a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn't want to put somebody up on a sloped roof ... [so] the decision was made to secure the building from inside," she said in a segment released on Tuesday.
Early on Tuesday morning, NPR asked Mayorkas, "Do you anticipate people losing jobs over last weekend?"
"I have 100% confidence in the director of the United States Secret Service, a dedicated, career-long law enforcement officer," Mayorkas told NPR.
Cheatle is a sociology graduate who worked for more than 24 years in the U.S. Secret Service. She was hired for the job in August 2024 by President Joe Biden, who stated:
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
House Republicans say Biden must resign after ending reelection campaign
|
House Republicans are calling on President Biden to resign from office after he announced that he would no longer seek reelection, arguing that he should not continue to serve in the White House if he is unable to run for another term.
The comments -- several of which were from House GOP leadership -- came shortly after Biden said he was withdrawing from the 2024 presidential race, a seismic announcement that rocked the political world and left the path forward for Democrats uncertain.
"If Joe Biden is not fit to run for President, he is not fit to serve as President. He must resign the office immediately," Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote on the social platform X. "November 5 cannot arrive soon enough."
"If the Democrat party has deemed Joe Biden unfit to run for re-election, he's certainly unfit to control our nuclear codes. Biden must step down from office immediately," House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (Minn.), the No. 3 Republican in the chamber, wrote on X.
Rep. Elise Stefanik (N.Y.), the chair of the House GOP conference, echoed that sentiment, arguing that he is "unable and unfit" to complete his term.
"If Joe Biden can't run for re-election, he is unable and unfit to serve as President of the United States," Stefanik said in a statement. "He must immediately resign."
Biden announced he was stepping aside from the Democratic presidential ticket in a letter to the country Sunday afternoon, reversing his decision regarding the 2024 election amid mounting pressure from Democrats calling on him to withdraw from the race. Several Democrats had urged him to drop out of the race after last month's disastrous debate performance, where he at times stumbled over his words and appeared to lose his train of thought.
He endorsed Vice President Harris for president.
"It has been the greatest honor of my life to serve as your president. And while it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as President for the remainder of my term," Biden wrote.
But while he said he plans to serve out the remainder of his term, which officially ends in the middle of January, pressure is already mounting on the president to step aside in the interim.
Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), the chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee, echoed that sentiment, challenging Democrats to consider if Biden can continue to serve the remainder of his term.
"If the president is mentally unfit to campaign, he is mentally unfit to have the nuclear codes," Hudson wrote in a statement. "Every House Democrat must now answer: is the president fit to serve the rest of his term?"
If Biden refuses to resign early, Republicans could turn to a resolution introduced by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) late last month that urges Harris to convene the Cabinet and declare Biden unable to carry out the duties of the Oval Office. Harris, however, would be unlikely to do so.
The Hill reached out to Roy for more information.
Some senators also called on Biden to resign in the wake of his reelection news.
"If Joe Biden is no longer capable of running for re-election, he is no longer capable of serving as President," Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), the chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, wrote in a statement. "Being President is the hardest job in the world, and I no longer have confidence that Joe Biden can effectively execute his duties as Commander-in-Chief."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
What is Project 2025, the conservative plan to remake federal government?
|
A: Project 2025 is an initiative developed by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, to make signficant changes to the backbone of the U.S. federal government. It is designed to be implemented if former President Donald Trump wins the 2024 presidential election. The project is built around a conservative policy agenda and aims to ensure that Republican loyalists are in place at all levels of the federal bureaucracy to carry out policies, effectively from the first days of a new administration. If enacted, it would bring significant changes across various aspects of American life, encompassing government operations, environmental regulations, social policies and civil service structures.
A: The project is structured around four main pillars:
A: The proposals cover a wide range of areas, including economic policies, social programs and government operations. Some notable plans include:
Government and Civil Service: The core tenet of Project 2025 is the overhaul of the federal bureaucracy. The plan includes the reclassification of tens of thousands of federal employees under a proposed "Schedule F" to facilitate easier firing and hiring of personnel aligned with conservative values. The goal is to ensure that federal agencies are staffed by individuals who will implement the president's agenda without resistance from career civil servants.
Environmental Regulations: Project 2025 seeks to roll back many of the Biden administration's climate policies. It proposes the dismantling of the Environmental Protection Agency's renewable energy programs, reducing funding for environmental justice initiatives and halting the expansion of the electrical grid for wind and solar energy. The project envisions a regulatory environment that favors the fossil fuel industry, potentially slowing the transition to renewable energy sources.
Social Policies: The project outlines a significant shift in social policies, particularly around reproductive rights and LGBTQ+ issues. It advocates for the reversal of federal protections for abortion and contraception and suggests the reinstatement of the Comstock Act to limit mail-order abortion pills while proposing the removal of federal funding from providers who offer reproductive health services. Additionally, it includes measures to restrict LGBTQ+ rights and remove diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives from federal programs.
Education and Public Services: Project 2025 calls for budget savings that would eliminate the Department of Education, delivering more control of education standards to state and local authorities. It would also eliminate the Head Start early education program.
Healthcare and Social Services: The initiative suggests privatizing various public services and reducing the scope of federal social programs, including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. These changes would shift to a greater reliance on state and local governments, as well as private entities, for the provision of these types of services.
Executive Power: A significant aspect of Project 2025 is the expansion of executive power. It proposes consolidating authority within the presidency, reducing the independence of federal agencies and increasing presidential control over policy implementation. This shift aims to streamline decision-making processes but raises concerns about the potential for executive overreach.
A: Critics argue that Project 2025 poses an affront to democracy and social welfare. The Democracy Forward Foundation describes it as a plan to undermine the quality of life for millions of Americans by prioritizing special interests and ideological extremism over the American public. They highlight concerns such as cutting wages, creating unsafe workplaces, destabilizing the economy and undermining civil rights protections.
A: Supporters believe that Project 2025 is necessary to streamline the federal government, reduce spending, and reverse any perceived damage caused by liberal policies. They argue that the initiative will restore conservative principles to governance, ensuring a more limited, efficient and effective federal government.
A: Project 2025 has become a focal point in the election. Among politicians who have spoken out in favor or against the framework:
Neil Chatterjee, Former Chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, via Politico: "Even if we lose the election and don't get the opportunity to govern, I still think this defined strategy is important because we know what we're for and what we can showcase to the American people even if we're out of power."
Paul Dans, Director of Project 2025 at the Heritage Foundation, via Salon: "We need to flood the zone with conservatives. This is a clarion call to come to Washington. People need to lay down their tools, and step aside from their professional life and say, 'This is my lifetime moment to serve.'"
Russell Vought, Former Director of the Office of Management and Budget, via Politico: "We have to be thinking mechanically about how to take these institutions over. and highlight the need for executive orders, playbooks, and memoranda to seize control of the administrative state."
David Dewhirst, Senior Advisor to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, via Project 2025: "For the next conservative president to succeed, the executive branch must be staffed at every level with proven, conservative leaders from across the country who will courageously and efficiently implement the president's agenda."
Alex Floyd, DNC Rapid Response Director, via : "Donald Trump is running on the extreme and unpopular Project 2025 agenda, plain and simple - and there is nothing Trump or his allies can say to distance themselves from it."
Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA), via press release: "Project 2025 is more than an idea, it's a dystopian plot that's already in motion to dismantle our democratic institutions, abolish checks and balances, chip away at church-state separation, and impose a far-right agenda that infringes on basic liberties and violates public will."
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), via press release: "Project 25 is a radical, extreme, pro-authoritarianism plan pushed by conservatives who are desperate to take our country backwards. It is a movement led by far-right extremists that attacks our nation's founding principles, such as our system of checks and balances, freedom of speech and of the press, and separation of church and state. Project 25 presents a bleak and dangerous vision for America."
Rep Diana DeGette (D-CO), via press release: "We must counteract the radical roadmap laid out by Project 2025 to ensure that our country does not go backwards at the hands of their extremist agenda."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Video: 14% of non-citizens spoken to are registered to vote in crucial swing state: Report
|
A new video shared by the Heritage Foundation's Oversight Project reveals that a shocking number of illegal immigrants and non-citizens in Georgia are allegedly registered to vote ahead of the 2024 election.
On Wednesday, The Oversight Project shared a video obtained by Muckraker.com, tweeting, "Footage obtained by @realmuckraker shows numerous non-citizens admitting to being registered voters."
The video begins by showing multiple people being asked whether they are registered to vote and whether they are U.S. citizens. Numerous individuals can be seen confirming that they are registered to vote despite not being citizens of the United States.
Roughly 30 seconds into the video, a reporter can be heard explaining how research was conducted for the video. "The apartment complex Elliot Norcross in Norcross, Georgia, is occupied primarily by non-citizens," the reporter stated. "We visited the complex to ask residents two questions: 'Are you a citizen?' and 'Are you registered to vote?' Shockingly, 14% of respondents admitted to being noncitizens registered to vote."
In a post on X, formerly Twitter, The Oversight Project noted that approximately 339,000 non-citizens are believed to be currently living in Georgia. "If the 14% proportion holds true state wide, this would equate to over 47,000 registered non-citizens," The Oversight Project warned. "For context, Joe Biden 'won' the state of Georgia by less than 12,000 votes in 2020."
READ MORE: Biden admin's secret voter turnout 'scheme' questioned by House GOP
The Oversight Project explained that it tried to locate the individuals questioned in the video on Georgia's voter rolls but were unable to find them. The Oversight Project noted that non-citizens often have poor address history records and use fake names and documents. As a result, The Oversight Project said it was not clear what information the individuals in the video gave when completing their voter registration.
The Oversight Project stated, "One thing is for certain: Systems are being taken advantage of, and the outcome of the 2024 election will be difficult to determine given the near impossibility of auditing in a short period of time."
Following the release of the video, The Oversight Project announced that it would be referring the non-citizen voter registration issue over to Georgia officials and would be willing to cooperate with law enforcement in a potential investigation.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
DOJ reveals it has Biden transcripts at issue in classified docs case after initial denial
|
Fox News contributor Joe Concha joined 'Fox & Friends First' to discuss the media's reaction to Robert Hur's testimony before Congress on Biden's handling of classified documents.
The Justice Department revealed late Monday in a court filing that it does in fact have transcripts of President Biden's interviews with a biographer after initially having denied possessing the documents.
While juggling Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests related to former special counsel Robert Hur's investigation into Biden's handling of classified documents following his departure as vice president in the Obama administration, DOJ attorneys said it would be time-consuming to process audio files into transcripts related to the president's conversations with biographer Mark Zwonitzer.
"We don't have some transcript that's been created by the special counsel that we can attest to its accuracy," DOJ lawyer Cameron Silverberg told U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich last month.
That changed Monday evening, when Silverberg told Friedrich in a new court filing that Hur's office did in fact have transcripts of some of Biden's conversations with Zwonitzer. The biographer worked with Biden in 2007 and 2017 to compile memoirs, Politico reported.
BIDEN ASSERTS EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE OVER RECORDINGS FROM CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS PROBE
"In the past few days, in the course of processing the portions of the Biden-Zwonitzer audio recordings that the parties agreed to (see June 25, 2024 Joint Status Report at 2-3, ECF No. 20), the Department located six electronic files, consisting of a total of 117 pages, that appeared to be verbatim transcripts of a small subset of the Biden-Zwonitzer audio recordings created for the SCO by a court-reporting service," a court filing late Monday evening reviewed by Fox News Digital states.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT REBUKED FOR DELAY TACTICS IN BIDEN-HUR TAPES
The specific FOIA request related to the Biden-Zwonitzer transcripts was filed by the Heritage Foundation.
The court filing Monday evening also revealed that while fielding the various FOIA requests related to the bombshell Hur report, DOJ officials contacted an unnamed person with knowledge of the transcripts, but the individual was unable to weigh in. After resisting reaching out to Hur directly for information pertaining to what documents he relied upon for his final report, the DOJ did in fact reach out to Hur.
Hur confirmed the Biden-Zwonitzer transcripts and said he relied on the documents, as well as a note handwritten by Biden related to Afghanistan, for his final report.
HOUSE REPUBLICANS SUBPOENA DOJ MATERIALS RELATED TO SPECIAL COUNSEL HUR INTERVIEW WITH BIDEN
Hur's report on Biden's handling of classified materials after his eight years as vice president was released in February, and stated Hur would not recommend criminal charges against Biden for possessing classified materials after his vice presidency, calling Biden "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."
"Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone from whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him - by then a former president well into his eighties - of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness," Hur wrote in his report.
BIDEN, NOT SPECIAL COUNSEL HUR, BROUGHT UP SON'S DEATH IN QUESTIONING
The findings sparked widespread outrage that Biden was effectively deemed too cognitively impaired to be charged with a crime yet could still serve as president.
In May, the White House asserted executive privilege over audio and video recordings related to Hur's investigation, including the interviews between Biden and Zwonitzer.
"The audio recordings of your interview and Mr. Zwonitzer's interview fall within the scope of executive privilege. Production of these recordings to the Committees would raise an unacceptable risk of undermining the Department's ability to conduct similar high-profile criminal investigations--in particular, investigations where the voluntary cooperation of White House officials is exceedingly important," Attorney General Merrick Garland wrote to Biden in a letter obtained by Fox News at the time.
FOREIGN OUTLETS PULL NO PUNCHES OVER BIDEN 'CONFUSION' AND 'RAGE' AFTER SURPRISE PRESS CONFERENCE
Silverberg said in his Monday court filing that he will confer with the relevant parties regarding processing the documents for potential release.
The court filing comes one day after Biden dropped out of the presidential race following mounting pressure from Democrats to bow out and let another candidate take the mantle to run against former President Trump. The pressure was amplified following Biden's botched debate performance, which opened the floodgates to criticism and concern surrounding the president's mental fitness and age.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Vice President Kamala Harris is now the presumptive Democratic nominee for the 2024 election following Biden's departure from the race.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Opinion | Biden Made a Courageous Choice. Democrats Must Seize the Opportunity.
|
The editorial board is a group of opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values. It is separate from the newsroom.
President Biden's decision to exit the 2024 presidential election is a fitting coda for a man whose life has been devoted to public service. Mr. Biden has served the nation well as its president. By agreeing to step down when his term ends in January, he is greatly increasing the chance that his party is able to protect the nation from the dangers of returning Donald Trump to the presidency.
Majorities of Americans have consistently said they did not believe Mr. Biden could lead the nation for another term, citing longstanding fears about his age and fitness that have only grown in recent months. Had he remained at the top of the ticket, he would have greatly increased the likelihood of Mr. Trump retaking the presidency and potentially both houses of Congress as well. Mr. Biden himself has consistently warned that specter presents a profound threat to the nation and its democratic traditions.
Mr. Biden has now done what Mr. Trump never will: He has placed the national interest above his own pride and ambition.
Mr. Biden's departure gives Democrats an opportunity to refocus public attention from questions about the president's fitness to the manifest moral and temperamental unfitness of Mr. Trump -- and to the dangers of rearming him with the considerable powers of the presidency.
Mr. Trump is a felon who flouts the law and the Constitution, an inveterate liar beholden to no higher cause than his self-interest and a reckless policymaker indifferent to the well-being of the American people. His term in office did lasting damage to the people and the project of America and to its reputation around the world. In a second term he would operate with fewer restraints and more willing enablers, and he and his emboldened advisers have made clear they intend to exercise power ruthlessly.
Yet it's not enough to describe all the harm Mr. Trump would do to this country: The Democratic Party needs to offer the American people a road map to a better future. The new presidential and vice-presidential nominees will offer a fresh chance to remind voters of longstanding differences between the two parties.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Biden to call for major Supreme Court reforms, including term limits, at Civil Rights Act event Monday
|
President Joe Biden is set to call for major Supreme Court reforms Monday, according to a White House official, a move that would make him the first sitting president in generations to back seismic changes to the way the nation's highest court operates.
Biden's election-year push comes amid deep unpopularity for the high court but stands little chance of going anywhere. He will call for a constitutional amendment stripping the president of immunity for crimes committed while in office, term limits for Supreme Court justices, and a binding code of conduct for the high court, the White House official said.
Biden's announcement, which he is set to make at an event in Austin, Texas, commemorating the Civil Rights Act, follows this month's monumental decision by the Supreme Court granting presidents full immunity for some actions taken while in office and after a tide of revelations about justices accepting vacations and gifts from wealthy conservative donors. Democrats on the campaign trail frequently point to the Supreme Court's conservative majority - solidified by former President Donald Trump - to underscore what they see as the high stakes of the 2024 election.
The White House official said Biden will call for an amendment dubbed the "No One Is Above the Law Amendment," which will state the Constitution "does not confer any immunity from federal criminal indictment, trial, conviction, or sentencing by virtue of previously serving as President."
In what would be another change to the Constitution, Biden will also call for term limits for Supreme Court justices, who serve lifetime appointments.
The reforms Biden is proposing would require congressional approval, which would be difficult to achieve before his term ends, as Republicans control the House and Democrats have a slim majority in the Senate. The constitutional amendment, meanwhile, would require a more complicated process involving the states that seems nearly impossible to succeed.
The reforms, which will face heavy resistance, are meant to "restore trust and accountability when it comes to the presidency and the United States Supreme Court," the White House official said.
CNN reported this month that Biden was seriously considering endorsing major Supreme Court reforms, actions that liberal lawmakers and groups have been pushing in recent years.
The Monday announcement will come more than three years after Biden created a commission to study structural changes at the Supreme Court, including term limits and proposals to increase the number of justices. The group submitted its report to the White House in late 2021, but the administration did not pursue any of the ideas discussed in the document.
The debate over proposed structural changes at the Supreme Court has become deeply partisan, with Republicans widely opposed. But the issue has drawn renewed attention after it was reported in May that controversial flags were previously hoisted on properties owned by conservative Justice Samuel Alito. Both of the flags were flown by rioters during the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, though Alito has denied any connection to that incident and has said his wife hoisted them for different reasons - including a spat with neighbors.
Meanwhile, the court handed down several controversial decisions this summer that drew sharp criticism on the left, including the stunning 6-3 ruling that granted Trump broad immunity from criminal prosecution over his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
Last year, the high court adopted its own code of conduct. But the measure was heavily criticized by ethics experts because it included no way to enforce its requirements. Liberal Justice Elena Kagan defended the code of conduct in remarks last week but also conceded it would be more effective if it included an enforcement mechanism.
Biden's proposal comes as polling indicates support for the court is hovering near historic lows. A Marquette Law School poll in May found that 61% of Americans disapprove of the job the court is doing. Just four years ago, the same poll found the court had a 66% approval rating.
Democrats have sought to use public disapproval of the court - particularly its 2022 ruling overturning Roe v. Wade - to drive voters. Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, now the presumptive Democratic nominee, have made that decision a central part of their campaign arguments, hoping the issue of abortion rights will galvanize voters heading into November.
Biden, a former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee who has resisted calls from his party to expand the court, has become increasingly critical of its makeup. He has described the Supreme Court as "out of kilter" and has warned of the impact a second Trump presidency could have on the nation's highest court.
Biden, who is making his first trip since bowing out of the 2024 race, will call for the changes at the presidential library honoring President Lyndon B. Johnson, who ended his own reelection bid in 1968. Biden will also use his remarks to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act, the landmark legislation that cemented Johnson's legacy.
CNN's MJ Lee and Devan Cole contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Jimmy Carter Told Son Why He Wants to Live Past 100: 'I'm Only Trying to Make It to Vote for Kamala Harris'
|
Kyler Alvord is a news editor at PEOPLE, leading the brand's political coverage. He joined the publication in 2021 on the crime beat.
Jimmy Carter is less than two months out from his 100th birthday on Oct. 1, but loved ones say his sights are set on reaching a different milestone: voting Kamala Harris for president.
Jimmy has been in hospice care for a year and a half, and though his condition has not dramatically changed since February 2023, his grandson Jason Carter told Southern Living in June that the family's 99-year-old patriarch was "no longer awake every day."
Two months later, however, Jason is sharing a more optimistic health update about the 39th U.S. president.
While promoting an upcoming tribute concert for his grandfather's birthday, Jason told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that Jimmy has been "more alert and interested in politics and the war in Gaza" in recent days.
Jason previously said that his grandfather has good days and bad days, and that it is often hard to predict what state he will be in when family stops in for visits.
When Jimmy's son Chip Carter asked him this week whether he wants to live to see his 100th birthday, the former president responded, "I'm only trying to make it to vote for Kamala Harris," according to Jason.
Though the 2024 presidential election is still three months away, the former president wouldn't have to wait until Nov. 5 to cast his ballot. Early voting in Georgia begins on Oct. 15, and absentee ballots are sent out up to 29 days before the election.
Georgia does not have any laws barring a ballot from being counted if someone dies between the early voting period and Election Day.
Jimmy, a Democrat who served in the White House from 1977 to 1981, has earned bipartisan praise for his post-presidency humanitarian work. For a while, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient stayed quieter than other former presidents about politics, but he grew more vocal under the presidency of Donald Trump.
"I think it's well-known that the incumbent [President Trump] is very careless with the truth," Jimmy told CBS News in a 2018 interview, adding: "I think I went through my campaign and my presidency without ever lying to the people or making a deliberately false statement, and I think that would be a very worthwhile thing to reinsert into politics these days."
"I think he's a disaster ... In human rights and in treating people equal," the former president said before his wife, former first lady Rosalynn Carter jumped in. "The worst is that he is not telling the truth, and that just hurts everything," she said.
When Trump was voted out of office in the 2020 election, Jimmy expressed optimism for the Biden-Harris administration.
"Rosalynn joins me in congratulating our friends President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris," he said in a statement. "We are proud of their well-run campaign and look forward to seeing the positive change they bring to our nation."
Georgia will play a significant role in the 2024 presidential election between Harris and Trump, as a swing state with 16 Electoral College votes. In 2020, Biden and Harris won Georgia by just 11,779 votes, or 0.23%.
Jimmy is deeply embedded in the state's politics as its former governor. He built his political career around seeking equality for all Americans at a time when segregationist and sexist attitudes dominated his rural Georgia community.
In his 1971 gubernatorial inauguration speech, he said that "the time for racial discrimination is over" and asserted that Black people should never "have to bear the additional burden" of being deprived equal opportunities. He has also routinely stood up for gender equality, supporting the Equal Rights Amendment and walking away from the Southern Baptist Church in 2000 when they declared that women cannot serve as pastors.
Never miss a story -- sign up for PEOPLE's free daily newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer.
As president, Jimmy nominated the first Black woman to the U.S. Cabinet, and he has lived to see the first Black woman elected to Senate, the first Black female Supreme Court justice and the first Black female vice president.
His unforeseen longevity in hospice care allowed him to see the first Black woman nominated for president by a major party on Friday, Aug. 2.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Entrepreneur warns a Kamala Harris presidency would hurt lower to middle-class the most
|
Entrepreneur Shawn Meaike discusses what the business climate would be like under Kamala Harris on 'The Big Money Show.'
As the 2024 election race heats up, and as Kamala Harris steps into the ring, small businesses are starting to examine what things could like under her presidency -- with one entrepreneur warning her administration's fiscal policies will hurt lower to middle-class Americans the most.
Entrepreneur Shawn Meaike sounded off during an interview on "The Big Money Show," Wednesday, explaining what the situation could look like with the current Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate at the helm.
"What people are not understanding is what... significant and actually ridiculous tax hike proposals mean for all of us, right?" He said. "When you start looking at these businesses now... it sounds great to say, I'm going to tax the 1% or get this, or I'm going to get only these individuals."
POSSIBLE KAMALA HARRIS PRESIDENCY SHOULD CONCERN SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS, ENTREPRENEUR SAYS
The entrepreneur, who founded and runs the life insurance agency, Family First Life (FFL), explained how the possible Harris economy and tax proposals would affect small businesses and threaten the American dream.
"At the end of the day, all these restaurants, all these business owners, myself, profit-sharing, what we're doing... we can't do." He continued, "at the end of the day, the American dream... I don't want to say the American dream is dead -- that's probably a little bit over the top -- but what I can tell you is it's going to make it really difficult to navigate what you want to do with employees, for employees."
Meaike recounted a recent conversation he had during which he discussed what the potential ramifications could be.
"I was with a gentleman yesterday. He owns multiple restaurants. I said, 'what are you doing to stay alive?' What do they do? Cut staff. Cut resources. The valets up the street are laid off. The servers are laid off. The guys and girls who deliver the food are laid off."
"So it's a trickle-down theory that's pretty significantly scary for me," he added.
The entrepreneur subsequently discussed the impact of wages and inflation, sending a warning to Americans should Trump not see a second term as president.
"If we don't have a Trump presidency, I think we continue to go the wrong way," he warned.
Meaike pointed to how his own family faced a difficult financial situation -- noting his mother's struggles with inflation and job losses -- remarking that "the most vulnerable people" are at risk of getting hurt.
"At the end of the day, when you start talking about [how] McDonald's is trying to find a way to get people to come in, McDonald's is saying, 'it's hard for you to come in and afford a meal'... what do people do when they're in a bad spot? They do things they wouldn't necessarily do."
The entrepreneur continued, expressing his concern for lower and middle-class income families if the current trajectory does not change.
"I think that financially, on top of the fact that it's an unsafe place right now, and you take that into consideration for insurance and everything else and small business owners are trying to do." He continued, "if we don't adjust this, the lower-class and middle-class income families are the ones going to be hurt by far the worst by this, and they're allegedly the ones [that are] going to be protected by a Harris presidency."
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
He also weighed in on Donald Trump choosing JD Vance as his running mate, remarking that he loved the pick, Vance's story and "the fact that he's a businessman."
Additionally, he told "The Big Money Show" he's excited about Trump and Vance's approach to money.
"I don't know why I want the government to have more of my money. I want me and my family to have more of my money. I trust me and what I do with my money more than I trust the federal government."
Meaike added that he was a small business owner during Trump's presidency, imploring other small business owners -- as well as employees -- to recall their financial situation during his administration.
"What we should be focused on is how much better was the employee's life," he concluded.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Fake electors get tapped as GOP convention delegates | CNN Politics
|
CNN --
Seven battleground states are sending fake electors and others who worked to upend the 2020 election results to represent their state parties at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, where they will officially anoint Donald Trump as their presidential nominee.
The fake electors and other election deniers identified by CNN include several who are currently facing criminal charges for their efforts in helping Trump try to overturn Joe Biden's 2020 victory. They hail from the states that were central to that plot last presidential cycle: Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico and Wisconsin, according to lists published by state parties and other documents obtained by CNN.
They've been selected to serve as national committee members, delegates or alternates with one clear task: Make Trump's nomination official.
Their role underscores how Trump has effectively woven election denialism into the GOP's platform. It also marks an about face for a party that, at least in the immediate aftermath of the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, sought to distance itself from Trump and his efforts to stay in power.
"Election denialism is like the price of entry now," according to former GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a CNN contributor who served on the House Select Committee that investigated the January 6 US Capitol riot and has endorsed Biden for president in 2024.
"These people that were in the fake elector scheme, or got a mug shot, they're now the heroes of the movement, and they've taken over the party," Kinzinger added.
Anna Kelly, a spokesman for the RNC, noted that Republican activists are responsible for electing their convention representatives. "State delegations are made up of delegates elected by their peers at the state party level," Kelly said.
From fringe elements to key players
The Arizona delegation includes three fake electors who have been charged in that state for their alleged roles in the plot, including state Sen. Jake Hoffman who was recently elected to be a Republican National Committee member. Hoffman has pleaded not guilty.
In Georgia, Amy Kremer - who helped organize the January 6 rally on the Ellipse ahead of the Capitol attack but has not been accused of any criminal activity - was chosen to serve on the Republican National Committee.
Jake Hoffman and Amy Kremer
AP
Michigan's delegation counts four individuals facing criminal charges brought by prosecutors in that state. The group includes former Michigan GOP co-chair and fake elector Meshawn Maddock who has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Matthew DePerno, a failed candidate for Michigan attorney general who recently announced a run for the state Supreme Court, is also headed to the convention. He too faces criminal charges for allegedly plotting to access and seize voting machines. He's denied any wrongdoing.
"They've gone from fringe elements of the party to, now, officially party members in good standing with perceived power," Kinzinger said, referring to those delegates who participated in efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
The Democratic National Committee also panned the roster headed to Milwaukee.
"This kind of far-right MAGA extremism on full display in today's GOP is exactly why voters will reject Trump this November," said Alex Floyd, a DNC spokesperson.
High honor
Nearly 5,000 delegates and alternates are set to convene in Wisconsin for the Republican Party's four-day confab beginning July 15 in Milwaukee. They'll descend from all 50 states and six territories. And they'll gather on the convention floor, sporting flamboyant hats and pledging their support to Trump.
The convention comes just months after Trump effectively remade the Republican National Committee in his image. Committee members selected Trump ally Michael Whatley to take over as party chair and Lara Trump, Trump's daughter-in-law, now serves as co-chair. Other senior Trump campaign advisers have taken on roles with the RNC, alongside their campaign duties.
Republican National Committee co-chairs Michael Whatley and Lara Trump address the media at the Oakland County GOP Headquarters, Friday, June 14, 2024 in Bloomfield Hills, Mich.
Carlos Osorio/AP
For the newly elected members of the RNC, the convention is a chance to gladhand and make their new role known. Their four-year term officially begins at the end of the convention. From there, they will take on responsibilities that could shape the GOP's future spending, fundraising, primary debates and next nominating convention.
"For a lot of people, it is a high honor. You are delegate to a presidential nominating committee and taking an important step in our country's democracy and history," said Douglas Heye, a GOP political strategist who once served as communications director for the Republican National Committee.
This year, those positions will be held by some Republicans who nearly undermined the democratic process in 2020.
"The first conventions I was going to, character matters was a big part of Republican messaging," Heye said. "We don't really talk about that anymore. And this is a manifest of that."
State cases against fake electors
Prosecutors in five of the seven hotly contested states last presidential cycle brought charges against dozens of Republicans who served as alternate electors or Trump allies who allegedly orchestrated the plot to overturn the election results.
But the cases have mostly plodded along. In Nevada, a judge recently dismissed the criminal charges against the GOP electors because of an issue about where the case was brought. At this stage, none of the four remaining state-level criminal cases is likely to be resolved before the 2024 election.
The slow progress of the criminal cases has left those who worked to overturn the last presidential election free to continue openly participating in the political process, cheered along by GOP activists, many of whom share in their baseless claims that the 2020 election was somehow rigged against Trump.
In Nevada, well before the charges were dismissed, the Republican Party selected five of the six fake electors from 2020 to attend the Republican National Convention.
New Mexico included just one of the alternate GOP electors - who has not been accused of criminal activity - in its convention delegation.
Pennsylvania is sending three fake electors to represent the state party in Milwaukee. While the GOP electors from Pennsylvania have not faced criminal prosecution, several played an active role in trying to upend the last presidential election.
That includes Thomas Carroll, a Pennsylvania attorney who represented two local county commissioners as part of a legal dispute about voting machine breaches. During the civil litigation, Carroll and the county were both sanctioned by the state's Supreme Court for defying a court order blocking their access to the machines, but they face no criminal charges.
Remorse and defiance
To be sure, some state level Republicans who participated in the fake elector scheme after the 2020 election have since expressed remorse for their actions.
In December, the 10 fake electors from Wisconsin disavowed their attempt to overturn Trump's defeat in 2020 and recognized the legitimacy of Biden's victory as part of a civil lawsuit settlement. In a rare moment of accountability, they even issued a statement acknowledging that the phony certificates they signed in December 2020 were "used as part of an attempt to improperly overturn" the lawful election results.
The Wisconsin Republicans pledged not to serve as real electors in 2024 or any election when Trump is on the ballot, or to act as sham electors in any future election, as part of the civil settlement.
But it didn't place any restrictions on other roles they could play. One of Wisconsin's fake electors, Pam Travis, is headed to the convention as a delegate. Another, Robert Spindell, is set to serve as an alternate. Neither have been charged with any crimes.
Ahead of November, many of the 2020 fake electors have remained defiant.
"The American people are awake to the perverse weaponization of government at the hands of power-hungry Democrats, which is why people are flocking to the Republican Party, President Trump, and the principles of liberty like never before, and my election as RNC National Committeeman for Arizona is proof positive that Republicans are the Party of everyday, hard working Americans," Hoffman, one of the Arizona fake electors, said in a statement to CNN.
Hoffman has pleaded not guilty and slammed the charges against him, telling CNN in a statement: "Let me be unequivocal, I am innocent of any crime, I will vigorously defend myself, and I look forward to the day when I am vindicated of this naked political persecution by the judicial process."
Maddock, one of the Michigan fake electors who has pleaded not guilty, has also called the prosecution against her "politically motivated" and continues to claim that Trump won the 2020 election. She responded to CNN's request for comment but did not address questions about her role as a fake elector and the significance of being chosen as a delegate.
Meshawn Maddock and Matthew DePerno
USA Today Network/AP
DePerno, also facing state charges in Michigan, shared a statement with CNN that said, in part: "You should actually do some research. So now is a good time to point out that not only are so-called 'election deniers' (what a dumb term) staying involved, we are planning on winning."
In Georgia, Kremer has also parroted the lie that Trump won a state he lost by some 12,000 votes.
"We didn't tell people to go to the Capitol. But the thing was, the people wanted to do something. So people marched to the Capitol," Kremer said in April, according to the Associated Press. "And we all know what's happened since then. The federal government has been weaponized against us."
Kremer told CNN in a statement that she is "honored and excited to be part of a new generation of leadership recently elected to the RNC and am blessed to represent Georgia on the committee."
