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.”
‘It’s Times Like These facts matter: Trump camp hits back at Foo Fighters over song use
Former President Donald Trump's campaign fired back at the Foo Fighters, who last week said the campaign didn't have the band's permission to use its 1990s anthem "My hero."
Trump's campaign on Friday afternoon played the song as he welcomed Robert F. Kennedy to the stage at his Glendale, Arizona, rally. Kennedy's walk-out to the song — with fireworks igniting behind him and Trump — caught the attention of the band, which delivered a stern response.
“Foo Fighters were not asked permission, and if they were, they would not have granted it,” a spokesperson told Billboard on Friday night. The person added that “appropriate actions are being taken” against Trump's campaign, and that any royalties received as a result of the usage will be donated to the Harris-Walz campaign.
ALSO READ: Donald Trump exploits AP photo error for new $99 'Save America' book
But according to the Trump campaign, not so fast.
"It’s Times Like These facts matter, don’t be a Pretender," campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung wrote in a post on X over the weekend, tagging the band.
Cheung, known for his often fiery statements, on Monday emailed The Hill to say it does, in fact, have a license to play the song.
Republican senator promotes seemingly-debunked scandal over Tim Walz and his dog Scout
Donald Trump's supporters have created a new scandal around Gov. Time Walz (D-MN) — this time involving his dog.
On Monday, several Republicans highlighted a photo of from X with a post in which the governor mentions his pet Scout. The animal in the picture, the Maga crowd claimed, is not Scout.
Dustin Gage, who calls himself the Minnesota GOP hype man and a political consultant, posted two tweets from Walz. One in 2022 celebrated Scout's birthday, with a photo of the family's black Labrador mix.
The other photo mentioned Scout having fun at the dog park later that year, which was illustrated with brown dog with white spots.
"Yes, this is Tim Walz tweeting about his dog Scout. Only problem is that these are two completely different dogs," posted Gage.
Republican U.S. Sen. Eric Schmitt (MO) was quick to sound the alarm on the new "scandal."
"Why would Tim Walz do this? It’s Creepy™️ and Weird™️," asked the senator.
ALSO READ: Donald Trump exploits AP photo error for new $99 'Save America' book
One follower questioned if Scout only sometimes identifies as "a dog of color," a reference to Donald Trump questioning Vice President Kamala Harris' race when speaking to the National Association of Black Journalists.
Broan Doherty, the former producer for Rush Limbaugh, said, "I look forward to Tim Walz's explanation, and can you imagine if J.D. [Vance] tweeted about his dog Scout and it was two different dogs?"
Former Trump campaign staffer A.J. Delgado pointed out a possible flaw in the GOP's logic. "These morons have such low thinking skills that it didn’t occur to him that Walz is taking a photo w ANOTHER dog bc they are at a DOG PARK and referencing that Scout enjoyed it. He is not saying it is Scout featured in the pic. Morons."
As it turns out, there was a different dog in the photo because Scout made a friend at the dog park. A video shows the encounter.
"Junior senator from Missouri is mad local man played with other dogs at the park," constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis posted on X with a screen capture of the video in which Scout was playing with the other dog.
See the video below:
Trump questions Kamala Harris’ intelligence in new complaint over debate rules
Donald Trump questioned the intelligence of Kamala Harris Monday after her campaign team insisted on keeping microphones on throughout their upcoming debate.
The Harris campaign has notified ABC News and other networks that the vice president prefers that microphones should remain live throughout the Sept. 10 debate, while Trump's team has expressed a preference to mute them until the candidate is asked a direct question — the set up that was agreed upon during his last debate with President Joe Biden.
"When is Comrade Kamala Harris going to start answering questions?" Trump posted on Truth Social. "She’s a Radical Left, No Fracking Marxist, and the Public needs to know what she stands for, which is POVERTY AND FAILURE FOR AMERICA! Kamala refuses to do Interviews, because she has NO CONFIDENCE in her own level of 'Intelligence,' and now wants to change the Rules of the Debate on ABC Fake News!"
