Featured Stories:
‘The bell of stupidity’: Conservative’s Christmas video lampoons Trump’s latest speech
President Donald Trump was supposed to prioritize the economy at a MAGA rally last week — but instead rambled about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and other familiar foes.
In a Christmas-themed video, The Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson (a Never Trump conservative former GOP strategist) and journalist Molly Jong-Fast brutally mocked the speech for failing to get the desired economic message across.
Jong-Fast told Wilson, "Let's talk about how positively b----- the whole thing is. It was meant to be a rally on affordability. Here's what was not discussed: affordability. Here's what was discussed: Marjorie Taylor Greene. He calls her Marjorie Traitor Brown."
Wilson, sounding amused, interjected, "And I'm also intrigued by how she's somehow a leftist."
Jong-Fast told the Never Trumper, "It has really been a week for Trump."
Wilson laid out a variety of ways in which Trump and the MAGA movement are having a bad Christmas, from the Epstein files to the economy.
"There is no unringing this bell of stupidity," Wilson told Jong-Fast. "They have f----- it up. They have made a giant mistake."
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Trump Supreme Court battle could be dismantled by Congress members’ own history
New evidence is emerging that could deal a major blow to President Donald Trump's case for stripping birthright citizenship to the children of immigrants.
The president has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to restore “the original meaning” of the 14th Amendment, which his lawyers argued in a brief meant that “children of temporary visitors and illegal aliens are not U.S. citizens by birth," but new research raises questions about what lawmakers intended the amendment to do, reported the New York Times.
"One important tool has been overlooked in determining the meaning of this amendment: the actions that were taken — and not taken — to challenge the qualifications of members of Congress, who must be citizens, around the time the amendment was ratified," wrote Times correspondent Adam Liptak.
A new study will be published next month in The Georgetown Law Journal Online examining the backgrounds of the 584 members who served in Congress from 1865 to 1871. That research found more than a dozen of them might not have been citizens under Trump’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment, but no one challenged their qualifications.
"That is, said Amanda Frost, a law professor at the University of Virginia and an author of the study, the constitutional equivalent of the dog that did not bark, which provided a crucial clue in a Sherlock Holmes story," Liptak wrote.
The 14th Amendment states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside," while the Constitution requires members of the House of Representatives to have been citizens for at least seven years, and senators for at least nine.
“If there had been an original understanding that tracked the Trump administration’s executive order,” Frost told Liptak, “at least some of these people would have been challenged.”
Only one of the nine challenges filed against a senator's qualifications in the period around the 14th Amendment's ratification involved the citizenship issue related to Trump's interpretation of birthright citizenship, and that case doesn't support his position.
"Several Democratic senators claimed in 1870 that their new colleague from Mississippi, Hiram Rhodes Revels, the first Black man to serve in Congress, had not been a citizen for the required nine years," Liptak wrote. "They reasoned that the 14th Amendment had overturned Dred Scott, the 1857 Supreme Court decision that denied citizenship to the descendants of enslaved African Americans, just two years earlier and that therefore he would not be eligible for another seven."
"That argument failed," the correspondent added. "No one thought to challenge any other members on the ground that they were born to parents who were not citizens and who had not, under the law in place at the time, filed a declaration of intent to be naturalized."
"The consensus on the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause has long been that everyone born in the United States automatically becomes a citizen with exceptions for those not subject to its jurisdiction, like diplomats and enemy troops," Liptak added.
Frost's research found there were many members of Congress around the time of the ratification of the 14th Amendment who wouldn't have met Trump's definition of a citizen, and she said that fact undercuts the president's arguments.
“If the executive order reflected the original public meaning, which is what the originalists say is relevant,” Frost said, “then somebody — a member of Congress, the opposing party, the losing candidate, a member of the public who had just listened to the ratification debates on the 14th Amendment, somebody — would have raised this.”
Trump issues ‘cease and desist’ against any Democrat engaging in election ‘skullduggery’
Donald Trump on Saturday promised that, if he were to win the 2024 presidential election, he would come down hard on anyone who engaged in election interference.
Trump, who himself has been criminally charged with election subversion in D.C. and in Georgia, took to his own social media network, Truth Social, to condemn the practice as it pertains to Democrats.
In a post labeled as a "CEASE & DESIST," Trump claimed that he, "together with many Attorneys and Legal Scholars," is "watching the Sanctity of the 2024 Presidential Election very closely."