"I look forward to working with my fellow colleagues at the RNC to secure our elections and make sure Donald J Trump is elected President in November," she added.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Fact check: Biden's NATO press conference | CNN Politics
|
Washington CNN --
President Joe Biden held a solo news conference on Thursday after a NATO summit in Washington, seeking to reassure voters concerned about his ability to serve and Democratic officials concerned about his ability to defeat former President Donald Trump in the 2024 election.
Biden's comments included some false and misleading claims. Here is a fact check.
Biden's Putin-Zelensky gaffe moment
Biden played down a gaffe he made at an event earlier on Thursday in which he had mistakenly introduced Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as "President Putin" before correcting himself moments later. Biden said at the press conference: "I said, 'No, I'm sorry, Zelensky.' And then I added five other names."
Facts First: Biden's last claim was false. He didn't utter "five other names" after he corrected the Putin-Zelensky mix-up. In fact, after Biden corrected himself, Zelensky said he is "better" than Putin, Biden agreed, and then Zelensky delivered remarks as Biden stood silently beside him.
Biden's travels
Biden spoke of a need to "pace" himself in his activities. He said, "The next debate, I'm not going to be traveling 15 time zones a week before. Anyway. That's what it was about."
Facts First: This is misleading. Biden did not travel abroad "a week before" the June 27 CNN presidential debate in which he performed poorly. In fact, he returned to the US from Europe 12 days before that debate, on June 15.
Biden attended a fundraiser in Los Angeles on June 15, returned to the White House on June 16 and went to Camp David on June 20 for intensive debate preparations. He stayed at Camp David until the day of the CNN presidential debate against Trump, which was held in Atlanta.
What Trump said about NATO
Biden, criticizing Trump's position on the NATO military alliance, said, "I think he said at one of his rallies, don't hold me to this, recently, where, 'NATO - I just learned about NATO,' or something to that effect. Foreign policy's never been his strong point."
Facts First: Biden's description of Trump's comment was indeed inaccurate. Trump did not say at a recent rally that "I just learned about NATO." Rather, Trump said at the rally that he had not known what NATO was, "too much," prior to attending his first alliance summit as president in 2017.
Trump said at his Tuesday rally in Florida: "I didn't want to be obnoxious because I felt, you know, it was the first time I'd ever done this. I went; I didn't even know what the hell NATO was too much before, but it didn't take me long to figure it out. Like about two minutes. And the first thing I figured out was they weren't paying." (Trump continued by making his usual false claims about NATO's funding structure.)
Biden is entitled to criticize Trump for this profession of prior ignorance about NATO or for his continued inaccuracy about NATO, but Biden's comments made it sound like Trump had acknowledged he had just learned about NATO now rather than seven years ago.
Hamas and the West Bank
Talking about the war between Israel and Hamas, Biden said Thursday, "There is a growing dissatisfaction in, on the West Bank, from the Palestinians, about Hamas. Hamas is not popular now."
Facts First: The limited available public opinion polling suggests the claim that "Hamas is not popular now" in the West Bank is not true - and that Hamas' popularity has increased there since its attack on Israel last October.
A poll taken in late May and early June by a well-known pollster based in the West Bank, the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, found that 73% of respondents in the West Bank supported the October attack by Hamas, that 82% of respondents in the West Bank were satisfied with Hamas' performance in the current war with Israel and that 71% of respondents in the West Bank preferred Hamas to control the Gaza Strip after the war. Hamas scored better on all of those questions among the respondents in the West Bank than it did among the respondents in Gaza.
In addition, Hamas had the support of about half the West Bank respondents who said they would vote in hypothetical parliamentary elections - double its support level in a poll nine months prior and more than double West Bank respondents' support in the latest poll for more moderate rival Fatah.
Biden's endorsement from the United Auto Workers
When a reporter told Biden that Reuters had reported Thursday that the leadership of the United Auto Workers union was concerned about Biden's ability to win the election, Biden responded, "UAW just endorsed me, but go ahead."
Facts First: Biden's claim that the UAW "just" endorsed him is misleading at best. The UAW actually announced its endorsement of Biden on January 24, more than five months ago.
In other words, Biden attempted to dismiss the reported post-debate concerns of UAW president Shawn Fain by insinuating that Fain's union had made a recent decision to back Biden. But the endorsement actually came long before the debate and the resulting crisis of confidence among some of Biden's pre-debate backers.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Kamala Harris' campaign raised $81 million in 24 hours after Biden dropped out
|
Washington -- Vice President Kamala Harris' presidential campaign raked in $81 million in the 24 hours after President Biden ended his bid for reelection and Harris announced she would be seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, her campaign said Monday.
The eye-popping haul includes money raised across Harris' campaign, the Democratic National Committee and joint fundraising committees, and underscores the vice president's enormous financial advantage over any potential challengers for the Democratic nomination. It is the largest amount of money raised in a 24-hour span in presidential history, according to Team Harris.
The campaign said that more than 888,000 grassroots donors made contributions in the past 24 hours, and for 60% of them, it was their first contribution of the 2024 election cycle. A call hosted by the group "Win with Black Women" brought in $1.6 million alone, Team Harris said.
"The historic outpouring of support for Vice President Harris represents exactly the kind of grassroots energy and enthusiasm that wins elections," said Kevin Munoz, spokesperson for Harris' campaign. "Already, we are seeing a broad and diverse coalition come together to support our critical work of talking to the voters that will decide this election."
Munoz said there is a "groundswell" of support for Harris.
The vice president officially launched her presidential campaign on Sunday, hours after Mr. Biden announced he would be exiting the 2024 presidential race. The president quickly endorsed Harris for the Democratic presidential nominee and a slew of other high-profile Democrats swiftly announced their backing for the vice president. The Biden campaign quickly filed paperwork with the Federal Election Commission renaming itself "Harris for President."
Among those who have thrown their support behind Harris are rising stars in the party who were considered possible successors to Mr. Biden, including Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and California Gov. Gavin Newsom.
The president's withdrawal from the campaign came after dozens of Democrats urged him to step aside in the wake of his disastrous debate performance in late June. His showing in the face-off with Trump raised concerns about his fitness for a second term in office and whether he could defeat the Republican presidential nominee in November.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Elon Musk to donate $45M a month to pro-Trump super PAC following endorsement of former president: report
|
Billionaire Elon Musk, coming off his endorsement of Trump after the Republican candidate survived an assassination attempt on Saturday, plans to donate about $45 million per month to a super PAC backing the former president, according to a report.
Formed last month in support of Trump with financial help from some of Musk's friends, America PAC includes Palantir Technologies co-founder Joe Lonsdale, Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, and former U.S. ambassador to Canada Kelly Craft and her husband, Joe, the chief executive of coal producer Alliance Resource Partners, The Wall Street Journal reported.
The group has spent at least $6.6 million on behalf of Trump, who was nominated at the Republican National Convention on Monday to be the party's candidate for president.
America PAC focuses on registering voters and urging swing state residents to vote early and request mail-in ballots, according to the report. The goal is to counter Democrats' "get out the vote" campaigns and on-the-ground efforts in the months leading up to the November election.
ELON MUSK DONATES TO GROUP WORKING TO ELECT TRUMP: REPORT
Musk, who is currently the richest person in the world with an estimated fortune of more than $250 billion, plans to make substantial $45 million donations to the super PAC each month leading up to the election, the report states. The largest known donation of the 2024 election cycle comes from the great-grandson of banker Thomas Mellon, who donated $50 million to a pro-Trump super PAC.
A filing made on Monday revealed that America PAC had $8.75 million in contributions for the three-month period ending on June 30, the WSJ reported, and Musk allegedly signaled that he planned to start his donations this month.
Musk reportedly made a donation to the super PAC last week, according to Bloomberg News, although the size of the donation is unknown.
Musk said in March that he did not plan to donate to the Trump or Biden campaigns, but the SpaceX and Tesla CEO is now putting his support behind the former president, even offering his full endorsement following the assassination attempt on Trump at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania.
"I fully endorse President Trump and hope for his rapid recovery," Musk wrote on X, adding in a subsequent post: "Last time America had a candidate this tough was Theodore Roosevelt."
BLACKROCK PULLS TV AD FEATURING TRUMP RALLY SHOOTER
Musk and Trump have been talking on a more frequent basis in recent months and have become friendly, according to The Wall Street Journal, which also noted that Trump had knowledge of a project Musk was helping organize to prevent voter fraud.
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
Musk has appeared more favorable toward Trump than Biden on X, often criticizing the current president while expressing support for the former president.
The tech executive also donated $100,000 to a GoFundMe page authorized by Trump to help the victims of Saturday's shooting and their families. One rally attendee was killed protecting his wife and daughter from gunfire, while two other spectators were injured.
The Wall Street Journal contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
JD Vance makes poorly-aged comment about Simone Biles in resurfaced clip
|
An old interview clip featuring JD Vance has resurfaced shortly after Simone Biles made history at the Paris 2024 Olympics, in which the potential vice president criticized the media's response towards her withdrawal from the Tokyo Olympics.
On Tuesday, July 31, the 27-year-old athlete became the most decorated gymnast in American history after the women's US gymnastics team scored gold during the all-around finals. The victory marked a comeback for Biles, who withdrew from the last summer Olympics in 2021 due to her mental health.
Following her withdrawal from the competition, Vance appeared on Fox News' Outnumbered in July 2021, where he called out the media for supporting Biles during her "weakest moment."
"It's understandable that she was going through an incredible amount of pressure," the Ohio senator said at the time. "What I find so weird about this - and it reflects on the media more than it does on Simone Biles - is that we've tried to turn a very tragic moment, Simone Biles quitting the Olympic team, into this act of heroism.
"And I think it reflects pretty poorly on our sort of therapeutic society that we try to praise people not for moments of strength, not for moments of heroism, but for their weakest moments."
Vance continued: "Being an athlete at that level is incredibly tough. A normal response in this moment would be to say: 'It's just a shame that she's going through this. It's a shame that she quit.' But instead, what our press has done, I think, is turn this into this weird therapeutic moment. 'Let's praise her for doing this.' And I think that's really where the problem herein lies."
In 2021, Biles pulled out of the women's all-around gymnastics competition to focus on her mental health, after suffering from a condition known as the "twisties". The phenomenon, typically experienced by gymnasts, involves losing control mid-air and feeling unable to land the move, creating a high-risk and dangerous situation. Biles has previously described the twisties as being "lost in the air," likening the uncomfortable experience to being unable to drive while at the wheel in a car.
However, that all went away during Tuesday's all-around team final, when Biles scored her eighth Olympic medal - becoming the most decorated gymnast in the US and the fifth-most decorated female Olympic gymnast in the world.
This isn't the first time that past comments made by Vance have resurfaced since he was selected as former president Donald Trump's running mate in the 2024 presidential election. The 39-year-old Republican politician sparked outrage after he described vice president Kamala Harris as a "childless cat lady" during a 2021 interview with Fox News host Tucker Carlson.
The Hillbilly Elegy author claimed that the US was governed by "a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they've made and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too."
"Look at Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, AOC, the entire future of the Democrats is controlled by people without children," Vance said. "How does it make any sense we've turned our country over to people who don't really have a direct stake in it?"
Despite being selected as Trump's running mate, another old video interview showed Vance admitting that there were "definitely some people" who voted for Trump in 2016 "for racist reasons". Meanwhile, resurfaced emails recently revealed that Vance once privately considered Trump a "demagogue," a "disaster," and a "morally reprehensible human being."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Elon Musk blasts Google over omission of Trump assassination search suggestions
|
'The Big Weekend Show' co-hosts discuss Vice President Kamala Harris' positions on key issues.
Billionaire Elon Musk suggested that Google's omission of search functions for the assassination attempt against former President Trump may be improper.
Musk took to social media to highlight that Google Search's autocomplete feature omitted results relating to the July 13 shooting. Google has denied taking any action to limit the results.
"Wow, Google has a search ban on President Donald Trump." Musk wrote. "Election interference?"
"They're getting themselves into a lot of trouble if they interfere with the election," he wrote in a follow-up post.
NY BALLOT INITIATIVE COULD BLOCK PARENTS FROM SAY IN CHILD'S TRANS SURGERY, CRITICS WARN IN FIERY CAMPAIGN
A Google spokesperson told FOX Business that there was no "manual action taken on these predictions."
META ADDING AI DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT FOR 2024 ELECTION ADS
"Our systems have protections against Autocomplete predictions associated with political violence, which were working as intended prior to this horrific event occurring," the spokesperson wrote. "We're working on improvements to ensure our systems are more up to date."
Screenshots from Google showed recommended search results of the failed assassination of former President Reagan and the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, whose death sparked World War I, the shooting of Bob Marley and the failed attempt on former President Ford.
GOOGLE TO REQUIRE POLITICAL ADS TO DISCLOSE USE OF AI DURING 2024 ELECTION CYCLE
Even the keywords "Trump assassination attempt" yielded no additional terms from Google, according to users.
"Big Tech is trying to interfere in the election AGAIN to help Kamala Harris," Donald Trump Jr. wrote on X. "We all know this is intentional election interference from Google. Truly despicable."
Google's spokesperson went on to say the autocomplete feature is "just a tool to help people save time" and they can still search for anything they want.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
"Following this terrible act, people turned to Google to find high quality information - we connected them with helpful results, and will continue to do so," the company said.
Fox News' Louis Casiano contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
CISA and FBI Release Joint PSA: Putting Potential DDoS Attacks During the 2024 Election Cycle in Context | CISA
|
WASHINGTON - Today, as part of their public service announcement series for the 2024 election cycle, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) jointly released Just So You Know: DDoS Attacks Could Hinder Access to Election Information, Would Not Prevent Voting. This public service announcement is to raise awareness that Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks on election infrastructure, or adjacent infrastructure that supports election operations, could hinder public access to election information, but would not impact the security or integrity of election processes. The PSA is part of the agencies' ongoing commitment to provide the public with information and the election infrastructure community with the support they need to run safe and secure elections.
"With Election Day less than 100 days away, it is important to help put into context some of the incidents the American public may see during the election cycle that, while potentially causing some minor disruptions, will not fundamentally impact the security or integrity of the democratic process," said CISA Senior Advisor Cait Conley. "DDoS attacks are one example of a tactic that we have seen used against election infrastructure in the past and will likely see again in the future, but they will NOT affect the security or integrity of the actual election. They may cause some minor disruptions or prevent the public from receiving timely information. It is important to talk about these potential issues now, because nefarious actors, like our foreign adversaries or cybercriminals, could use DDoS incidents to cast doubt on the election systems or processes. An informed public is key to neutralizing the impact of foreign influence operations and disinformation, which is why we put out this advisory on what a DDoS attack could - and couldn't - do."
"DDoS are low-level attacks that work by overwhelming websites with traffic to render them inaccessible," said FBI Deputy Assistant Director Cynthia Kaiser. "Given the prevalence of false claims about DDoS attacks in prior U.S. and foreign elections, we are warning that DDoS attacks against election-related websites could temporarily disrupt access to some online election functions, like voter look-up tools, but would not prevent voting or compromise the integrity of voting systems. This warning highlights the importance for voters to seek out information about how to vote prior to Election Day and demonstrates the FBI's and CISA's continued commitment to sharing information with the public about potential cyber threats."
This publication is to help educate the public on what DDoS attacks are, their effects on election infrastructure, recommendations for voters, and victim reporting information.
CISA and the FBI encourage the public to report information concerning suspicious or criminal activity, such as DDoS attacks, to their local FBI field office, by calling 1-800-CALL-FBI (1-800-225-53240, or online at ic3.gov). DDoS attacks impacting election infrastructure can also be reported to CISA by calling 1-844-Say-CISA (1-844-729-2472), emailing report@cisa.dhs.gov, or submitting online at www.cisa.gov/report. To learn more, visit Just So You Know: DDoS Attacks Could Hinder Access to Election Information, Would Not Prevent Voting on CISA.gov.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Scoop: House Democrats whip against Republicans' latest non-citizen voting crackdown
|
Why it matters: House Republicans have made non-citizen voting in federal elections -- for which there is no evidence of a widespread phenomenon -- a marquee issue going into the 2024 campaign.
State of play: The House is set to vote next week on the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or SAVE Act, which would require "documentary proof of United States citizenship" to vote in federal elections.
Driving the news: In a whip question -- a roundup of the coming week's votes with instructions for how leadership wants rank-and-file members to vote -- House Minority Whip Katherine Clark's (D-Mass.) office told House Democrats they are "urged to VOTE NO" on the bill.
The other side: Johnson's office released a 22-page report making the case for the SAVE Act, which points to a "loophole" in current federal law that only requires voters to attest to their citizenship status, rather than being asked.
Flashback: House Republicans aiming to block non-citizen voting in Washington, D.C. previously held a vote in May, in which 52 Democrats broke away from their leadership and voted yes.
Between the lines: The GOP fixation on the topic echoes former President Trump's unfounded claims of widespread immigrant voting in past elections, as well as his equally baseless claims about the 2024 election.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Celebs Spread Deceptively Edited Video, Falsely Claim Trump Will Outlaw Elections
|
Hollywood celebrities are spreading a hoax claiming that former President Donald Trump will outlaw elections if he returns to the White House.
Their specious claim comes from a recent speech during which the GOP presidential nominee encouraged Christians to turn out en masse this November -- with important context cut from a 27-second video clip.
"Four years, it will be fixed, it will be fine. You won't have to vote anymore. In four years, you won't have to vote again," Trump said Friday to the crowd at Turning Point Action's Believers' Summit in West Palm Beach, Florida.
Celebrities twisted Trump's remarks to claim that he will outright ban elections -- when he was saying they needed to contribute to "a landslide that's too big to rig" so a second Trump administration can reform election laws with voter ID requirements, thus reducing the need for massive turnout to counteract alleged voter fraud. The statement, in context, reads:
I will secure our elections. Our goal will be, as I said, one day voting with paper ballots, proof of citizenship, and a thing called voter ID. (Applause) You know, when you negotiate and I do that with the Democrats and I negotiate with them all the time on this. I say, look, we're going to fix our laws with voting, we have to start with voter ID. Everybody has to -- "No way!" -- the discussion never even goes any further.
I say, we have to have voter ID. It's called voter identification. "No, we're not going to do it." Now, there's only one reason they do that. because they want to cheat. There's only one reason.
You know, in their national convention, when they have their convention, they have a voter tag on them bigger than their chest, depending on who, whose, which chest we're talking about. Bigger than this, I like this. It has their name, their serial number, it's got the whole deal, middle name, past addresses, it's got everything. Otherwise you can't get into the Democrat National Convention.
But with voting, one of your most important things you can do, maybe in many ways your most important, they don't want to approve voter ID. That's because they want to cheat. But until then, Republicans must win. We have to win this election. Most important election ever. (Applause)
We want a landslide that's too big to rig. If you want to save America, get your friends, get your family, get everyone you know, and vote, vote early, vote absentee, vote on Election Day. I don't care how, but you have to get out and vote.
And again, Christians -- get out and vote! Just this time. (Applause) You won't have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what? It'll be fixed, it'll be fine. You won't have to vote anymore. My beautiful Christians. I love you, Christians. I'm a Christian. I love you. Get out. You've got to get out and vote. In four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good. You're not going to have to vote.
Since Friday's speech, pro-Kamala stars including Rob Reiner, Mia Farrow, and Barbra Streisand have spread the Trump hoax to their millions of social media followers. Disney's Doctor Strange director Scott Derrickson also spread the lie.
As Breitbart News reported, the formerly respected Atlantic magazine got in the game, too. "He's telegraphing his authoritarian intentions in plain sight," writer Brian Klaas's article states.
Rob Reiner falsely claimed Trump "point blank said he will destroy our Democracy."
Mia Farrow also spread the lie, saying Trump will hold onto the White House forever.
Here it is America. We are warned. This guy and his inner circle intend to seize power -and keep it. Say a clear ' NO' with your vote 🇺🇸 https://t.co/5vLXUsnPVm
-- Mia Farrow 🏳️🌈 🌻🇺🇸💙 (@MiaFarrow) July 27, 2024
Barbra Streisand got in the game too.
Scott Derrickson -- who directed Disney's Marvel superhero movie Doctor Strange -- falsely claimed Trump "will remain in power until he dies."
HBO's The Wire creator David Simon also spread the lie.
Several other celebrities re-posted the hoax from other accounts, including John Cusack, Amber Tamblyn, and Nancy Sinatra.
Their not-so-subtle subterfuge is part of the establishment's ongoing effort the smear Trump as an enemy of democracy -- and to make voters forget that Democrat elites just nullified their own presidential primary, executed a soft coup of President Joe Biden, and installed Vice President Kamala Harris as the party's presumptive nominee without her earning a single vote.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
New poll reveals what Democrats think of Harris as president
|
Morale is plummeting among Biden staff and Democratic officials still loyal to President Biden's re-election campaign, CNN reported on Friday, with the fight to get him to withdraw from the race or stay turning off many people involved.
With President Biden's future uncertain, a majority of Democrats say the country would be in good hands if his vice president took over the White House.
A new poll from the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that about 6 in 10 Democrats believe Vice President Kamala Harris would do a good job as president herself. About 2 in 10 Democrats don't believe she would, and another 2 in 10 say they don't know enough to say.
The survey comes as an increasing number of Democratic officials are publicly urging Biden to withdraw from the 2024 presidential election after his disastrous debate performance on June 27. Democratic officials are worried that voters don't believe the 81-year-old president is capable of performing his duties, and many have suggested that Harris or another candidate would fare better against the Republican nominee, former President Trump.
Recent polls show Democratic voters have soured on Biden as well. A Suffolk University/Boston Globe poll of Massachusetts residents found that 64% of likely Democratic or Democratic-leaning voters want someone other than Biden to face off against Trump. The AP-NORC national survey likewise found that 65% of Democrats say Biden should drop out of the race.
BIDEN CAMPAIGN INSISTS HE'S 'IN THIS RACE' DESPITE MOUNTING DEMOCRAT CALLS TO RESIGN: LIVE UPDATES
While Harris is the focus of several insider discussions for a plan B ticket, the vice president has maintained strong public support for Biden and defended him from slings and arrows thrown by panicked party officials speaking anonymously to the press.
But if Harris, 59, were to replace Biden atop the ticket, Democratic voters would mostly be happy with the younger candidate -- a woman of color who could champion the party's message on abortion rights and a former state attorney general who could prosecute the case against Trump, a convicted felon in New York.
65% OF DEMOCRATS SAY BIDEN SHOULD DROP OUT AFTER DEBATE DISASTER, POLL FINDS
Harris could also motivate key Democratic constituencies to show up on Election Day, including women and Black adults, who were more likely than Americans overall to say Harris would do well as president.
Americans outside the Democratic Party were more skeptical of how Harris would perform in the Oval Office. Only about 3 in 10 Americans say Harris would be a good president. Nearly half said Harris would not do a good job, and 2 in 10 say they don't know enough to have an opinion.
BIDEN RESPONDS TO 'DISENCHANTMENT' FROM BLACK VOTERS: 'THEY KNOW WHERE MY HEART IS'
Harris' favorability rating is similar to Biden's, but the share of Americans who have an unfavorable opinion of her is somewhat lower. The poll showed that about 4 in 10 U.S. adults have a favorable opinion of Harris, while about half have an unfavorable opinion. There are more Americans with a negative view of Biden: approximately 6 in 10. About 1 in 10 Americans say they don't know enough to have an opinion of Harris, whereas nearly everyone has an opinion on Biden.
About three-quarters of Democrats have a positive view of Harris, which is in line with how Democrats view Biden. Seven in 10 have a favorable view of him.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Harris is also better-known among Democrats than other potential candidates, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom or Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. About one-third of Democrats say Newsom would make a good president, and half don't know enough to say. About one-quarter of Democrats say Whitmer would do well, and about two-thirds don't know enough to say.
The AP poll of 1,253 adults was conducted July 11-15, 2024, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 3.8 percentage points.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Trump's presidential bid has the support of only half of his Cabinet
|
It is rare for Cabinet members to not support the president they served. They are normally some of a president's most loyal supporters. But in the case of Trump's Cabinet, these uniquely qualified insiders -- spanning from the vice president and chiefs of staff to more than a dozen agencies, such as Agriculture, Commerce, Homeland Security and Transportation -- are deeply divided about whether he should return to power.
Some such as former secretary of state Mike Pompeo and former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley spoke at the Republican National Convention, where Trump secured his party's presidential nomination, while others like his former vice president Mike Pence were notably absent. Pence has been publicly critical of Trump and told The Washington Post that he does not support his candidacy.
In total, The Post reached out to all 42 members of Trump's Cabinet, asking each of them whether they supported his presidential bid. Twenty responded. Twenty-two didn't, but we were able to determine through public statements that nine of them backed Trump's candidacy and two didn't.
When asked for comment, Karoline Leavitt, Trump campaign national press secretary, told The Post in a statement that "President Trump has unified and strengthened the Republican Party more than ever before and is supported by nearly every single GOP leader and elected official, including most of his former cabinet and staff."
More than half -- 24 of 42 -- of Trump's former Cabinet members have expressed support for his second presidential campaign. And some are among Trump's loudest supporters, like former housing secretary Ben Carson, former treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin, Trump's short-lived national security adviser Michael Flynn, and Trump's other director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe, who has advised Trump on policy during his 2024 presidential campaign.
Even officials who left the administration on bad terms with the former president, such as former attorney general Jeff Sessions, who resigned his post under pressure and had his later U.S. Senate bid torpedoed by Trump, are now in Trump's camp. When contacted by The Post in July, Sessions said, "I do plan to support President Trump."
Finally, this group also includes two of Trump's harshest critics: William P. Barr, Trump's second attorney general, and Haley, both of whom previously denounced him and even warned people against voting for him.
Barr resigned in December 2020 after repeatedly telling Trump there was no widespread fraud in the election he had just lost. Barr said Trump "shouldn't be anywhere near the Oval Office," last year, but ultimately said in April he would vote for him. Haley said Trump was "unhinged," in February, before backing him at the Republican National Convention in July.
"Donald Trump has my strong endorsement, period." Haley said at the convention. She also warned that if Vice President Harris were to be the Democratic nominee, the country would be worse off, saying "For the sake of our nation, we have to go with Donald Trump."
When asked by CNN's Jake Tapper why she endorsed Trump after having publicly criticized him, she said "If I'm looking at substance, I am going to agree with Trump more than I'm going to agree with Harris."
3 Cabinet members oppose Trump
Three of Trump's former Cabinet members, however, have publicly said they would not vote for him, citing not just disagreements over his policies, but fears around the perceived threat to personal freedoms and American democracy that they think his candidacy poses.
Pence had the most public clash with Trump when he refused the former president's demand to block Congress from certifying his election loss to Joe Biden. A mob of Trump supporters attacked the Capitol and interrupted that certification process, putting Pence in danger.
Pence ran against Trump in the 2024 Republican nominating contest, but dropped out before the first primary and has refused to endorse him. He told The Post he does not support Trump's candidacy.
But perhaps no one has been more explicit in their dislike of Trump than Mark T. Esper, Trump's other former defense secretary. He claimed in his 2022 memoir that Trump asked whether U.S. troops could shoot at civilian protesters, and suggested the United States secretly bomb drug labs in Mexico. And on the third anniversary of the attack on the Capitol he told CNN, "Yes I do regard him as a threat to democracy, democracy as we know it." After saying on HBO on March 29 that he "definitely" is not voting for Trump, he said on CNN, "I'm not sure we can survive another four years of Donald Trump."
Finally, John Bolton, one of Trump's four national security advisers, clashed with Trump over a number of issues, including his approach to North Korea, Iran and Afghanistan. In September 2019, Trump announced on Twitter that he had fired Bolton, who told The Post at the time that he had submitted his resignation a day earlier. In January, Bolton updated his memoir and wrote "Trump is unfit to be president."
15 Cabinet members won't say whether they support Trump
This group of former Cabinet officials have declined to say whether they will vote for Trump. Eleven did not respond to multiple messages, and have not stated their positions publicly. Two responded to inquiries but declined to state their position; and two said they were undecided.
Many in this group have been publicly critical of Trump, according to a Post analysis of media statements from former Cabinet officials; two, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, quit Trump's administration in its final days, citing the attack on the U.S. Capitol by a mob of his supporters.
Chao emailed staff at the time to say it "deeply troubled me in a way that I simply cannot set aside." And DeVos wrote in her resignation letter, "There is no mistaking the impact your rhetoric had on the situation, and it is the inflection point for me." Chao's husband, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the minority leader, has endorsed Trump's 2024 election bid while she has remained silent. DeVos backed a Trump rival in the Republican presidential nominating contest, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, and declined as late as last month to endorse Trump. Neither responded to messages from The Post.
Notably, a number of national security officials also fall into this camp: They include one of Trump's two defense secretaries, Jim Mattis; one of his two directors of national intelligence, Daniel Coats; one of his four national security advisers, H.R. McMaster; and both people who served as Trump's homeland security secretaries, John F. Kelly and Kirstjen Nielsen.
Mattis, Coats and McMaster have each criticized Trump publicly although they have avoided talking directly about the election. Mattis's spokesman said he does not comment on politics; Coats told The Post "I have not made a final decision" about whether he would vote for Trump. But, he added: "There's no way I'm going to vote Democrat."
Tom Price, one of Trump's two former health and human services secretaries, also told The Post he was undecided. Initially, he said he would have supported a Trump-Haley ticket. But after Trump selected Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) as his running mate, Price told The Post, "It's not no comment and it's not silent. It is undecided."
At least one other person in this group also projected some form of neutrality. A spokesperson at the company that former energy secretary Dan Brouillette now leads said it "does not endorse presidential candidates," and ignored follow-up questions about his views.
The rest did not respond to messages from The Post.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Kamala Harris' approval rating surges as Donald Trump's falls
|
Vice President Kamala Harris has seen a significant boost in her approval ratings ever since she became the presumptive Democratic 2024 nominee, while Donald Trump's has fallen, according to a poll.
An ABC News/Ipsos survey of 1,200 adults released on Sunday showed that Harris' favorability rating stands at 43 percent, 8 points up from the 35 percent favorability rating she recorded in a previous poll conducted before President Joe Biden ended his 2024 campaign.
The number of people who hold an unfavorable view of the vice president has also fallen from 46 percent recorded in the previous poll published last week, to 42 percent in Sunday's survey.
In comparison, Trump's favorability rating has fallen 4 points between the two surveys from 40 percent to 36. The previous poll was conducted in the week after Trump was confirmed as the GOP's 2024 nominee at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, and the assassination attempt against the former president in Pennsylvania.
The poll is the latest indication of enthusiasm behind Harris' White House bid after Biden ended his reelection campaign following weeks of pressure in the wake of his languished CNN debate performance on June 27.
Biden, 81, had already faced concerns that he was too old to run for a second term, with multiple polls suggesting voters were not enthused that the 2024 election was going to be a rematch between the president and the 78-year-old Trump.
Ever since Biden dropped out of the race and endorsed Harris, multiple current and former Democratic figures have also backed the vice president in the race against Trump.
Harris has also seen a surge of fundraising, with her campaign reporting it has raised more than $200 million in its first week, around two-thirds of which came from first-time donors.
Elsewhere, the ABC News/Ipsos poll shows nearly nine in 10 Democrats (88 percent) are expressing enthusiasm for Harris' campaign as well as 70 percent of Black voters.
Harris has also seen a major rise in the number of independent voters who hold a favorable view of her, up from 28 percent last week to 42 percent in the latest poll.
The poll showed that Trump's favorability rating among the potentially key independent demographic dropped from 35 percent last week to 27 percent in Sunday's survey.
When contacted for comment, Trump's communications director Steven Cheung referred to a recent Telegraph/Redfield & Wilton Strategies poll which showed Trump beating Harris in several swing states.
Harris' office has been contacted for comment via email.
After Biden ended his reelection campaign on July 21, Trump became the oldest presidential nominee in U.S. history. If Trump wins November's election, he could overtake Biden as the oldest ever sitting U.S. president during his second term.
The previous ABC News/Ipsos poll showed that 15 percent of Americans held unfavorable views of both Trump and Biden.
Now the race is likely to be between Harris and Trump, only seven percent of Americans say they dislike both candidates.
The ABC News/Ipsos poll surveyed 1,200 U.S. between July 26-27. The results have a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Kamala Harris formally chosen as Democratic nominee
|
If she defeats Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, in November she would be America's first female president.
She ran unopposed in the virtual roll call after President Joe Biden stepped aside last month and quickly endorsed her. Several potential rivals followed his lead.
On Friday afternoon, Ms Harris formally became the nominee after securing the support of 2,350 delegates, the threshold required to earn the nomination.
In total, Democrats have said 3,923 delegates - or 99% of the participants - plan to vote for her.
The rollcall began on Thursday and ends on Monday.
Presidential and vice-presidential nominees are typically anointed at their party conventions, but the relatively late date of the 2024 DNC risks falling afoul of state ballot access laws.
Ms Harris, 59, was born in Oakland, California, and is the first Democratic nominee in the party's nearly 200-year history to hail from a western state.
She rose through the ranks of state politics from San Francisco district attorney to California attorney general and then US senator.
Before dropping out of the race, Mr Biden had easily won the Democratic primary. He did not face stiff opposition despite voter concerns about his age and had won backing from 99% of pledged DNC delegates.
But the 81-year-old faced escalating pressure from within the party to withdraw after a poor June debate performance against Trump.
The decision to hold a virtual nominating process ahead of the 19-22 August convention was made while Mr Biden was still the presumptive candidate.
