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.”
Democrats scrap plan to push through early Biden nomination vote
The Democratic National Committee will no longer try to nominate President Joe Biden on an accelerated timeline.
Although the Democratic National Committee had decided to hold a virtual vote on July 21 to nominate Biden, many Democrats who are pushing for a new nominee protested and claimed that this move was an attempt to rush through the process without giving consideration to a potential new candidate.
CNN political commentator and former Biden communications director Kate Bedingfield noted that the ballot access deadlines begin on Aug. 20 because ballots must be printed.
"Waiting until 8/19 to formally nominate a candidate would give very little breathing room to get a name on those ballots if there were to be a brokered convention," she wrote on the social media site X. "An earlier virtual process in some ways leaves more flexibility on the table, not less, because it doesn’t put the party’s back against the wall re: ballot deadlines on 8/20. Probably not the argument the Biden team wants to make (to say the least!!), but it is another thing those that are upset about this should consider."
Read Also: The risk of dumping Biden
Now, the DNC announced that it will push back the vote to August.
Anti-Biden Democrats now have a few additional weeks to find a candidate willing to run against Biden, mount a campaign and raise the funds necessary to build and win a national effort in four months.
‘Scared to death’: Many Republicans are silently shuddering at Trump’s VP pick
Many powerful Republicans are horrified and frustrated by Donald Trump's choice of running mate in the upcoming presidential election, according to a new report.
Sen. J.D. Vance's isolationist views both alarm and infuriate hawkish Republicans who fear the 39-year-old will destroy the Republican Party's longtime foreign policy consensus, Politico reported Wednesday.
"Trump didn’t just select a running mate here – he doused political kerosene on the raging Republican fire over foreign policy," writes columnist Jonathan Martin. "While toeing the party line and praising Vance in their public comments, in private the interventionists ranged from horrified to merely alarmed that one of the loudest critics of aiding Ukraine could soon be first in line for the presidency."
One influential Republican member of Congress told Martin, “I’m scared to death.”
Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA), Defense Appropriations Subcommittee chair, reportedly raised concerns about Russia's invasion, telling an associate, “The Ukrainians better hurry up and win.”
ALSO READ: Do presidents’ popularity increase after assassination attempts? History has an answer
Trump's decision, which represents a victory for his eldest son who lobbied hard for Vance, showcases the lack of influence Republican infighters such Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) have on the former president, Martin writes.
"[McConnell] had little to say about the Vance pick, only raising an eyebrow when I asked him about it immediately after it became public and declining to speak any further," Martin writes.
"McConnell is a party man first and was unwilling to distract from the unity of the week."
Many Republicans presented a united front in public, but Martin reports a swift shift in mood behind closed doors.
Trump allies gleeful over shooting — and keen to weaponize it: analysis
Following the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump at his Pennsylvania rally last weekend, his allies at the Republican National Convention are downright elated over the turn of events, wrote Amanda Marcotte for Salon — and already making plans to use it as a political weapon.
"Trump is leaning into this with all the subtlety of a pro wrestler," wrote Marcotte. "In a video that leaked Tuesday, Trump is heard on speakerphone talking to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. about his injury, which he described as like being bitten by 'the world’s largest mosquito.' But when Trump showed up at the Republican National Convention (RNC) on Monday night, he was sporting a comically oversized bandage on his ear. The crowd responded by chanting, 'Fight, fight, fight!'"
In the immediate aftermath of the attack, Trump's allies tried to blame the whole thing on President Joe Biden and Democrats, either through outright conspiracy theories they orchestrated it, or because their warnings the former president poses a danger to democracy supposedly incited it. There is no evidence to support this; the shooter appears if anything to have Republican roots.
Nonetheless, Marcotte wrote, Republicans are "eager" to use the shooting, and speculation about motive, to try to confuse one of the key issues voters still don't trust Trump on: the preservation of democracy and the rule of law.
ALSO READ: How Trump and Senate Republicans are circling the wagons to save Clarence Thomas
"People on the ground at the RNC are eager to use this shooting to deflect the entirely correct accusation that Republicans, by nominating the man who incited the January 6 insurrection, are the ones endorsing political violence," wrote Marcotte. "Instead, they used the shooting to level false accusations at President Joe Biden's administration. One delegate from North Carolina claimed, 'We don't really have a lot of trust in the agencies that are going to be doing an investigation.' She hoped for a private investigation because 'there's a lot of questions' about 'the FBI and who they really work for.'"
