Raw Video: Obamas Walk to Church Across From WH

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) took another stab at defending her decision to shoot and kill a 14-month old puppy years ago that attacked some chickens, by citing a South Dakota law that allows animals that kill "livestock" to be put down.

Taking to X, formerly known as Twitter, the embattled Republican attempted to put out the firestorm she created by writing in her new book that she "hated" the puppy named Cricket and after an incident took it to a gravel pit and shot it while also claiming it was "worthless" as a hunting dog despite its young age.

On Sunday, she wrote, "I can understand why some people are upset about a 20 year old story of Cricket, one of the working dogs at our ranch, in my upcoming book — No Going Back. The book is filled with many honest stories of my life, good and bad days, challenges, painful decisions, and lessons learned."

ALSO READ: ‘Fraudulent’: Trump tormentor Lincoln Project loses big money in cybertheft scheme

She then continued:

"What I learned from my years of public service, especially leading South Dakota through COVID, is people are looking for leaders who are authentic, willing to learn from the past, and don’t shy away from tough challenges. My hope is anyone reading this book will have an understanding that I always work to make the best decisions I can for the people in my life. The fact is, South Dakota law states that dogs who attack and kill livestock can be put down. Given that Cricket had shown aggressive behavior toward people by biting them, I decided what I did. Whether running the ranch or in politics, I have never passed on my responsibilities to anyone else to handle. Even if it’s hard and painful. I followed the law and was being a responsible parent, dog owner, and neighbor. As I explained in the book, it wasn't easy. But often the easy way isn't the right way."

That did not satisfy Noem's many internet critics.

As one put it, she seemed more invested in selling her book, writing, "Stop using you murdering your dog in cold blood to try to sell copies of your book you sicko."

That was one of the nicer responses she received.

Former FBI special agent Asha Rangappa said, "It sounds like out of at least three options 1) train the dog; 2) drive any distance to a shelter; or 3) shoot it on the spot, you literally took the easiest one."

Former Trump campaign aide A.J. Delgado called Noem a "liar."

"BTW, liar, he never 'killed' livestock -- only attacked, which every dog does (i.e., runs after them). Quit changing your story. Your career is OVER."

@OurShallowState said, "The dog frustrated you. You killed it. That wasn't a tough decision by an empathetic person. That was a weak and lazy decision by a sociopathic person. Leading in government is making the right choices. You are insensitive and impatient. Your choices suck."

Democrat Harry Sisson also weighed in.

"There is no justifying your actions. What you did was disgusting and unforgivable. Also, nobody is going to buy your damn book," he said.

Noem even lost the support of some commenting users.

@colin_fendley said, "I have been a farm owner, I have been a K9 Handler, and I have trained thousands of dogs; you can not justify this, my dear. I'm a conservative, and you lost my support."

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) admitted that "nobody" wanted the drama she was creating by trying to oust House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) — but she's doing it anyway.

Following a press conference Wednesday where Greene vowed to trigger a "motion to vacate" the Speaker's chair next week, she spoke to conservative podcaster Steve Bannon.

"And we have Mike Johnson going in there and basically giving a sloppy kiss to [House Minority Leader] Hakeem Jeffries and Jeffries taking him in with a great big hug and them holding and sharing the speaker's gavel together," Greene complained. "That's what's wrong for America."

"Steve, nobody wants this drama right now, but it's Mike Johnson that has completely brought it on all of us," she continued.

"Yeah, this is inconvenient. Yeah, this is something I don't want to have to do with right now. Yeah, this is something that our conference shouldn't have to go through."

ALSO READ: DeJoy faces pain over postal 'crime wave’

Greene insisted she did not run for Congress to "go along and get along."

"I didn't come up here to Washington to go along and get along and put it in cruise control and just have an easy job, cushy job up here in Washington while America burns down to the ground and gets taken over by George Soros and all of his protests in Hamas and fully open borders and we're being invaded and the economy falls apart and our dollar loses value and inflation continues to skyrocket and our kids have no hope for a future," she ranted.

"I'm sorry, I'm not here to participate in the uniparty, but I can't wait to deliver a vote for American voters next week so they can have a fully transparent list of everybody here in Congress that believes in the uniparty and has a membership card in the uniparty," Greene added.