It came in response to rules for ballot access in the state of Ohio, which requires that candidates for the November ballot be formally selected 90 days before the election - or by 7 August.
Republican leaders in the state had warned they would enforce the law and, though lawmakers eventually created an exemption as they have done in the past, Democrats said an early rollcall would pre-empt further risks of their candidates being excluded from the ballot.
Delegates do not need to vote on the vice-presidential pick.
Ms Harris is expected to name her running mate by Monday.
The top contenders are Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.
The Trump campaign and some Republicans have criticised the replacement of Mr Biden with Ms Harris, arguing she is the first major party candidate to secure the nomination without holding a press conference or a sit-down interview. Some have referred to the substitution as a "coup".
But Ms Harris has hit the campaign trail hard since Mr Biden's endorsement, making the case against Trump in multiple campaign rallies and fundraisers across battleground states.
On Friday, the campaign announced it had raised more than $310m (£242m) in the month of July, with more than two-thirds of people donating money for the first time.
That figure is more than double the $138m raised by the Trump campaign last month and marks the biggest haul of the 2024 election cycle so far.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Homemade Air Fryer Chips
|
You can also make these chips chunky, skinny or crinkle-cut. Skinny chips will take a few minutes less, and chunky chips will take a few minutes more in the air fryer - just check on them and give them a shake an extra couple of times to ensure they don't burn.
Crispy, golden and fluffy. They are the perfect side to any meal, or can just be eaten by themselves as a snack. 😋
Stay updated with new recipes!
Subscribe to the newsletter to hear when I post a new recipe. I'm also on YouTube (new videos every week) and Instagram (behind-the-scenes stories & beautiful food photos).
This post was first published in Sept 22. Updated in July 2024 with a video and some housekeeping.
Some of the links in this post may be affiliate links - which means if you buy the product I get a small commission (at no extra cost to you). If you do buy, then thank you! That's what helps us to keep Kitchen Sanctuary running. The nutritional information provided is approximate and can vary depending on several factors. For more information please see our Terms & Conditions.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
'White Women For Kamala' speaker tells viewers to never correct Black women: 'Put our listening ears on!'
|
By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News' Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.
One of the speakers in a Zoom meeting rallying support for Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign among White women went viral for her patronizing tone as she chided listeners never to "correct" women of other races.
The "White Women: Answer The Call" Zoom meeting gathered 164,000 White women last week, breaking the world record for the largest Zoom call. The massive remote meeting to rally support for Harris featured multiple celebrity guests like U.S. Women's Soccer star Megan Rapinoe, musician Pink, and actress Connie Britton, the last of whom jokingly dubbed the meeting, "Karens for Kamala." The Thursday gathering was inspired by a previous Zoom call directed at Black women last Sunday that was organized by activist group "Win With Black Women."
Arielle Fodor, a teacher turned TikTok "influencer" with over 1.3 million followers, went viral for her contribution to the Zoom meeting. Fodor, known as Mrs. Frazzled on TikTok, makes content where she uses what she describes as a "teacher voice," speaking as if addressing children while correcting people about things like "mansplaining."
After being introduced Thursday as someone who could help "gentle parent" the group through the 2024 election, she said, "BIPOC women have tapped us in as White women to step up, listen, and get involved this election season. This is a really important time and we all need to use our voices and influence for the greater good. No matter who you are, you are all influencers in some way."
DEM WHO CRITICIZED VP HARRIS' HANDLING OF SOUTHERN BORDER ENDORSES HER FOR PRESIDENT
She then went on to share some "dos and don't's for getting involved in politics online and navigating the toxicity that comes with it."
Fodor went on to warn her fellow White women "that some toxicity can come from us too."
"Don't make it about yourself. As White women, we need to use our privilege to make positive changes," she said. "If you find yourself talking over or speaking for BIPOC [Black, Indigenous, and other people of color] individuals or, God forbid, correcting them, just take a beat and instead we can put our listening ears on."
CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE
'THEY TAKE US FOR GRANTED': BLACK AMERICANS SOUND OFF ON MISCONCEPTIONS DEMOCRATS HAVE ABOUT THEM
She encouraged listeners, "Do learn from and amplify the voices of those who have been historically marginalized and use the privilege you have in order to push for a systemic change. As White people, we have a lot to learn and unlearn. So do check your blind spots. You are responsible for your algorithm, believe it or not. Intentionally seek out and share content from BIPOC creators, activists, and thought leaders. They should be the leaders of conversations about race, injustice, and equity."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The remarks were shared widely on X, with conservative figures taking aim at Fodor's speaking style, calling it condescending and cringe-inducing.
"Next-level cringe," X owner Elon Musk wrote about it.
Fodor posted her entire remarks to the call on her TikTok account and called it the "speech that launched a million haters." In them, she encouraged listeners to try to persuade Trump supporters in their orbit because "you are all influencers."
"Being an ally means being willing to be uncomfortable, and no one is more uncomfy than someone talking to their bigoted family members," she said, smiling.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Musk says he's not donating $45 million a month to Trump
|
Tech billionaire Elon Musk appeared to pare down his commitment to give $45 million a month supporting former President Trump, saying Tuesday that his giving is "at a much lower level."
Musk had reportedly committed the record amount to America PAC, which he founded alongside other notable conservative donors. The promise came the same day Trump named Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) as his running mate.
In a Tuesday interview with conservative commentator Jordan Peterson, Musk backed off reports of the $45 million figure for Trump.
"What's been reported in the media is simply not true," he said.
Musk later explained on the social media platform X, which he owns, that he will still back America PAC. He did not confirm nor deny the $45 million figure, or what proportion of those funds would go to backing Trump.
"I am making some donations to America PAC, but at a much lower level and the key values of the PAC are supporting a meritocracy & individual freedom," he wrote. "Republicans are mostly, but not entirely, on the side of merit & freedom."
The commitment broke a previous promise to stay out of the 2024 election for Musk. He endorsed Trump last week, shortly after the former president survived an attempted assassination.
"I fully endorse President Trump and hope for his rapid recovery," Musk wrote in a post on his social platform X, alongside a video of the former president standing and raising his fist after being shot in the ear.
Musk appeared to be growing closer to Trump in recent months, with The Wall Street Journal reporting in late May that the billionaire and the former president had discussed a possible advisory role for Musk in a second Trump administration.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Joe Biden tells campaign staff leaving race was right thing to do
|
In his first comments since dropping out of the 2024 election, US President Joe Biden called into a campaign staff meeting in Delaware on Monday as his team transitions to supporting Vice-President Kamala Harris for president.
Biden, who is quarantining after contracting Covid-19, thanked the staff and told them to "embrace" Ms Harris because "she's the best".
"I know yesterday's news was surprising and hard for you to hear, but it was the right thing to do," Mr Biden told staffers.
Ms Harris and staffers had gathered at the campaign headquarters in Wilmington, Delaware one day after Mr Biden pulled out of the race for president and endorsed Ms Harris as his replacement.
Since then, millions of dollars in donations have poured into her campaign and leading Democrats have lined up to support her bid as the democratic nominee.
For weeks, Mr Biden faced increasing pressure to step aside over concerns about his ability to win another term, spurred by a poor performance in a debate against Republican Donald Trump.
On the call, Mr Biden acknowledged the team had "poured" their "heart and soul" into helping him stay in office for a second term but said, "I'm not going anywhere" and vowed to remain "fully engaged" in the campaign.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Trump greets Netanyahu at Mar-a-Lago, says World War III could happen if Harris wins
|
Former President Trump claimed on Friday that conflicts in the Middle East could escalate into a third World War if he loses the 2024 election.
The Republican nominee for president made those remarks as he met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at his Mar-a-Lago resort home. Netanyahu traveled to Florida to meet with Trump after meeting with President Biden and presumptive Democratic nominee Vice President Kamala Harris in Washington, D.C., earlier this week, following his Wednesday address to a joint session of Congress.
At Mar-a-Lago, Trump told reporters that Harris is "worse" on Middle East issues and claimed Israel's war with Hamas in Gaza could expand into a wider regional conflict if she succeeds Biden, who announced Sunday that he would not seek re-election.
"We'll see how it goes. But if it all works out, if we win, it'll be very simple. It's all going to work out. And very quickly," Trump said. "If we don't, you're going to end up with major wars in the Middle East. And maybe a third World war. You are closer to a third World War right now than at any time since the Second World War. We've never been so close because we have incompetent people running the country."
NETANYAHU TO MEET TRUMP AS ISRAELI LEADER LOOKS TO REKINDLE RELATIONSHIP
Trump's remarks come amid a reported diplomatic flare-up between Harris and Netanyahu which occurred after their meeting Thursday.
In comments after the meeting, Harris said she told the Israeli prime minister that she "will always ensure that Israel is able to defend itself, including from Iran and Iran-backed militias such as Hamas and Hezbollah."
"I also expressed with the Prime Minister my serious concern about the scale of human suffering in Gaza, including the death of far too many innocent civilians. And I made clear my serious concern about the dire humanitarian situation there," she added, calling for an end to the war and the release of all hostages held in Hamas captivity.
Harris' criticisms of Israel's conduct in the Gaza war reportedly irked Netanyahu, according to Axios, who has repeatedly said fighting must continue until Hamas is eliminated, even if hostages are released.
Asked about Harris' comments Friday, Netanyahu told reporters Israel still hopes for a cease-fire deal.
NETANYAHU SEEMS TO CONTRADICT BIDEN CEASE-FIRE OFFER: 'NONSTARTER' IF ALL CONDITIONS NOT MET
"We're trying to get one. And I think, to the extent that Hamas understands that there's no daylight between Israel and the United States, that expedites the deal. And I hope that those comments don't change that," Netanyahu said.
The Mar-a-Lago meeting is face-to-face contact Netanyahu has had with Trump since the Republican nominee left the White House in 2020. Their relationship strained when Netanyahu congratulated President-elect Biden on his victory that year, which prompted Trump to call out the Israeli leader. "I haven't spoken to him since," Trump told Israeli journalist Barak Ravid that year. "F--k him," the former president added.
Now, Netanyahu is making an effort to make amends and secure Trump's support for Israel in the war against Gaza, should the Republican candidate return to the White House after the November election.
BIDEN JOKES HE WAS '12' WHEN HE FIRST MET ISRAELI PM GOLDA MEIR DURING NETANYAHU VISIT TO WHITE HOUSE
In Trump's home, the Israeli leader presented him with a photo of one of the Bibas toddlers, children who are still held captive by Hamas terrorists in Gaza.
Netanyahu said the picture was given to him by the toddlers' grandfather, who asked him to share it with Trump.
"Wow, that's very moving," Trump said, accepting the photograph. "We'll get that taken care of."
Protesters gathered in West Palm Beach, Florida, to greet Netanyahu as his plane landed. The prime minister's visit to the nation's capital earlier this week sparked pro-Hamas demonstrations, which featured antisemitic slogans, calls for Israel's eradication, vandalism and heated confrontations with D.C. police.
In his address to Congress, Netanyahu accused Iran of funding the protests and tore into the demonstrators, who have demanded an immediate cease-fire between Israel and Hamas.
'CHICKENS FOR KFC': NETANYAHU RIPS CEASE-FIRE ACTIVISTS IN SPEECH TO CONGRESS AS TLAIB SILENTLY PROTESTS
"I have a message for these protesters. When the tyrants of Tehran, who hang gays from cranes and murder women for not covering their hair, are praising, promoting and funding you, you have officially become Iran's useful idiots," Netanyahu said Wednesday.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
"Some of these protesters hold up signs proclaiming gays for Gaza. They might as well hold up signs saying 'Chickens for KFC.' These protesters chant 'From the river to the sea.' But many don't have a clue what river and what sea they're talking about."
The war in Gaza has raged since Hamas' mass slaughter of nearly 1,200 people, including more than 30 Americans, in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Hamas continues to hold more than 100 hostages in Gaza, including eight Americans.
Fox News Digital's Benjamin Weinthal and Greg Norman contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
US election live updates: top Democrats back Kamala Harris as donations surge after Biden steps aside
|
Hello and welcome to the Guardian's live US politics coverage following President Joe Biden's announcement that he will be withdrawing from the race - but seeing out his term as president - and his endorsement of his Vice President, Kamala Harris.
"I will do everything in my power to unite the Democratic Party -- and unite our nation - to defeat Donald Trump and his extreme Project 2025 agenda," Harris said in a statement announcing that she would be running.
Harris reportedly sent a fundraising email that began, "I am running to be President of the United States".
Democrat donations spiked sharply following Biden's announcement. The liberal political action committee ActBlue announced that Democrats had donated $46.7m in the seven hours since Biden announced that he would withdraw to 9pm ET, saying it was the biggest fundraising day of the 2024 election cycle.
Reports emerged later that the total had ticked over to $50m - making it one of the two biggest fundraising days in the history of the PAC, with the other being after Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsbgerg died.
Meanwhile senior Democrats, including some of those who have been named as possible contenders for the presidential or vice-presidential nomination, endorsed Kamala Harris for the nomination on Sunday within hours of Biden's announcement.
Shortly after Biden stepped aside he firmly endorsed Harris, who would make history as the nation's first Black and South Asian woman to become a major party's presidential nominee. Other endorsements flowed from Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, the first major female presidential nominee, and prominent US senators, a wide swath of House representatives and members of the influential Congressional Black Caucus.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
10% of illegal aliens admit they're registered to vote: Heritage Foundation survey | Blaze Media
|
A survey conducted by the Heritage Foundation's Oversight Project found that 10% of illegal aliens and non-citizens stated that they are registered to vote in the upcoming election.
In a video posted to X on July 4, Mike Howell, the Oversight Project's executive director, stated, "My fellow Americans, today we are calling on all of you to declare independence from foreigners deciding our elections. The evidence you are about to see relates to illegal aliens being registered to vote. This is a problem national in scale. The United States of America is for Americans, and our elections only should be decided by them."
'If this proportion holds true nationwide, the integrity of the 2024 election is in jeopardy.'
Muckraker.com reported that it interviewed dozens of individuals residing at a Charlotte, North Carolina, apartment complex primarily occupied by illegal aliens. A hidden camera captured several interviews with residents who claimed to be non-citizens who had also registered to vote.
"We come with a group, an organization that is trying to help register Hispanic people to vote. Because in a few months we will be voting for governor or president," the interviewees were told.
Anthony Rubin, the founder of Muckraker, explained, "We visited the apartment complex to ask residents two questions: Are you registered to vote; and are you a citizen?"
"Shockingly, four of the 41 people we asked confirmed that they were a non-citizen and registered to vote," Rubin continued. "If this proportion holds true nationwide, the integrity of the 2024 election is in jeopardy."
During an interview on Real America's Voice's "The War Room," Howell stated, "The borders have been wide open. We've been told by the left and the mainstream media that poses no threat to the integrity of our election systems. We've been told that it's a conspiracy theory."
"And so, what we did," Howell continued, "is simply went out and asked in an apartment complex in North Carolina. And discovered that illegal aliens, or non-citizens -- wherever they are in the process -- admitted to being registered to vote at a proportion that is four out of 40, which is 10%. If that pattern holds, with the 10 million plus that have come across the border, you do the math for an election last go-around that came down to 40,000 votes in a few key swing states. The plan from this Biden administration is to refuse a peaceful transition of power by relying on illegal aliens to vote for them, and that's clear as day."
Howell noted that a report containing the survey's findings was sent to the state's governor and attorney general.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Border mayors judge Harris' performance on immigration crisis as vice president: 'Nonexistent'
|
By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News' Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.
Vice President Kamala Harris' record on immigration and border security has been thin in her current role, according to three mayors along the southern border, leaving questions about how she plans to tackle one of the biggest issues in the 2024 presidential election.
"From where I sit, I would grade the vice president's performance of the border crisis as pretty much nonexistent," Mayor Douglas Nicholls of Yuma, Arizona, told Fox News Digital.
President Biden assigned Harris to tackle the root causes of Central American migration, from poverty to violence, in early 2021. Harris traveled to Mexico and Guatemala that June, and negotiated a deal that saw the U.S. send $4 billion to Central American countries, with private companies kicking in an extra $5.2 billion.
SIX HOUSE DEMS VOTE WITH GOP TO CONDEMN KAMALA HARRIS FOR 'BORDER CZAR' ROLE
She also visited El Paso, Texas, in 2021, amid mounting pressure from Republicans.
But Harris' focus faded from immigration after that, and she has not visited the southern border or any Central American countries since January 2022.
"Every border is different," Mayor Jorge Maldonado of Nogales, Arizona, said. "'Til you see her come here and really look at our border and pay any interest, you know, she doesn't know what Nogales is."
Nogales sits above "one of the hardest borders to get to," Maldonado said, sparing it from much of the migrant surge other sectors endured.
But Customs and Border Protection does send lots of migrants from other areas to the small, remote city because it is home to a large processing center, which caused some chaos at the height of the surge when officials began releasing migrants, Maldonado said.
WATCH MORE FOX NEWS DIGITAL ORIGINALS HERE
Media outlets and Republicans gave Harris the moniker of "border czar" shortly after she received her root causes directive. The White House rejected that nickname at the time, and is pushing back on it again as Harris' critics argue she failed to make any difference at the border.
"The term 'border czar' ... it's become more of a political liability since there wasn't a lot done," Nicholls said.
"She needed to be here," Dr. Victor Treviño, mayor of Laredo, Texas, said when asked about the White House's opposition to the informal title. But now, he said he sees a "great opportunity" for Harris to get bold on immigration.
Treviño attended a gathering of Latino leaders last week at the vice president's residence in D.C. and said he saw a new side to Harris. As vice president, she was very quiet, he said. Since becoming a candidate, Harris is "communicative and very outspoken on things that need to be done," he said.
"If she continues to function in that fashion, I think she'll have a very good chance," he said.
CRISIS IN CALIFORNIA: A $6,500 CARTEL TICKET AND A DREAM OF DRIVING FOR DOORDASH
Treviño is inviting Harris to visit the border in Laredo ahead of the election, as immigration continues to rank high among voters' priorities.
"The Latino vote is crucial for her if she is to win the presidency," Treviño said. "She needs to look at our challenges and be involved with what we live and work every day here."
CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Fox News Digital reached out to the Vice President's campaign and the White House, but did not immediately hear back.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
'Joe Biden Is a Gift'
|
The outcome of the presidential campaign, Republicans believed, was a fait accompli. "Donald Trump was well on his way to a 320-electoral-vote win," Chris LaCivita told me this past Sunday as Democrats questioned, ever more frantically, whether President Joe Biden should remain the party's nominee in November. "That's pre-debate."
LaCivita paused to repeat himself: "Pre-debate."
This could be interpreted as trash talk coming from a cocky campaign: If you thought Biden was in trouble before he bombed at the June 27 debate, imagine the trouble he's in now. But I heard something different in LaCivita's voice.
One of the two principals tasked with returning Trump to the White House, LaCivita had long conceived of the 2024 race as a contest that would be "extraordinarily visual" -- namely, a contrast of strength versus weakness. Trump, whatever his countless liabilities as a candidate, would be cast as the dauntless and forceful alpha, while Biden would be painted as the pitiable old heel, less a bad guy than the butt of a very bad joke, America's lovable but lethargic uncle who needed, at long last, to be put to bed.
As the likelihood of a Trump-versus-Biden rematch set in, the public responded to the two candidates precisely as LaCivita and his campaign co-manager, Susie Wiles, had hoped. The percentage of voters who felt that Biden, at 81, was too old for another term rose throughout 2023, even as the electorate's concerns about Trump's age, 78, remained relatively static. By the end of the primaries, the public's attitude toward the two nominees had begun to harden: One was a liar, a scoundrel, and a crook -- but the other one, the old one, was unfit to be president.
In the months that followed, Trump and his campaign would seize on Biden's every stumble, his every blank stare to reinforce that observation, seeking to portray the incumbent as "stuttering, stammering, walking around, feeling his way like a blind man," as LaCivita put it to me. That was the plan. And it worked. Watching Biden's slide in the polls, and sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars for an advertising blitz that would punctuate the president's visible decrepitude, Trump's team entered the summer believing that a landslide awaited in the fall.
Only one thing could disrupt that plan: a change of candidates atop the Democratic ticket.
There was always a certain danger inherent to this assault on Biden's faculties. If Wiles and LaCivita were too successful -- if too many Democrats decided, too quickly, that Biden was no longer capable of defeating Trump, much less serving another four years thereafter -- then they risked losing an ideal opponent against whom their every tactical maneuver had already been deliberated, poll-tested, and prepared. Campaigns are usually on guard against peaking too soon; in this case, the risk for Trump's team was Biden bottoming out too early.
In my conversations with LaCivita and Wiles over the past six months, they assured me multiple times that the campaign was planning for all contingencies, that they took quite seriously the possibility of a substitution and would be ready if Biden forfeited the nomination.
By mid-June, however, not long before the debate, their tone had changed. Trump was speaking at a Turning Point USA rally in Detroit and the three of us stood backstage, leaning against the wall of a dimly lit cargo bay, a pair of Secret Service vehicles idling nearby. When I asked about the prospect of Trump facing a different Democratic opponent in the fall, LaCivita and Wiles shook their heads. They told me it was too late; the most influential players in Democratic politics had become too invested in the narrative that Biden was fully competent and capable of serving another four years.
"We're talking about an admission that the Democratic Party establishment would have to make," LaCivita said. "We're talking about pulling the plug -- "
"On the president of the United States," Wiles interrupted.
LaCivita nodded. "Who they've been saying up to this point in time is perfectly fine."
No, Wiles and LaCivita agreed, the general-election matchup was set -- and they were just fine with that.
"Joe Biden," Wiles told me, allowing the slightest of smiles, "is a gift."
But now, as we talked after the debate, it was apparent that they might have miscalculated. Elected Democrats were calling for Biden's removal from the ticket. When I asked who Trump's opponent was going to be come November, his two deputies sounded flummoxed.
"I don't know. I don't know," Wiles said.
"Based off of the available public data," LaCivita added, "he doesn't look like he's going anywhere."
Ronald Brownstein: The Biden-replacement operation
Biden quitting the race would necessitate a dramatic reset -- not just for the Democratic Party, but for Trump's campaign. Wiles and LaCivita told me that any Democratic replacement would inherit the president's deficiencies; that whether it's Vice President Kamala Harris or California Governor Gavin Newsom or anyone else, Trump's blueprint for victory would remain essentially unchanged. But they know that's not true. They know their campaign has been engineered in every way -- from the voters they target to the viral memes they create -- to defeat Biden. And privately, they are all but praying that he remains their opponent.
I was struck by the irony. The two people who had done so much to eliminate the havoc and guesswork that defined Trump's previous two campaigns for the presidency could now do little but hope that their opponent got his act together.
Wiles and LaCivita are two of America's most feared political operatives. She is the person most responsible for Florida -- not long ago the nation's premier electoral prize -- falling off the battleground map, having spearheaded campaigns that so dramatically improved the Republican Party's performance among nonwhite voters that Democrats are now surrendering the state. He is the strategist and ad maker best known for destroying John Kerry's presidential hopes in 2004, masterminding the "Swift Boat" attacks that sank the Democratic nominee. Together, as the architects of Trump's campaign, they represent a threat unlike anything Democrats encountered during the 2016 or 2020 elections.
On the evening of March 5 -- Super Tuesday -- I sat down with them in the tea room at Mar-a-Lago, an opulent space where intricate winged cherubs are carved into 10-foot marble archways. As the sun set behind the lagoon that borders the western edge of Trump's property, the lights were also going out on his primary challengers. Soon the polls would close and the former president would romp across more than a dozen states, winning 94 percent of the available delegates and effectively clinching the GOP nomination. Trump had just one target remaining.
For an hour and 15 minutes, Wiles and LaCivita presented their vision for retaking the White House. They detailed a new approach to targeting and turning out voters, one that departs dramatically from recent Republican presidential campaigns, suggesting that suburban women might be less a priority than young men of color. They justified their plans for a smaller, nimbler organization than Biden's reelection behemoth by pointing to a shrunken electoral map of just seven swing states that, by June, they had narrowed to four. And they alleged that the Republican National Committee -- which, in the days that followed our interview, would come entirely under Trump's control -- had lost their candidate the last election by relying on faulty data and botching its field program.
In political circles, it's considered a marvel that Trump won the presidency once, and came within 42,918 votes of winning it a second time, without ever assembling a sophisticated operation. Trump's loyalists in particular have spent the past few years haunted by a counterfactual: Had the president run a reelection campaign that was even slightly more effective -- a campaign that didn't go broke that fall; a campaign that didn't employ unskilled interlopers in crucial positions; a campaign that didn't discourage his supporters from casting votes by mail -- wouldn't he have won a second term comfortably?
Wiles and LaCivita believe the answer is yes. Both have imported their own loyalists, making the campaign a Brady Bunch configuration led by the oddest of couples. Wiles, who runs the day-to-day operation, is small and self-possessed, a gray-haired grandmother known never to utter a profane word; LaCivita, a Marine combat veteran who charts the macro strategy, is a big and brash presence, famous for profane outbursts that leave Wiles rolling her eyes. They disagree often -- staffers joke about feeling like the children of quarreling parents -- but Wiles, who hired LaCivita, pulls rank. What unites them, with each other and Trump, is an obsession with winning. To that end, Wiles and LaCivita have never been focused on beating Biden at the margins; rather, their plan has been to bully him, to humiliate him, optimizing Trump's campaign to unleash such a debilitating assault on the president's age and faculties that he would be ruined before a single vote is cast this fall.
At one point that March evening, the three of us sat discussing the era of hyperpolarization that Trump ushered in. Given the trench-warfare realities -- a vanishing center of the electorate, consecutive presidential races decided by fractions of percentage points, incessant governing impasses between the two parties -- I suggested that Electoral College blowouts were a thing of the past.
In the scenario they were imagining, not only would Trump take back the White House in an electoral wipeout -- a Republican carrying the popular vote for just the second time in nine tries -- but he would obliterate entire downballot garrisons of the Democratic Party, forcing the American left to fundamentally recalibrate its approach to immigration, economics, policing, and the many cultural positions that have antagonized the working class. Wiles and LaCivita wouldn't simply be credited with electing a president; they would be remembered for running a campaign that altered the nation's political DNA.
It's a scenario that Democrats might have scoffed at a few months ago. Not anymore. "The numbers were daunting before the debate, and now there's a real danger that they're going to get worse," David Axelrod, the chief strategist for Barack Obama's two winning campaigns, told me in the first week of July. "If that's the case -- if we get to the point of fighting to hold on to Virginia and New Hampshire and Minnesota, meaning the main six or seven battlegrounds are gone -- then yeah, we're talking about a landslide, both in the Electoral College and in the popular vote."
Axelrod added, "The magnitude of that defeat, I think, would be devastating to the party. Those margins at the top of the ticket would sweep Democrats out of office everywhere -- House, Senate, governor, you name it. Considering the unthinkable latitude the Supreme Court has just given Trump, we could end up with a situation where he has dominant majorities in Congress and, really, unfettered control of the country. That's not far-fetched."
In the course of many hours of conversations with the people inside Trump's campaign, I was struck by the arrogance that animated their approach to an election that most pundits long expected would be a third consecutive cliff-hanger. Yet I also detected a certain conflict, the sort of disquiet that accompanies abetting a man who is both a convicted felon claiming that the state is persecuting him and an aspiring strongman pledging to use the state against his own enemies. People close to Trump spoke regularly of his victimhood but also his own calls for retribution; they expressed solidarity with their boss while also questioning, in private moments, what working for him -- what electing him -- might portend.
At the center of the campaign, I would come to realize, is a comedy too dark even for Shakespeare: a mad king who shows flashes of reason, a pair of cunning viziers who cling to the hope that these flashes portend something more, and a terrible truth about what might ultimately be lost by winning.
From the January/February 2024 issue: Twenty-four Atlantic contributors on what would happen if Trump wins
Long before Wiles took charge of Trump's 2024 campaign, she appeared to be caught in a political love triangle. Having helped Ron DeSantis eke out victory in the Florida governor's race of 2018 -- no small feat given the "blue wave" that crushed Republicans nationwide -- Wiles was presumed to be charting his course as a presidential contender even as she kept ties with Trump, whose Florida campaign she ran in 2016.
But soon after DeSantis's win, Wiles was suddenly and unceremoniously banished from the new governor's inner circle. She swears she doesn't know why. Maybe DeSantis couldn't stand her getting the credit for his victory. Or perhaps he felt she was ultimately more loyal to Trump. Whatever the case, Wiles told me, working for DeSantis was the "biggest mistake" of her career -- and she became determined to make him feel the same way about discarding her.
Her friends had been shocked when she'd agreed to work for Trump the first time around, and relieved when she joined DeSantis a couple of years later. Now, in late 2019, she was adrift -- blackballed by the state's political establishment, recently divorced, and fretting to friends about financial difficulties. (Wiles denied that part, saying, "I was able to pick myself up and get work without too much of a delay.") She decided to rejoin Trump for the short term, agreeing to run his Florida operations in 2020, but what lay beyond was murky. All she knew, Wiles recalls thinking, is that she couldn't be "nearly as trusting" going forward.
After Trump lost the 2020 election, Wiles faced a defining professional decision. Trump's holdover political organization, a PAC called Save America, was fractured by infighting and needed new management. Wiles needed the work. But she knew the former president's operation was a graveyard for political consultants. The only way she would say yes to Trump, she made it known, was if she took total control -- answering to him and him alone. Trump agreed to that condition. Within days, the decree reached all corners of the Republican empire: There was a new underboss at Mar-a-Lago. Wiles, LaCivita told me, had established herself as "the real power behind the throne."
They didn't know each other back then; LaCivita had been affiliated with a pro-Trump outside group, but not with the candidate himself. He and Wiles had a mutual friend, though, in Trump's pollster Tony Fabrizio. When Fabrizio arranged a dinner for the three of them in March 2022 at Casa D'Angelo, an Italian restaurant in Fort Lauderdale, LaCivita figured he was being buttered up to join Save America. But during that conversation, and over another dinner soon after, he realized Wiles wasn't just looking for help with the PAC; Trump was planning to run again in 2024, and she needed a partner to help her guide his campaign. LaCivita was noncommittal. "You need to come meet the boss," Wiles told him.
Sitting down with Trump for the first time, on the patio of Mar-a-Lago a few weeks later, LaCivita was overwhelmed. The music was blaring; Trump controlled the playlist from his iPad, sometimes ignoring the conversation at the table as he shuffled from Pavarotti to Axl Rose. Guests approached the table to greet the former president, repeatedly interrupting them. At times Trump seemed less interested in LaCivita's qualifications than in his thoughts about a competitor, the Republican consultant Jeff Roe, who had sat in "that very chair" LaCivita occupied and shared his own theories about the 2024 election.
LaCivita would later tell me, on several occasions, that he'd had no misgivings about going to work for Trump. But according to several people close to him, that's not true. These individuals, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to preserve their relationships with LaCivita, told me he'd been torn -- appreciating the once-in-a-career opportunity before him while also recognizing that Trump was still every bit the erratic, combustible man who'd renounced his own vice president the moment he ceased to be completely servile. Wiles could sense LaCivita's reluctance. When Trump decided later that year that he wanted to hire LaCivita, and requested his presence at his Bedminster club in New Jersey, she resorted to deception. "I knew if I said, 'Chris, you're going to come up here and the president's going to put the hard sell on you and you're going to get hired,' he might not come," Wiles told me. "So we tricked him."
LaCivita went to Bedminster believing that Trump wanted to brainstorm ideas for television ads. Instead, two minutes into the conversation, Trump asked LaCivita: "When can you start?" LaCivita froze; he recalls nodding in the affirmative while struggling to articulate any words. "Susie, make a deal with him," Trump said. "Let's get this thing going."
Almost immediately after he came on board in the fall of 2022, LaCivita's new boss began to self-destruct. In late November, Trump hosted Ye (the rapper formerly known as Kanye West) and Nick Fuentes, a known anti-Semite and white supremacist, for dinner at Mar-a-Lago. Then, in early December, Trump proclaimed on social media that the supposedly fraudulent nature of Biden's 2020 victory "allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution." Adding insult to self-inflicted injury, Trump blamed anti-abortion activists for the GOP's poor performance in the midterm elections, infuriating an essential bloc of his political base.
"It was rough. Rough," LaCivita told me.
In those early days, I wondered, did he regret saying yes to Trump?
"You know, I won't go -- " he stopped himself. "Look, on this level, a campaign is never without its personal and its professional struggles. That's just the way it is."
LaCivita wasn't the only one struggling. When I started to ask Wiles to identify the low point of Trump's campaign, she cut me off before the question was finished.
"Christmas. He was quiet over Christmas," she said, alluding to the drubbing he took for the Ye-Fuentes dinner and his post about terminating the Constitution. That week, she told me, Trump asked Wiles a question: "Do you think I would win Florida?'"
He could feel his grip on the party loosening. Trump's losing streak had coincided with DeSantis winning reelection by a million and a half votes in the fall of 2022. Already some major donors, operatives, and activists had defected to the Florida governor as he built a presidential campaign aimed at toppling Trump in the 2024 GOP primary.
"I said, 'Yes, of course,'" Wiles recalled, biting her lip. "But I wasn't sure."
Wiles and LaCivita knew that DeSantis would stake his entire campaign on the Iowa caucuses. In 2016, Ted Cruz had defeated Trump there by building a sprawling ground game of volunteers and paid staffers who coordinated down to the precinct level. DeSantis was copying that blueprint, hiring Cruz's senior advisers from that race while raising loads of money to construct an even bigger organization.
