Raw Story

Democrats are calling out Republican lawmakers for shutting down constituent town halls that have gotten too hot for them to handle.

GOP lawmakers who have met with angry constituents recently include reps. Pete Sessions (R-TX), Rich McCormick (R-GA), Keith Self (R-TX) and Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS). Many of the lawmakers have struggled to answer pointed constituent questions about President Donald Trump and his lieutenant Elon Musk, leading to boos and jeers from the crowd.

Trump himself has discounted the complaints as coming from "paid troublemakers," and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) agreed: "There are people who do this as a profession, they're professional protesters," he said.

The Republicans' solution to their constituents' complaints? No more in-person town halls.

ALSO READ: 'Absolutely unconscionable': Ex-Republican demands Trump removed from office after fight

According to Politico, "The chair of the House GOP's campaign arm told Republican lawmakers Tuesday to stop holding in-person town halls amid a wave of angry backlash over the cuts undertaken by President Donald Trump's administration. Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), the NRCC chair, delivered the message inside a closed-door meeting of House Republicans, according to three people granted anonymity to describe the private remarks."

Congressional Democrats immediately pounced on the new directive.

Rep. Theresa Leger Fernandez (D-NM) accused the GOP of being "afraid of their constituents," while a House Democratic super PAC spokesperson said, "If you're going to have the audacity to raise prices and rip away health care from millions of Americans, you should at least have the courage to face your constituents," Politico reported.

Max Cohen with Punchbowl News quoted Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesperson Viet Shelton on X: "So House Republicans’ political strategy is ‘see no families nor workers,’ ‘hear no protesters’, ‘speak to no one’ and hope everyone gets less angry at them when they rip away Americans’ health care? Got it.”

Cohen also quoted Democratic spokesperson Emma Weir: "Plain and simple: Republicans are hiding from the voters who elected them because they’re breaking their promises... It’s time they take responsibility for their dangerous actions.”

Read the Politico article here.

Speaking to the press on Tuesday, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau attacked President Donald Trump's tariffs on Mexico and Canada as "dumb. "

The tariffs began at midnight, and Trudeau announced that his nation would retaliate with a 25 percent levy on $30 billion of U.S. goods coming into Canada.

In his briefing, Trudeau connected Trump's tariffs to appeasing Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“The United States launched a trade war against Canada, their closest partner and ally, the closest friend," Trudeau said. "At the same time, they’re talking about working positively with Russia, appeasing Vladimir Putin, a lying murderous dictator. Make that make sense."

ALSO READ: 'Absolutely unconscionable': Ex-Republican demands Trump removed from office after fight

“The excuse that [Trump] is giving for these tariffs today of fentanyl is completely bogus, completely unjustified, completely false … and I will admit, I have been holding out hope that these tariffs were just a clever negotiating ploy," Trudeau continued.

In a statement issued Monday, Trudeau cited data to disprove Trump's claims that Canada is responsible for the fentanyl coming into the United States.

“While less than 1 percent of the fentanyl intercepted at the U.S. border comes from Canada, we have worked relentlessly to address this scourge that affects Canadians and Americans alike," Trudeau said. "We implemented a $1.3 billion border plan with new choppers, boots on the ground, more co-ordination, and increased resources to stop the flow of fentanyl."

"We appointed a fentanyl czar, listed transnational criminal cartels as terrorist organizations, launched the Joint Operational Intelligence Cell, and are establishing a Canada-U.S. joint strike force on organized crime," his statement added. "Because of this work – in partnership with the United States – fentanyl seizures from Canada have dropped 97 percent between December 2024 and January 2025 to a near-zero low of 0.03 pounds seized by U.S. Customs and Border Protection."

Speaking to the press, an angry Trudeau said: "Donald, this is a very dumb thing to do."

The "Trudeau Tracker" shows that Trudeau's approval rating increased more than 10 points since the battle with Trump over trade.

See the press conference below or at the link here.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Fox News host Harris Faulkner expressed outrage after Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau referred to the U.S. president as "Donald."

In a speech on Tuesday, Trudeau responded to U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to impose 25% tariffs on Canadian goods.

"We will stand up for Canadians every single second of every single day because this country is worth fighting for," Trudeau said before Faulkner cut him off.

"He has just made this personal with President Trump!" the Fox News host exclaimed. "He didn't acknowledge his title as President of the United States."

"He called him Donald more than once!" she continued. "He said this is a very, well, he said you are a very smart person, but this is a dumb thing to do, paraphrasing that first part."

ALSO READ: 'Absolutely unconscionable': Ex-Republican demands Trump removed from office after fight

"And then he made the point that the world is watching and that this fight between him and who he called Donald is not good."

Trudeau has said Canada would respond to Trump's tariffs with a 25 percent tariff on $155 billion worth of American goods.

Watch the video below or at this link.

Republicans in Congress have the power to "stop this tariff madness right now" and prevent a catastrophic trade war that will undermine the U.S. economy, conservative analyst Charles W. Cooke wrote for the National Review — all they have to do is find the courage to do it.

The tariffs on Canada and Mexico, previously delayed by thirty days after Trump cut "deals" with these countries, are now in full force, with the stock market in freefall, and major companies scrambling to minimize the damage as goods and raw materials are subject to new taxes at the border. It's a similar shock to the tariffs on China, which went into effect last month and left consumers stunned at new fees for shipping. The economic losses could be compounded as targeted countries prepare to hit back with their own tariffs.

