Raw Story
Featured Stories:
Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce still didn’t announce pregnancy, despite AI rumors
‘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.”
Why Bernie Sanders is thanking Elon Musk

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday took the unusual step of applauding Elon Musk—but not for reasons that the Tesla CEO and world's richest man would likely find flattering.
In the wake of reports indicating that Musk plans to inject $45 million per month into a new super PAC supporting former President Donald Trump's bid for another four years in the White House, Sanders (I-Vt.) thanked Musk for doing "an exceptional job of demonstrating a point that we have made for years—and that is the fact we live in an oligarchic society in which billionaires dominate not only our economic life and the information we consume, but our politics as well."
"And let me be clear. While the size of Musk's financial contribution is particularly egregious, he is not alone in attempting to buy this election to further his own needs," Sanders continued. "Other billionaires are also playing a significant role—in both political parties. Oh, I know... here goes Bernie Sanders again about Citizens United and the role of money in politics. I have no shortage of critics who accuse me of being boring and of hammering away at the same themes year after year after year."
"They're probably right. I am repetitious, but that’s because the problems we care about are only getting worse," he added. "Let's be clear. It has never made sense to me, then or now, that a tiny clique of people should have incredible wealth and power while most people have none."
"While people like Elon Musk try to buy elections for Donald Trump, people who work for low wages, have no health insurance, can't afford prescription drugs, and can't find affordable housing are giving up on politics."
Citing unnamed sources, The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg reported earlier this week that Musk has pledged to donate $45 million per month to America PAC, whose founding donors include ultra-rich tech investors who are part of Musk's social circle. The New York Timesseparately reported that "one leader of America PAC told a friend that the group expected to have a major donor who would make donations in four batches, adding up to as much as $160 million over the course of the campaign."
The Journal and Bloomberg stories—which Musk denied with a meme that included the words "fake gnus"—followed reports that Musk had already given the super PAC a substantial sum of money despite his March declaration that he is "not donating money to either candidate for U.S. president."
Musk formally endorsed Trump on X—the social media platform Musk owns—following an assassination attempt against the former president this past weekend in Pennsylvania. Conspiracy theories about the attempt on Trump's life proliferated rapidly on X, with the help of Musk himself.
The Tesla CEO's name did not appear on America PAC's disclosure filings for June, which could mean that he donated to the PAC earlier this month.
Musk, who is worth over $250 billion, is one of more than a dozen billionaires supporting Trump and his newly chosen running mate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio). Axios and the Times reported Tuesday that Musk personally lobbied Trump to make Vance his vice presidential pick.
Musk and other U.S. billionaires got $1 trillion richer during Trump's first four years in office, gains fueled by massive tax cuts he signed into law in 2017.
Sanders wrote in his email Tuesday that Musk's influence on the 2024 election could be particularly pronounced given his ownership of X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.
Musk, Sanders wrote, has used the platform "to amplify the voices of conspiracy theorists who deny the results of the last election and spread the dangerous idea that Democrats want to allow mass, undocumented migration to the country to replace, electorally, the votes of white people."
"The reality is that while people like Elon Musk try to buy elections for Donald Trump, people who work for low wages, have no health insurance, can't afford prescription drugs, and can't find affordable housing are giving up on politics," the senator continued. "They see the rich getting richer as they use their wealth to buy influence, and wonder whether anyone in Washington even knows what is going on in their lives."
Sanders argued that to end the pernicious political influence of Musk and other billionaires, it is essential to elect candidates who support overturning Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the 2010 Supreme Court decision that spawned the super PACs now playing a massive role in the nation's elections.
"It is an issue that should concern all Americans—regardless of their political point of view—who wish to live under a government that represents all of the people and not just a handful of powerful special interests," Sanders wrote. "Taking action is not just good politics, it is also good policy. Because the truth is, campaign finance reform is the most important issue facing us today, because it impacts all the others."
‘Backbone of an octopus’: Former Haley colleague ‘not surprised’ she rolled over for Trump