Trump had never gotten over being outmaneuvered by Cruz in Iowa. In fact, long before he declared America's federal elections illegitimate, Trump had claimed that the 2016 caucuses were rigged. So when Wiles and LaCivita sat him down to discuss strategy in the state -- warning him of what DeSantis had planned -- Trump told them, matter-of-factly, "That can never happen again."
Over the next year, two things became apparent. First, thanks to the constant suck of Trump's legal fees on his political coffers -- campaign insiders say that courtroom costs have accounted for at least 25 cents of every dollar raised by the campaign and affiliated PACs, an estimate that tracks with reporting elsewhere -- Trump was not going to be able to spend money like DeSantis could in Iowa. Second, he might not need to.
In Florida, Wiles claims, she had discovered that there were roughly a million Trump supporters who had no history of engagement with the state party apparatus. And yet these people, when contacted by the GOP in 2016 and 2020, would sometimes become Trump's most devoted volunteers. Wiles believed the same thing was possible in Iowa. So did LaCivita. This didn't exactly represent a bet-the-house risk; Trump was always going to be favored against a big, fractured field, in Iowa and beyond. Still, Wiles and LaCivita saw in the opening act of the 2024 primary a chance to pressure-test a theory that could prove crucial later in the year.
Scouring precinct-level statistics from the four previous times Trump had competed in Iowa -- the primary and general elections in 2016 and 2020 -- they isolated the most MAGA-friendly pockets of the state. Then, comparing data they'd collected from those areas against the state's voter file, LaCivita and Wiles found what they were looking for: Some 8,000 of those Iowans they identified as pro-Trump -- people who, over the previous seven or eight years, had engaged with Trump's campaign either physically, digitally, or through the mail -- were not even registered to vote. Thousands more who were registered to vote had never participated in a caucus. These were the people who, if converted from sympathizers to supporters, could power Trump's organization.
Political consultants often consider eligible voters on a one-to-five scale: Ones being the people who never miss an election and hand out campaign literature in their spare time, fives being the reclusive types who can't be canvassed, have never cast a vote, and probably never will. Most campaigns, especially in Iowa, focus their resources on the ones and twos. "There was this other bucket that we identified: low-propensity Trump supporters," Wiles said. "We sort of took a gamble, but we were really sure that those tier-three people would be participating, that they would be our voters."
Several times in the summer and fall of 2023, I heard from DeSantis allies who were bewildered by what Trump's team was (and wasn't) doing on the ground. "Our opponents were spending tens of millions of dollars paying for voter contacts for people to knock on doors," LaCivita said. "And we were spending tens of thousands printing training brochures and pretty hats with golden embroidery on them."
The gold-embroidered hats were reserved for "captains," the volunteers responsible for organizing Trump supporters in their precincts. Notably, Wiles said, most of these captains came from the third tier of Iowa's electorate -- they were identified, recruited, and then trained in one of the hundreds of caucus-education sessions Trump's team held around the state. At that point, the captains were given a list of 10 targets in their community who fit a similar profile, and told to turn them out for the caucuses. It was called the "10 for Trump" program. The best way to find and mobilize more low-propensity Trump supporters, the thinking went, was to deputize people just like them.
It appeared to work. On caucus night, as the wind chill plunged to 40 degrees below zero in parts of Iowa -- and voter turnout plunged too -- Trump won 51 percent of the vote, breaking an Iowa record, and clobbered DeSantis despite being heavily outspent. According to LaCivita, the precincts where the campaign invested heavily in the "10 for Trump" program saw a significant jump in turnout compared with the rest of the state.
That's the story Wiles and LaCivita are telling about Iowa, anyway. Not everyone believes it. Trump enjoyed a sizable lead in the Iowa polls from the start, thanks in part to his allies blanketing the state with TV ads before his opponents were even out of the gate. Several people who worked on competing campaigns in Iowa said it was Trump's first indictment, in March 2023 -- not his campaign's ground game or anything else -- that made him unbeatable. "When the Democrats started using the law to go after Trump, it hardened all of his very conservative supporters, some of whom had softened after 2022," Sam Cooper, who served as political director for DeSantis, told me. "It was a race the Trump campaign locked up well before caucus day."
The consensus of the political class post-2020 held that Trump's base was maxed out; that any MAGA sympathizers who'd gone undiscovered in 2016 had, by the time of his reelection bid, been identified and incorporated into the GOP turnout machine. Wiles and LaCivita disagreed. They built a primary campaign on the premise that an untapped market for Trumpism still existed. But they knew that the true test of their theory was never going to come in Iowa.
Six miles inland from Mar-a-Lago, tucked inside a contemporary 15-floor office building that overlooks a Home Depot parking lot, is a presidential-campaign headquarters so small and austere that nobody seems to realize it's there. When I told the security guard at the front desk that I'd come to visit "the Trump offices," she gave me a quizzical look; only later, after hanging around for several hours, was I clued in to the joke that nobody in this building -- not any of the dozen law firms, or the rare-coin dealer, or apparently even the security guard -- has any idea exactly who occupies the second and sixth floors.
In fairness, Trump's team used to inhabit just one of those floors. It was only after the merger with the Republican National Committee in early March, which eliminated dozens of supposedly duplicative jobs and relocated most of the RNC staff to Palm Beach, that additional space became necessary. Still, that a former president whose 2020 headquarters was something out of a Silicon Valley infomercial -- all touch-screen entryways and floor-to-ceiling glass offices with dazzling views of the Potomac -- was housing his 2024 operation in a plebeian office park signaled a sort of inverse ostentation, saying much about the personalities and priorities behind this campaign.
From day one, people familiar with internal deliberations told me, Wiles and LaCivita emphasized efficiency. There would be none of the excesses that became a staple of Trump's 2020 reelection effort, which raised more than $1 billion yet unfathomably ran short of cash in the home stretch of the election. They needed to control all the money. And for that, they needed to control the national party apparatus.
David A. Graham: Trump's campaign has lost whatever substance it once had
The Trump campaign's takeover of the RNC in March -- installing the former president's daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, as the new co-chair, while establishing LaCivita as chief of staff and de facto chief executive, all of it long before Trump had technically secured the party's nomination -- didn't sit well with many Republicans. Appearances aside, the imperatives of a presidential campaign are not always aligned with those of the RNC, whose job it is to advance the party's interests up and down the ballot and across the country. "Party politics is a team sport. It's bigger than Ronald Reagan or Donald Trump or any one candidate," said Henry Barbour, a longtime Mississippi committeeman, who has fought to prevent the national party's funds from going to Trump's legal defense. "Nobody's ever going to agree on exactly how you split the money up, but you've got to take a holistic approach in thinking about all the campaigns, not just one."
The RNC under Ronna McDaniel, who chaired the national party from early 2017 until LaCivita's takeover, had become a frequent target of Trump's ire. He didn't like that the party remained neutral in the early stages of the 2024 primary -- and he was especially furious that McDaniel commissioned debates among the candidates. But what might have bothered him most was the RNC's priorities: McDaniel was continuing to pour money into field operations, stressing the need for a massive get-out-the-vote program, but showed little interest in his pet issue of "election integrity."
"Tell you what," Trump said to Wiles and LaCivita. "I'll turn out the vote. You spend that money protecting it."
The marching orders were clear: Trump's lieutenants were to dismantle much of the RNC's existing ground game and divert resources to a colossal new election-integrity program -- a legion of lawyers on retainer, hundreds of training seminars for poll monitors nationwide, a goal of 100,000 volunteers organized and assigned to stand watch outside voting precincts, tabulation centers, and even individual drop boxes.
To sell party officials on this dramatic tactical shift, Wiles and LaCivita pointed to the inefficiencies of the old RNC approach -- of which there were plenty -- and argued that they could run a more effective ground game with fewer resources. "The RNC has always operated on number of calls, number of door knocks, and nobody paid any attention to what the result of each of those was. We have no use for that," Wiles told me. "It doesn't matter to me how many calls you've made. What matters to me is the number of calls you've made and gotten a positive response from a voter ... They considered success volume. It's not."
Several RNC insiders told me they agreed, at least broadly, with this critique. Yet they also said Trump's team had grossly exaggerated the party's past expenditures to serve the campaign's mission of reallocating resources toward Trump's election-integrity obsession. For example, LaCivita told me that, based on his review of the party's 2020 performance, the RNC spent more than $140 million but made just 17.5 million voter-contact attempts. When I challenged that number, he conceded that it might have been closer to 27 million. But according to an internal RNC database I obtained, the party knocked on nearly 32 million doors in competitive states alone, and made another 113 million phone calls, for a total of some 145 million voter-contact attempts.
A wide array of party officials I spoke with said that McDaniel, who declined to comment for this story, had lost the confidence of her members. And none of them disputed that the RNC ground game needed reassessing. But the abrupt directional change announced by Wiles and LaCivita, these officials told me, could only be interpreted as financial triage. It was unfortunate enough that Trump's legal-defense fund steadily drained the campaign coffers; his insistence on this sweeping, ego-stroking program to "protect the vote" was going to cost an untold fortune. Given these constraints, Wiles and LaCivita knew that they couldn't run a traditional Republican field program.
Which is how I got to talking with James Blair.
"In private equity, or investment in general, you look for highest upside at smallest input," Blair, the 35-year-old political director for Trump and the RNC, told me, trying to justify their cut-rate ground game. "In a very basic sense, you can try to do everything all the time -- and often the result is you do nothing particularly well -- or you can try to do a few things that deliver high value compared to their relative input level."
We were sitting in a sterile second-floor conference room, the whiteboard to my left freshly wiped down, at the campaign's headquarters. The space outside was more colorful, with depictions of the 45th president adorning the walls: an elaborate In Trump We Trust mural; a blown-up birthday poster, signed by some of his spiritual advisers, depicting Trump under the watch of a lamb, a lion, a white horse, and two doves; a framed replica of Trump's mug shot, in the style of the Obama-era HOPE poster, above the words NEVER SURRENDER. On a stretch of wall outside the conference room, large black letters spelled out the campaign's mantra: Joe Biden is: Weak, Failed and Dishonest.
Blair wore the expression of a man who knows something the rest of us don't. He studied finance at Florida State, then accepted an entry-level job at the statehouse in Tallahassee, with plans to eventually pivot toward a career in business. Instead, he ended up running legislative races for the state GOP in 2016, overseeing the DeSantis campaign's voter-contact program in 2018, and then joining the new governor's office as deputy chief of staff. As with many Wiles loyalists, Blair's time in DeSantis's orbit was brief, and his reunion with Wiles in Trumpworld -- her allies on the campaign are known as "the Florida mafia" -- was inevitable.
Blair, like Wiles, believes that campaigns have become beholden to empty statistics. "If you chase numbers in terms of top-line output, you make tactical decisions that increase that goal," he said. "So that would be dense suburban areas where you can hit more doors per hour, right? More doors per body [equals] higher output." The problem, Blair said, is that most of those doors aren't worth knocking on: Turnout is already highest in the suburbs, and fewer and fewer voters there remain truly persuadable, for reasons of hardened partisan identification along economic or cultural lines. And yet, since the days of Karl Rove, campaigns have blanketed the country with paid canvassers, investing hundreds of millions of dollars in contacting people who are already going to vote and who, in most cases, already know whom they're voting for.
This is the crux of Team Trump's argument: Now that the electoral landscape looks so different -- both campaigns fighting over just a handful of states, a finite number of true swing voters in each -- shouldn't the party reassess its strategy? Especially given the campaign's financial burdens, some Republicans agree that the answer is yes. One of them is Rove himself.
"There are two groups of people to consider: the low-propensity Republicans and the persuadable swing [voters]. Be careful that you're not antagonizing one with your outreach to the other. You don't want people knocking on the swing doors wearing 'Let's Go Brandon' shirts," Rove told me. When it comes to running a ground game in this environment, he added, "the priority should be maximizing turnout among the true believers," who, if they vote, are a lock for Trump.
This isn't to say Trump's campaign won't be targeting those persuadable voters. It's just a matter of preferred medium: If Wiles has to drop millions of dollars to engage the suburban mom outside Milwaukee, she'd rather that mom spend 30 seconds with one of LaCivita's TV spots than 30 seconds with a pamphlet-carrying college student on her front porch. This is the essence of Trump's voter-contact strategy: pursuing identified swing voters -- college-educated women, working-class Latinos, urban Black men under 40 -- with micro-targeted media, while earmarking ground resources primarily for reaching those secluded, MAGA-sympathetic voters who have proved difficult to engage.
Stephanie McCrummen: Biden has a bigger problem than the debate
The campaign, I was told, hopes to recruit somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 captains in each of the seven battleground states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. They won't all be low-propensity Trump supporters, as they were in Iowa -- there isn't time to be that selective -- but they will be trained in the same way. Each will be assigned a roster of people in their communities, 10 to 50 in total, who fit the profile of Trump-friendly and electorally disengaged. "Our in-house program is focused on doing the hardest-to-do but highest-impact thing," Blair said, which is contacting the MAGA-inclined voters whom previous Trump campaigns missed.
In truth, "hardest-to-do" might be an understatement. Blair was describing this program to me in early June; building it out by the time early voting begins in September is akin to a three-month moonshot. (He declined to share benchmarks demonstrating progress.) Republican officials in key states, meanwhile, have complained for months about the Trump campaign's practically nonexistent presence on the ground. When they've been told of the plan to scale back traditional canvassing operations in favor of a narrower approach, their frustration has at times turned to fury.
"The RNC had promised us a lot of resources, but there's been a huge pullback. And the Trump team isn't standing up its own operation, so we're really behind," Jason Cabel Roe, a GOP consultant in Michigan who's handling the state's most competitive congressional race, told me. "The state party's a mess; they're not going to pick up the slack. When I talk to other Republicans here, they say the same thing: 'Where are the resources for a field operation?'"
Trump officials acknowledge that these concerns are legitimate. Democrats have opened hundreds of field offices and positioned more than 1,000 paid staffers across the battleground map, while the Trump team is running most of its presidential operations out of existing county-party offices and employing fewer than a dozen paid staffers in most states. The great equalizer, they believe, is intensity: Whereas Democrats have struggled to stoke their base -- multiple swing-state Biden allies told me that volunteer recruiting has been anemic -- Republicans have reported having more helpers than they know what to do with. In this context, Trump's enlisting unpaid yet highly motivated voters to work their own neighborhoods, while the Democrats largely rely on parachuting paid staffers into various locations, might not be the mismatch Republicans fear.
The Trump campaign's approach wouldn't be feasible in most presidential elections. But in 2024, LaCivita told me, there are "probably four" true battlegrounds: Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. (He said the campaign feels confident, based on public and private polling, as well as its own internal modeling, that Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina are moving out of reach for Biden.) In this scenario, Trump's team doesn't need to execute a national campaign. They are "basically running four or five Senate races," Beth Myers, a senior adviser to Mitt Romney's 2012 campaign against Barack Obama, told me. "And they can get away with it, because the playing field is just that small now."
Myers is no Trump fan. Still, she credits Wiles and LaCivita with developing a strategy that recognizes both the "excesses" of past Republican campaigns and the realities of a new electorate. In 2012, Romney and Obama fought over a much larger map that included Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Virginia, Colorado, New Hampshire, and even, at least initially, Missouri and Indiana. "Vendors got involved and started telling us that we needed seven 'touches' -- that the number of contacts was more important than who we were contacting," Myers said. "But we got that wrong. I think the quality of the touch is much more important than the quantity of the touch, and I think that's what Chris is doing here."
Notably, thanks to a new Federal Election Commission opinion that allows campaigns to coordinate canvassing efforts with outside groups, there will still be an enormous field operation working on Trump's behalf. Blair explained that allied organizations such as Turning Point Action, America First Works, and the Faith and Freedom Coalition would handle much of the right's canvassing effort moving forward, focusing on the "standardized volume plays" as the campaign itself takes a specialized approach. (This isn't the relief Republicans officials have been hoping for: Turning Point, for example, became a punch line among GOP strategists and donors after it promised to deliver Arizona -- where its founder, Charlie Kirk, resides -- in the 2022 midterms, only for Democrats to win every major statewide race. Kirk's group is assuring dubious party officials and major donors that its operation has scaled up, but several told me they aren't buying it.)
Blair knows the campaign can't ignore the outcry from local Republicans. As we ended our conversation, he was heading to his office to lead a conference call with county chairs in battleground states, part of an effort to "educate" them about the program and "get buy-in."
If one thing has calmed Republican nerves, it's the recent, record-breaking fundraising haul that accompanied Trump's conviction in the New York hush-money case. A campaign that was once being badly outraised brought in more than $70 million in the 48 hours after the verdict. Suddenly -- and to the shock of both campaigns -- Trump entered July with more cash on hand than Biden.
But this windfall hasn't altered the plans of Wiles and LaCivita. Even when the money was pouring in, it was too late, they told me; the campaign's tactical decisions for getting out the vote had already been made. Around this same time, I noticed that it wasn't just those swing-state Republicans getting anxious. The day before I visited headquarters, one Trump aide, who requested anonymity to speak candidly, confessed to me that doubts about the field strategy permeate this campaign. This person predicted that Wiles, LaCivita, and Blair will either look like geniuses who revolutionized Republican politics -- or the biggest morons ever put in charge of a presidential campaign.
"I accept that framing," Blair told me, flashing a smirk. "And I live by it every day."
As Blair and I stood up to leave the conference room, he stopped me. The smirk was gone. He wanted to make something clear: He takes these decisions very seriously. "Because if we lose," he said, "I think there's a pretty good chance they're going to throw us in jail."
It was a startling moment. I'd heard campaign aides make offhand remarks before about expecting to end up incarcerated for helping Trump. But this was more direct, more paranoid. Blair was telling me that, in a second Biden administration, he expected deep-state flunkies to arrest him for the crime of opposing the president. And he wasn't alone. Brian Hughes, a campaign spokesperson known for his extensive government work and generally affable demeanor, nodded in agreement as Blair spoke. "I think we all feel that way," Hughes said.
Throughout our conversations, Wiles and LaCivita kept insisting to me that something important has changed about Donald Trump. As they tell it, the man who once loathed making donor calls is now dialing for dollars at seven in the morning, unprompted. The man who could never be bothered with the fine print of Iowa's caucuses finally sat down and learned the rules -- and then started explaining them to Iowans at his pre-caucus events. The man who treated 2016 like a reality show and 2020 like a spin-off now speaks of little else but winning.
This may all be the stuff of reverential narratives. Yet there is no denying the consequence of Trump's evolution on one tactical front: voting by mail. In 2020, the president railed against the practice, refusing to heed the advice of campaign aides who told him, given the shifting nature of consumer behaviors during the pandemic, that absentee votes would almost certainly decide the election. This time around, Wiles led a months-long effort to educate her boss on the practice, explaining how Republicans in Florida and elsewhere had built sprawling, successful operations targeting people who prefer not to vote in person. Wiles pressed Trump on the subject over the course of at least a dozen conversations, stretching from the pre-Iowa season all the way into the late springtime, pleading with him to bless the campaign's effort to organize a voter-contact strategy built around absentee ballots.
"It wasn't like we went in there one day and said, 'Okay, today we're gonna say we like mail-in ballots.' It doesn't happen that way," Wiles told me at one point. "As he better understood campaign mechanics, he understood, you know, why this -- "
"Winning!" LaCivita chimed in, palms raised, growing impatient with the explanation.
Wiles shot him a look. "Why this was important," she said.
The funny thing, Wiles noted, is that she can't take credit for convincing Trump. It was "a person who will remain nameless" -- someone from outside the campaign, who happened to be kibitzing with the former president about his own reasons for voting by mail -- who said something that jolted Trump's brain. "That's when the switch flipped. And that is very typical," Wiles said, chuckling. "You work on something, work on something, work on something, and then in some bizarre, unexpected way, somebody phrases it differently -- or it's somebody that he particularly respects in a particular area who says it -- and that's it."
The campaign is now engineering a mobilization program aimed at making absentee voting seamless and customizable based on each voter's jurisdiction. (The initiative, dubbed "Swamp the Vote," comes with face-saving disclaimers about this being necessary only to defeat the sinister, election-stealing left.) This project might not assuage the Trump-fueled fears of Republican base voters, but that's hardly the point. His campaign sees the mail-voting push as a path to attracting a slice of the electorate that the Republican Party has spent two decades ignoring: low-propensity left-leaning voters, especially young men of color, who, due to some combination of panic and boredom, turned out for Biden in 2020.
These voters are one explanation as to how Democrats ran up an unthinkable 81-million-vote total in the last presidential election -- and, more to the point, increased their margins in places such as Phoenix, Detroit, Milwaukee, and Philadelphia. For the past several years, however, polling has shown Black and Hispanic men drifting further right -- a trend sharply accelerated by the Biden-Trump rematch. If the Republican nominee can siphon off any significant chunk of those voters in November -- persuading them to mail in a ballot for him instead of sitting out the election -- the math for the Democrats isn't going to work. That could make November a realignment election, much like Obama's win in 2008: one that shifts perceptions of voter coalitions and sends the losing side scrambling to recalibrate its approach.
Ironically enough, it was Obama's dominant showings with nonwhite voters in 2008 and 2012 -- winning them by margins of four to one -- that inspired a Republican autopsy report that called for kinder, gentler engagement with minority communities. Now record numbers of Black and Latino men might be won over by the same candidate who prescribes mass deportations, trafficks in openly racist rhetoric, and talks about these voters in ways that border on parody. "He says stuff like 'The Blacks love me!''" LaCivita remarked to me at one point. He threw his arms up, looking equal parts dumbfounded and delighted. "Who the fuck would say that?"
Wiles, for her part, wanted to be clear about the campaign's aims. "It's so targeted -- we're not fighting for Black people," she said. "We're fighting for Black men between 18 and 34."
Ronald Brownstein: How Trump is dividing minority voters
When she told me this, we were standing together backstage -- LaCivita, Wiles, and me -- at the Turning Point USA event in Detroit. Most of the faces in the crowd were white; the same had been true a few hours earlier, when Trump spoke at a Black church on the city's impoverished west side. But that didn't matter much to Wiles and LaCivita. The voters they're targeting wouldn't even know Trump was in Detroit that day, much less come out to see him. These aren't people whose neighborhoods will be canvassed by Republican volunteers; rather, they will be the subject of a sweeping media campaign aimed at fueling disillusionment with the Democratic Party.
As we stood chatting, I remembered something that one of Trump's allies had told me months earlier -- a sentiment that has since been popularized and described in different ways: "For every Karen we lose, we're going to win a Jamal and an Enrique." Wiles nodded in approval.
"That's a fact. I believe it. And I so believe we're realigning the party," she told me.
Wiles paused. "And I don't think we're gonna lose all the Karens, either. They buy eggs. They buy gas. They know. They may not tell their neighbor, or their carpool line, but they know."
Just to be clear, I asked: If the Trump campaign converts significant numbers of Black and Hispanic voters, and holds on to a sizable portion of suburban white women, aren't we talking about a blowout in November?
"We are," Wiles said.
This is the scenario Trump craves, the one he's been talking about at all of his recent rallies: winning by margins that are "too big to rig." I had to wonder, though: What if the campaign's models are wrong? What if, yet again, the election is decided by thousands of votes across a few key states? Wiles and LaCivita had accommodated Trump's request to spend lavishly on an "election integrity" effort. But had they accommodated themselves to his lies about the last election -- and what might be required of them next?
One afternoon in early June, as we sat in the hallway of an Arizona megachurch -- Trump was delivering some fire and brimstone inside the sanctuary, decrying the evils of illegal immigration and drawing chants of "Bullshit! Bullshit! Bullshit!" -- I asked LaCivita if he felt additional pressure running this particular campaign: Winning meant Trump would avoid further criminal prosecution; losing could mean more convictions and even incarceration. Either way, I suggested, this would be Trump's last campaign.
"I don't know," LaCivita said, a smile spreading across his face. "I read somewhere that he was gonna change the Constitution so he could run again!" He was soon doubled over, howling and smacking both palms on his knees. It was an odd scene. When he finally came up for air, LaCivita told me, "I'm being sarcastic, of course." Another pause. "I'm joking. Of course I am!"
If he was really joking, I replied, there was no need to keep clarifying that it was a joke.
"No, no," LaCivita said, straightening his tie. "I just get a kick out of it."
LaCivita tries to laugh off stress whenever possible. The Trump campaign, he said, is a "360-degree shooting gallery" in which "everybody is coming after you, internally and externally," all the time. On any given day, he might be cleaning up after a particular staffer who has gone rogue with reporters, or extinguishing rumors he says are being spread about him by Trump's confidant Richard Grenell ("he just likes to cause trouble"), or refuting supposed policy plans for the second Trump administration being floated by "those quote-unquote allies" on the MAGA right. ("It's the Project '25 yokels from Heritage. They and AFPI" -- the America First Policy Institute, another think tank -- "have their own little groups that raise money. They grift, and they pitch policy," LaCivita said. "They have their own goals and their own agendas, and they have nothing to do with winning an election.") In his mind, all the "noise" -- Trump's authoritarian spitballing very much included -- is a source of levity.
There was a time, however, when LaCivita didn't find it so funny. According to several people close to him, he was alarmed by Trump's rise in 2016. After he came to terms with Trumpism, as so many in the party eventually did, his qualms were rekindled by the January 6 insurrection. Then came the opportunity to help run the 2024 campaign. Once again, LaCivita hesitated. And once again, LaCivita gave in -- only to find himself, a few weeks into the job, working for a man who was dining with a neo-Nazi and toying with the idea of terminating the Constitution. After a while, he became resigned to these feelings of dissonance, friends told me, and eventually desensitized to them altogether. His focus was winning: demolishing Biden, electing Trump, ushering in massive Republican legislative majorities. But had he given much thought to what that success might mean?
Not long after our conversation in Arizona, I met LaCivita for breakfast on Capitol Hill, near his office at the RNC. Later that day, his boss would meet with House and Senate Republicans -- many of whom, like LaCivita, had been ready to throw Trump overboard a couple of years ago, and who now stood and saluted like the North Korean military. As we sipped coffee, I asked LaCivita about the potential "termination" of the Constitution that the former president floated in 2022.
"I don't know if he used the word terminate," LaCivita said, squinting his eyes. "I think he may have said change or something." (Trump did, in fact, say termination.)
Certainly it's plausible that a hired gun, someone who cares about winning and winning only, could have genuinely forgotten the language used by his employer. And yet, according to several people familiar with the fallout, LaCivita -- a Purple Heart recipient who lost friends in the Gulf War -- was so bothered by the social-media post that he confronted Trump about it himself.
LaCivita confirmed to me that he'd called Trump about the post. In his telling, Trump responded that people were twisting his words, then agreed to issue a statement declaring his love for the Constitution. And that was that, LaCivita said, offering a shrug. He likened it to football: When the quarterback throws an interception, the team has to move on. No dwelling on the last play.
As he shoveled over-hard eggs into his mouth, Marine Corps cufflinks were visible beneath his dark suit. LaCivita had sworn an oath to the Constitution; he'd risked his life for the Constitution. Didn't a part of him, when he read that post, think about the implications beyond political strategy?
"I mean, he took an oath to the Constitution too, as president of the United States," LaCivita said. "I never put myself in a position of judging somebody."
LaCivita thought for a moment. He told me that he'd sat in the courtroom on the second day of Trump's hush-money trial in May. "Listening to the stuff they're saying, meant for no other reason than to harm the guy politically -- it just pissed me off," he said. "It made me that much more determined."
Now we were getting somewhere. Do the people who enter Trump's orbit, I asked, become hardened by the experience? Do they adopt his persecution complex? Do they take the insults to him personally?
"I don't psychoanalyze myself, and I sure as hell don't psychoanalyze the people that I work for," LaCivita told me. "But I truly believe that the things that he can do as president can actually make the country a whole lot better. You don't do this at this level for transactional purposes."
No doubt LaCivita is conservative by nature: pro-gun, anti-abortion, viscerally opposed to Democratic orthodoxy on illegal immigration and gender identity. At the same time, he has worked for Republicans who span the party's ideological spectrum -- most of them moderates who, he admits, reflect his own "center right" beliefs.
Just recently, I told LaCivita, I'd read an interview he'd given to his hometown newspaper, The Richmond Times-Dispatch, more than a decade ago. One quote stood out. Reflecting on his appetite for the fray -- as a Marine, as a hunter, as a political combatant -- LaCivita told the interviewer: "A warrior without war is miserable."
When I looked up from reading the quote, LaCivita was nodding.
"People hire me to beat Democrats," he said. "That's what I do. That's what Chris LaCivita does. He beats Democrats, period."
He paused. "And Donald Trump gave me the opportunity of a lifetime."
That much is true. Political consultants spend their careers dreaming of the day they're called upon to elect a president, and those who succeed gain a status that guarantees wealth and prestige. I couldn't help but think of how Wiles, the seasoned strategist who'd been humiliated by Florida's young hot-shot governor, had hitched her career to Trump during his post-January 6 political exile. "The last time he was in Washington," she said, "he was being run out of there on an airplane where nobody came to say goodbye." Now Trump was barging his way back into the White House -- and those same Republicans who once accused him of treachery, she noted, were cheering him on.
"He didn't change," Wiles told me. "They changed."
I wanted to know if Wiles had changed. She boasted to me, during one conversation, that she had been somewhat successful in getting her boss to cut back on the rigged-election talk on the campaign trail. ("People want to have hope, they want to be inspired, they want to look forward," she said.) But in that same conversation, Wiles could not answer the question of whether the 2020 election had actually been stolen. "I'm not sure," she said, repeating the phrase three times.
She paused, seeming to catch herself. "But we know," Wiles added, "that it can't happen again."
Her moment of hesitancy stood out. One of the maxims of this campaign, something LaCivita drills into his staff, is that self-doubt destroys. ("You're either right or you're wrong," he said. But you can't second-guess decisions "once the bullet leaves the chamber.") Which, as we sat inside that diner on Capitol Hill, one block from the scene of the January 6 carnage, returned us to the question of Trump's threat against the Constitution. If LaCivita were to acknowledge his trepidation about the man he's working for --
"Boom!" he said, interrupting with a faux gunshot noise. "You're done. You're done. Hesitation in combat generally gets you killed."
Even if you're hesitating for good reason?
"Hesitation in combat gets you killed," LaCivita said again, leaning across the table this time. He pounded his fist to punctuate every word: "I. Don't. Hesitate."
In that moment, the sum of my conversations with LaCivita and Wiles and their campaign deputies began to make sense. For all their lofty talk of transformation -- transforming their boss's candidacy, transforming Republican politics, transforming the electorate, transforming the country -- it continues to be Trump who does the transforming.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Does Project 2025 propose eliminating overtime pay?
|
Democrats have mobilized to try and prevent it from being implemented
(NewsNation) -- With the 2024 election cycle in full swing, both political parties are actively promoting and discrediting agendas and policies. One such effort, Project 2025, is being championed by some right-leaning conservatives and criticized by liberals.
The Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank that wrote the 900-page "governing agenda," said Project 2025 is a guide on what the next president needs to do so they can undo the "damage" to America they claim has been caused by liberal politicians. Critics, though, say Project 2025 is extremist, "authoritarian" and even dystopian.
With both parties attacking each other, there has been an onslaught of misinformation regarding the actual proposals, including claims that it seeks to eliminate overtime pay for some workers.
Eliminating overtime pay?
On page 592, the document lays out recommendations for changes to overtime pay regulations in the United States. The Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 playbook proposes an "overtime pay threshold" that is not an abolishment of overtime pay.
The proposed changes would give employers more flexibility in managing overtime pay and benefits, potentially reducing their costs but also potentially impacting some workers' overtime earnings.
Critics say Project 2025 erodes overtime pay
Liberal advocacy organization Democracy Forward created "The People's Guide to Project 2025," which says "4.3 million people could lose overtime protections" if the governing agenda is enacted.
Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, in an Instagram post, wrote that during former President Trump's administration, the "Department of Labor set the overtime pay threshold for salaried workers at a disgraceful $35,500 per year -- meaning any workers earning more than that were not eligible for overtime pay even if they worked more than 40 hours. It's estimated that the move eliminated overtime for about 8 million workers."
The professor and pundit said that the Biden administration "has since raised the threshold, meaning more salaried workers will qualify for overtime."
The current overtime rules laid out in the Fair Labor Standards Act for covered nonexempt employees include:
What does Project 2025 propose?
A main component of Project 2025 is the firing of as many as 50,000 federal workers, who conservative groups say will get in the way of their agenda.
Under Project 2025, agencies such as the U.S. Department of Education would be "eliminated," and others, like the Federal Trade Commission, Federal Communications Commission, and Justice Department, would be put under the president's control.
The proposal also calls for for an overhaul of the U.S. tax system that would include fewer tax brackets, the elimination of most deductions and a lower corporate tax rate.
Many former Trump administration officials, including Ben Carson and Ken Cuccinelli, were contributors to the plan.
Biden's campaign and Democrats have increasingly worked to hit Trump with Project 2025 as Biden has grappled with a negative news cycle and growing calls from Democrats to step down from his campaign.
Trump has distanced himself from the agenda, saying any attempt to tie him to it is "pure disinformation."
But he's also spoken warmly about it, and the connection was further cemented by Trump's selection of Ohio Sen. JD Vance as his running mate. Heritage President Kevin Roberts said he's "good friends" with Vance and that the Heritage Foundation had been privately rooting for him to be the VP pick.