The Harris campaign issued a statement Monday morning casting doubt on the Republican nominee's ability to behave himself onstage.
“Our understanding is that Trump’s handlers prefer the muted microphone because they don’t think their candidate can act presidential for 90 minutes on his own," said Brian Fallon, the Harris campaign’s senior adviser for communications.. "We suspect Trump’s team has not even told their boss about this dispute because it would be too embarrassing to admit they don’t think he can handle himself against Vice President Harris without the benefit of a mute button."
The Trump campaign accused Harris of playing "games" with the format and insisted that the ABC News debate take place under the same terms as the CNN debate with the president, who has since dropped out of the race and endorsed his vice president, while Trump himself told reporters he didn't care either way.
"Doesn’t matter to me," Trump said. "I’d rather have it probably on."
ALSO READ: Inside the Democratic National Convention corporate moneyfest
Trump has suggested he may back out of the debate altogether because he doubts that ABC News can be an impartial host.
"I watched ABC FAKE NEWS this morning, both lightweight reporter Jonathan Carl’s(K?) ridiculous and biased interview of Tom Cotton (who was fantastic!), and their so-called Panel of Trump Haters, and I ask, why would I do the Debate against Kamala Harris on that network?" Trump posted Sunday on Truth Social.
Harris camp calls Trump’s bluff on debate
As Donald Trump attacks ABC News and suggests he may pull out of the scheduled presidential debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, the Harris campaign is calling his bluff on the one major remaining sticking point: debate rules.
The Harris campaign wants the microphones for both candidates to stay on during the September 10 debate, but Trump's advisors have been refusing, saying they want the same rules as the fateful CNN debate that led to President Joe Biden scrapping his re-election bid.
At 11:00 AM ET NBC News posted video (below) of Trump from Monday morning saying he did not care one way or the other about muting the microphones, but insisting the rules should stay the same as the CNN debate.
Harris campaign senior adviser for communications Brian Fallon picked up on Trump's remarks and called his bluff.
READ MORE: ‘Black Jobs’: Trump Clarifies What He Meant
"Trump said unmuting the mics 'doesn’t matter to me.' Always suspected it was something his staff wanted, not him personally. With this resolved, everything is now set for Sept 10th," Fallon wrote on X.
Trump had told NBC's Jake Traylor, "We agreed to the same rules. I don't know. Doesn't matter to me. I'd rather have it probably on. But the agreement was that it would be the same as it was last time. In that case, it was muted. I didn't like it the last time, but it worked out fine. Ask Biden how it worked out. It was fine. And I think it should be the same."
Trump, widely reported to want to pull out of the ABC News debate, especially after his late Sunday night rant, went on to claim it is Harris, a former prosecutor, who is not a "good debater" and "doesn't want to debate."
The ex-president, now down in the polls, declared, "they're trying to change it. The truth is, they're trying to get out of it because she doesn't want to debate. She's not a good debater. She's not a smart person. She doesn't want to debate."
Politico Playbook Monday morning reported that behind the scenes, the Trump campaign is refusing to agree to the Harris campaign’s request the microphones stay on at all times.
READ MORE: ‘Sold His Endorsement’: RFK Jr Suspends, Backs Trump – Running Mate Wants Vaccine Apology
“It’s clear the veep’s team is hoping to get Trump to lose his cool on mic,” Playbook reported.
Harris is “more than happy to have exchanges with him if he tries to interrupt her,” a “person familiar with the negotiations tells Playbook.”
“And given how shook he seems by her, he’s very prone to having intemperate outbursts,” they said. “I think the campaign would want viewers to hear [that].”
“Our understanding,” Harris campaign's Fallon had said in a statement, “is that Trump’s handlers prefer the muted microphone because they don’t think their candidate can act presidential for 90 minutes on his own. We suspect Trump’s team has not even told their boss about this dispute because it would be too embarrassing to admit they don’t think he can handle himself against Vice President Harris without the benefit of a mute button.”