ALSO READ: Buckle up: Win or lose, Trump promises potential scenarios of violence
Trump went on to say that he knows "better than most" about election interference crimes.
"I know, better than most, the rampant Cheating and Skullduggery that has taken place by the Democrats in the 2020 Presidential Election. It was a Disgrace to our Nation! Therefore, the 2024 Election, where Votes have just started being cast, will be under the closest professional scrutiny and, WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again," the ex-president added. "We cannot let our Country further devolve into a Third World Nation, AND WE WON’T!"
Trump continued:
"Please beware that this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials. Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country."
‘It’s a lie’: Trump’s ‘own campaign’ failed to substantiate ex-president’s new rally claim
Donald Trump's own presidential campaign has failed to substantiate the former president's Saturday rally claim about children and schools, according to CNN, which deemed the statement a "lie."
Trump recently spoke at a Moms for Liberty event where the former president made an eye-popping claim about transgender kids.
"The transgender thing is incredible... your kid goes to school and comes home a few days later with an operation. The school decides what’s going to happen with your child," Trump said last week.
ALSO READ: Buckle up: Win or lose, Trump promises potential scenarios of violence
This led political fact-checker PolitiFact to issue a "pants-on-fire" rating for the claim, saying, "If a surgical procedure at school sounds far-fetched, that’s because it is. Schools generally do not provide students with medical care without parental consent, let alone offer surgery. Parents, guardians and doctors, not schools, are the decision makers for health decisions involving minors."
Trump repeated a version of this same claim at a rally on Saturday. At a rally in Mosinee, Wisconsin, which was filled with verbal slip-ups on which critics quickly pounced, the former president said, "Can you imagine you're a parent and your son leaves the house and you say, Jimmy, I love you so much. Go have a good day in school. And your son comes back with a brutal operation. Can you even imagine this?"
This led to extreme pushback on social media, including by a CNN fact checker.
Daniel Dale, CNN senior reporter on the fact-check beat, said, "Trump’s own campaign could not find a single example of this 'school secretly sends child for gender-affirming surgery without parental consent' thing having ever happened anywhere in the U.S."
Dale then added, "Experts say it has not and could not. It’s a lie."
Dale also linked to a CNN fact check article from the last time Trump made the claim.
‘Wow’: Liz Cheney reveals Kamala Harris just secured a powerful Republican’s vote
Former Rep. Liz Cheney revealed Friday that Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, has secured the vote of powerful Republican who once held significant power in the White House.
The Republican also happens to be Cheney's dad.
“Dick Cheney will be voting for Kamala Harris," the former Wyoming representative said at the Texas Tribune Festival in Austin.
Replied the moderator, "Wow."
According to USA Today reporter John C. Moritz, there were "Big cheers from the decidedly left-leaning audience."
ALSO READ: Trump’s RFK Jr. endorsement actually helps Harris
Dick Cheney was the all-powerful vice president behind former President George W. Bush, and like his daughter Liz, a conservative unafraid to speak out against Trump.
Liz Cheney endorsed Harris officially on Wednesday, arguing Trump represented a danger to American Democracy.
"As a conservative and someone who believes and cares about the Constitution, I have thought deeply about this, and because of the danger that Donald Trump poses," she said. "Not only am I not voting for Donald Trump but I will be voting for Kamala Harris."
Dick Cheney criticized Trump while campaigning for his daughter in her unsuccessful 2022 reelection campaign.
“In our nation’s 246-year history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump,” Cheney said. “He tried to steal the last election using lies and violence to keep himself in power after the voters had rejected him. He is a coward. A real man wouldn’t lie to his supporters. He lost his election, and he lost big. I know it. He knows it, and deep down, I think most Republicans know.”
Kamala Harris should remind debate watchers of Trump’s historic failure: analysis
Vice President Kamala Harris should remind debate watchers of Donald Trump's greatest failure as president – and one of the major reasons he was not re-elected for a second term.
Democrats have effectively adopted vice presidential candidate Tim Walz's framing around Trump and his running mate J.D. Vance as "weird," and Bloomberg columnist Nia-Malika Henderson urged Harris to use her running mate's summation of the former president's response to the Covid pandemic that killed more than 400,000 Americans on his watch.
“He froze in the face of Covid, and our neighbors died because of it,” Walz said last month during a campaign appearance in Michigan, "and by doing nothing about Covid, he drove this economy into the ground.”