Democrats pounced on Vance's past praise for Project 2025.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
2024 election updates: Kamala Harris rakes in campaign donations after Biden drops out of race; Democrats offer early support
|
Vice President Kamala Harris's presidential campaign is officially underway after President Biden announced Sunday that he was dropping out of the race and endorsed her as his successor. Within hours of receiving Biden's backing, Harris raked in $49.6 million in grassroots donations, according to a spokesperson for her campaign.
Many prominent Democrats moved quickly to throw their support behind Harris, including Reps. Adam Schiff of California, Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Jim Clyburn of South Carolina and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, as well as the political action committee representing the Congressional Black Caucus.
Other party leaders, however, like former President Barack Obama and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi praised Biden's decision to step out of the race but stopped short of endorsing Harris. It's unclear if she will face any challengers for the nomination ahead of the Democratic National Convention in Chicago next month.
Biden announced his decision in an open letter posted to social media on Sunday, following a weeks-long pressure campaign from fellow Democrats that began in earnest following his much-criticized debate performance in late June.
Harris is scheduled to speak at an event at the White House on Monday at 11:30 a.m. ET. Follow along below for live updates, and sign up here to get breaking news direct to your inbox with Yahoo News email alerts.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Barrage of hate from far-right Trumpists to Sikh prayer at Republican convention
|
Toxic response to prayer from pro-Trump Harmeet Dhillon, leading figure on Republican national committee
A toxic, racist, far-right response to Harmeet Dhillon's Monday-night Sikh prayer at the Republican national convention is just one sign of the difficulties Donald Trump and Republicans have in selling a more diverse version of Trumpism to the party's base.
Social media posts following Dhillon's prayer indicated that some far-right Trumpists had been polarized by the sight of a non-Christian form of religious devotion on the convention stage in Milwaukee.
The barrage of hate she received from a segment of fellow Trump supporters may have been especially galling to Dhillon, whose earliest public prominence was as a civil rights lawyer defending turban-wearing Sikh men from post-9/11 racial profiling.
At the same time, Dhillon's benediction showed how far the California lawyer and Republican national committeewoman has ascended in the Trump movement, where she is now a serious player.
In a decade, Dhillon has gone from a serial Bay Area political candidate to a well-remunerated member of Trump's stable of top lawyers, an integral part of the post-Maga Republican party's power structure, and a star of conservative media.
The case of Dhillon - whose firm has banked $8.25m from Maga Pacs for its assistance in Trump's myriad legal battles - illustrates the tensions that may arise as Trump's personal loyalties, and his attempts to expand his voter base, run up against the racial and religious prejudices of elements of his existing coalition.
The Guardian emailed Dhillon for comment on this reporting but received no response.
Perhaps the earliest response to Dhillon's prayer came from white nationalist and antisemitic activist Nick Fuentes, who said of the prayer in his live stream of the convention's first night: "This is blasphemy. This is total blasphemy. Oh, fuck off. What a joke."
In his post-stream summary, Fuentes, who leads the so-called "Groyper" movement under the slogan "Christ is King", added that "Jesus Christ needs to be front and center," and said: "Jesus saved Trump's life on Saturday and no one wants to give him credit at this convention."
Fuentes came to broader notoriety after he attended an infamous November 2022 dinner at Trump's Mar-a-Lago club with his then-employer Ye, the singer formerly known as Kanye West.
Fuentes's acolytes followed suit. As the prayer was ending, an X account associated with the Fuentes-aligned "America First" website posted: "RNC promotes blasphemy and Sikh idolatry moments after Lutheran benediction."
The far-right podcaster and internet personality Stew Peters took a similar line on X, posting: "Day 1 of the RNC was complete with satanic chants and multiple prayers to FALSE GODS."
Peters is known for his conspiracy theories on Covid and vaccines, outspoken Christian nationalism, and antisemitic rhetoric. On X and other platforms, Peters has freely advocated antisemitic narratives including Holocaust denial.
The Gab founder, antisemite and self-proclaimed "Christian nationalist" Andrew Torba posted a screenshot of a supportive reply to a Dhillon post on her prayer from a Jewish American with the line: "Your Judeo-GOP, sir."
Lauren Witzke, meanwhile, posted video of a part of Dhillon's speech with the caption, "How about you get deported instead, you pagan blasphemer," adding: "God saves our president and the RNC mocks him with this witchcraft."
Witzke is a far-right political activist and one-time Republican Senate candidate who has promoted anti-LGBTQ+ positions, the "QAnon" conspiracy theory, and various antisemitic tropes, including that Jews control government, academia and the media, and that they have a divided loyalty between America and Israel.
Others, members of the Republican hard right and conservative media stars were similarly unimpressed, though less direct in criticizing Dhillon.
Matt Walsh, the host of The Matt Walsh Show on Ben Shapiro's Daily Wire platform, is known for inflammatory expressions of traditionalist Christian positions on cultural, religious and political issues, especially in relation to LGBTQ rights.
On Tuesday, he complained: "Trump has never had more momentum or good will and the RNC decided to use that to push a message of diversity and inclusivity rather than using it to advance anything resembling a conservative agenda."
The lawyer and Blaze Media host Daniel Horowitz, notable for his fixation on immigration at the southern border, called Monday a "night of endless racial and ethnic pandering, union communism not just populism, and a porn star. This is going to be a long haul."
Other convention speakers included the Teamsters union president, Sean O'Brien, and Amber Rose Levonchuck, known professionally as Amber Rose, who has appeared in hip-hop videos.
Carol M Swain posted that "I'm just say ... The God of Abraham, Issac [sic], and Jacob would oppose interfaith chapels and the blending of worship across deities," followed by an extended Bible quote.
Swain is a former professor at Princeton and Vanderbilt Universities and remains a conservative public intellectual. Swain, who is African American, attracted student protests in the years leading up to her retirement in 2017 over publicly stated views on Islam ("an absolute danger to us and our children") and Black Lives Matter (which she said was "misleading black people").
Dhillon's appearance thus appeared to divide a Maga movement which had come to see her as one of its tribunes.
That status ultimately derived from her litigation on behalf of leading Trump movement figures, including Trump himself, and media savvy lawsuits targeting movement bugbears and defending rightwing activists.
Through her firm Dhillon Law and the non-profit Center for American Liberty, where she serves as chief executive, Dhillon has brought suit on behalf of rightwing internet personalities including Andy Ngo and Rogan O'Handley, known online as "DC Draino".
During the Covid pandemic, Dhillon pushed back on lockdowns and mask mandates, launching a flotilla of suits in California that named leading Democrats including Governor Gavin Newsom as defendants.
She parlayed all of this into brand-building media appearances, and became a regular on Fox News programs hosted by Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson, until the latter was dropped by the network.
About the time of Carlson's exit, Dhillon went from being his regular guest to a go-to lawyer, reportedly acting for him in the discrimination case that led up to his ouster, in a 2023 dispute with Fox itself , and against a Pac proposing to draft the former host for the 2024 presidential election.
Dhillon has acted directly for Trump in several high-profile cases. Her firm, Dhillon Law, represented Trump and acolytes including Michael Flynn and Sebastian Gorka in their interactions with Congress's January 6 committee, to which Trump refused to testify. Her firm also represented Trump at the supreme court in January after courts in Maine and Colorado struck him from the state's presidential ballots in 2023.
Advocacy for Trumpist causes has won Dhillon the prominence that booked her spot on the convention stage, as well as millions of dollars for her firm.
The most recent Federal Election Commission figures indicate that Dhillon Law has received over $10.4m in legal fees to date from Republican campaign committees.
All of those payments came after 2019, and the bulk - some $8.1m - has been paid since 2023, the year of her campaign to displace Ronna McDaniel as RNC chair. That campaign failed to oust McDaniel, but endeared her further to Trumpist conservatives who blamed McDaniel for Trump's loss in 2020 and the GOP's underperformance in the 2022 midterms.
A whopping $8.25m of the total has come from Trump-related Pacs, reportedly making Dhillon one of the highest-paid of Trump's many lawyers.
Another big client is the Republican National Committee Dhillon sits on, which has paid the firm nearly $1.8m since 2019, despite Dhillon serving as RNC committeewoman for California since 2016, and has coincided with Dhillon's ascent to national prominence and Trumpworld's inner circle.
The culture-wars suits have also channeled money to Dhillon Law. The Guardian previously reported that the Center for American Liberty, where Dhillon is chief executive, had paid Dhillon Law $1.3m since its founding, making the firm its single biggest contractor.
At that time, Joan Harrington, a fellow at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at the Santa Clara University, called the arrangement a "conflict of interest".
A filing subsequent to that reporting indicates that the non-profit paid Dhillon Law an additional $269.864 in 2022, bringing the total to over $1.5m.
Meanwhile, while the Monday night event tried to represent Trump supporters as more diverse than the largely white bloc who have hitherto voted for the president, the response to Dhillon's prayer suggests that a swath of rightwing opinion will volubly resist that becoming a reality.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Alina Habba accuses Kamala Harris of 'committing a crime,' covering up Biden's health
|
Alina Habba, a legal spokesperson for former President Donald Trump, accused Vice President Kamala Harris of breaking the law by "co-conspiring" to hide President Biden's cognitive decline during a speech on Wednesday.
Habba was speaking to a crowd of Trump supporters at a rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, when she made the comments. The lawyer now serves as a senior adviser to Trump's re-election campaign.
"President Trump has been and is innocent of any crime other than loving this country," Habba began.
"Let me tell you, Kamala," she continued. "You are committing a crime because the only co-conspirator I know of the Biden-Harris administration is you, and you have lied to us about President Biden for the last three and a half years."
TRUMP TELLS JESSE WATTERS THAT HE WAS NOT WARNED ABOUT GUNMAN, DESPITE REPORTS
The crowd cheered while Habba delivered the speech.
"The truth always comes out," she added. "So let me just tell you, America. Her policies are the same ones we've been living in for three and a half years, so don't get it twisted. They don't work."
THE 'WEIRD' CAMPAIGN: THE STUNNING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HARRIS AND VANCE COVERAGE
Trump and Harris have been throwing jabs at each other in recent days as the 2024 presidential election nears.
Biden dropped out earlier in July after concerns about his age intensified.
Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment.
Fox News Digital's Greg Wehner contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Focus group host shocked after half of Black voters say they are voting Trump: 'I didn't see that coming'
|
By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News' Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.
A "Daily Show" focus group of Black New York voters led to a lively discussion after half of the members said they would vote for former President Donald Trump in the 2024 election.
"Do I have to say his name? I don't want to, but more than likely, it's going to be Trump," one man in the group said.
His admission led to both applause and angry murmurs from the other focus group members, with one woman groaning "unbelievable," before proclaiming her support for President Biden.
The other members then revealed their intentions, with three pledging their vote to Biden and the other three standing firmly behind Trump.
TRUMP ENLISTS PROMINENT BLACK REPUBLICANS TO APPEAL TO THEIR PEERS: 'FISHING WHERE THE FISH ARE'
"Okay, we're an even split, which -- yeah, I didn't see that coming," the focus group interviewer said as the voters erupted in laughter.
When asked, some members agreed there would be a "big shift" towards Trump in November.
"For me, I have always been a Democrat, and it's like, for the most part, with the Democratic Party, they always make a bunch of promises that they cannot deliver," one male voter said.
"You know, they use the issues of the African American community as a soapbox to stand on and make promises just to get us to come out and vote, and then once we vote and everyone's in place -- it's like, well, what happened?" one female voter chimed in.
As the voters debated their issues with the two candidates, some focus group members asked whether Biden had issued an apology for past comments he directed at the Black community in media appearances.
BLACK REPUBLICAN CALLS OUT BIDEN'S 'REAL RECORD ON RACE' IN SIX-FIGURE AD BUY TO AIR DURING CNN DEBATE
"They have both said things that were questionable and unsavory, but when you start looking at facts -- it's like Biden, you done dropped the ball, brother," a female voter said.
Some focus group members specifically referenced a "Breakfast Club" interview in May 2020, when Biden told popular radio show host Charlamagne tha God, "If you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't Black."
A New York Times/Siena College poll released in late June showed 48% of the electorate say they would vote for Trump, the Republican, if the presidential election were held that same day, while 44% said they would vote for Biden, the Democrat. That contrasts with April's New York Times/Siena College poll that showed Trump leading Biden by just one percentage point.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The poll showed 26% of Black likely voters would support Trump in the 2024 election. While 65% of Black likely voters said they would support Biden, Trump's gains represent a significant uptick since 2020.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Biden tells Democratic lawmakers he is weighing big reforms to the Supreme Court
|
WASHINGTON -- President Joe Biden is preparing to endorse significant proposals to reform the Supreme Court, notifying some members of Congress about his intentions last weekend, three sources familiar with the plans told NBC News on Tuesday.
The proposals under serious consideration include legislation to establish term limits for justices and an updated code of ethics that would be binding and enforceable, one source said. The policies haven't been finalized but may be rolled out in the coming weeks, which would mark a new approach for a president who has long been skeptical of restructuring the Supreme Court.
A White House spokesperson declined to comment.
Biden told lawmakers in the Congressional Progressive Caucus during a virtual meeting Saturday that he had been consulting constitutional scholars on this matter for more than a month, according to one person familiar with the discussion.
"I'm going to need your help to and advice on how we should be doing what I'm going to be doing there. Want to make sure we have a closer working relationship, because we're in this together," Biden told the lawmakers, though he didn't get into specific policy substance, the source said.
The Washington Post first reported on Biden's plans.
Two other sources told NBC News said Biden told the lawmakers that he'll come out for big reforms, without giving them details, but that members on the call understood him to be referring to term limits and ethics rules. The call took place Saturday before the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania rally.
"Look, it's not, it's not hyperbole to suggest Trump is literally an existential threat, an existential threat to the very Constitution of democracy we, we say we care about. And I mean if this guy wins, he's not, and now, especially with that Supreme Court giving him the kind of breadth of -- I don't need to get into the Supreme Court right now -- anyway, but I need your help," Biden said.
Changing the structure of the Supreme Court would require Congress to make a new law. That's extremely unlikely while Republicans control the House, as the party is pleased with the 6-3 conservative majority it has built on the high court.
But the proposals could become a useful messaging device for Biden on the campaign trail. And if Democrats sweep the 2024 election, they may have a fighting chance of passing. Democrats have rallied voters against the Supreme Court, citing unpopular rulings like the elimination of federal abortion rights and a spate of recent reports detailing apparent ethical lapses among some of the justices.
Last month, Senate Democrats sought to pass Supreme Court ethics legislation but ran into Republican opposition. In the House, Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Don Beyer, D-Va., have introduced legislation that would impose 18-year term limits for future justices, ultimately creating vacancies to fill during every four-year presidential term and preventing retirements for partisan reasons.
Khanna praised Biden for warming up to the idea, noting that he first introduced term limits legislation in 2020.
"Since then, we have been advocating for the president to champion this reform," Khanna told NBC News on Tuesday. "It is a big step for him to now call for common sense term limits for the court and a judicial code of ethics."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Dow, S&P 500, Nasdaq plummet on recession fears
|
Economist Peter Morici criticizes the Biden administration's economic policies and discusses former President Trump's campaign push to cut taxes on Social Security benefits.
U.S. stocks are having the worst session since 2022 after a string of weak economic reports jolted investor fears that a recession may be brewing.
All three of the major benchmarks are down well over 2% with the Dow Jones Industrial Average off over 900 points and all of the largest 11 S&P sectors in the red.
The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite is nearing a correction, down 10% from its peak.
A paltry employment report which saw just 114,000 jobs created last month and an uptick in unemployment to 4.3% added fuel to the fire on Friday. This after weekly jobless claims jumped more than expected to an 11-month high on Thursday, which was followed by Intel's announcement that it plans to cut 15% of its workforce and pause its dividend.
Consumer discretionary stocks were down over 4% with declines in Walmart and Target as well as Amazon which told investors shoppers were turning more cautious in its latest earnings report.
Additionally, the ISM Manufacturing report fell below 50, a sign of contracting, plus the sector posted another month of job cuts in July.
MANUFACTURERS TALKS 2024 ELECTION AND WHAT THEY NEED
Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, at this week's meeting, signaled a rate cut is likely with about 80% of market participants expecting a larger easing which would bring rates from 550-525 to 475-500, according to the CME's FedWatch Tool which tracks future rate moves.
THE US HOUSING MARKET IS 'STUCK,' AND MIGHT REMAIN THAT WAY UNTIL 2026
Gold, a traditional flight to safety, was also under pressure. However, it is hovering near its record $2,470 an ounce.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Determined Biden soldiers on with 2024 campaign as down-ballot Dems worry over his electability
|
Swing state voters say Biden debate performance 'really impactful' on their election decision
Voters in New Hampshire, a key northeastern swing state, say President Biden's extremely rough performance two weeks ago in his debate with former President Trump will weigh heavily on their decision of whom to support in the 2024 election rematch.
"I'm leaning toward Donald Trump a little bit. Just because, I mean, the debate performance is really, really, really impactful for me, I was really thrown off by Joe Biden's performance," a New Hampshire voter named Mario, told Fox News.
Mario and nearly a dozen other voters shared their views as they stopped Monday at a highway rest area about half between the state capital of Concord and Manchester, which is New Hampshire's largest city.
Mario shared, "I'm not really a Donald Trump person," adding, "I think Donald Trump is too old, too."
William Yacopucci, another New Hampshire voter, said Biden has "been an awesome president. I really like him. I think he can still do a good job for the remainder of this term."
But, he added, "Three or four years from now, he's going to be that much older. So, though I really, really like him, I think they should give someone else another shot at it."
New Hampshire voter Al Byrnes told Fox News he "was very sad that President Biden performed like he did, but in the concept of everything, I would still totally back him tomorrow at this point."
"I do wish that he would drop out of the race, but, I would support him or whoever replaces him. Anything but Donald Trump," Byrnes emphasized.
Rose, another New Hampshire voter who said she was leaning toward Trump, offered, "Biden doesn't seem like he knows what he's talking about."
But taking aim at the debate performances of both Biden and Trump, she added, "I felt like they were both just talking circles around each other."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Buttigieg ripped for 'extraordinarily brazen' slam on Trump that critics say was accidental 'dunk' on Biden
|
'Outnumbered' co-hosts discuss the Trump team's hesitancy to schedule debates with Vice President Kamala Harris, who has not officially secured the Democratic Party nomination for the 2024 race.
Biden Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was ripped by conservatives on social media Friday after he mocked former President Trump for showing "weakness" by not agreeing to debate VP Harris in September.
"Has a presidential nominee ever agreed to a debate, then pulled out? Remarkable show of weakness here," Buttigieg posted on X before being mocked by conservatives who argued that former President Trump had an agreement with Biden, not Harris, who dropped out of the race and thus effectively pulled out of the scheduled debate.
"Yes. Biden. Literally this past weekend," CNN's Scott Jennings posted on X.
"Joe Biden agreed to 2 debates, then pulled out of his entire campaign after the first one," pollster Frank Luntz posted on X.
TAKE IT FROM ME, REPUBLICANS: KAMALA HARRIS IS A STRONG CANDIDATE. DON'T UNDERESTIMATE HER
"The only one I can think of is Joe Biden, right?" The Federalist's Mollie Hemingway posted on X.
"I'm actually surprised Pete would dunk this hard on his boss, Joe Biden," Fox News contributor Guy Benson posted on X. "The man *just* pulled out of the race (and therefore the second debate), clearly against his will. Undeniable weakness aside, give him a moment of peace."
FLASHBACK: NEW HARRIS CAMPAIGN SENIOR ADVISER MADE SEVERAL INSENSITIVE COMMENTS ABOUT WOMEN, GAY PEOPLE
"This is the sort of extraordinarily brazen tack you take only when you know that the media is in full campaign mode in your favor," National Review's Charles C. Cooke posted on X.
Fox News Digital reached out to Buttigieg's office and the Harris campaign but did not receive a response.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Trump said earlier this week he's open to debating Vice President Harris more than once as the two face off in the 2024 presidential election.
"Absolutely. I'd want to. I think it's important," Trump said Tuesday when asked by Fox News' Bill Melugin on a conference call with reporters if he would commit to debating Harris at least once.
"I would be willing to do more than one debate, actually," Trump said. Minutes later, Trump noted, "I haven't agreed to anything. I agreed to a debate with Joe Biden."
The Trump campaign said on Thursday that he will not participate in a debate until Democrats finalize their nominee because it "would be inappropriate to schedule things with Harris because Democrats very well could still change their minds."
VP Harris criticized that position from the Trump campaign as "backpedaling."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
J.D. Vance, Trump's VP pick, has often criticized him
|
"I'm a 'Never Trump' guy. I never liked him," Vance told Rose. "But I noticed this willingness from people who think a lot like I do that, look, we told you so. ... The problem is if you take that attitude as sort of gloating over Trump's defeat, then you're playing into the very thing that gave rise to Trump in the first place, which is a feeling that the elites think that they are smarter than you and just think you're a bunch of idiots."
The Republican National Convention is kicking off in Milwaukee just days after Trump was injured in a shooting at his rally. Get live updates.
Trump VP pick: Donald Trump has chosen Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio as his running mate, selecting a rising star in the party and previously outspoken Trump critic who in recent years has closely aligned himself with the former president.
Presidential election polls: Check out The Post's presidential polling averages of the seven battleground states most likely to determine the outcome of the election.
Key dates and events: Voters in all states and U.S. territories have been choosing their party's nominee for president ahead of the summer conventions. Here are key dates and events on the 2024 election calendar.
Abortion and the election: Voters in about a dozen states could decide the fate of abortion rights with constitutional amendments on the ballot in a pivotal election year. Biden supports legal access to abortion, and he has encouraged Congress to pass a law that would codify abortion rights nationwide. After months of mixed signals about his position, Trump said the issue should be left to states. Here's how Biden's and Trump's abortion stances have shifted over the years.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Joe Biden drops out of 2024 race, exit comes amid growing pressure from top Dems
|
Joe Biden drops out of 2024 race, exit comes amid growing pressure from top Dems
Joey Garrison and Swapna Venugopal Ramaswamy, USA TODAY
July 21, 2024 at 7:53 PM
WASHINGTON - President Joe Biden said Sunday he is ending his bid for reelection amid intense pressure from Democratic leaders sounding the alarm that his path to beat former President Donald Trump in November has vanished.
The president's historic withdrawal throws the 2024 race - already roiled by a shocking attempt on Trump's life - into uncertain territory, with Vice President Kamala Harris seen as the Democrat best placed to take Biden's place atop the party's ticket.
Biden made the announcement from his home in Rehoboth Beach, Del., where he's self-isolated since testing positive for COVID-19 Thursday night.
"It has been the greatest honor of my life to serve as your President," Biden said in a written statement. "And while it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and my country for me to stand down and to focus solely on my duties as President for the rest of my term."
Biden did not immediately endorse a successor. He said he would speak to the nation later this week to provide more detail about his decision.
It marks an extraordinary turn for Biden, who for three weeks remained defiant in the face of growing calls from Democratic lawmakers that he withdraw after a disastrous June 27 debate with Trump raised scrutiny over the president's mental fitness.
Biden's exit came after he received bleak warnings from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries that his candidacy could lead to massive losses for Democrats in the Senate and House.
More than 30 congressional Democrats called for Biden to bow out, and former President Barack Obama reportedly relayed similar fears to Democratic allies about Biden's prospects of beating Trump. Democratic donors from Hollywood to Wall Street also came out against Biden continuing his reelection bid.
The decision upends the 2024 election less than 110 days before Election Day, with Democratic National Committee members now tasked with choosing an alternative nominee to take on Trump, whose polling lead has swelled while Democrats have fought internally.
Vice President Harris is now the frontrunner to replace Biden as the Democratic nominee, but the party's bench of Democratic governors could also be in the mix including Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Gavin Newsom of California.
Biden becomes the first incumbent president not to seek reelection since Lyndon B. Johnson who, in 1968 amid national unrest and turmoil within the Democratic Party over the Vietnam War, stunned the nation with his decision not to seek a second full term.
Biden, 81, has battled Americans' concerns over his age since he took office but it turned into panic for Democrats after last month's first debate with Trump, the Republican nominee. Biden's voice sounded faint, he struggled to complete sentences and finish thoughts, and he failed to rebut many many of Trump's claims on the debate stage.
Biden's campaign was in a free fall over the past few weeks with his future in doubt. Instead of focusing solely on Trump, Democrats spent as much time and energy debating whether Biden could even defeat his predecessor.
Fundraising for the Biden campaign took a dramatic hit. And Biden not only fell behind in key battleground states that will decide the election, but his growing unpopularity seemed to put recent Democratic strongholds like Virginia in play for Trump.
Biden's departure will soon mean the end of a five-decade career in Washington that began in 1972 with an upset victory for U.S. Senate in Delaware. He served as a senator for 36 years, then as Obama's vice president from 2009 to 2017. Biden returned to public life to run against Trump in the 2020 presidential election, beating Trump 51%-47% in the popular vote.
This is a breaking story. Check back for updates.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Biden drops out: President leaves 2024 race amid party pressure
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Biden to push for constitutional amendment next week to reverse Trump immunity decision: report
|
Biden to push for constitutional amendment next week to reverse Trump immunity decision: report
Chris Pandolfo
July 27, 2024 at 7:57 PM
President Biden is set to propose several changes to the U.S. Constitution on Monday to make good on his promise to reform the Supreme Court, according to a report.
In a reversal from the president's longstanding resistance to changes to the high court, Biden said on Wednesday that Supreme Court reform would be among his top priorities for the remainder of his term in office. Biden announced Sunday that he would not seek re-election after mounting pressure from Democratic Party officials who asked him to step aside after his widely panned debate performance in June.
The president is expected to propose setting term limits for justices on the Supreme Court, which would require a constitutional amendment, and establishing an enforceable code of ethics, which could be enacted by Congress, Politico reported.
BIDEN TO ANNOUNCE SUPPORT FOR MAJOR CHANGES TO SUPREME COURT AMID OUTRAGE OVER RECENT DECISIONS: REPORT
Biden is also likely to voice support for a constitutional amendment that would limit immunity for presidents and certain other officeholders after the court ruled in July that presidents cannot be prosecuted for "official acts" during their time in office. The court's ruling stemmed from a case concerning former President Trump.
The framers of the Constitution intentionally made it difficult to amend. A two-thirds majority of both the House and the Senate needs to pass any proposed amendment, which is then sent to the states for ratification. It must be approved by three-fourths -- 38 -- of the 50 states to become the supreme law of the land.
READ ON THE FOX NEWS APP
"This decision today has continued the court's attack in recent years on a wide range of long-established legal principles in our nation, from gutting voting rights and civil rights to taking away a woman's right to choose, to today's decision that undermines the rule of law of this nation," Biden said in public remarks after the court handed down its opinion.
TRUMP IMMUNITY CASE: SUPREME COURT RULES EX-PRESIDENTS HAVE SUBSTANTIAL PROTECTION FROM PROSECUTION
Politico reported the specifics of the proposal have not been finalized and could still change. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Biden said Supreme Court reform is "critical to our democracy" in an Oval Office address Wednesday explaining his decision to drop out of the 2024 election.
HARRIS VS. TRUMP: 100 DAYS FROM ELECTION, IT'S A DRAMATICALLY ALTERED PRESIDENTIAL RACE
"Over the next six months, I'll be focused on doing my job as president. That means I'll continue to lower costs for hard-working families, grow our economy. I'll keep defending our personal freedoms and our civil rights, from the right to vote to the right to choose. I'll keep calling out hate and extremism, make it clear there is no place, no place in America for political violence or any violence ever, period. I'm going to keep speaking out to protect our kids from gun violence, our planet from climate crisis, is the existential threat," Biden said.
"And I will keep fighting for my for my cancer moonshot, so we can end cancer as we know it because we can do it. And I'm going to call for Supreme Court reform because this is critical to our democracy, Supreme Court reform. You know, I will keep working to ensure America remains strong and secure and the leader of the free world."
Fox News Digital's Louis Casiano contributed to this report.
Original article source: Biden to push for constitutional amendment next week to reverse Trump immunity decision: report
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Nolte -- Michigan Police: 80-Year-Old Trump Supporter Run Over in 'Politically Motivated' Attack
|
The Hancock, Michigan, Police Department posted a press release Sunday warning about "three different incidents that appeared to be politically motivated," with the targets being "Trump and Law Enforcement supporters."
This is what happens when billions of corporate media dollars are used to smear the decent, hardworking, everyday people who support former President Donald Trump as Nazis....
One of the victims is an 80-year-old man who was run down in his yard while putting up a pro-Trump sign:
At approximately 5:45PM, in the 1600 blk of Anthony Street, the same subject driving an ATV (4-wheel) allegedly with intention to do harm drove into the residence yard, running over an 80-year-old male who was posting a political sign in his yard. The victim was transported to the hospital with serious injuries and remains in critical condition.
It is believed that the person driving the ATV is involved in all three incidents. Be aware, the subject appeared to target both Trump and Law Enforcement supporters.
Local media reported it was a Trump yard sign.
BREAKING: Manhunt underway in Hancock, Michigan after a suspect ran over an 80-year-old man who was putting a Trump sign in his yard. Police believe this individual is involved in a string of politically motivated attacks.
The individual was driving an ATV and pulled the sign... pic.twitter.com/lGMe2ppU3c
-- Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) July 23, 2024
Two other incidents "involved vehicles that were intentionally vandalized."
The police describe the suspect as having a "thin build with possible dreadlocks or long hair."
An update says a man who identified himself as the guilty party asked for the police to come pick him up. After entering the residence with a search warrant, the suspect, a 22-year-old male, was found dead by a "self-inflicted gunshot wound."
This happened just a week after an assassination attempt on Trump that only failed due to a fluke turn of the head -- an assassination attempt only made possible by inexplicable Secret Service security lapses.
Defiant: Bloodied Trump Pumps Fist to Crowd After Possible Shooting at Rally
Let me tell you what's happening here...
Democrats tried to unconstitutionally remove Trump from state ballots; tried to smear him as a Nazi, insurrectionist, and unique threat to democracy; tried to frame him and imprison him for life with dozens of phony criminal charges...and they failed.
And, now, Trump is winning the 2024 presidential election, and people who -- for nearly a decade -- have been wound up and incited by the organized left (Democrats, the corporate media, and Hollywood), are freaking out and panicking, and that leads to violence.
You see, in their twisted minds, violence is righteous against the next Adolf Hitler.
Do patriots not have a moral duty to stop the next Adolf Hitler and his Nazi supporters?
Of course, they do.
Don't you understand that this is what it's always been about...calling Trump a Nazi and calling us Nazi supporters is a declaration of war on us.
Look at what exactly we are dealing with: An ideology that describes the murder of unborn babies as "health care," a political party that endorses the sexualization and permanent mutilation of little kids to please its trans financiers.
The left has spent a decade saying it's okay to punch a Nazi and kill Baby Hitler.
Trust me, the closer Trump gets to a victory, the worse it's going to get.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Biden blames Trump's alleged 'shouting' for debate debacle despite no evidence it occurred
|
President Biden said former President Donald Trump distracted him with alleged "shouting" during their debate last week, which he said compounded his disastrous performance. (Credit: ABC News)
President Biden said former President Donald Trump distracted him by "shouting" during their debate last week - behavior that Biden said only added to his troubles during a disastrous performance.
"How quickly did it come to you that you were having that bad night?" ABC News' George Stephanopoulos asked the president during an interview that aired Friday evening.
"Well, it came to me I was having a bad night, when I realized that even when I was answering the question, even though they turned his mic off, he was still shouting. And I let it distract me," Biden said. "But I'm not blaming it on that, but I realized that I just wasn't in control."
The ABC News interview marked Biden's first sit-down interview since his widely panned debate performance, which included the president losing his train of thought, stumbling over his words, and delivering responses in a raspy voice - something that the White House later blamed on a cold.
BIDEN TAKES BLAME FOR 'BAD NIGHT' IN DEBATE AGAINST TRUMP: 'MY FAULT, NO ONE ELSE'S FAULT'
The debate's agreed-upon rules included turning off the microphone of the president or former president when the other was answering a question. At times, Trump was seen and heard speaking when his mic was turned off, but he was not heard or seen shouting at Biden during the first debate of the 2024 presidential election cycle.
PRESIDENT BIDEN FACES THE MOST CONSEQUENTIAL WEEKEND OF HIS POLITICAL CAREER
The president's performance during the debate sparked concern and panic within the Democratic Party, as traditional allies and media pundits quickly noted that Biden appeared to be showing his age - 81 years old - during the showdown. The concern soon cascaded into establishment media outlets, such as the New York Times, and even elected Democratic officials calling on Biden to step out of the race.
"The president appeared on Thursday night as the shadow of a great public servant," the New York Times editorial board wrote in its piece following the debate. "He struggled to explain what he would accomplish in a second term. He struggled to respond to Mr. Trump's provocations. He struggled to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his lies, his failures and his chilling plans."
The Times continued: "More than once, he struggled to make it to the end of a sentence. Mr. Biden has been an admirable president. Under his leadership, the nation has prospered and begun to address a range of long-term challenges, and the wounds ripped open by Mr. Trump have begun to heal. But the greatest public service Mr. Biden can now perform is to announce that he will not continue to run for re-election."
BIDEN RAMPS UP SPENDING IN BID TO STEADY HIS FALTERING CAMPAIGN
Biden and his administration and campaign have worked to quell concerns about his mental acuity and age since last week, touting his series of campaign events immediately following the debate, as well as upcoming press conferences and continued appearances.
WHAT BIDEN SAID ABOUT HIS DEBATE PERFORMANCE
The president admitted he performed poorly in the debate, including during the Stephanopoulos' interview, summing it up as a "bad night" and a "bad episode."