During an appearance on CNN with host Jim Acosta, a former colleague of Nikki Haley, who served with her in the South Carolina House of Representatives, claimed he was not surprised in the least that she would set aside her principles and endorse Donald Trump.
Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, was given a key spot in the Republican National Convention on Tuesday where she endorsed the former president, whom she has previously labeled "unhinged" while claiming re-electing him would be equivalent to "suicide."
On Wednesday CNN contributor Bakari Sellars, a former South Carolina lawmaker, smirked when the topic came up and noted her history of being an opportunist with no fixed beliefs.
"I can tell you is that this surprises no one who knows Nikki Haley," he began. "She has the backbone of an octopus and so politically, when you have somebody who floats with the wind, this is not a surprise."
ALSO READ: Associated Press issues warning about iconic Trump assassination attempt photo
"I mean, I think this is one of the larger issues that Donald Trump actually had with Nikki Haley; the fact that she can do one thing in your face, then behind your back, do something totally different so that's kind of what we're seeing amongst the people around Donald Trump," he added.
"It's fascinating to see the Lindsey Grahams, the Marco Rubios, the Ted Cruzes, the Nikki Haleys who he [Trump] talks about like dogs," Sellars continued. "He talks about their wives. He called her 'birdbrain,' sent literal bird foods to her room. She says this and that, and then they kind of just crumble and it's missed and so the Republican Party that we're seeing on display is a Republican Party that is not like any Republican party before."
"I would venture to say, doesn't stand for much," he added, to which host Acosta added, "Yeah, he collects these critics turned converts like baseball cards."
Watch the video below or at this link.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Ex-Republican concerned Trump is hiding medical report after attack

It has been four days since Donald Trump came inches from death after a failed assassination attempt, and the campaign still hasn't released any kind of medical report talking about the injuries.
While Washington is at work trying to uncover failures by the U.S. Secret Service on Saturday, the ex-president is walking around the Republican Convention with a giant pad of gauze and tape covering his ear.
This raised concerns from Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL), a former Tea Party Republican who has since turned against Trump and the MAGA movement.
"No medical reports," posted Walsh. "No doctor’s statements. No information at all on the Republican nominee for President who was shot and injured four days ago. That’s just wrong. Shitty job media. If it were the Democratic nominee who’d been shot, [Sean] Hannity, et al, would be blowing a gasket."
Read Also: Trump’s ‘secretary of retribution’ has a ‘target list’ of 350 people he wants arrested
“Trump has posted that his ear was pierced by a bullet, but the sad fact is that he’s an unreliable source. News organizations need to wait for more credible confirmation of what happened,” wrote journalist Steven Beschloss on Saturday.
Questions have surfaced asking whether the bullet pierced Trump's ear, grazed it, or broke a piece of the TelePrompter and the glass that shot out at Trump's ear.
Ex-prosecutor and commentator John Flannery asked, "Was it a bullet or shrapnel from a teleprompter - hey Don, release your medical records."
"It's been almost 90 hours since the first assassination attempt on a president or former president in more than four decades, and we still don't have any info from medical experts who have examined Donald Trump," said writer Charlotte Clymer. "No interviews, pressers, or statements. Nothing. Isn't that weird?"
"For 2 weeks media talked about Biden's health non-stop after a bad debate. Are we ever going to get a medical report on Trump, since the GOP claims he was 'shot in the face'? Even though it was a minor injury, it's traumatic to be shot at. Where's the mental health check?" asked investigative reporter Victoria Brownworth.
National security lawyer Bradley Moss also found it odd.
"It has been several days since Trump was injured. No medical reports. No statements from doctors. Nothing," he said on X.
"And the media is barely talking about it, instead discussing an imaginary 'pivot'."
‘Weak and tired’ Trump ‘steamrolled’ into picking ‘the guy who made the least sense’

Despite the over-inflated praise of Donald Trump for picking Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) as his 2024 running mate at the Republican Party Convention being held in Milwaukee, there are serious questions being raised over whether the freshman senator brings anything to the ticket that it didn't already have.
According to Salon political analyst, Heather "Digby" Parton — no fan of the convicted felon ex-president — he had so many better candidates to choose from and it looks like he blew it.
Parton began by admitting she thought Gov. Kristi Noem (R-SD) would have fit the bill better had she not confessed to shooting a puppy named Cricket, as she argues that Noem "has the Mar-a-Lago Barbie look, which Trump obviously loves, and putting a woman on the ticket might have helped with those suburban moms who don't like him very much."
She then added skipping over North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum (R) and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) could come back to haunt Trump.
RELATED: 'Scared to death': Many Republicans are silently shuddering at Trump's VP pick
"Of all the choices discussed over the past few weeks, Senator JD Vance of Ohio was the guy who made the least sense," the Salon columnist wrote before adding that the very MAGA Vance "seems like the least likely to gain him any votes he didn't already have."
If there is anyone to blame for the selection of Vance — with confidante Kellyanne Conway pushing hard for Rubio to no avail — it would be Trump sons Don Jr. and Eric who reportedly "steamrolled" their father.
"I have to say that in all the articles written about this decision, what comes across to me is that Donald Trump has lost a step," Parton wrote. "Maybe he's just so cocky about winning that he doesn't think it matters, which is possible. But from the way it sounds, he let himself be steamrolled into picking someone who on some level he knows wasn't the best choice for his electoral prospects."
"Maybe the 78 year old Trump is just as weak and tired as that other old guy he's running against," she concluded.
You can read more here.
Trump ridiculed for Republican convention ratings slump