"Congress can stop this right now. Literally right now. Today. This morning. Before lunch. In a matter of hours," wrote Cooke. "The Constitution gives absolute control over tariffs to Congress. As such, any power that the president enjoys must be delegated. With one bill — passed by veto-proof majorities — Congress could take back some (or all) of that power."

ALSO READ: 'Putin is the bad guy!' Tensions boil over on Fox & Friends over Trump's Ukraine moves

Trump's authority to unilaterally pass tariffs stems from a 1977 law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a law which, as the name implies, is meant for emergency situations, but which gives the president the power to determine what constitutes an emergency.

"Congress can repeal it, amend it, or pass a separate law that supersedes it, and there’s nothing that anybody can do to stop it," said Cooke. "Such a law could exempt Canada and Mexico from its provisions, or make clear that other tariff deals involving those countries (like the one Trump signed in 2019) have precedence, or do anything else that Congress wants it to do, because — again! — Congress has plenary power over tariffs. Heck, if Congress passed a law that simply read, 'All delegation of the legislature’s Article I, Section 8 tariff powers is hereby rescinded,' that would immediately be the law of the land."

Congress is reluctant to do this, he noted, because "both parties like the imperial presidency" and anticipate using these powers when they are in charge. But this is "dumb" and "shortsighted," Cooke admonished, and it weakens the original purpose of the Constitution — and it's time lawmakers found their voice again.

"Its legality notwithstanding, there was arguably a time in history at which it made utilitarian sense for the president to be in charge of trade deals. But times change," wrote Cooke. "In a system such as ours, it is utterly bizarre that president enjoys this quasi-monarchical authority. If it wishes, Congress can remove it before you’ve even finished reading this post."

Some Democratic lawmakers plan to pack the House chamber Tuesday night with fired federal workers to hear President Donald Trump's address to Congress. One person expected to be there is an Army veteran who until recently worked at the Veterans' Administration and was laid off around the same time he received a bonus check for "outstanding performance."

Adam Mulvey told CNN's Kate Bolduan that he plans to attend the president's speech as the guest of Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL).

"Tonight, I'd like to hear what the overarching plan is," Mulvey said. "I understand there's areas to cut and there's ways we can tighten up the budget, and we probably need to. But I don't think the way we're doing it is correct. We're going about it in a haphazard manner."

ALSO READ: 'Absolutely unconscionable': Ex-Republican demands Trump removed from office after fight

Mulvey said he worked for a federal health care center in Illinois that serves veterans and active-duty military recruits from Naval Station Great Lakes, and that he and his colleagues had discussed the DOGE firings hitting other federal agencies.

"We've been hearing about different things in the media, but none of us there expected it would touch the VA because our mission is so important, and the patients that come in our doors are so important and need the care that they're getting," Mulvey said. "So, I received a call from my supervisor, who's also a disabled veteran, Gill. He told me he heard there were rumors that employees were getting emails about terminations. I quickly got my work phone, and looked down and there it was: I saw an email saying that I was terminated."

Mulvey continued, "The part that was hard to swallow at first is that it said I was terminated for performance. Every employee from the VA and across the federal government that has been terminated has received the same carbon-copy email that says, 'Your firing is based on your poor performance.' You know, nothing could be further from the truth. I just received a performance evaluation where I received the highest ratings. In fact, yesterday I received my final paycheck from the federal government and it included a cash bonus for performance exceeding the standards for the year, so to be terminated and fired from a layoff for financial reasons is one thing. But to be told it's based on my poor performance, I think that was very disingenuous."

Watch the clip below via CNN.

Vice President J.D. Vance's casual dismissal of the United Kingdom during an interview on Fox News on Monday night led to a furious tirade from MSNBC's Joe Scarborough on Tuesday morning.

Speaking with host Sean Hannity, Vance downplayed Britain's support for Ukraine and President Volodymyr Zelensky as "some random country that hasn't fought a war in 30 or 40 years"

After sharing the clip, the "Morning Joe" host launched into a brutal tirade aimed at the VP, who has been heavily criticized for his sneering attack on Zelensky in the Oval Office last Friday that shocked the world.

ALSO READ:'Absolutely unconscionable': Ex-Republican demands Trump removed from office after fight

"We can do fact checks," the MSNBC host blurted. "And this 'random country,' Great Britain, the country, we have a special relationship."

''Some random country,'" he repeated. "Well, here's a list of recent wars that that random country fought alongside with the United States: in 1990, the Gulf war, the British lost 47 lives. 1992, the Bosnian war –– 59 British personnel died. 1998 the Kosovo war, they fought alongside of us and 72 Brits killed. 2000, the Sierra Leone civil war, two personnel died. 2000 war, 2001 the war i Afghanistan, 457 British personnel lost their lives. 2003 the Iraq war 179 Brits lost their lives, 136 killed in hostile incidents."

"And then you go on and you see that the overall war on terror was proportionately 12 percent deadlier for the United Kingdom than it was for Americans, based on the number of troops deployed and the number of troops killed," he detailed. "Three times the number of British troops were shot and killed in Afghanistan than they were in Iraq, and a UK soldier was twice as likely to be shot and killed than their U.S. counterpart."

The exasperated Scarborough then blurted, "I don't know where to begin."

You can watch below or at the link.

- YouTube youtu.be