"It was a bad episode," Biden said. "No indication of a serious condition. I was exhausted. I didn't listen to my instincts in terms of preparing. It was a bad night."
He said the blame squarely falls on him, not those who prepped him going into debate night.
"The whole way I prepared - nobody's fault. Mine. Nobody's fault but mine," Biden said during the ABC News interview. "I prepared what I usually would do sitting down, as I did coming back with foreign leaders or the National Security Council, for explicit detail."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Trump recently lambasted Biden's debate performance in a video that appears to have been shot on a golf course earlier this week. the former president said: "We kicked that old, broken down pile of crap."
Despite calls from both Democrats and Republicans to bow out over concerns of mental acuity and age, Biden has vowed he will remain in the race.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Biden's former comms director: Trump wasn't saying 'there will be no more elections'
|
President Biden's former communications director poured water on some Democrat's concerns Sunday that former President Trump implied there won't be future elections if he's elected again.
Trump made the remarks at a Turning Point USA event on Friday, telling supporters, "In four years, you won't have to vote again."
Kate Bedingfield wrote on social media that Trump wasn't implying that there wouldn't be an election in 2028 if he won, as some on the left have remarked.
"I think he is saying I won't be on the ticket either way, so who cares," she said. "Which is hideously damning in its own right, cause this is what the Republican Party has turned itself inside out and shredded its credibility for -- to become a stan account for this one awful, narcissistic guy."
Top Trump surrogates have also brushed off the comments in recent days, with Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) saying in a CNN interview Sunday that Trump was "obviously making a joke."
Bedingfield's post received some push back from those who said her comments downplayed Trump's threat to democracy, specifically referring to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and attempts to sow doubt about the 2024 election. She later clarified her point.
"I am not suggesting Trump isn't a threat to democracy or that he hasn't said and done despicable things -- like Jan 6, like saying he'd be a dictator on day one -- he has and it is unacceptable and appalling," she said.
"But it does mean we have to think about winning messages targeted to those people who don't absorb everything Donald Trump says the same way everyone responding here does," she continued. "It does not mean I think we should let him off the hook. The opposite -- I think it means Dems absolutely 100 percent have to win because the stakes are existential."
Other notable Democrats also chimed in backing up Bedingfield, including former Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor, now of "Pod Save America."
"He's a selfish prick and a liar who says he can fix everything in four years or politics won't matter once hes gone," Vietor said of Trump. "That doesn't mean he's not also a threat to democracy- and you've said as much a million times!"
Anti-Trump conservative commentator Bill Kristol also supported Bedingfield's point, labeling her critics "mostly dense or foolish."
"A range of arguments are needed to defeat Trump, and dogmatically asserting there's one magic argument or kind of argument that works on everyone, is silly and counter-productive," he wrote.
While the Biden campaign relied on warnings about Trump's threat to democracy as its primary argument against the former president, the Harris campaign seems to be testing new attack lines as well.
Harris surrogates including Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D), who is reportedly a contender to be her running mate, have begun labeling Republicans as simply "weird," pointing to positions on LGBTQ rights and abortion access that are relatively unpopular.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Harris Narrows Gap Against Trump, Times/Siena Poll Finds
|
Vice President Kamala Harris begins a 103-day sprint for the presidency in a virtual tie with former President Donald J. Trump, according to the latest New York Times/Siena College poll, as her fresh candidacy was quickly reuniting a Democratic Party that had been deeply fractured over President Biden.
Just days after the president abandoned his campaign under pressure from party leaders, the poll showed Democrats rallying behind Ms. Harris as the presumptive nominee, with only 14 percent saying they would prefer another option. An overwhelming 70 percent of Democratic voters said they wanted the party to speedily consolidate behind her rather than engage in a more competitive and drawn-out process.
Her swift reassembling of the Democratic coalition appeared to help narrow Mr. Trump's significant advantage over Mr. Biden of only a few weeks ago. Ms. Harris was receiving 93 percent support from Democrats, the same share that Mr. Trump was getting from Republicans.
Overall, Mr. Trump leads Ms. Harris 48 percent to 47 percent among likely voters in a head-to-head match. That is a marked improvement for Democrats when compared to the Times/Siena poll in early July that showed Mr. Biden behind by six percentage points, in the aftermath of the poor debate performance that eventually drove him from the race.
Mr. Trump leads Ms. Harris 48 percent to 46 percent among registered voters. He had led among registered voters by nine percentage points over Mr. Biden in the post-debate poll.
The survey provides a snapshot of the presidential race in the middle of one of the most volatile and unpredictable periods in modern American history. Democrats suddenly have a new nominee. And, less than two weeks after Mr. Trump survived an assassination attempt, his favorability rating rose to the highest level it has ever been in a national New York Times survey.
In some ways, the poll showed a reset to where the race was before Mr. Biden imploded on a debate stage in Atlanta: months of a narrow but steady Trump edge in the national polling averages. But in other ways, the new poll provided intriguing hints at how a Harris candidacy could remake the political coalitions and map that will determine the outcome of the 2024 election.
Ms. Harris was faring better among groups that Mr. Biden had been the weakest in, especially younger voters and nonwhite voters. At the same time, some Democrats fear she might not retain the same strengths that Mr. Biden has had among older voters, for whom the poll does show some erosion of Democratic support.
The poll showed Ms. Harris garnering about 60 percent support from voters under 30 and Hispanic voters, groups Mr. Biden had consistently struggled with. Among voters under 45, Ms. Harris was ahead by 10 percentage points, less than three weeks after Mr. Trump had held a narrow edge with that group over Mr. Biden.
Because the survey was of voters nationwide, the impact of Ms. Harris's candidacy in particular battleground states was not immediately clear. But a Democratic candidate with greater appeal to younger and more diverse voters could put renewed focus on the Sun Belt states of Nevada, Arizona and Georgia, which had been threatening to slip off the swing-state map for Mr. Biden.
Ms. Harris has emerged as the Democratic Party's expected nominee after a tumultuous few weeks. Mr. Biden stepped aside on Sunday, following a month of drawn-out questions about his mental faculties following a poor debate performance at the end of June. In the interim, Mr. Trump escaped an assassination attempt, named Senator JD Vance of Ohio as his running mate and formally accepted his party's nomination at the Republican National Convention.
Ms. Harris is on a glide path toward next month's Democratic convention as she seeks to become the first woman, first Black woman and first person of South Asian descent to serve as an American president.
"Her being president or even being in the running is very important just for history," said Summer Nesbitt, a 27-year-old school tutor near Detroit who supports the vice president. But Ms. Nesbitt, who is Black, added that she found some of Ms. Harris's explicit appeals to Black voters a turnoff. "I don't think that you have to try to pretend to be more down or be more Black just so you can get the Black vote. Just be yourself."
Voters are more tuned into the race. Just before the June debate, only 48 percent of voters said they were paying a lot of attention to the presidential campaign. That figure now stands at 64 percent, though the interest of independents continues to lag behind that of Democrats and Republicans.
The national mood remains bleak, but noticeably less so, with 61 percent seeing the country headed in the wrong direction, which is lower than in recent months.
Ms. Harris faces some structural challenges as November approaches. She is the sitting vice president at a time when 75 percent of voters rated the nation's economic conditions as "fair" or "poor." And significantly more voters see Mr. Trump as a strong leader than those who say the same of Ms. Harris.
"I'm a Democrat, but I've changed my mind after everything that's happened with Joe Biden's administration," said Anna Ayala, a 58-year-old who lives in San Jose, Calif., and voted for Mr. Biden in 2020. She plans to vote for Mr. Trump in 2024. "I mean, the border situation is out of control."
The country's view of Ms. Harris has also brightened, with her favorable rating rising by 10 percentage points since February. Ms. Harris enters the campaign with a favorable rating of 46 percent, better than Mr. Biden's, but still behind Mr. Trump's.
Views of all three -- Mr. Trump, Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris -- split dramatically along gender lines. For the most part, men like Mr. Trump while women don't. Women like Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris, while men don't.
Mr. Trump's favorable rating ticked up to 48 percent. This comes not long after the indelible images of him rising to his feet after an assassination attempt at a Pennsylvania rally, pumping his fist in the air as blood streaked across his face, shouting, "Fight! Fight! Fight!"
"Honestly the way he handled it after the fact, the way he pretty much stood up in defiance of what happened, kind of gave me that sense of pride that I hadn't felt when it came to our country in a while," said Eddie Otzoy, a 29-year-old contractor in Los Angeles, who had voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Mr. Biden in 2020, but is now backing Mr. Trump. "Once the assassination attempt happened, it made me feel like they wanted to shut him up for a reason."
Nearly 90 percent of voters said they approved of Mr. Biden's decision to exit the race, a view shared by Democrats, Republicans and independents alike.
Perhaps as a result, Ms. Harris has almost instantly united the party behind her, to a far greater degree than Mr. Biden had been able to in the last two years. Nearly four in five Democrats or voters who lean toward the Democratic Party said they would like to nominate her. In contrast, only 48 percent of Democrats had said they wanted Mr. Biden as the nominee just three weeks ago.
A majority of Democrats said they felt enthusiastic about Ms. Harris as the nominee, with only 10 percent dissatisfied or angry.
"It would be a larger setback for the Democrats if they try to find someone else to try to fill in," said Michael Newman, a 59-year-old contractor in Arlington, Texas, who is supporting Ms. Harris. "She has a pretty good insight on the goals that Biden was working on."
Mr. Biden's decision not to seek re-election -- "I revere this office, but I love my country more," he said in a national address on Wednesday evening -- has resulted in a sharp spike in his favorability rating. The 7-point jump in his favorable rating after three of the most brutal weeks of his presidency -- as party leaders questioned his mental competence and fitness -- suggested that voter frustration with Mr. Biden may have been based not just on how he was governing but the fact that the 81-year-old president was seeking a second term.
Mr. Biden's 43 percent favorability rating was his best showing since 2022.
In a multicandidate race, less than a single percentage point separated Mr. Trump and Ms. Harris, with Ms. Harris at 44 percent and Mr. Trump at 43 percent after rounding.
The independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s share of the vote continues to drop, hitting just 5 percent of likely voters in the new survey. He was the only third-party candidate above 1 percent.
Among Ms. Harris and Mr. Trump's greatest strengths in the poll were that voters saw them as intelligent and having the right temperament to handle the job. Ms. Harris gets slightly higher marks for her smarts; 66 percent of voters say "intelligent" describes her well, compared with 59 percent for Mr. Trump.
Neither candidate holds an edge on the ability to unify the country, a sign that perhaps, in this era of deep political polarization, few believe national unity is even possible.
Christine Zhang contributed reporting.
Here are the key things to know about this Times/Siena poll:
We spoke with 1,142 registered voters across the country from July 22 to 24, 2024.
Times/Siena polls are conducted by telephone, using live interviewers, in both English and Spanish. About 96 percent of respondents were contacted on a cellphone for this poll. You can see the exact questions that were asked and the order in which they were asked here.
Voters are selected for the survey from a list of registered voters. The list contains information on the demographic characteristics of every registered voter, allowing us to make sure we reach the right number of voters of each party, race and region. For this poll, we placed more than 140,000 calls to nearly 54,000 voters.
To further ensure that the results reflect the entire voting population, not just those willing to take a poll, we give more weight to respondents from demographic groups that are underrepresented among survey respondents, like people without a college degree. You can see more information about the characteristics of our respondents and the weighted sample at the bottom of the results and methodology page, under "Composition of the Sample."
The poll's margin of sampling error among registered voters is plus or minus 3.3 percentage points. In theory, this means that the results should reflect the views of the overall population most of the time, though many other challenges create additional sources of error. When computing the difference between two values -- such as a candidate's lead in a race -- the margin of error is twice as large.
You can see full results and a detailed methodology here. If you want to read more about how and why we conduct our polls, you can see answers to frequently asked questions and submit your own questions here.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Trial judge retakes control of Trump 2020 election case after Supreme Court immunity ruling
|
Washington -- U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan has once again taken control over the 2020 election-related prosecution against former President Donald Trump and could soon lay out how the case will move forward in the coming weeks.
The case was sent back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit after the Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision that former presidents are immune from prosecution for official acts they took while in office. The three-judge panel at the appeals court level -- which previously found that Trump could not be shielded from criminal charges -- issued a brief, unsigned order sending the matter back to the district court on Friday.
"It is ordered, on the court's own motion, that this case be remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion," the D.C. Circuit said.
Chutkan is now expected to interpret and apply the Supreme Court's ruling. She will have to decide which alleged conduct described in special counsel Jack Smith's indictment of the former president is "official" in nature and which could be the subject of criminal prosecution.
Smith charged Trump about a year ago with four counts tied to his conduct after the 2020 presidential election, including conspiracy to defraud the U.S. Prosecutors alleged the former president worked to subvert the peaceful transfer of power through a pressure campaign at the state and federal level that culminated in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack.
Trump pleaded not guilty to the charges. He denied wrongdoing and claimed the prosecution was politically motivated.
While concluding that former presidents have legal protections from charges for alleged acts that fell within their official duties, the Supreme Court rejected Trump's claims that he is entitled to sweeping, absolute immunity unless impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion for the court's conservative majority. He divided presidential conduct into three categories: official acts that are part of presidents' "core constitutional powers"; other official acts that are outside their "exclusive authority"; and unofficial acts. Presidents have "absolute" immunity for the first category, "presumptive" immunity for the second, and no immunity for the third.
In applying that legal test, the high court ruled the charges against Trump could not be tied to conduct related to his official role as president, like allegations that he worked with Justice Department officials in a plot to investigate the election results, which he believed were rife with fraud. Other alleged conduct contained in charging documents -- including Trump's interactions with then-Vice President Mike Pence ahead of the Jan. 6 Electoral College certification by Congress -- is a closer call, according to the Supreme Court's decision. As a result, Chutkan will have to presume that Trump is immune from charges tied to that conduct, too, but the Justice Department will have an opportunity to rebut that presumption in future proceedings.
Chutkan's work is likely to be most consumed in determining whether the rest of Trump's alleged actions -- namely that he worked to organize false slates of electors, communicated with outside attorneys to execute that plan and urged his supporters to descend on Washington on Jan. 6 -- fall within the scope of official or unofficial acts.
Roberts wrote that any protections from prosecution "may depend on the content of context" of the allegations and instructed Chutkan to "carefully analyze the indictment's remaining allegations to determine whether they too involve conduct for which a president must be immune from prosecution."
Chutkan first ceded control of Trump's case to the higher courts after she rejected his claim of absolute presidential immunity last year, writing in a December 2023 opinion that presidents do not enjoy a "lifelong 'get-out-of-jail-free' pass" after they leave office. Trump appealed to get the case fully dismissed, which resulted in a pause in the proceedings until the matter was resolved.
While Trump did not ultimately receive the full immunity from prosecution he initially sought in Chutkan's courtroom, his legal team successfully delayed the criminal proceedings from going forward for more than eight months.
Chutkan is now faced with overseeing the case in the run-up to the 2024 election, though it's highly unlikely a trial will take place before Election Day on Nov. 5.
Justice Department officials have said there is no legal impediment that would preclude them from proceeding with the case against Trump during the election season. For her part, Chutkan told Trump and his legal team last year that "politics stops at this courtroom door."
The Supreme Court also limited prosecutors' use of a key federal charge brought against hundreds of Jan. 6 rioters. Trump has also been charged with the count -- obstruction of an official proceeding -- and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, but Smith's team argued the legal framework in the case does not apply to Trump's indictment.
The former president could still seek to have the two obstruction-related charges tossed out based on the Supreme Court's decision, though it's unclear whether he would succeed.
As the 2020 election-related case against Trump appears to get going again, Smith's other prosecution against the former president was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in Florida last month after she found the special counsel was not legally appointed.
Smith has appealed the ruling and litigation is set to commence later this month, but Trump's successful challenge of his appointment in the classified documents case could pose further challenges to the case in Chutkan's court.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
State elections chief demands DNC stop using Ohio to justify virtual meeting to coronate Harris
|
DNC chair Jaime Harrison was pressed on whether President Biden was "bullied out of office" during an interview on "Today."
Ohio's top election official is demanding that Democrats stop using his state as an excuse to justify their expedited nomination of Vice President Kamala Harris for president at a virtual meeting next month.
Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose sent a letter to DNC Chairman Jamie Harris on Thursday calling out party officials for deceptively claiming the Buckeye State's ballot access deadline requires them to nominate a presidential candidate before the party convention in Chicago on Aug. 19-22.
"I've seen numerous media reports and interviews within the past week in which you repeatedly cite Ohio's August 7 ballot access deadline as justification for your committee's intent to conduct a 'virtual nominating convention,'" LaRose wrote to Harrison. "As you know, the Ohio General Assembly made an exception to the ballot access deadline for the 2024 presidential election, passing legislation signed by the governor that temporarily extends it to September 1, 2024."
The Democratic National Committee announced Wednesday it will hold a virtual roll call vote on the party's presidential and vice presidential nominees weeks before the convention, purportedly because of a ballot-access conflict in Ohio. Harrison and other Democratic officials have insisted the early vote is necessary because of an Aug. 7 deadline under Ohio state law.
DEMOCRATS TO CONFIRM NOMINEES BY VIRTUAL ROLL CALL WEEKS BEFORE DNC IN CHICAGO TO AVOID LEGAL CHALLENGES
"Since May, MAGA Republicans in Ohio have played games with our democracy and threatened to keep Democrats off the general election ballot. Just this week, after President Biden withdrew from the race, Republicans like Speaker Mike Johnson threatened litigation to challenge the Democratic nominee's place on the ballot and disenfranchise voters," a DNC spokesperson told Fox News Digital.
"The Democratic Party is undertaking an open, fair, and democratic process to select our nominee, ensure we meet all legal requirements - not just in Ohio, and move forward as a united Democratic Party with a candidate who can defeat Donald Trump in November," the spokesperson added.
BIDEN'S CABINET DOUBLES DOWN ON SUPPORT FOR PRESIDENT AMID CALLS TO INVOKE 25TH AMENDMENT
Under DNC rules, candidates have until July 27 to declare their candidacies with the convention and until July 30 to show they've met the qualifications for nomination. The earliest delegates can begin voting electronically will be Aug. 1, assuming Harris is the only candidate to declare and meet the required qualifications and delegate support threshold.
Although unlikely, if more than one candidate declares and meets those requirements, a period of up to five days will be allowed for each candidate to make the case for nomination to the delegates before voting can begin.
HARRIS REPEATS DEBUNKED CLAIM TRUMP WANTS TO 'BAN' ABORTION DURING FIRST CAMPAIGN RALLY SINCE BIDEN QUIT RACE
Harris announced she'd locked up the nomination within 36 hours of Biden's exit from the race, noting she'd won commitments of backing from a majority of the nearly 4,000 delegates.
"I am proud to have earned the support needed to become our party's nominee," she wrote in a social media post just after midnight early Tuesday morning.
Contrary to what Democrats are saying, LaRose argued there is nothing in Ohio state law that would keep the eventual Democratic presidential candidate off the ballot so long as a candidate is nominated before Sept. 1.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
"As the state's chief elections officer, I've confirmed with our state's attorney general that Ohio law does not require the DNC to conduct a 'virtual roll call' prior to your scheduled August convention dates," LaRose wrote.
"I'm confident that your attorneys are well-aware of this fact, and I suspect your current rhetorical posturing is part of a plan to replace the incumbent president without a contested convention or any kind of democratic process. It's clever, if not completely antithetical to your party's relentless finger wagging about threats to democracy, but I ask that you stop using Ohio to justify your course of action."
LaRose concluded his letter with an assurance that so long as the Democrats nominate candidates for president and vice president before Sept. 1, they will appear on the Ohio ballot.
Fox News Digital's Paul Steinhauser and Brandon Gillespie contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Biden calls for Supreme Court term limits and ethics rules
|
Efforts to reform the court are unlikely to be passed by the US Congress.
Democrats, however, hope that pushing for reform can help galvanise voters ahead of the November 2024 election.
The Supreme Court has ruled on a string of historic cases in the last two years, starting with ending the constitutional right to abortion in June of 2022.
At the same time, it has been dogged by allegations of judicial ethics violations, particularly after journalists investigated Justice Clarence Thomas for not reporting gifts.
In an opinion piece published in the Washington Post on Monday morning, Mr Biden said that "what is happening now is nor normal".
"It undermines the public's confidence in the court's decisions, including those impacting personal freedoms," he wrote in the Post. "We now stand in a breach."
To address these concerns, Mr Biden has proposed ending lifetime appointments to the court.
Instead, he believes that sitting presidents should appoint a new justice to the court every two years, who would then serve an 18-year period.
Reform advocates have previously suggested that staggered 18-year-term limits would help depoliticise the court and make it more balanced and representative of the population.
Additionally, Mr Biden is pressing Congress to establish a new code of ethics that would force justices to disclose gifts and avoid overt political activities.
"Every other federal judge is bound by an enforceable code of conduct," the president wrote. "There is no reason for the Supreme Court to be exempt."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
As Trump creates distance from Project 2025, the conservative Agenda47 comes into focus
|
Project 2025 is a conservative political playbook causing a stir in the Trump and Biden campaigns. Here is what we know now.
As the Republican National Convention (RNC) continues into its third day, speakers and party members have rallied around a firm support of Trump, despite a tumultuous few years that resulted in 34 felony convictions for falsifying business records, among other controversies.
At the RNC, political speakers outlined issues the Republican party considers to be some of the biggest facing Americans, including crime, immigration and identity politics. While some also proposed solutions that would be ushered in under a conservative president, voters don't have to guess Trump's plans; instead, they can simply head over to his website.
Starting in 2022, Trump's official campaign began uploading a series of policy plans to its website, detailing how the Republican candidate plans to tackle some of the country's most pressing issues. Called Agenda47, the campaign materials paint a big picture of what Americans may expect under another Trump presidency.
Here's what to know about Agenda47.
What to know about Heritage Foundation: Main group behind Project 2025 and RNC sponsor
What is Agenda47 and how is it different from Project 2025?
Agenda47 is the Trump administration's official policy platform for the 2024 presidential election. Outlined in a series of videos and statements on the Trump website, the proposals were released during primary election season.
Many of the actions proposed would be achieved through executive order and touch on topics ranging from climate change and education to the economy and immigration.
The policies are separate from Project 2025, an ultra-conservative initiative created by far-right think tank the Heritage Foundation. Project 2025 is something of a playbook for the next conservative president and details a reimagining of the executive branch and plans to overhaul federal government agencies in a conservative image.
It was created by a team that includes several members of Trump's former staff, but Trump has since attempted to distance himself from the Heritage Foundation after President Joe Biden publicly criticized his ties to the project.
Agenda47, on the other hand, is the official outline for Trump's campaign.
What Agenda47 says about education
Trump's proposals for education reform focus on defunding and punishing educators and institutions that do not teach conservative values and creating new organizations to enforce rules created around Republican talking points to "save" schools from "Radical Left maniacs."
These plans include:
On the college level, Agenda47 wants to punish universities like Harvard for "turning students into Communists and terrorists" and plans to do away with the existing accreditation system, replacing it with one that adheres to GOP values and heavily fines those that don't comply. With money made from the fines, Agenda47 proposes the creation of a free online "American Academy" with "no wokeness or jihadism."
Immigration
Anti-immigrant rhetoric is a prominent feature of Trump's 2024 campaign, a fact reflected in Agenda47. In the discussion of policy around immigration, Trump's preamble relies on the message that immigrants are "criminals" and "birth tourists" taking over America.
According to the plan, Trump will sign an executive order on "day one" to end automatic citizenship for children of "illegal aliens."
The agenda also envisions a slew of proposed executive and presidential orders that will:
Crime
Agenda47 says it wants to restore "law and order" to address what Trump claims is "out of control crime."
The plan proposes an investment in hiring, retention, and training for police officers and increasing their liability protections as well as supporting policing policies like stop-and-frisk and local police working with ICE on deportation.
Agenda47 also wants to:
Healthcare
Agenda47 places a focus on pharmaceuticals and medical devices manufactured within the U.S.
Under the plan, essential medical devices and medicines would be manufactured in the U.S. and federal agencies would be required to "Buy American" to prevent shortages.
It also calls for an increase in the production of drugs domestically, bans agencies from other countries from buying "essential drugs" and demands that pharmaceutical companies only be paid the "best price they offer to foreign nations."
The agenda proposes cutting federal regulations on resources like energy, cutting taxes, raising tariffs on foreign producers while lowering taxes for domestic producers, imposing universal tariffs on most foreign products, "eliminating dependence on China" and banning federal contracts for any company that outsources to China.
Welfare, social security
Agenda47 says "Under no circumstances should Republicans vote to cut a single penny from Medicare or Social Security."
In the proposal, Trump blames threats to the programs on Biden's spending and says the Democrats are trying to undo Social Security, though Republicans have previously proposed a higher retirement age and funding cuts.
Trump's agenda proposes cutting tax dollars going to "corrupt foreign countries," "illegal aliens," "left-wing gender programs from our military" and "climate extremism" to save Social Security funding.
The proposal also bans undocumented immigrants from receiving any welfare monies and seeks to address homelessness, banning "public camping" and instead giving unhoused individuals the option to go to some form unspecified of "treatment" or being arrested.
It also proposes the creation of large tent cities to accommodate unhoused people with doctors and social workers on site.
LGBTQIA+ rights
Trump makes apparent throughout his policy plans an anti-LGTBQIA+ stance that specifically targets transgender individuals.
Proposed policies include
Removing any healthcare provider that offers gender-affirming care to youth from Medicare and Medicaid eligibility.
Pushing Congress to pass laws that say "the only genders recognized by the U.S. government are male and female -- and they are assigned at birth."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Exclusive: Meta removes Trump account restrictions ahead of 2024 election
|
Why it matters: The company said it was making the change to ensure parity among presidential candidates leading up to the 2024 election.
State of play: Since being reinstated in January, 2023, Trump's accounts have been subject to stricter penalties than other Meta users, including account suspensions and advertising restrictions, if he violated the company's rules.
Zoom in: Meta decided to roll back the restrictions to Trump's accounts amid concerns that a smaller policy violation could result in his account being suspended or limited leading up to the election, a spokesperson said.
Yes, but: While Meta is doing away with stricter penalties on Trump's account, it maintains its ability to limit the distribution of problematic posts for his or any accounts even if they don't explicitly violate Meta's rules -- such as oblique references to QAnon.
What they're saying: "In assessing our responsibility to allow political expression, we believe that the American people should be able to hear from the nominees for president on the same basis," Meta president of global affairs Nick Clegg said in a statement.
Catch up quick: Meta and many other social media platforms barred Trump soon after the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol for breaking their rules and over fears of further incitements to violence.
The big picture: Meta's move is part of a broader effort by Big Tech companies to revisit policies put in place during extraordinary circumstances that they may feel no longer apply.
What's next: In the future, Meta says that if it places other accounts under the restrictions it applied to Trump, it will periodically review them to see whether they should be removed.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Election Live Updates: Obama Endorses Harris, as Trump Prepares to Meet With Netanyahu
|
Just days after the president abandoned his campaign under pressure from party leaders, the poll showed Democrats rallying behind Ms. Harris as the presumptive nominee, with only 14 percent saying they would prefer another option. An overwhelming 70 percent of Democratic voters said they wanted the party to speedily consolidate behind her rather than engage in a more competitive and drawn-out process.
[The poll is full of findings unlike any we've seen this cycle, with the exception of who leads the presidential race, Nate Cohn writes.]
Her swift reassembling of the Democratic coalition appeared to help narrow Mr. Trump's significant advantage over Mr. Biden of only a few weeks ago. Ms. Harris was receiving 93 percent support from Democrats, the same share that Mr. Trump was getting from Republicans.
Overall, Mr. Trump leads Ms. Harris 48 percent to 47 percent among likely voters in a head-to-head match. That is a marked improvement for Democrats when compared to the Times/Siena poll in early July that showed Mr. Biden behind by six percentage points, in the aftermath of the poor debate performance that eventually drove him from the race.
Mr. Trump leads Ms. Harris 48 percent to 46 percent among registered voters. He had led among registered voters by nine percentage points over Mr. Biden in the post-debate poll.
The survey provides a snapshot of the presidential race in the middle of one of the most volatile and unpredictable periods in modern American history. Democrats suddenly have a new nominee. And, less than two weeks after Mr. Trump survived an assassination attempt, his favorability rating rose to the highest level it has ever been in a national New York Times survey.
In some ways, the poll showed a reset to where the race was before Mr. Biden imploded on a debate stage in Atlanta: months of a narrow but steady Trump edge in the national polling averages. But in other ways, the new poll provided intriguing hints at how a Harris candidacy could remake the political coalitions and map that will determine the outcome of the 2024 election.
Ms. Harris was faring better among groups that Mr. Biden had been the weakest in, especially younger voters and nonwhite voters. At the same time, some Democrats fear she might not retain the same strengths that Mr. Biden has had among older voters, for whom the poll does show some erosion of Democratic support.
The poll showed Ms. Harris garnering about 60 percent support from voters under 30 and Hispanic voters, groups Mr. Biden had consistently struggled with. Among voters under 45, Ms. Harris was ahead by 10 percentage points, less than three weeks after Mr. Trump had held a narrow edge with that group over Mr. Biden.
Because the survey was of voters nationwide, the impact of Ms. Harris's candidacy in particular battleground states was not immediately clear. But a Democratic candidate with greater appeal to younger and more diverse voters could put renewed focus on the Sun Belt states of Nevada, Arizona and Georgia, which had been threatening to slip off the swing-state map for Mr. Biden.
Ms. Harris has emerged as the Democratic Party's expected nominee after a tumultuous few weeks. Mr. Biden stepped aside on Sunday, following a month of drawn-out questions about his mental faculties following a poor debate performance at the end of June. In the interim, Mr. Trump escaped an assassination attempt, named Senator JD Vance of Ohio as his running mate and formally accepted his party's nomination at the Republican National Convention.
[Follow the latest polls and see updated polling averages of the Harris vs. Trump matchup.]
Ms. Harris is on a glide path toward next month's Democratic convention as she seeks to become the first woman, first Black woman and first person of South Asian descent to serve as an American president.
"Her being president or even being in the running is very important just for history," said Summer Nesbitt, a 27-year-old school tutor near Detroit who supports the vice president. But Ms. Nesbitt, who is Black, added that she found some of Ms. Harris's explicit appeals to Black voters a turnoff. "I don't think that you have to try to pretend to be more down or be more Black just so you can get the Black vote. Just be yourself."
Voters are more tuned into the race. Just before the June debate, only 48 percent of voters said they were paying a lot of attention to the presidential campaign. That figure now stands at 64 percent, though the interest of independents continues to lag behind that of Democrats and Republicans.
The national mood remains bleak, but noticeably less so, with 61 percent seeing the country headed in the wrong direction, which is lower than in recent months.
Ms. Harris faces some structural challenges as November approaches. She is the sitting vice president at a time when 75 percent of voters rated the nation's economic conditions as "fair" or "poor." And significantly more voters see Mr. Trump as a strong leader than those who say the same of Ms. Harris.
The country's view of Ms. Harris has also brightened, with her favorable rating rising by 10 percentage points since February. Ms. Harris enters the campaign with a favorable rating of 46 percent, better than Mr. Biden's, but still behind Mr. Trump's.
Views of all three -- Mr. Trump, Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris -- split dramatically along gender lines. For the most part, men like Mr. Trump while women don't. Women like Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris, while men don't.
Mr. Trump's favorable rating ticked up to 48 percent. This comes not long after the indelible images of him rising to his feet after an assassination attempt at a Pennsylvania rally, pumping his fist in the air as blood streaked across his face, shouting, "Fight! Fight! Fight!"
"Honestly the way he handled it after the fact, the way he pretty much stood up in defiance of what happened, kind of gave me that sense of pride that I hadn't felt when it came to our country in a while," said Eddie Otzoy, a 29-year-old contractor in Los Angeles, who had voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Mr. Biden in 2020, but is now backing Mr. Trump. "Once the assassination attempt happened, it made me feel like they wanted to shut him up for a reason."
Nearly 90 percent of voters said they approved of Mr. Biden's decision to exit the race, a view shared by Democrats, Republicans and independents alike.
Perhaps as a result, Ms. Harris has almost instantly united the party behind her, to a far greater degree than Mr. Biden had been able to in the last two years. Nearly four in five Democrats or voters who lean toward the Democratic Party said they would like to nominate her. In contrast, only 48 percent of Democrats had said they wanted Mr. Biden as the nominee just three weeks ago.
A majority of Democrats said they felt enthusiastic about Ms. Harris as the nominee, with only 10 percent dissatisfied or angry.
"It would be a larger setback for the Democrats if they try to find someone else to try to fill in," said Michael Newman, a 59-year-old contractor in Arlington, Texas, who is supporting Ms. Harris. "She has a pretty good insight on the goals that Biden was working on."
Mr. Biden's decision not to seek re-election -- "I revere this office, but I love my country more," he said in a national address on Wednesday evening -- has resulted in a sharp spike in his favorability rating. The 7-point jump in his favorable rating after three of the most brutal weeks of his presidency -- as party leaders questioned his mental competence and fitness -- suggested that voter frustration with Mr. Biden may have been based not just on how he was governing but the fact that the 81-year-old president was seeking a second term.
Mr. Biden's 43 percent favorability rating was his best showing since 2022.
