Tag: spencer pratt
'Rigged!' Trump And MAGA Furious Over Pratt's Defeat In Los Angeles Primary

'Rigged!' Trump And MAGA Furious Over Pratt's Defeat In Los Angeles Primary

President Donald Trump and his movement of MAGA Republicans are venting their rage online after Republican reality TV star Spencer Pratt lost to two Democrats, Mayor Karen Bass and Councilmember Nithya Raman, in the Los Angeles mayoral race.

Because Trump has accused all of the politicians he opposes of cheating, tracing all the way back to the 2016 Republican Iowa caucus, he naturally has accused Bass and Raman of cheating Pratt. MAGA Republicans online are taking notice.

"I'm at the rare intersection of: - Was rooting for Pratt - Thought he was good for the LA political conversation - Dislike California's election administration laws and policies - But understand how the process works,” posted an X user named Stephen Richer.

Similarly Republican pollster Frank Luntz observed "reality TV star Spencer Pratt says he ‘will be done with trying to live in LA’ if he doesn't win the mayoral election. Yesterday, he was surpassed in the Los Angeles mayoral primary for the second run-off spot in November."

Another Republican wrote going by Dr. Terry Simpson on X wrote that "I'm a Republican. Los Angeles is roughly 50% Democratic and about 10% Republican. Any candidate who wants to lead this city must win support well beyond the Republican base. Spencer Pratt didn't lose because voters didn't understand he was independent. He lost.”

Other Republicans reacted with the outrage that Trump is trying to stir up, even though there is no evidence that anything illicit is occurring in the California election.

"A 43,000-vote swing just handed Nithya Raman the edge over Spencer Pratt in LA,” an X user who goes by jay plemons posted. “The exact size of the city's homeless population. Ballot harvesting from shelters, universal mail ballots, and late drops made it happen. Coincidence?"

Similarly X user Mark Mendlovitz wrote, "The large variance of Pratt and Raman but not Bass should be setting off screaming alarm bells."

Even House Speaker Mike Johnson suggested there might be fraud in California, despite the fact that he also acknowledged there is no proof. Instead he cited the absence of evidence as being in itself suspicious.

“I'm not saying it's rigged,” Johnson told CNN’s Manu Raju on Monday. “I'm saying it stinks to high heaven. And everybody knows that. Let's remove the appearance of impropriety. Let's have, what a concept, let's have votes on an election the day of the election. That's what many states are able to do. I think California is playing around with this.”

After Raju asked Johnson if he had proof the election was improper, he admitted that “I don't — some of these efforts are so diabolical and so far upstream that it is impossible to prove. But I think everybody knows instinctively something is wrong here. And that's a concern. We need people to believe in the integrity of our election system.”

Trump, who attempted a coup after he lost the 2020 presidential election to then-Vice President Joe Biden, is reportedly falsely accusing the California election of being stolen as a preparation for denying the results of the 2026 midterms, which are also expected to swing against him.

“By baselessly framing Ms. Raman’s rise as a Democratic scam, Mr. Trump extended his long-running project to erode public faith in elections — and gave an unusually clear preview of how he could greet any disappointing results for his party in November, when control of Congress is at stake,” wrote The New York Times' Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman on Monday. “He has been anything but subtle about his desire to limit the ability of Democrats to vote by mail, implying, with no evidence, that simply choosing that widely used means of casting a ballot is inherently suspect.”

Swan and Haberman added, “Addressing a gathering of Republican lawmakers in March, he said the way to hold their majority was to pass a strict voter identification law cracking down on mail ballots. ‘It’ll guarantee the midterms,’ he told them, warning that failure would bring ‘big trouble.’”

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Trump's Stooge: Tainted Federal Prosecutor Stirs California Election Conspiracies

Trump's Stooge: Tainted Federal Prosecutor Stirs California Election Conspiracies

There he goes again. As Democrats predicted before the first votes were in, President Donald Trump is, as is his way, challenging the results of the elections in California. With absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing, he took to Truth Social twice on Wednesday.

"The Dumocrats are at it again! They are trying to STEAL THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA PRIMARY, AND THE MAYOR OF LOS ANGELES, PRIMARY, AWAY FROM TWO GREAT REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES. Here we go with the very late and massive numbers of MAIL IN BALLOTS," Trump posted

"There's BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California. Votes are all tied up. May not be in for weeks. Under investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles. Why the vote counting DELAY???"

Trump knows exactly why the delay. It's because the state relies heavily on mail-in ballots, which must be postmarked by election day but may not arrive until days after. And then they are hand-counted, with signatures verified and corrected if necessary. It's part of making sure that as many people participate as possible, and that every vote is counted. Another word for it is democracy.

You'd think that if Democrats were stealing the Governor's and Mayor's race, they'd be doing a more effective job of it; in fact, Trump's favored candidates are doing better than expected. But there is a method to Trump's madness: the popular theory, backed up by some practical evidence, that late-deciding mail-in ballots tend to break Democratic and progressive.

Four years ago, Rick Caruso, the popular developer, held a comfortable lead over Karen Bass on the morning after the election, only to see their positions reversed by the late ballots. Does that mean that Spencer Pratt and Steve Hilton, the TV hosts turned politicians, will lose their spots in the run-off? Probably not. But the feds are ready to prosecute, just in case.

More troubling than Trump's social media rants are the actions actually being taken by his ardent loyalist, who is the "first assistant U.S. Attorney" for the Central District of California — a loophole method of having a non-confirmed and non-confirmable appointee run the office. First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, on Friday morning, said his office "has multiple election fraud investigations underway," in coordination with the FBI in Los Angeles. Essayli's office confirmed that Assistant U.S. Atty. Robert Renner was at a Los Angeles County ballot processing center Friday "to observe the vote counting process."

Essayli's office has earned the reputation, under his "leadership," of losing. He has distinguished himself for his vigor in pursuing the Trump agenda, prosecuting protestors, immigrants and activists, with surprisingly little success. There is an old expression that a good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. Essayli and his lieutenants are not, by that standard, very good prosecutors.

The judges of the Central District could select a new U.S. Attorney to fill the vacancy in the Central District, but they haven't moved to do so. One explanation is that they are simply letting Essayli and his team fall on their faces. Meghan Blanco, a former federal prosecutor and veteran defense attorney, suggested to the Los Angeles Times that the federal judges' inaction with Essayli might be a clever act of resistance. "If you're a judge and displeased with what DOJ is doing and the shenanigans they're pulling ... you let the Essayli appointment play out," Blanco said. "No one has seen a U.S. attorney's office lose the way this office is losing now."

Opening investigations to suit the president's partisan whims is the secret to success in the Trump justice system. It is what won Bill Pulte, the housing chief who, based on his willingness to scour the mortgage applications of Trump's enemies, the spot of Director of National Intelligence. It is all that Trump values, and it is a terrible abuse of power. In prior times, presidents could face impeachment for such abuses. In this world, we have come to accept it as business as usual. It should not be.

Susan Estrich is a celebrated feminist legal scholar, the first female president of the Harvard Law Review, and the first woman to run a U.S. presidential campaign. She has written eight books.


Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World