Reminding voters of that historic failure comes with risks, Henderson concedes, because many Americans prefer not to dwell on bad memories associated with the pandemic, and many still accuse Democrats of overreacting with safety measures in those early days.
ALSO READ: 'Bacon. Wind. Marco Rubio': New York Times Trump coverage spurs laughter from critics
"But 'getting over' Covid won’t be easy, given that it remains one of the top 10 leading causes of death, according the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention," Henderson wrote. "Trump’s approach to the pandemic doesn’t bode well for what he would do in a second term. While he pushed for a Covid vaccine as part of Operation Warp Speed, he sowed confusion about the vaccine’s effectiveness, spread conspiracy theories and consistently downplayed the seriousness of the virus."
Trump's misinformation proved especially deadly for his own supporters, with research showing pro-Trump counties had much higher death rates than those that backed president Joe Biden in 2020, and the nation never fully recovered from his early mishandling of the pandemic.
"He called it a hoax," Henderson wrote. "He said it would disappear. He said fewer tests would mean fewer cases. He called Dr. Anthony Fauci an idiot and praised quacks who were pushing unproven treatments for Covid. He dithered and delayed and people died as a result. Rather than having a national strategy, Trump deemed the federal government a mere 'backup' option for the states as they scrambled for ventilators, personal protective equipment and a system for testing and contact-tracing."
The former president claims credit for rescuing the economy and tens of millions of jobs, but Henderson said Harris must correct the record and remind voters that the pandemic was still raging the last time they voted for president in 2020 – when Trump was still in the White House.
"In her 2020 debate against Vice President Mike Pence, Harris’ first question was about Covid," Henderson wrote. "She said that Trump’s mishandling of the pandemic was the 'greatest failure of any presidential administration in the history of our country.' With thousands dying daily and Trump recommending bleach and ultraviolet light as a cure, the 2020 presidential election was a referendum on Covid and Trump’s competence."
"He treated the pandemic like it was a branding challenge, not a medical and economic catastrophe," Henderson added. "Democrats must remind voters of this, raising the specter of Trump at the helm again, spinning lies and doing nothing as another disaster unfolds."
Trump’s hush money sentencing delay dismantles key campaign talking point: legal expert
The newly reported delay of former President Donald Trump's sentencing hearing in his criminal hush money trial could have a surprising effect on his campaign, one former assistant District Attorney says.
Kristen Gibbons Feden appeared on MSNBC Friday to discuss New York City Judge Juan Merchan's decision to push Trump's sentencing on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records until Nov. 26, weeks after Election Day on Nov. 5.
Gibbons Feden argued Merchan's decision would undercut a key talking point in Trump's presidential reelection campaign.
"It being after the election really helps to dis-convince, or go against Trump's narrative that the judiciary in this particular case was being politicized," she said.
"Placing it after the November election... allows Trump's narrative to be cut," said Gibbons Feden. "He cannot say that any type of decision made with regard to the sentencing is going to influence the election again because the sentencing decisions are going to be made afterwards."
Gibbons Feden noted Trump for months has targeted the family of the judge, claiming political ties interfered with his criminal trial, which concluded with a guilty verdict from 12 New York City jurors in May.
The former prosecutor also noted Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg had not pushed back on Trump's demands to delay sentencing until after Election Day.
"The prosecution wasn't opposing it and just requesting it be as expeditiously as possible, which it absolutely is," she said. "It allows him the opportunity to appeal and really seems to meet a middle ground and be an objective decision."
Read Also: How Donald Trump could run for president — and lead the nation — from prison
This is one of four trials that Trump has faced since leaving office.
Trump was ultimately found guilty of falsifying business records to bury salacious stories about his relationship with adult film star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 presidential election.
The former president pleaded not guilty and denied an affair with Daniels, who testified against him in court.
See the full comments below or at the link here.
- YouTube youtu.be
‘He did me a favor’: Trump says he’s ‘insulted’ by Putin’s fake Harris endorsement
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump suggested Thursday that he might be "insulted" if Russian President Vladimir Putin actually endorsed Democratic nominee Kamala Harris.
Trump made the remarks while speaking to the Economic Club of New York.
"Putin came out today, he endorsed Kamala, and I didn't know, was I supposed to call him up and say, thank you very much, I appreciate it," Trump opined. "But he endorsed Kamala. I have a feeling, I don't know, I don't know exactly what to say about that."