In a multicandidate race, less than a single percentage point separated Mr. Trump and Ms. Harris, with Ms. Harris at 44 percent and Mr. Trump at 43 percent after rounding.
The independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s share of the vote continues to drop, hitting just 5 percent of likely voters in the new survey. He was the only third-party candidate above 1 percent.
Among Ms. Harris and Mr. Trump's greatest strengths in the poll were that voters saw them as intelligent and having the right temperament to handle the job. Ms. Harris gets slightly higher marks for her smarts; 66 percent of voters say "intelligent" describes her well, compared with 59 percent for Mr. Trump.
Neither candidate holds an edge on the ability to unify the country, a sign that perhaps, in this era of deep political polarization, few believe national unity is even possible.
Christine Zhang contributed reporting.
You can see full results and a detailed methodology here. If you want to read more about how and why we conduct our polls, you can see answers to frequently asked questions and submit your own questions here.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Kamala Harris' legal, political career kicked off with failed bar exam
|
'Outnumbered' panelists sound off on the left's narrative after President Biden tasked her with leading efforts to stem migration at the southern border in 2021.
Vice President Kamala Harris is placing her experience as a "top cop" front and center as she looks to "prosecute" her GOP opponent and press her case for why she should win the presidency in November - but the legal career she's leaning on is "devoid" of achievement, critics say, and she owes much of her success to networking.
Her nearly three-decade rise up the ranks has included numerous bumps along the way - including failing her bar exam on the first try in 1989.
Civil rights attorney Leo Terrell, who passed the California bar the same year on his first try, described Harris as a "political opportunist" who was in "the right position, the right place" at the right time. By making calculated moves, she was able to leap from district attorney to attorney general to senator to vice president - and perhaps beyond.
"Networking," Terrell said, is what catapulted Harris' career. "Let's face it, she got to her position not on academic achievement. She got to her position as San Francisco district attorney, California attorney general, U.S. senator and vice president, because of networking."
THE MEDIA'S SUDDEN REJECTION OF KAMALA HARRIS' 'BORDER CZAR' LABEL
Terrell added that the guidance of former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, who has openly discussed his extramarital relationship with Harris during the 1990s, also aided Harris' political rise.
"She has no outstanding achievement as a lawyer, as a trial lawyer, her record is devoid," Terrell said. "... From my perspective, listening to her speak, listening to her approach to matters of public concerns... I don't think she's an academic heavyweight. I just don't see what's propelling her to this current political status. It's pure networking and politics and being in the right place, at the right time."
Harris has leaned on her experience as the Golden State's "top cop" after announcing her candidacy for president in the aftermath of President Biden dropping out of the race.
"As a tough prosecutor, Kamala Harris dealt with men like Trump all the time: Rapists, con men, frauds, criminals - she's used to guys like Trump, used to putting them in their place," a narrator for a pro-Harris ad released this week states.
Following Biden's exit from the race, Democrats have begun to push the narrative that the election is now pitting a "Prosecutor vs. the Felon," referring to former President Trump, who was found guilty in a New York criminal case earlier this year.
"The contrast in this race could not be clearer - a prosecutor versus a convicted felon. A champion for American's fundamental freedoms versus a man who has tried to rip them away at every turn. Let's get to work," Rep. Greg Stanton, D-Ariz., wrote on X.
OBAMA'S INNER CIRCLE SIGNALS 44TH PRESIDENT FIRMLY BEHIND HARRIS DESPITE NOT SAYING SO PUBLICLY
"November 5: the Prosecutor vs. the Felon," Rep. Daniel Goldman, D-N.Y., also chimed in.
Harris, who will turn 60 in October, spent 27 years in the legal world, which kicked off with her failing the bar exam.
Harris' failure made national news in 2020, when she was running on the Biden ticket for the White House while simultaneously juggling her Senate duties, most notably serving on the Senate Judiciary Committee. In that capacity, Harris questioned Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, who was selected by Trump to fill the seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
"Republicans are scrambling to confirm this nominee as fast as possible because they need one more Trump judge on the bench before Nov. 10 to win and strike down the entire Affordable Care Act," said Harris during the nomination hearing. "This is not hyperbole. This is not a hypothetical."
Harris' questions and exchanges with Coney Barrett were not nearly as fiery as her demeanor during previous hearings, including the battle surrounding Brett Kavanaugh's nomination in 2018. As the 2020 election cycle loomed over the hearings, social media commenters pointed out that the then-vice presidential nominee had failed her bar exam, while Coney Barrett finished first in her class while attending Notre Dame Law School.
"Kamala Harris failed the bar 1st time. Amy Coney Barrett 1st in her class," one social media post at the time read. "I rest."
The social media comments spurred outlets such as USA Today to publish fact checks that revealed Harris did in fact fail the bar exam on her first try, while Coney Barrett graduated top of her class. While the New York Times reported in a 2016 profile on Harris that she failed the exam, and had recently consoled a young law student who also failed the test, telling her: "It's not a measure of your capacity."
NEW YORK TIMES SPINS KAMALA HARRIS' PAST WORD SALADS AS 'CELEBRATORY ARTIFACTS' WITH CANDIDACY UNDERWAY
Harris ultimately passed one year later, with the bar admitting her in 1990, Fox News Digital found on the California Bar's website.
DEMS HYPE HARRIS AS TRUMP 'PROSECUTOR' IN ELECTION, BUT CRITICS SLAM HER LEGAL CAREER
Harris attended historically Black college Howard University as an undergraduate, and earned her law degree from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, which Terrell noted is an excellent law school - making it "kind of odd" for a student to fail the bar exam on their first try.
After passing the bar, she launched her career in the Alameda County District Attorney's Office as a deputy DA in 1990. In the late 1990s, she moved over to the San Francisco District Attorney's Office as assistant DA, then to the San Francisco city attorney's office, before running in 2004 to become San Francisco's top cop. She was elected as San Francisco DA and served in the role for about seven years, in that time building a friendship with then-Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and rubbing elbows with fellow Californian, Rep. Nancy Pelosi.
HOW DOES KAMALA HARRIS POLL AGAINST DONALD TRUMP?
Her meteoric rise in politics only grew from there, clinching the California attorney general position in 2011, when Gov. Jerry Brown led the state, then winning her Senate run in 2016 after longtime Sen. Barbara Boxer announced her retirement from politics.
HARRIS OUTPERFORMS BIDEN IN 2024 SHOWDOWN WITH TRUMP: POLL
Days after Obama endorsed Biden for president in August 2020, Biden announced Harris would join him on the ticket. Harris, who has been called "the Female Obama," has had a long friendship with the 44th president, including being among the first elected Democrats in the nation to endorse his first run for president in the 2008 election - snubbing Hillary Clinton in favor of the then-Illinois senator.
"We did it, Joe," Harris famously said in a phone call with Biden after polls showed the pair won the election.
Harris is now the presumptive Democratic nominee for the 2024 election, after Biden bowed out of the race, which was shortly followed by him endorsing his veep.
VP HARRIS FINALLY REACTS TO DC VIOLENCE, HOURS AFTER FLAG BURNING BY ANTI-ISRAEL AGITATORS
"My very first decision as the party nominee in 2020 was to pick Kamala Harris as my Vice President. And it's been the best decision I've made," Biden said in an X post following his withdrawal from the race. "Today I want to offer my full support and endorsement for Kamala to be the nominee of our party this year. Democrats - it's time to come together and beat Trump. Let's do this."
The 46th president had faced mounting pressure from his Democrat allies and legacy media outlets to bow out of the race since June 27, when he delivered a botched debate performance against Trump that was riddled with garbled remarks and where the president lost his train of thought and appeared more subdued than during other recent public events.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The debate reignited concern among conservatives and critics that Biden's mental acuity had slipped, while it marked the beginning of a pressure campaign among Democrats to oust Biden.
Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.
Fox News Digital's Jamie Joseph contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Biden drops out, throwing the 2024 election into chaos
|
President Joe Biden said in a statement posted on his social media account he is dropping out of the presidential race -- a historic decision that throws the 2024 election into upheaval and marks the latest exit of a presidential incumbent in modern history.T
he extraordinary move by Biden to decline the nomination will send shockwaves through the Democratic Party, triggering a frenzied effort to replace him just weeks before the party's nominating convention. In making the announcement, Biden did not immediately endorse Vice President Kamala Harris or another candidate to be the Democratic nominee.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Republicans Block Bill That Would Have Cut Taxes For Families
|
WASHINGTON -- A bipartisan bill expanding the child tax credit, as well as business deductions sought by corporate America, failed to advance in the Senate on Thursday after overwhelming opposition from Republicans who feared giving Democrats a major win ahead of the November elections.
The 48-44 vote came amid debate about which party is more "pro-family" and whether the government should penalize people without children, or "childless cat ladies," as Ohio Sen. JD Vance, the Republican vice presidential candidate, suggested in recently resurfaced comments that have drawn bipartisan criticism.
"If these folks are so pro-family, why aren't they supporting paid family and medical leave? If they believe in families, why are they not supporting the child tax credit?" Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) told HuffPost when asked about GOP opposition to the bill.
The legislation would have given low-income parents larger tax refunds, especially in households with multiple children. Tax analysts said a tax filer who has two children and earned $9,000 last year would receive a child tax credit refund worth $975 under current law, but $1,950 under the proposal.
The bill's authors, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.), said it would "help 16 million kids from low-income families and lift 500,000 out of poverty," in part by allowing parents to claim the full tax credit for each of their kids, something they can't do now.
Republicans complained that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) only brought the measure up for a vote six months after it was approved by the House (by a 357-70 vote) to help bolster the campaigns of vulnerable Democratic incumbents facing tough reelection fights in November.
Some GOP senators also warned about giving Democrats a major election-year legislative victory, insisting that they'd be better positioned to pass the legislation next year if they win control of the White House and the Senate.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) even handed out mock checks to his colleagues addressed to "anyone w/ 2 kids" and dated "a few weeks before the 2024 election," according to Bloomberg News reporter Zach Cohen.
But Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who voted to advance the bill, wasn't convinced by that argument.
"You could turn that around and say that a Republican House was able to pass meaningful tax relief for children and that'd be great for them going forward into the fall campaign. You could put the political argument both ways," he said.
Progressives in the chamber, meanwhile, voted to advance the bill even though they didn't think it included enough benefit for families.
The bill included several sweeteners for Republicans, including business tax breaks for research-and-development expenses long sought by corporate donors. It would also not cost the government money, according to budget scorekeepers, because it would crack down on abuse of the employee retention tax credit, or ERTC, a program from the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic that encouraged business owners to keep workers on company payrolls. Republicans disputed that cost analysis, however.
Vance, who missed Thursday's vote, has repeatedly accused Democrats of being the "anti-child" party, citing, among other things, liberal concerns over the human impact on climate change. In 2021, for example, he argued that Republicans should "go to war" against the idea of deciding not to have children, suggesting that someone who focuses on building their career instead of making babies will be "a sad, lonely, pathetic person."
Last week, he doubled down, saying, "This is not about criticizing people who for various reasons don't have kids. This is about criticizing the Democratic Party for becoming anti-family and anti-child."
But Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) took offense to his remarks.
"I said that it was offensive to me as a woman," Murkowski told reporters Wednesday. "Women make their own determinations as to whether or not they're going to have children or cats or dogs or how many kids they're going to have."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Biden campaign latest: Senator Joe Manchin calls for president to drop out of 2024 race
|
Biden has remained defiant amid calls for his departure from the race.
Good morning on this fine Sunday and welcome to The Guardian US's live politics blog.
The 2024 election continues to dominate the news, with one big question looming: Will President Joe Biden remain in the race?
Biden has vowed not to drop out despite multiple high-powered Democrats and prominent donors' calls for him to step aside, following a disastrous debate performance against Republican rival Donald Trump more than two weeks ago.
Biden, who claimed to have had a cold during this highly awaited showdown, stumbled in his delivery of what otherwise would have been cogent responses. Biden's quiet voice, in conjunction with mumbling and lackluster energy, prompted renewed questions about whether he had the physical and mental fortitude for another term.
While Biden sat down for several interviews following the debate, they did little to quell these concerns, as he repeatedly doubled down on his candidacy rather than create confidence in his political viability. Biden told ABC's George Stephanopoulos that he'd need to hear from the "Lord Almighty" to drop out of his campaign.
Biden said to Complex's Chris "Speedy" Morman that he was "1,000%" sticking in the race, "unless I get hit by a train." And he told BET's Ed Gordon that a "medical condition" would be the only thing to prompt his departure.
Biden did claim during a watershed news conference that he would leave the race if adviserts said "there's no way you can win" but insisted: "No one is saying that. No poll says that."
But Biden, who if elected again would be 86 at the end of his second term, faces close polls in key battleground states. And Trump, who last week survived an apparent assassination attempt, has cast himself as a physical foil to Biden - playing up his vigor and defiance.
Stay tuned to the blog for up-to-the-minute developments in today's politics news.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Google AI chatbot refuses to answer questions about Trump assassination attempt, relating to previous policy
|
Constellation Research founder R' Ray' Rang weighs in on the competition between Microsoft and Google over A.I. dominance and the technology's impact on the markets.
Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot Google Gemini refuses to answer questions about the failed assassination attempt against former President Trump, in accordance with what it calls its policy on election-related issues.
"I can't help with responses on elections and political figures right now," Gemini told Fox News Digital when asked about the recent assassination attempt. "While I would never deliberately share something that's inaccurate, I can make mistakes. So, while I work on improving, you can try Google Search."
Google Gemini is one of many multimodal large language models (LLMs) currently available to the public. As is the case with all LLMs, the human-like responses offered by these AIs can change from user to user based on a number of factors, including contextual information, the language and tone of the prompt and training data.
META ADDING AI DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT FOR 2024 ELECTION ADS
Google announced in December that it would limit the types of queries related to elections across the world in the run-up to the 2024 U.S. presidential election.
"Gemini is responding as intended," a Google spokesperson told Fox News Digital on Tuesday. "As we announced last year, we restrict responses for election-related queries on the Gemini app and web experience. By clicking the blue link in the response, you'll be directed to the accurate and up-to-date Search results."
While the tech giant's policy related to elections and politics was initially announced in late 2023, the controversy over Google's influence over the upcoming election has only grown in the wake of the failed assassination attempt against Trump.
Google users reported that the search engine initially omitted the attempted assassination of Trump from its autocomplete feature, drawing criticism from social media users who accused the Big Tech giant of trying to influence the presidential election.
GOOGLE FEATURE OMITS SEARCH RESULTS FOR FAILED TRUMP ASSASSINATION; BIG TECH ACCUSED OF ELECTION MANIPULATION
Screenshots from Google instead showed recommended search prompts of the failed assassination of Ronald Reagan, the shooting of Bob Marley and the failed attempt on former President Ford.
Even the keywords "Trump assassination attempt" initially yielded no additional terms from Google. As of Tuesday, however, searching "assassination attempt on" yielded the autocomplete option "assassination attempt on Donald Trump."
A Google spokesperson previously told FOX Business that there was no "manual action taken on these predictions."
In an updated statement, a Google spokesperson said that it has been "rolling out improvements to our Autocomplete systems to show more up-to-date predictions. These updates will also address the anomalies for some searches for the names of several past presidents and the current vice president. The issues are beginning to resolve, and we'll continue to make improvements as needed. As always, predictions change over time and there may be some imperfections. Autocomplete helps save people time, but they can always search for whatever they want, and we will continue to connect them with helpful information."
Fox Business' Louis Casiano, Nikolas Lanum and Christina Wurm contributed to this report.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Harris Faulkner gets honest about reporter from NABJ event -- then she makes election prediction that Democrats will hate | Blaze Media
|
Trump's appearance at a National Association of Black Journalists event certainly made headlines.
Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner called out ABC News reporter Rachel Scott on Thursday for trying to corner Donald Trump with "gotcha" questions.
On Wednesday, Trump sat for questions at a National Association of Black Journalists panel in Washington. The appearance began with immediate contention: Scott didn't say "hello" to Trump but immediately began to grill him with questions implying that he is racist.
'I mean, it didn't take much to show humanity, and in that moment, I was so disappointed that that didn't happen.'
In true Trump form, the former president condemned Scott for her "nasty" question.
Reflecting on the event during a "Fox & Friends" interview, Faulkner -- who was one of three black journalists to question Trump at the NABJ event -- expressed dismay over how Trump was treated.
Not only did audio and technical problems snare the event -- issues Faulkner attributed to the NABJ and ABC News -- but Faulkner blasted Scott, though without naming her, for stirring up emotion through "gotcha moments" that grabbed headlines. She mourned the fact that emotionally charged moments grabbed headlines instead of the fact that Trump, according to Faulkner, willingly walked "into a racial storm."
But that's not the only problem with the event, Faulkner went on to say.
Like Trump, Faulkner took significant issue with the fact that Trump was not given a proper welcome.
"He walks out on stage and not a greeting to acknowledge it's been 18 days at that point since you survived an assassination attempt. 'We're going to ask you tough questions, but Mr. President, welcome, and we are glad you're still here,'" she said.
"I mean, it didn't take much to show humanity, and in that moment, I was so disappointed that that didn't happen," she added. "I couldn't control it, but it got things off to an emotional start, and you and I both know that once that happens and you are interviewing someone, there is an agenda."
At the end of her reflection, Faulkner made a prediction about the 2024 election: The only color that will matter is green.
"I don't know that people are going to vote on the color of their skin and the hair texture this time around," she predicted. "This is about money, the color is green."
If Faulkner is right, then Vice President Kamala Harris will have a tough time overcoming President Joe Biden's record and her history of far-left economic views. Americans, after all, remember the price of their groceries when Trump was president.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Dem Staffer Posts 'Don't Miss Next Time' After Trump Assassination Attempt
|
Jacqueline Marsaw, a field director for Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), expressed disappointment in a now-deleted Facebook post that a shooter failed to assassinate former President Donald Trump on Saturday in Pennsylvania.
"I don't condone violence but please get you some shooting lessons so you don't miss next time ooops [sic] that wasn't me talking," she had posted, according to some reports.
Although she reportedly deleted the post, screenshots were plastered all over X.
Staffer for Congressman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) 👇🏻 pic.twitter.com/yVqm75yV3S
-- Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) July 14, 2024
As reported by Breitbart News's Bradley Jaye, Thompson -- who led the defunct January 6 Select Committee -- had introduced legislation in April that would take away Trump's Secret Service protection upon conviction.
Thompson called it the "Denying Infinite Security and Government Resources Allocated toward Convicted and Extremely Dishonorable (DISGRACED) Former Protectees Act."
Thompson is also the top Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, the body tasked with protecting the safety of the American people.
On Sunday, Thompson posted: "There is no room in American democracy for political violence. I am grateful for law enforcement's fast response to this incident. I am glad the former President is safe, and my thoughts and prayers go out to everyone involved."
Donald Trump Jr. posted a reminder of Thompson's bill on X, saying, "Remember, if @BennieGThompson and the Democrats got their way, my dad would be dead right now. Don't let them memory hole it."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Why Aren't We Talking About Trump's Fascism?
|
Joe Biden has created a distraction from the existential question that should define this election.
The 2024 presidential election, like the two previous ones, boils down to a simple question: should the United States remain a representative democracy, or should it become a right-wing autocracy? Unfortunately, the crucial debate we should be having about Trump's fascism has been derailed in the wake of Joe Biden's terrible debate performance on June 28, which has made Biden's own fitness to continue as a nominee the most discussed topic in politics.
Donald Trump's authoritarianism, which culminated in his refusal in 2021 to accede to the peaceful transfer of power and his incitement of a mob that attacked Congress, is well known. It has not receded in time but has only gotten worse. On Monday, The New York Times carried a story with this shocking headline: "Trump Amplifies Calls to Jail Top Elected Officials, Invokes Military Tribunals."
According to the article:
Former President Donald J. Trump over the weekend escalated his vows to prosecute his political opponents, circulating posts on his social media website invoking "televised military tribunals" and calling for the jailing of President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, Senators Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer and former Vice President Mike Pence, among other high-profile politicians.
Mr. Trump, using his account on Truth Social on Sunday, promoted two posts from other users of the site that called for the jailing of his perceived political enemies.
One post that he circulated on Sunday singled out Liz Cheney, the former Wyoming congresswoman who is a Republican critic of Mr. Trump's, and called for her to be prosecuted by a type of military court reserved for enemy combatants and war criminals.
While the prospect of Dick Cheney's daughter wearing an orange jumpsuit and locked up in Gitmo might offer some wry amusement to those who love historical irony, Trump is menacing not just the politicians he named, but the rule of law itself. Nor are these threats merely rhetorical. Thanks to the Supreme Court's massive expansion of the domain of presidential immunity (which now encompasses anything that can be considered an official act), if he returns to the White House Trump would have licence to commit crimes on a scale not seen since the heyday of the divine right of kings. As my Nation colleague Elie Mystal noted in his deft explication of the ruling, "Take the now-classic example of a president ordering Seal Team Six to assassinate a political rival. According to the logic of the Republicans on the Supreme Court, that would likely be an official act. According to their logic, there is also no way to prove it's 'unofficial,' because any conversation the president has with their military advisers (where, for instance, the president tells them why they want a particular person assassinated) is official and cannot be used against them."
Trump would be empowered not only by the judges he himself appointed in his first term, but also by a Republican party and conservative movement that has increasingly fallen under his sway. As amply documented by The Nation and other publications, the Trump agenda for a second term being prepared in Project 2025 by right-wing think tanks such as The Heritage Foundation involves a wholescale attack on guardrails of American democracy such as civil service neutrality. Trump and his political allies are preparing to reshape the federal government so that it ceases to be a bureaucracy with rules and norms, but instead becomes the plaything of their whims.
Celebrating the Supreme Court's expansion of presidential immunity, Heritage Foundation head Kevin Roberts on July 2 said, "we are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be."
Neither Trump's threats of violence, nor Robert's bloodcurdling prediction of Trump leading a new American revolution are getting the attention they merit. Some liberals are blaming this on the media, saying they are amplifying the issue of Biden's age too much at the expense of more important stories.
But the Biden aging story is in fact completely legitimate. It's foolish to deny what more than 50 million Americans witnessed with their eyes and ears during the debate. It is a fact that Biden is facing calls withdraw his nomination from elected Democrats, big donors, major media outlets like The New York Times, and ordinary citizens.
On Wednesday, Biden met Democratic governors to reassure them he is up to the job of being president and leading a campaign against Trump. According to The New York Times, Biden said, "he needed to get more sleep...He repeatedly referenced pushing too hard and not listening to his team about his schedule, and said he needed to work fewer hours and avoid events after 8 p.m." Asked by Hawaii governor Josh Green about his health, Biden responded he was fine and "it's just my brain." While this was meant as a joke, not everyone who heard the quip found it comforting. It fell into the disquieting category of a truth spoken in jest.
There's no shame in an 81-year-old man needing to cut back on his work schedule and get more sleep. We are biological creatures and aging is a natural part of life. But Biden has a uniquely demanding job which will become only more intense as the campaign heats up. If Biden needs more rest, the easiest way he can achieve that laudable goal is to quit his current job.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Trump says he 'would be willing to do more than one debate' with Vice President Harris
|
'America's Newsroom' co-anchor Dana Perino joins Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum to discuss the fallout from President Biden withdrawing from the presidential race.
Former President Trump says he's open to debating Vice President Kamala Harris more than once as the two face off in the 2024 presidential election.
"Absolutely. I'd want to. I think it's important," Trump said Tuesday when asked by Fox News' Bill Melugin on a conference call with reporters if he would commit to debating Harris at least once.
"I would be willing to do more than one debate, actually," Trump emphasized.
Minutes later, Trump noted, "I haven't agreed to anything. I agreed to a debate with Joe Biden."
HARRIS BREAKS FUNDRAISING RECORDS SINCE BIDEN DROPPED OUT OF 2024 RACE
President Biden, in a blockbuster announcement Sunday, suspended his 2024 re-election rematch with Trump and endorsed his vice president. The move by Biden ignited a surge of endorsements by Democratic governors, senators, House members and other party leaders backing Harris to succeed Biden as the party's 2024 standard-bearer.
WHAT'S NEXT FOR HARRIS NOW THAT SHE'S SEEMINGLY LOCKED UP THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION?
Biden suspended his campaign amid mounting pressure from within the Democratic Party for him to drop out after a disastrous performance in last month's first presidential debate with Trump.
The 81-year-old president's uneven delivery and awkward answers during the first 20 minutes of the debate in front of a national audience quickly prompted questions about his mental and physical ability to serve another four years in the White House.
Harris on Monday night announced that she'd locked up the nomination by landing commitments of backing from a majority of the nearly 4,000 delegates to next month's Democratic National Convention, which kicks off Aug. 19 in Chicago.
Trump told reporters debating Harris instead of Biden "will be no different because they have the same policies."
HEAD HERE FOR THE LATEST FOX NEWS REPORTING ON HARRIS REPLACING BIDEN AS THE DEMOCRAT'S 2024 PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE
The former president, who skipped out on the GOP presidential primary debates with his Republican challengers, said, "I think debating is important for a presidential race. I really do.
"I think if you're the Democrat nominee or the Republican nominee, you have an obligation to debate. I think it's very important."
Trump, in comments with reporters on a call where he amplified his criticism of Harris on the crucial issue of border security, once again took aim at ABC News, which was scheduled to host the second debate between Biden and Trump in early September.
HEAD HERE FOR THE LATEST FOX NEWS REPORTING ON HARRIS REPLACING BIDEN AS THE DEMOCRAT'S 2024 PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE
"I'm not thrilled about ABC because they're truly fake news," Trump said.
He noted that when it comes to the next presidential debate, "I have at least equal say. And I don't like the idea of ABC."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Detroit pastor slams 'identity politics' as Kamala Harris becomes presumptive Democratic nominee
|
By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News' Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.
Detroit-based Pastor Lorenzo Sewell said on Wednesday that "we need to stop" playing identity politics, reacting to Vice President Kamala Harris becoming the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.
"It would be amazing to have the first Black woman president, I think that would be cool," Sewell, the pastor of 180 Church on Detroit's west side, told ABC 7.
"But we need to stop playing identify politics as well," he added.
The pastor, who spoke at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin last week, went on to say, "You don't have anything more powerful in America than a Black woman, so I understand there are allegiances there, but sometimes that can be misguided. I've had people call me this afternoon and say 'vote for Kamala Harris because she's Black.' That doesn't resonate with me right?"
HARRIS BREAKS FUNDRAISING RECORDS SINCE BIDEN DROPPED OUT OF 2024 RACE
ABC 7 reported further that Sewell said that he has not publicly endorsed any candidate for the 2024 presidential election and that he never intended being "front and center with the Trump campaign."
Sewell hosted former President Trump at his church in June in addition to speaking at the RNC last week.
"If President Trump would've moved just a millimeter, we would not be hearing tonight how he is going to make America great again," Sewell said at the GOP convention.
Sewell added that the Black community has been "hurting" under the Democratic leadership.
"When we look at our community, we see clearly that our community is hurting and it's been under Democratic leadership," Sewell said.
"I'm not saying for the last 60 years Democrats are doing the wrong thing. What I'm saying is that when you look at our community, specifically Detroit, Pontiac, Flint, and Saginaw, we're hurting. And the Republican Party is saying 'I want to have a conversation.'"
Furthermore, Sewell said that a growing number of Black men are shifting support toward the Republican Party.
The ABC local affiliate also interviewed Black voters about their thoughts on Trump.
Tayson Stewart, 27, said that "Trump looks like he's trying to help us."
"... he looks like he knows what he's talking about," Detroit-based Stewart said.
"The Black voters are asleep. They are going to vote for Kamala because they following Biden, and don't do it. Trump really trying to help us, that's what I think."
"I'm terrified if that man is in there," Detroit-based Leon Crosby, 57, said about Trump.
"I'd be terrified as an African American," Crosby added.
HEAD HERE FOR THE LATEST FOX NEWS REPORTING ON HARRIS REPLACING BIDEN AS THE DEMOCRAT'S 2024 PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE
Trump, who was formally nominated last week at the Republican National Convention as the GOP's 2024 presidential nominee, stands at 46% support among registered voters in an NPR/PBS News/Marist Poll released on Tuesday.
Harris, who on Monday night announced that she'd locked up her party's nomination by landing commitments of backing from a majority of the nearly 4,000 delegates to next month's Democratic National Convention, stood at 45% support.
The poll was conducted on Monday, the day after President Biden's announcement that he was ending his 2024 re-election rematch with Trump.
Sewell's comments came amid Harris facing scrutiny over her qualifications to be commander in chief.
Tennessee Republican Rep. Tim Burchett on Monday called Harris a "DEI hire" in an interview with CNN, suggesting that Harris was selected as vice president solely because she was a Black woman.
"One hundred percent she is a DEI hire," Burchett told CNN's Manu Raju. He continued, "Her record is abysmal at best."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Although some in the GOP are urging the Trump campaign to stick to criticizing Harris over her policy positions.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
'Betrayed': Unions, White House irate over Teamsters president's RNC speech
|
White House officials, congressional Democrats and several labor leaders say they are angry about Teamsters President Sean O'Brien's prime-time address to the Republican National Convention on Monday night, which marked a striking departure for a powerful union that for decades has supported Democrats.
In a speech closely watched by other union officials, O'Brien praised former president Donald Trump - calling him "one tough SOB" after Saturday's assassination attempt - as well as his running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio, for "truly [caring] about working people."
Breaking from nearly all other speakers at the Republican convention, O'Brien did not publicly endorse Donald Trump. He also criticized corporate greed and took pains to emphasize that he would work with any lawmaker who would support union priorities, regardless of party affiliation. But his very presence in Milwaukee - among GOP lawmakers and a former president who have pushed a policy agenda sharply at odds with that of the unions - sent shock waves through labor and Democratic circles.
White House aides were particularly furious over O'Brien's appearance, which they viewed as a betrayal of the administration's support for many of the Teamsters' top priorities, according to two people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations.
President Biden secured a pension bailout that restored retirement accounts for around 350,000 Teamsters members, appointed staunchly pro-labor allies to the National Labor Relations Board and instituted labor requirements for federal contracts. The backlash against O'Brien's speech reflects the high stakes of the 2024 presidential election for the nation's labor movement, which fears Trump will undo these policies.
"How could the Teamsters not endorse the man who is transparently the most pro-labor president in history? There is no question the White House is furious," said one person in communication with White House officials. "Everybody is p -- -ed. Everybody is like, 'What on Earth? How could this have gotten so messed up?'"
White House spokesperson Robyn Patterson did not respond directly to reports of internal backlash at the White House but told The Washington Post in a written statement, "as Teamsters President Sean O'Brien said on Tuesday: 'Joe Biden is the most pro-union President we've ever had,'" referencing a CNN interview O'Brien gave after the convention.
"He's fought for higher wages, better working conditions, and has already protected more than 1 million union pensions while in office - including for more than half a million Teamsters," Patterson said.
In his address, O'Brien acknowledged that Trump's invitation to him to speak at the convention had sparked "political unrest" on both sides of the political spectrum. "The left called me a traitor," he said to a round of boos from the audience. O'Brien has explained his decision to wait to endorse this year as an effort to carefully assess the union's options, saying that his members' votes "will not be taken for granted."
Kara Deniz, a Teamsters spokeswoman, responded to the criticism with a statement: "The corporatists that the Teamsters exposed on the floor of the RNC own the Washington Post and were likely upset by how many times Sean O'Brien directly called out Amazon's atrocious employment practices."
"The Teamsters refuse to be pressured to fall in line by those who continue to applaud a broken system," Deniz continued. "We will continue to participate in the political process at all levels on behalf of working people."
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.
At least one labor leader, American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten, defended O'Brien's speech. And some labor leaders say they hope they can cultivate the support of a minority faction of GOP leaders - including Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who has worked with O'Brien - who have suggested an openness to backing some priorities of organized labor.
"Today, the Teamsters are here to say we are not beholden to anyone or any party," O'Brien said at the Republican convention. "The Teamsters and the GOP may not agree on many issues, but a growing group has shown the courage to sit down and consider points of view that aren't funded by big-money think tanks."
Still, O'Brien's embrace of Trump on the national stage drew criticism from other labor unions, congressional Democrats and even members of his own union.
John Palmer, a Teamsters executive board member and vice president at-large, said Tuesday that he was "embarrassed" by O'Brien's convention speech. "Without Joe Biden, myself and many other Teamsters would lose our pensions. So this is really disrespectful," Palmer added.
Other labor officials were also critical of O'Brien's appearance.
Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, the country's largest federation of unions, said in a statement that although she agrees with O'Brien's critiques of corporate greed, "Donald Trump and J.D. Vance are on the bosses' side."
"We won't be fooled," Shuler said.
"It's disappointing to see a national labor leader speak like that at the GOP convention," said Matthew Biggs, president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, which has 90,000 members. "Make no mistake about it, their intent is to crush federal unions and have mass firings of federal employees and turn the government into an at-will employer where people are hired and fired based on their political leanings."
Jimmy Williams Jr., president of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, representing 140,000 skilled trades union members, called O'Brien "a brother of mine" but noted that "on this issue we respectfully disagree."
"The Republican Party platform doesn't do a thing to help unions or working people," Williams said. "And what we are hearing in this campaign is no different."
It's not surprising that a number of top labor unions are angry, experts say.
"Many labor leaders and rank-and-file members, inside and outside the Teamsters, are upset and feel betrayed by O'Brien's speaking at a convention of the party that has been vehemently anti-union," said Kate Bronfenbrenner, director of labor education research at Cornell University, citing conversations with union officials. "We have the Teamsters now endorsing, whether directly or indirectly, a Republican candidate that is very antilabor."