"It's a coming out party, Steve, and I'm ready to deliver it."

Watch the video below from Real America's Voice.

WASHINGTON — Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and Tom Massie (R-KY) announced on Wednesday from the U.S. Capitol that they will continue to file a motion to remove Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) from his post.

Massie told reporters that Johnson aligned himself with Democratic votes on the omnibus spending bill, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) reauthorization, and the national security bill that funded Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan military aid.

He and Greene characterized them as the three "betrayals" to the GOP.

The votes passed with overwhelming support from Democrats along with several Republicans.

"He is a lost ball in tall weeds. ... He's in over his head," Massie said about Johnson, according to Jake Sherman at Punchbowl News.

Johnson was voted in after former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) was removed by members of his own party. Before Johnson was chosen, nearly 20 votes were cast for other candidates for the new speaker.

House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark (MA) told Raw Story she wasn't aware of the know what the intention of the far-right flank of the House Republicans.

ALSO READ: ‘Clear indication’: Dems accuse GOP congressional candidate of illegal super PAC ties

She disputed Greene's claim that the Democrats were a "uniparty" united with Johnson after her party's leaders declared Tuesday that they would vote to table any motion to remove him from Greene.

"We are not a party that is endorsing Donald Trump; that is moved to the most extreme position in opposition to what the American people want us to do here," said Clark. "So, our goal here is to get back to governing. And this particular motion to vacate — we will table. But that is not a statement of unity with anything this House GOP is doing."

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) agreed, saying that Democrats were certainly not aligned with the MAGA Republicans.

"Donald Trump Republicans campaign on overturning Roe v. Wade. Republicans overturn Roe v. Wade. Donald Trump bragged about it," Lieu told Raw Story as a way of contrasting the two parties.

He explained that if the Democrats flip the House and keep the Senate, they will pass legislation that would codify reproductive healthcare rights in American law.

"So, the two parties are clearly not the same," Lieu continued. "Marjorie Taylor Greene can make up whatever she wants. But to say that somehow the two parties are the same is factually wrong."

He agreed with Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY), who said that the caucus would vote to table the motion to vacate Johnson from the speakership.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) confirmed that it likely "won't take that many Democrats" to table the motion and ultimately save Johnson.

"Do we want to wait another three weeks, maybe a month, to find another speaker? Who the hell is that going to be?" she said to Raw Story.

"I don't think anyone wants it. I don't think there are the votes for it," she continued. "So, we'll have another period of completely dysfunctional government."

New York Judge Juan Merchan slapped former President Donald Trump with a $9,000 contempt of court fine on Tuesday for repeatedly violating the gag order in his Manhattan hush money trial to publicly attack witnesses and jurors — and warned him that a stay on Rikers Island could be in his future if he continues on his current path.

This led some commenters on social media to praise the judge — but many others urged him to stop showing so much restraint on Trump, who has already been fined multiple times for similar violations in his civil trials.

"BREAKING: Judge Merchan fines Trump for violating gag order 9 times," wrote political influencer Ed Krassenstein on X. "Trump has officially been held in contempt of court. But I'm sure that MAGA will claim that it's because the judge is biased and because Trump is being politically targeted, right? When will Republicans ever just say, 'Trump made a mistake?'"

"The $9,000 Trump has to pay for violating his gag order is good but isn’t going to stop him," wrote political podcaster "JoJoFromJerz." "I don’t see how he makes it through this trial without spending some time in the pokey."

ALSO READ: ‘Clear indication’: Dems accuse GOP congressional candidate of illegal super PAC ties

MSNBC political analyst Tim O'Brien had a sober assessment. "Trump will see Justice Merchan’s $9,000 fine for violating the gag order as a reasonable cost for the ability to continue attacking the judge, court and rule of law," he wrote. "It won’t stop him."

"If any of us violated a gag order so many times, we would be in custody," wrote legal expert and commentator John Collins.

Georgia State University constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis thinks this is an ominous sign for the former president.

"Judge Merchan makes plain by holding Donald Trump in contempt that the New York gag order is a blanket one covering any statements about witnesses, jurors, (or potential jurors earlier in the process)," he wrote.

"He has little room to run to the media: a danger zone for undisciplined Trump."