Ultimately, she wrote, Republicans care little about Trump as a human being, or about the man who died in that crowd. They just care about a rallying cry to vent their grievances about fellow Americans they hate. "That's why their response to Trump playing up his minor injury with a diaper-sized bandage was not to commiserate with his pain. Instead, the crowd chanted, 'Fight, fight, fight!'"
Trump campaign sues Michigan officials over voter registration
Former President Donald Trump's campaign is suing Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, arguing that their plan to let certain state agency workers register more voters is illegal.
According to the lawsuit filed on Monday and flagged by 12News, Whitmer and Benson do not have authority, under a 1995 law passed by the Michigan legislature, to designate the Michigan Department of Veterans Affairs and Small Business Administration to register voters, as these were not agencies included on that law as available for the governor to designate.
Whitmer issued an executive order last year that allows more state agencies to register voters, and Benson implemented the arrangement. The Trump campaign wants a federal judge to declare this unlawful and force state officials to seek approval from the legislature to give voter registration duties to these agencies.
This lawsuit is the latest in a years-long campaign by Trump and his Republican allies to try to block various policies designed to make it easier to vote.
READ: Behind Trump and the GOP's plan to use this opportunity to shut up Democrats
In another such case, Stephen Miller, a former Trump adviser and the head of the far-right group America First Legal, filed a lawsuit alleging that the state of Arizona set up too many voting centers in Black and Hispanic precincts, creating a voting disadvantage for white and indigenous voters. This lawsuit was dismissed in February.
Earlier this month, anti-voting elements in Wisconsin suffered a defeat after the recently-elected liberal Supreme Court majority restored ballot drop boxes for mail ballots throughout the state, reversing a previous court decision that had abolished their use. "Wisconsin voters should have more options, and drop boxes are a secure and easy way to increase civic participation and ensure voters have another safe, secure, and accessible way to cast their ballot," stated Sam Liebert, the head of a local voting rights group.
Mike Johnson speech malfunction prompts live band playlist including Cheap Trick
The live band at the Republican National Convention took over to fill an awkward moment when House Speaker Mike Johnson's teleprompter malfunctioned.
"Ladies and gentlemen, it is now my honor to Introduce the Attorney General, and there goes the teleprompter," said Johnson (R-LA), who froze for a moment before the band took over, and the crowd laughed.
The playlist included "We're an American Band" by Grand Funk Railroad, "I Want You to Want Me" by Cheap Trick, "China Grove" and "Taking' It to the Streets" by The Doobie Brothers.
Another was "Roll with the Changes" by REO Speedwagon.
The band extended Cheap Trick's less than four-minute hit with numerous instrumental riffs to fill time for more than 10 minutes. The band performed for more than 30 minutes.
The live band at the Republican National Convention filled in when Speaker Mike Johnson's teleprompter malfunctioned. (Dave Levinthal/Raw Story)
Johnson had just announced that former President Donald J Trump "received a majority of the votes entitled to be cast at the convention, has been selected as the Republican Party nominee for President of the United States."
‘Ridiculous!’ Karine Jean-Pierre rips right-wing smear on women Secret Service agents
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre blasted right-wing claims that women were not qualified for Secret Service work following the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump.
At Monday's White House briefing, Jean-Pierre was asked about right-wing figures who blamed the shooting on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies.
"There's been a lot of right-wing chatter about the female agents guarding the former President, specifically whether women are up to the job," a reporter told the press secretary. "People are noting that they're smaller, that they weren't able to cover the President, but, I mean, this is a talking point that is circulating."
"That's ridiculous," Jean-Pierre asserted. "I understand why you're asking the question. The sentiments coming from that about women and not being able to do the job, that's ridiculous."
"These men and women put their lives on the line," she continued. "What they're doing is brave. And we should not discount that. We should not discount that, if it's a man or if it's a woman. And to have that sentiment out there is unfair, and it's ridiculous."
EXCLUSIVE: Trump's 'secretary of retribution' has a 'target list' of 350 people he wants arrested
Jean-Pierre noted that President Joe Biden had ordered an independent review following the shooting.
"And so getting into these types of speculation is just ridiculous," she said.
On Sunday, Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) told Fox News that a "DEI initiative person" at the Secret Service was to blame for not protecting Trump.
Watch the video below or at this link.
Karine Jean-Pierre rips right-wing smear on women Secret Service agents www.youtube.com
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.”