O'Brien began as a rank-and file Teamsters member and quickly scaled the ranks of his local Boston union. He took over the Teamsters top job two years ago, after winning a union election on a reform platform. He promised stronger contracts at UPS and an aggressive approach toward organizing the vast landscape of nonunion Amazon warehouses that now dominate the logistics space. His tenure ended decades of Hoffa family leadership.
Democrats on Capitol Hill also expressed astonishment at O'Brien's appearance at the convention. The Teamsters have received backing from Democrats to launch campaigns against Amazon's labor practices and save its union members' pensions.
"The Democratic Party is pro-labor union and pro-worker," said Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), the son of a Teamster, responding to O'Brien's address. "Every single Democrat in Congress voted to save the pensions of hundreds of thousands of Teamsters workers. And every Republican voted against it."
O'Brien's Republican convention appearance rankled one progressive group so much that it is taking the unusual step of mounting an official campaign urging O'Brien specifically to endorse the Democratic nominee. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee is asking Teamsters members to speak out against O'Brien. "It is misinformation to stay neutral in 2024 if Donald Trump and Republicans won't publicly match the Democratic Party's strong pro-worker agenda," the group said.
Labor unions are among top financial backers of the Democratic Party. For decades, the Teamsters mostly contributed to Democrats, and the Teamsters have supported Democrats in more than 90 percent of the group's contributions this election cycle, according to data from Open Secrets, a Washington nonprofit that tracks campaign contributions. Earlier this year, the Teamsters donated $45,000 to the Republican National Committee, its first large contribution to Republicans in years. The Teamsters also sent at least $150,000 to the Democratic National Committee this cycle.
Most major unions have rallied behind Biden, and some are likely to be prominently featured at the Democratic National Convention next month. O'Brien has requested to speak at the Democratic convention but has yet to receive an invitation, Deniz, the Teamsters spokeswoman, previously told The Post.
Democrats may see O'Brien's support as buttressing pro-business forces, but GOP lawmakers hoping to change their own party are hoping more labor leaders follow his lead. Some Republicans praised O'Brien's move as an important first step in encouraging more Republicans to support unions.
O'Brien's "posture of saying to both parties, 'Hey, we will be for you if you will be for workers, if you will support workers [to] get better wages and help protect their jobs' ... that's pretty sharp," Hawley told The Post on Tuesday. "What I think he's doing is really savvy."
Yet O'Brien's tighter relationship with Hawley appears to be causing internal strife. After Hawley penned an opinion piece praising O'Brien's convention speech, while accusing corporate America of using profits to push DEI and "the religion of the trans flag," the Teamsters' official X account briefly rebuked the Hawley piece.
Responding directly to O'Brien's comments on X, calling Hawley's article "100 % on point," the Teamsters account said "unions gain nothing from endorsing the racist, misogynistic, and anti-trans politics of the far right, no matter how much people like Sen. Hawley attempt to tether such bigotry to a cynical pro-labor message." The post was deleted but was captured in a screenshot and shared by journalist Matt Pearce.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Video: Biden dropped out after threats from top Democrats: Report
|
A new report claims President Joe Biden was "blackmailed" into announcing his decision to drop out of the 2024 presidential race after top Democrats threatened to use the 25th Amendment to remove him from office.
In a post on X, formerly Twitter, Collin Rugg, co-owner of Trending Politics, wrote, "Biden was blackmailed into dropping out of the race after top democrats threatened to remove him from office with the 25th Amendment according to the New York Post. It's becoming clear that the coup was a well-orchestrated plan by Democrats."
Rugg claimed that Biden's disastrous performance at CNN's presidential debate in June appears to have been a "setup" intended to allow Democrats to remove Biden and choose an alternative candidate ahead of the November election.
An anonymous Democrat familiar with the private conversations of the Democratic Party's leaders told Politico that former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) threatened to forcibly remove Biden from the race.
"Nancy made clear that they could do this the easy way or the hard way," the anonymous Democrat said. "She gave them three weeks of the easy way. It was about to be the hard way."
READ MORE: Pics: Biden did not sign drop out letter himself, social media users claim
In his post on social media, Rugg said the hard way "appears to have been the 25th Amendment." He also pointed out that Biden's own staff members were not aware of the president's decision to drop out of the race until his digitally signed letter was shared on X.
"But did this plan go back even further? In 2020, Pelosi unveiled legislation that would allow Congress to intervene under the 25th Amendment to remove the president," Rugg wrote alongside a video of Pelosi discussing legislation intended to make it easier for Congress to intervene if a president was not able to fulfill their responsibilities. "She assured the public at the time that the legislation was not for Trump."
A source close to the Biden family told The New York Post that as Biden refused to listen to the demand of Democrats for him to drop out of the 2024 election, top Democrats threatened to use the 25th Amendment against him. By using the 25th Amendment, Vice President Kamala Harris and members of Biden's cabinet could have declared him unfit to serve as president and forced him to step down from office.
The source said that following the disastrous debate in June, Hunter Biden became increasingly involved in his father's business and began attending every meeting.
"Hunter felt he [Joe Biden] was being set up and he was very concerned about his father," the source told The New York Post. "These people, these officials were not on Joe's side."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Word Are Deeds: Rebecca Solnit the Power of Speech to Shape the Future
|
"Your opponents would love you to believe that it's hopeless, that you have no power."
There is a curious and curiously popular habit whereby people edit down the subjective truth in the statement "I am afraid we will lose" to the pseudo-objective declaration "We will lose." My best interpretation of this, after seeing it time after time, in crisis after crisis, is that it's how people hide from their own vulnerable emotions. It's an interesting journey from real fear to false authority and projection of confidence. But why would you assert as fact and inevitability what you fear? What are you protecting? Maybe the self rather than the cause, but only protecting it from disappointment, uncertainty, risk.
When you assert that the future is already decided, you undermine the motivation to participate in shaping that future -- which seems ridiculously obvious as I type these words, but doesn't seem like it's considered by these prophets of doom. Also when you turn your feelings into facts, you turn truth into fiction. Accepting defeat in advance is a curious form of self-protection. I want to see people protect the cause by distinguishing between these two things and maybe realizing that you protect the self by protecting the cause and the possibilities.
This is not an argument against fear. It's an argument for clarity about what's a feeling and what's a fact and a contemplation of how our words shape our world. I've been saying for the last few years, in regard to climate, "I respect despair as an emotion but don't confuse it with an analysis." You can feel fear, despair, sorrow, anxiety without surrender; history is full of countless people who persevered under the grimmest circumstances, often with heavy hearts and no victory visible on the horizon, or success a wild unlikelihood. Sometimes they lost, but the only ones who won were the ones who stuck with it (or who benefited from someone else doing the work).
Here I'm arguing for what my friend Roshi Joan Halifax calls wise hope, not foolish optimism; there are times when an honest assessment of "this will not work" is the beginning of turning toward what possibly will. On the other hand, in my years on this earth, I've seen things declared impossible or unimaginable come to pass, notably the fall of the Soviet satellite states in 1989 -- I don't think that even most of the people who toppled those regimes believed they could and would, until they did.
We make something more likely, more widely believed, by saying and repeating it. Our rhetoric encourages or discourages. Which is why sports teams chant a version of "I believe we will win." A whole sector of the progressive/left/whatever, however, seems to be eternally chanting "I believe we will lose." This is not something sports teams do, incidentally.
In life outside games, warnings matter, but warnings are not prophecies. Warnings say, "this could happen, or if this happens, the results will be that," which is quite different from "this will happen" as a flat declaration of inevitability. From Orwell to Octavia Butler, the people who give us warnings believe we have choices to make; as Butler said: "The very act of trying to look ahead to discern possibilities and offer warnings is in itself an act of hope."
I don't love Winston Churchill's politics, but I do like some of his rhetoric, namely his famous declaration of defiance: "We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall never surrender." He said that on June 4, 1940, when he had just become Britain's prime minister. The war was going terribly: Belgium had surrendered and the Nazis, having crushed France, were about to take Paris. Britain faced continental fascism largely alone and Churchill feared that Germany would invade the UK. He didn't say that the Allies would win, but that they would not cease to try. And he saw his job as to feed their stubborn ferocity, not their fear.
In the wake of the 2016 election, historian Timothy Snyder issued his Twenty Rules for Surviving Tyranny. The first is "1. Do not obey in advance." I would add to that "do not surrender in advance." I shared that in the wake of the abysmal debate last week, adding: Do not surrender prematurely. Do not surrender maturely, for that matter. Do not surrender if there is any other option, and maybe don't surrender then, either.
Snyder continues,
Much of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then start to do it without being asked. ... Anticipatory obedience teaches authorities what is possible and accelerates unfreedom.
I have said,
Your opponents would love you to believe that it's hopeless, that you have no power, that there's no reason to act, that you can't win. Hope is a gift you don't have to surrender, a power you don't have to throw away.
It was striking in the face of that terrible debate to see people decide we had already lost an election that will not begin until early voting this fall. You would never see this kind of public defeatism and infighting from the Republicans, not that their boundless loyalty to a deranged criminal is exactly admirable. But it is effective. On the other hand, saying we've lost or will inevitably lose the election helps lose it.
What has most moved me in public life over the past thirty or forty years is people facing terrible odds without surrendering.
Sunday, facing the nightmare of the far-right party's success in the French election, left-wing politician Jean Luc Melenchon declared in a nighttime rally in Paris, "French people, the future of our common homeland will depend on your choice, whatever our skin color, our religion, our gender. Nothing is decided. Courage, young people! Hold fast! The future is what we make of it!" He spoke in Place de la Republique, where the rights of man and the revolutionary values of liberté, egalité, fraternité are celebrated, reaffirming those commitments.
"With high hope for the future no prediction in regard to it is ventured," said Lincoln in his second inaugural address, in the midst of that war over the future of slavery in the United States (which is itself a reminder that the people who decided to abolish that institution were at first a marginalized, mocked, and sometimes terrorized minority and abolition was widely regarded as impossible).
What has most moved me in public life over the past thirty or forty years is people facing terrible odds without surrendering. I'm old enough to remember the anti-apartheid movement when Nelson Mandela was still serving a life sentence, and the collapse of the Soviet satellite states thanks to nonviolent organizing and civil society engagement; I've seen it in more contemporary faces of resistance from Florida's Coalition of Immokalee Workers to Chiapas's Zapatistas to the Indigenous-led anti-pipeline activism at Standing Rock and western Canadian sites; I've seen it in the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street, in the Chilean student movement a few years ago, in the South Pacific Climate Warriors, and in the Hong Kong protests of 2019-2020.
We are in a crisis like nothing before in this country -- only the rise of the Confederacy, secession, and the Civil War are equal in import, but they are not equal in corruption at the heart of things -- in Congress and in the Supreme Court, which has staged a judicial coup in its last few days of outrageous rulings.
If Trump resumes office, the third branch falls and they combine into an unholy cabal for at least an attempt at endless tyranny. We may not win, but it behooves us to do everything we can to do so, and that includes our words and their impact. This does not mean suppressing fear and dissent, but being clear about the difference between emotion and analysis and about the fact that our words shape our worlds.
It also means recognizing the arenas in which opinion and thereby consequences are being shaped. A bunch of pundits who presumably want the Democrats to win the 2024 presidential election have taken to calling for Biden to step down, apparently oblivious or indifferent to how that weakens his candidacy, while not demonstrating a convincing alternative path to the White House. They too seem to have taken their fears for analyses.
They are joined in this undermining of the candidate by the New York Times, which famously dragged ("but her emails") the Democratic candidate in 2016 while saying little about the Republican candidate's appalling record of racism, bankruptcy, corruption, and criminal associates. The paper has published mountains of articles and editorials on Biden's age since February and a few days ago issued an editorial insisting he must step down. (Strikingly, only the Philadelphia Inquirer saw Trump's criminality and threats of tyranny as grounds to declare he should step down.)
As a study of the newspaper issued this spring put it,
The Times is engaged in a game of circular narrative construction: first, cover an issue excessively relative to other equally or more important issues; second, conduct opinion polls and follow up reporting that offer respondents the opportunity to express concern about the excessively covered issue; third, cover the results of stage two as if they are newsworthy events that happened independently of any prior media coverage.
Words have impacts. We shape our worlds with them, and that's a power that though not evenly distributed lies with nearly all of us one way or another. The poet Marie Howe famously recounted of the Soviet refugee she studied with, "One of my teachers at Columbia was Joseph Brodsky... and he said 'look,' he said, 'you Americans, you are so naïve. You think evil is going to come into your houses wearing big black boots. It doesn't come like that. Look at the language. It begins in the language."
But there is another kind of language that opens the door and lets that evil into the house -- including by saying it's inevitable -- and that issues from our mouths, not theirs.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Video: Illegal immigrants given Social Security cards prior to election
|
Fake Social Security cards (Patrick Schneider/Charlotte Observer/TNS)
A resurfaced report claims that illegal immigrants in Chicago are being provided with Social Security Cards prior to the 2024 presidential election.
The Wall Street Apes social media account shared a video of the resurfaced CBS News report on X, formerly Twitter, stating, "Illegal Migrants In Chicago Are Receiving Social Security Cards." The X account also warned, "The 2024 Presidential Election will be the most rigged election in history."
In the video, a CBS News reporter can be heard saying that 1% of over 26,000 illegal immigrants in Chicago had received Social Security cards and work permits.
"It's not clear how many applications have been submitted, though as of December 29, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services had only processed work permits and Temporary Protected Status applications for 1,480 Chicago new arrivals, that's according to city data obtained by CBS 2," the CBS News reporter said in a video that was first published in January.
READ MORE: 300,000+ illegal immigrants granted 'temporary amnesty' by Biden admin
The reporter added, "Once those applications are processed, they also need to be approved. Sources tell us that only 284 asylum seekers in Chicago have gotten work permits; 279 have received their social security card."
The resurfaced report of illegal immigrants receiving Social Security cards comes as the House of Representatives passed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act on Wednesday to prevent illegal immigrants from voting in federal elections by requiring proof of U.S. citizenship.
Republicans in the House of Representatives have repeatedly stressed the importance of ensuring that only U.S. citizens participate in federal elections, especially given the unprecedented level of illegal immigration that has taken place under President Joe Biden's administration.
"If just a small percentage, a fraction of a fraction of all those illegals that Joe Biden has brought in here to vote, if they do vote, it wouldn't just change one race," House Speaker Mike Johnson warned on Wednesday. "It might potentially change all of our races."
Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Wis.), who serves as the Republican chair of the House Administration Committee, also warned about the danger of illegal immigrants voting in the 2024 election. He said, "Every illegal vote cancels out the vote of a legal American citizen."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
How 'Project 2025' could change Medicare
|
Traditional Medicare as seniors know it could be radically altered depending on this year's election cycle.
One proposal in a "Project 2025" plan developed by allies of former President Donald Trump is to make a private-sector alternative to Medicare the default option when older Americans enroll in the federal health insurance program.
The Project 2025 document developed by conservative think tank Heritage Foundation also includes a rollback of regulations governing this private-sector alternative, known as Medicare Advantage (MA).
Just over half of Medicare-eligible seniors are already enrolled in MA plans.
If ever adopted, these ideas in Project 2025 could limit the choices seniors have for health care services. But insurers may benefit if certain regulations enacted by the Biden administration are undone.
One supporter of the current Medicare Advantage regulations, Center for Medicare Advocacy associate director David Lipschutz, said insurers "would likely embrace an effort to roll back some of the rules that apply to them."
"From a consumer advocate standpoint, we would correspondingly prefer more regulation and more accountability from plans."
It's not yet clear what chance these suggestions -- or anything else in the sprawling 922-page Project 2025 -- have if Trump were to win the 2024 election.
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump recently distanced himself from the plan, and on Thursday at the Republican National Convention he also pledged to "protect Social Security and Medicare" without offering details.
A discussion of Medicare Advantage was also nowhere to be found in the GOP's 16-page party platform.
However, the Project 2025 effort is run by close allies of the former president who could have prominent roles in a second Trump administration.
Roger Severino, who wrote the section that includes the Medicare reforms, served as the director of the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Civil Rights from 2017 to 2021 under the Trump administration.
Trump's vice presidential pick, JD Vance, also recently said Project 2025 contained "some good ideas."
Last Monday, Heritage also led a six-and-a-half-hour "Policy Fest" at the RNC, with Project 2025 executive director Paul Dans saying the goal of the plan was to "bring our movement together."
What worries Lipschutz about Project 2025 is it will "supercharge the privatization" of government-run health coverage by making Medicare Advantage the default option at enrollment.
Right now, traditional Medicare is the default option.
The popularity of Medicare Advantage plans has grown over the last decade because they offer other benefits -- such as dental and vision care and low or no premiums -- that traditional Medicare does not.
But there are trade-offs.
Seniors with MA plans can only go to the plan's network of healthcare providers -- which can change from year to year -- whereas those on traditional Medicare can see any practitioner or hospital system that accepts the coverage, which is nearly all providers.
MA insurers have also come under scrutiny in the last two years for delaying or denying authorizations for patient procedures or care, according to some providers, as well as not paying for medical services patients received without prior approval.
The practices have forced more than a dozen healthcare providers across the country to dump their contracts with several MA insurers in the last two years, leaving seniors enrolled in those plans with a smaller pool of doctor and hospital choices.
As a result, defaulting seniors into Medicare Advantage would "kind of fly in the face of the existing Medicare statute, which makes a point of emphasizing the free choice of provider for beneficiaries," Lipschutz said.
MA insurers, however, may welcome the changes offered in Project 2025.
Not only would default MA enrollment increase the number of people on their plans, but the proposal includes "[removing] burdensome policies that micromanage MA plans" and "[reconfiguring] the current risk adjustment model," among others.
Overall, the Biden administration has "not been very friendly to the industry," Whit Mayo, an analyst with Leerink Partners, previously told Yahoo Finance, with a nearly "historic level of regulations," many of them aimed at addressing issues with MA plans.
For instance, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services established new rules on how much insurers can compensate a broker selling MA plans to make sure seniors are steered into coverage that best meets their needs.
The agency also changed how MA plans will be rated and finalized rules around health equity, behavioral healthcare services, and supplemental benefits that would require more action from insurers.
Finally, the agency introduced a new patient risk coding model that will likely reduce how much money the government pays to insurers for each patient.
All these regulations cut into MA insurers' bottom lines, forcing some this year to lower their forward-looking guidance. A rollback of some or all of these regulations could have the opposite effect on their profits.
But what would be the trade-off?
"In my mind, it very likely means less overall oversight and enforcement efforts over plans," Lipschutz said, "and subsequent consequences for breaking the rules."
--
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
'It's Gonna Take a Civil War': Trump Campaign Speaker Warns of Violence if Dems Win
|
Inside the MAGA Asylum: Four Days of Worship With the Cult of Trump
An elected GOP politician from Ohio is warning that if Donald Trump doesn't win the 2024 election it will mean "Civil War."
State Sen. George Lang was one of the warm-up speakers Monday at a Trump campaign rally Monday, where vice presidential nominee J.D. Vance spoke solo for the 2024 GOP ticket for the first time. The rally was held in the suburb of Middletown, Ohio, where Vance grew up -- just days after a Republican National Convention at which Trump had tried to stage a show of national unity.
Lang -- in sharp contrast -- used his time at the TRUMP branded podium to warn of violence that could tear America apart. Lang, who represents nearby Hamilton, Ohio, took the stage shouting Trump's post-shooting battlecry, "Fight! Fight! Fight!" And Lang insisted that America is in a "fight for the soul of our nation" and for "our kids and our grandkids."
He then uncorked his views on looming partisan violence. "I believe wholeheartedly that Donald Trump and Butler County's J.D. Vance are the last chance to save our country, politically," Lang said. "I'm afraid that if we lose this one, it's gonna take a civil war to save this country."
Lang quickly emphasized that a militarized MAGA movement would win such a war.
"It will be saved," he said.
Lang didn't stop there, elaborating that "if we come down to a civil war I'm glad we have people like ... the Bikers for Trump on our side," pointing to a group of MAGA motorcycle enthusiasts in the audience. Lang then inveighed against liberals he claimed are "chipping away" at our rights, insisting of the American republic, that 2024 is the "last stand to save it!"
The bombastic message suggests MAGA Republicans are returning to form after the RNC convention in Milwaukee, which attempted to portray Trump -- in the aftermath of the attempt against his life -- as a changed man and a chastened figure who would lead the country to a less divisive, unified place. "I am running to be president for all of America," Trump said during his acceptance of the GOP nomination, "not half of America, because there is no victory in winning for half of America."
However that mask of unity was loosely applied -- and the familiar divisive impulses and bellicose language of the MAGA movement were on display at side events throughout the week. At a Moms for Liberty forum, for example, former Trump presidential rival Vivek Ramaswamy compared the MAGA movement to America's founding revolutionaries, and declared that the 2024 election would be "our generation's 1776."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Kamala's NatSec Adviser Probed Over Ties to Iranian Influence Network
|
'The Biden-Harris Administration is no stranger to Iran accommodators, appeasers, and accomplices,' Cotton and Stefanik write
Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) and Rep. Elise Stefanik (R., N.Y.) launched a probe into Vice President Kamala Harris's national security adviser over his ties to an Iranian government influence network, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.
In a Wednesday letter to Harris, Cotton and Stefanik asked the presumptive Democratic nominee to provide information about her adviser Phil Gordon's "connections to Ms. Ariane Tabatabai, a senior Department of Defense official who was reportedly involved in an Iranian government operation to expand Tehran's soft power in the United States."
Gordon, the letter notes, coauthored at least three opinion pieces with Tabatabai that argued against sanctions on the Iranian regime. Tabatabai was outed last year as an alleged member of an Iranian-run influence network that reported back to Tehran's foreign ministry.
Gordon's connections to Tabatabai are fueling concerns ahead of the 2024 election. Gordon is likely to play a central national security role in a Harris White House, and his connections to pro-Tehran advocacy groups suggest that renewed diplomacy with Iran will be a top foreign policy priority for Harris if she is elected.
Cotton and Stefanik are primarily concerned about Gordon's access to classified information and want to know if his ties to Tehran's enablers might disqualify him from holding a top-secret security clearance.
Gordon, the lawmakers note, published pieces with Tabatabai "blatantly promoting the Iranian regime's perspective and interests." Those pieces were published after the time Tabatabai was alleged to be working for the Iran Experts Initiative (IEI), an influence network that included several American policymakers associated with the Biden administration's former Iran envoy, Robert Malley, who was indefinitely suspended from his job amid allegations that he leaked classified information.
In a March 2020 article, Gordon and Tabatabai "claimed continued sanctions on Iran would create 'catastrophe' in the Middle East," Cotton and Stefanik wrote in their letter. In another piece, according to the lawmakers, Gordon and Tabatabai "wrote sanctions could lead to new Iranian efforts to 'lash out with attacks on its neighbors, and on Americans and American interests in the Middle East.' Each prediction was as wrong, as it was biased in favor of Tehran."
Gordon is also "closely associated with the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), another Iranian influence organization that allegedly collaborates with Tehran," according to the letter. NIAC has long faced allegations of serving as Iran's unregistered lobbying arm in America and was a player in the Obama administration's self-described pro-Tehran "echo chamber." Gordon spoke at NIAC's Leadership Conference in 2014 and 2016, before and after his time serving in the Obama administration as a Middle East hand working on the nuclear agreement with Iran.
"The Biden-Harris Administration is no stranger to Iran accommodators, appeasers, and accomplices," Cotton and Stefanik wrote. "Ms. Tabatabai remains gainfully employed in the Defense Department, helping oversee sensitive special operations. The FBI is investigating your former Special Envoy for Iran Robert Malley for passing classified intelligence to Tehran and your Special Envoy Amos Hochstein allegedly passed intelligence about Israeli airstrikes to Hezbollah potentially as recently as this weekend."
The lawmakers pressed the vice president's office to come clean about Gordon's ties to the pro-Tehran advocacy world and about the nature of his relationship with Tabatabai.
"When you hired Mr. Gordon, were you aware of his connections with Ariane Tabatabai, the IEI, and the NIAC?" Cotton and Stefanik asked. "Did Mr. Gordon undergo security screening and receive a security clearance when you hired him? Does he have an active security clearance?"
The lawmakers also want to know if Harris initiated an investigation into Gordon after "Tabatabai's connections to the Iranian Foreign Ministry were revealed in September 2023."
"Did Mr. Gordon admit and report his ties to this individual?" they asked. "Have you or Mr. Gordon met with other members of the IEI, including Ali Vaez? Have you met with Ms. Tabatabai personally?"
"As the Vice President do you support Ms. Tabatabai's continued employment at the Department of Defense?" the lawmakers went on. "As the Vice President what specific actions will you take to address the issue of Iranian sympathizers, aside from yourself, within the Administration?"
In his 2014 speech to the NIAC, Gordon said that a "nuclear agreement [with Iran] could begin a multi-generational process that could lead to a new relationship between our countries."
NIAC continues to champion diplomacy with Iran and praised Harris in 2020 for committing to reenter the nuclear deal after former president Donald Trump abandoned it.
In a 2018 op-ed written with Malley, Gordon argued that "Iran sanctions won't advance U.S. interests."
"Far from convincing Tehran to cooperate, new U.S. measures are on track to achieve the exact opposite," Gordon and Malley wrote in Foreign Policy magazine. "In Trump's vision, sanctions are a quasi-magical, multi-purpose tool: They would force Iran back to the table to accept an improved nuclear deal, include restrictions on Tehran's ballistic missiles program, and give inspectors unlimited access."
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
The Republican party's obsession with families has taken a fanatical turn | Moira Donegan
|
It is becoming clear that much of the stakes of the November contest will revolve around questions of gender - and specifically, questions of family
"It's possible," writes Jessica Winter in the New Yorker, "that if JD Vance had his way, citizenship in the United States would be conferred not solely by birthright but by marriage and children." This is no exaggeration. In a now viral 2021 clip, JD Vance said: "Let's give votes to all children in this country, but let's give control over those votes to the parents of those children. When you go to the polls in this country as a parent, you should have more power - you should have more of an ability to speak your voice in our democratic republic - than people who don't have kids. Let's face the consequences and the reality: If you don't have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn't get nearly the same voice."
This position now represents large swaths of the Republican party, which has taken on an angry and aggressively prescriptive approach to family life.
If you're a woman in America, Republicans want you to be a mother whether you care to or not. They want you to risk your health to give them more babies. Then, when those babies get bigger, they want to make sure that those children's fathers - or, excuse me, "parents" - have a near-total control over both them and you.
They don't want you to be able to get a divorce if your marriage turns unhappy or even abusive. They don't want your daughter to be able to get birth control if her father doesn't approve of it; they don't want your other daughter to be able to get the hormone treatment she needs to thrive as her truest self. They want to inspect your kids' genitals before they let them play on the high school softball team. They want to ban books, and decide what your kids can and can't read.
They want to bar the medical treatments that allow you to plan your family and have children on your own terms-things like egg freezing and IVF. They want to make you have your children young, and they want to stigmatize those of us women who pursue our own careers, interests, and ambitions instead of popping out as many children as they deem appropriate.
If you say no - if you resist their prescription for marriage, motherhood, and perpetual feminine self-sacrifice - they want to let you know, in sneeringly condescending terms, that you're "childless cat ladies", that you're not as good as them, that step parents are not real parents, blended families are not real families, that women who don't have children are disgusting, worthless, and deserving of contempt. If you say no, they want to denigrate you in public, punish you financially, dilute your vote, and lessen your citizenship.
As the 2024 presidential election heats up following Trump's selection of JD Vance as his running mate and Kamala Harris's emergence as the new Democratic standard-bearer, it is becoming clear that much of the stakes of the November contest will revolve around questions of gender - and specifically, questions of family. And the view of the family that is emerging from the Republicans is a dark one indeed.
Because the version of "family" that the Republicans are putting forward is one that can only look a very particular way. In their eyes, family is a compulsory relation of domination, an institution in which marriage and parenthood function to grant men near-total private control over women and children. Women, meanwhile, face a grim fate in the Republicans' preferred vision of family: they are forced into motherhood, trapped into marriage, and punished for resistance.
It's not just that Vance, the VP pick and heir presumptive to the post-Trump Republican party, has made repeated, creepy remarks disparaging childless women and suggesting that adults without children should pay higher taxes and receive fewer votes. It's that Vance's obsessive, invasive, and prurient investment in other people's sexual and reproductive lives is the logical conclusion of the Republican party's gender politics.
Vance's belief that women must be either compelled into childbirth or denied full citizenship is obviously of a piece with his party's ambition to impose a national abortion ban. But it also flows from their opposition to no-fault divorce rights; their insistence that teens must not be able to access sexual, reproductive, or transition-related healthcare without the approval of their parents; their rejection of IVF, diversity initiatives, and anti-discrimination protections; and their opposition to myriad other public policy initiatives that have helped advance women's health, protect their safety, and allow them full access to work, education, and the public sphere.
The Republican plan, in short, is to sabotage or revoke any cultural or policy change that allows women to live as men's equals. They instead aim to reshape policy, culture, and the law to keep women in the home, dependent, without control over their own bodies, and at the mercy of men.
They aim, that is, to advance a so-called "family values" in which birth is mandatory, marriage is inescapable, children are property rather than persons with rights of their own, and men are in charge. There's a word for this dark vision of a world in which the private sphere is wholly controlled by husbands and fathers. That word is "patriarchy".
But the creepy and unsubtle patriarchal vision of gender and the family that is being advanced by the Trump-Vance Republican party may also present an opportunity for Harris and the Democrats to reclaim the mantle of "family", and to redefine it for a better future. Rather than a compulsory, inescapable and unequal institution based on sexist domination, a "family" might instead be an alliance of equality, mutuality, and care - one in which sovereign individuals can choose one another, and come together in an effort to love one another, respect one another, and help one another to thrive.
These are, after all, the kinds of families that many Americans find themselves inhabiting: ones in which romantic partners might be gay or straight, married or not, but view themselves as equal partners; ones in which ties of blood, marriage, love, history, and affinity all blend together in layers of connection and mutuality, ones in which children are wholly voluntary, chosen and loved, and in which women are sovereigns over their own bodies and lives, whose ambitions in the public world are neither impeded nor resented in the private one.
These non-hierarchical, non-domineering, voluntary families can be encouraged through policy: through free, safe and legal abortion access, through free childcare, through paid family leave, affordable healthcare, high quality care for seniors, insurance coverage for assisted reproductive technology, access to the full range of healthcare services for children and teens, and a thriving public school system. Such investments would help the sorts of families that most people want to build: ones that honor the dignity and worth of everyone in them.
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
X Allegedly Suspends 'White Dudes for Harris' Account After Group Raises $4 Million for Her Campaign: 'We Scared Elon Musk'
|
Elon Musk's X Activates Setting Allowing It to Train Grok AI on User Posts and Interactions by Default 4 days ago
White Dudes for Harris, a pop-up group backing VP Kamala Harris' bid to defeat Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election, said Elon Musk's X had suspended its account -- right after it hosted a YouTube livestream that raised more than $4 million for the Harris campaign.
Mike Nellis, founder/CEO of digital advertising firm Authentic, who is one of the organizers of White Dudes for Harris, wrote in a post Monday evening, "We scared @elonmusk and @DonaldJTrumpJr so much tonight they suspended our account and won't let us back in. These guys are running scared of the success we've had tonight, but we're not going to quit." In a follow-up posted, he added, "I ask this question seriously... are we the first white dudes to ever get suspended by @elonmusk's Twitter? I think we are."
In an update Tuesday, Nellis wrote that "Our tweets are back (@dudes4harris) but our account remains suspended and according to Twitter our account is 'permanently in read-only mode.'"
A representative for X did not respond to a request for comment.
Hamill, commenting on the seeming suspension, wrote, "In a little over 3 hours, the @dudes4harris Zoom call triggered $4M in donations for @KamalaHarris. Apparently, someone else was triggered, too. 🤣"
Musk -- replying late Monday evening to someone who posted an excerpt of Hamill's comments during the livestream saying that "never has it been more important for us to stand up to [Trump's] mental illness and vote for Kamala in 2024" -- wrote on about Hamill, "His brain has been marinating in Kool-Aid for a long time."
The White Dudes for Harris said 190,000 people tuned in to the YouTube livestream on Monday, which featured appearances from actors including Hamill, Jeff Bridges, J.J. Abrams, Sean Astin, Josh Groban, Josh Gad, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bradley Whitford. "I qualify, man. I'm white, I'm a dude, and I'm for Harris," Bridges, who played the "The Dude" in the Coen brothers' 1998 film "The Big Lebowski," said on the livestream.
The White Dudes for Harris account on X describes itself as "Just a few dudes who support Kamala Harris." It currently has more than 55,000 followers.
Musk, meanwhile, has not made a secret of his opposition to Harris. On Friday, July 26, Musk shared a deepfake video that altered a recent Harris campaign video, which featured Harris saying she was "the ultimate diversity hire" and that she "had four years under the tutelage of the ultimate deep state puppet, a wonderful mentor, Joe Biden." The original account that posted the video labeled it a "parody," but Musk's post simply was captioned "This is amazing," with a laughing emoji.
In a post Sunday on X, California Gov. Gavin Newsom cited an article about Musk's post and wrote, "Manipulating a voice in an 'ad' like this one should be illegal. I'll be signing a bill in a matter of weeks to make sure it is."
Musk replied to Newsom, "I checked with renowned world authority, Professor Suggon Deeznutz, and he said parody is legal in America 🤷♂️"
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.