It's unclear if Trump's remarks are the final word on unmuting the microphones.
Watch Trump below or at this link.
.@jake__traylor: "Would you want the microphones muted in the debate whenever you're not speaking?"
Donald Trump: "We agreed to the same rules. I don't know, doesn't matter to me. ... The agreement was that it would be the same as it was last time. In that case, it was muted." pic.twitter.com/l7d7Odd7cb — NBC Politics (@NBCPolitics) August 26, 2024
READ MORE: Stephen Miller and GOP AGs Sue to Protect Feds’ Right to Rip Apart Multi-Status Families
‘Is that all you’ve got?’ Trump mocked on MSNBC over his ‘Where’s Hunter?’ freakout
On Friday morning, the entire panel on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" reacted with hoots of laughter over reporting on Donald Trump's frenzy of posting on Truth Social during Vice President Kamala Harris' nomination acceptance speech late Thursday night.
In particular, a Trump post that asked, "WHERE’S HUNTER?" just before he complained, "[Tim] Walz was an ASSISTANT Coach, not a COACH," drew laughter.
As co-host Willie Geist explained, "Even last night, as Vice President Harris was giving her address, Donald Trump was live Truth Socialing with comments. His rejoinder to her comments were, all caps, 'Where's Hunter?' I mean, is that all you've got?"
"Oh, my God," MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski uttered as Joe Scarborough burst out laughing and Geist continued, "Come on now, come on, you have to do a little better than that. He's playing the hits."
ALSO READ: Trump is losing his audience
"At least try," Scarborough joked.
'Yeah, he's not even trying anymore," Geist replied. "He's just playing the old classics in his mind. Part of the message last night, too, was this has been an extraordinary week —."
"I mean, 'Where is Hunter?'" Scarborough interrupted. "That's like Elvis, like, wearing fringe in 1967 in the Summer of Love. I mean, come on! 'Where's Hunter? God, I'm sorry."
Morning Joe regular John Heilemann laughed and added, "I love, 'Is she talking about me?' Talk about projection and confession, my God."
- YouTube youtu.be
Trump ‘disoriented’ because ‘nothing seems to be working’ to slow Harris: analysis
Vice President Kamala Harris has put Donald Trump in a box, and the former president so far has been unable to escape, according to an analysis.
Trump has been pulling out one trick after another from his playbook that had previously knocked his opponents off balance and kept the spotlight on himself, but the Washington Post's Dan Balz said Harris has cruised past those snares and forced her GOP rival to play catchup.
"As Harris has glided through the past month, Trump has taken to social media or to friendly media interviews in hopes of setting the terms of the conversation, but that has backfired," wrote Balz, the newspaper's chief correspondent for national politics. "He has tried invective, exaggeration and lies, something that in the past he used to shift the focus, sometimes to distract from his own problems, at other times to draw attention away from a rival. It hasn’t done what he hoped."
ALSO READ: Donald Trump exploits AP photo error for new $99 'Save America' book
The past week belonged to Harris and her party, just as the GOP convention week belonged to Trump and the Republicans, but the former president's attempts at counterprogramming have flopped.
"Trump has learned, perhaps painfully, that at this moment, fewer are listening to him," Balz wrote. "In short, nothing seems to be working the way it once did."
Harris leaves Chicago with the wind at her back, but campaigns are unpredictable and a Sept. 10 debate looms on the schedule.
"Everyone now awaits the next round of national and battleground state polls to see whether Harris receives the traditional bounce that accompanies a successful convention and whether the enthusiasm that was on display this week inside the United Center and at massive rallies in the days before will settle a bit," Balz wrote.
"As many of the luminaries who spoke here this week reminded Democrats, this is a very tight race," Balz added, "close enough certainly that even a disoriented Trump could win — if he regains his legs as a candidate, which is one of the biggest questions at this moment."
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.”