"I don't know if I'm insulted or he did me a favor," he added.
In fact, Putin was most likely joking when he said this week that he backed Harris after the Biden administration sanctioned Russia for interfering in U.S. elections.
ALSO READ: Why Trump's Arlington controversy is actually a crime
Putin claimed he would support Harris just as he had backed President Joe Biden.
"She laughs so expressively and infectiously that it means that everything is fine with her," the Russian dictator teased.
Popular articles
‘The bell of stupidity’: Conservative’s Christmas video lampoons Trump’s latest speech
President Donald Trump was supposed to prioritize the economy at a MAGA rally last week — but instead rambled about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and other familiar foes.
In a Christmas-themed video, The Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson (a Never Trump conservative former GOP strategist) and journalist Molly Jong-Fast brutally mocked the speech for failing to get the desired economic message across.
Jong-Fast told Wilson, "Let's talk about how positively b----- the whole thing is. It was meant to be a rally on affordability. Here's what was not discussed: affordability. Here's what was discussed: Marjorie Taylor Greene. He calls her Marjorie Traitor Brown."
Wilson, sounding amused, interjected, "And I'm also intrigued by how she's somehow a leftist."
Jong-Fast told the Never Trumper, "It has really been a week for Trump."
Wilson laid out a variety of ways in which Trump and the MAGA movement are having a bad Christmas, from the Epstein files to the economy.
"There is no unringing this bell of stupidity," Wilson told Jong-Fast. "They have f----- it up. They have made a giant mistake."
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Trump Supreme Court battle could be dismantled by Congress members’ own history
New evidence is emerging that could deal a major blow to President Donald Trump's case for stripping birthright citizenship to the children of immigrants.
The president has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to restore “the original meaning” of the 14th Amendment, which his lawyers argued in a brief meant that “children of temporary visitors and illegal aliens are not U.S. citizens by birth," but new research raises questions about what lawmakers intended the amendment to do, reported the New York Times.
"One important tool has been overlooked in determining the meaning of this amendment: the actions that were taken — and not taken — to challenge the qualifications of members of Congress, who must be citizens, around the time the amendment was ratified," wrote Times correspondent Adam Liptak.
A new study will be published next month in The Georgetown Law Journal Online examining the backgrounds of the 584 members who served in Congress from 1865 to 1871. That research found more than a dozen of them might not have been citizens under Trump’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment, but no one challenged their qualifications.
"That is, said Amanda Frost, a law professor at the University of Virginia and an author of the study, the constitutional equivalent of the dog that did not bark, which provided a crucial clue in a Sherlock Holmes story," Liptak wrote.
The 14th Amendment states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside," while the Constitution requires members of the House of Representatives to have been citizens for at least seven years, and senators for at least nine.
“If there had been an original understanding that tracked the Trump administration’s executive order,” Frost told Liptak, “at least some of these people would have been challenged.”
Only one of the nine challenges filed against a senator's qualifications in the period around the 14th Amendment's ratification involved the citizenship issue related to Trump's interpretation of birthright citizenship, and that case doesn't support his position.
"Several Democratic senators claimed in 1870 that their new colleague from Mississippi, Hiram Rhodes Revels, the first Black man to serve in Congress, had not been a citizen for the required nine years," Liptak wrote. "They reasoned that the 14th Amendment had overturned Dred Scott, the 1857 Supreme Court decision that denied citizenship to the descendants of enslaved African Americans, just two years earlier and that therefore he would not be eligible for another seven."
"That argument failed," the correspondent added. "No one thought to challenge any other members on the ground that they were born to parents who were not citizens and who had not, under the law in place at the time, filed a declaration of intent to be naturalized."
"The consensus on the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause has long been that everyone born in the United States automatically becomes a citizen with exceptions for those not subject to its jurisdiction, like diplomats and enemy troops," Liptak added.
Frost's research found there were many members of Congress around the time of the ratification of the 14th Amendment who wouldn't have met Trump's definition of a citizen, and she said that fact undercuts the president's arguments.
“If the executive order reflected the original public meaning, which is what the originalists say is relevant,” Frost said, “then somebody — a member of Congress, the opposing party, the losing candidate, a member of the public who had just listened to the ratification debates on the 14th Amendment, somebody — would have raised this.”