The Republican National Convention hasn't performed well in television ratings, and former President Donald Trump, who is notoriously obsessed with crowd sizes, is being ridiculed for the failure.
Variety reported that despite a near-death experience, the convention's first night drew 18.1 million viewers across all networks.
"Fox News led the pack by far with 6.9 million viewers at 10 p.m. Next was ABC with 2.3 million viewers, NBC with 2.2 million, CBS with 1.8 million, MSNBC with 1.3 million and CNN with 1.1 million," the report said.
Read Also: Failed VP pick Rubio and angsty GOPers nervous Trump will mess up convention
The first night was also the first time that Donald Trump was seen publicly after the assassination attempt. It was also the first appearance of Trump with his newly selected vice presidential running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH).
MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell called the event a “very low-rated convention” for Trump.
“I think it’s one of the reasons why he went there,” O’Donnell continued. “And I think even if he hadn’t been attacked, there’s a possibility he would have gone to try to pump up his ratings. He did everything he could to pump up Monday night’s ratings that are lower than the Monday night ratings of his 2016 convention.”
“So that’s six million ardent Trump supporters is the most they can get,” O’Donnell pointed out. “Less than 10 percent of ardent Trump voters decided, ‘I’m going to watch this thing last night.'”
Colleague Rachel Maddow mocked, “That’s really not that much of a bump for Fox."
President Joe Biden's campaign poked at Trump, noting that his speech to NATO garnered 6 million more views.
Watch the video below or at this link.
Trump ridiculed for Republican convention ratings slump www.youtube.com
Dems ramp up fight against Trump just steps outside Republican National Convention

MILWAUKEE — Democrats remain in the midst of a destructive conflict over whether President Joe Biden should quit the 2024 race.
But steps outside the Republican National Convention’s security perimeter, Democratic Party leaders on Wednesday angled to frame the presidential election as a “binary choice” between Biden and Republican nominee Donald Trump. No more, no less.
“A binary choice,” Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) declared.
Democratic leaders uttered the “Biden-Harris” on numerous occasions.
Another oft-used phrase: “Now until November.”
Walz acknowledged that Democrats, at this moment, are not as unified behind their presidential candidate as Republicans are — quickly noting that a parade of one-time Trump critics such as former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Sen. Ted Cruz all lavished Trump with praise during Tuesday night’s Republican National Convention speeches.
The Democrats drew contrasts between Biden and Trump on abortion rights, personal freedoms and the choice of Trump’s selection of a white man as his vice presidential running mate versus Biden’s choice of a Black and Asian woman.
“Trump picked J.D. Vance because he would bend over backwards,” said Quentin Fulks, Biden’s principal deputy campaign manager, said of Trump's new running mate.
He added that despite the Trump campaign’s calls for “unity” this week, Republicans “are here to divide.”
Walz mused that Republicans “don’t have much division in their party” because “they bend the knee and grovel.” He described Vance not as an independent thinker but a “perfect Frankenstein monster created by the Heritage Foundation.”
ALSO READ: Associated Press issues warning about iconic Trump assassination attempt photo
Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX) further panned Republicans for supporting an immigration policy that aims to potentially deport millions of people living illegally in the United States, but offers few details on how such an undertaking would be done.
“It’s just one party that proposes solutions over and over again,” Escobar said of Democrats regarding immigration. “The alternative is very dark.”
Some prominent Democratic Party members continue to openly question whether Biden, 81, is physically and mentally fit to stand for reelection following a disastrous debate performance last month and underwhelming national interviews since then. Some — including elected members of Congress — have outrightly called for Biden to yield the nomination to Vice President Kamala Harris, or to open the Democratic National Convention to other potential candidates.
Other Democrats remain steadfast in their support of Biden, and the Democratic National Committee is plowing forward toward Biden’s formal nomination.
The Republican National Convention is scheduled to conclude Thursday night with a nomination acceptance speech by Trump, who officially became the GOP nominee on Monday.
The Democratic National Convention is slated to take place a month from now in Chicago. But Democrats assembled in Milwaukee today only offered vague details about how a planned, pre-Democratic National Convention “virtual roll call” to nominate Biden and Harris will work in practice.
Walz said that this virtual roll call — as opposed to an in-person delegate vote roll call at the Democratic National Convention — would not take place before Aug. 1. The goal is to “get it done by the 15th of August,” he added.Popular articles
Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce still didn’t announce pregnancy, despite AI rumors
‘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.”

