The stories you want. The opinions that matter.
No, thanks
@DevilsTower
Kamala Harris

Voter Registration Surging As Harris Inspires Young Americans

After President Joe Biden ended his reelection campaign on Sunday and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as the next Democratic nominee, Vote.org reportedly registered 38,500 new voters over the next 48 hours. This represents a 700 percent surge over the previous 48 hours, with most of those voters being ages 34 and younger.

That beats the previous best day of the 2024 cycle, which came on National Voter Registration Day in September when pop superstar Taylor Swift posted an Instagram story urging her followers to get registered. That message helped spur over 35,000 new voter registrations.

The latest surge in registrations comes as Harris and other Democratic candidates see a flood of donations. Since Harris entered the race, ActBlue has recorded $179 million in donations to Democratic candidates and causes. That's just part of a historic flood of over $250 million that poured in since Harris became the nominee-apparent.

It all reflects a genuine, pent-up demand for something new. And Harris is meeting that demand.

Even before it was clear there would be a Biden vs. Donald Trump rematch, voters were begging for something, anything, other than a Biden vs. Donald Trump rematch. In a December poll by the Associated Press/NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, over half of Americans said they would be dissatisfied if the race were a repeat of the 2020 matchup.

The lack of enthusiasm was notable at ActBlue, where contributions were not only running behind the 2020 election cycle but also trailing contributions during the 2022 midterm elections.

That big spike on the far right of the chart reflects the sharp increase in contributions since Harris started running for president. This article was written early Wednesday morning, and this week already rivals the top weeks at the very end of the 2020 presidential election cycle. That’s big.

Democrats are excited about Harris. That’s reflected in the contributions.

Young voters, who tend to be more Democratic than other age groups, are excited about Harris. That’s reflected in the registrations.

Those young voters are particularly energized and enthusiastic over the change in the ticket. As WGBH Boston reported on Sunday, some young Democrats were willing to turn up for Biden. But they’re willing to work for Harris.

“This is the most energized I have felt as a young Democratic voter in so long,” 22-year-old Democrat Audrey Grant told WGBH. “I think this is one of the first times that the Democratic Party has seized control of a media narrative and really changed the tide.”

That younger demographic—and in particular, younger voters of color—was critical to carrying Biden and Harris over the top in 2020. It could be even more critical this year.

That Harris could pull in the kind of registration numbers associated with someone like Swift is encouraging. But the real power that such cultural figures have to move the needle shouldn’t be ignored.

On Tuesday, Beyoncé gave Harris permission to use her popular 2016 song “Freedom" in her campaign. Harris made it her entrance song in her first campaign appearance in the swing state of Wisconsin.

Swift’s obvious political clout and concerns that she would endorse Biden drove Republicans to distraction earlier in the year, leading to a host of conspiracy theories. Since Harris kicked off her campaign, the surge of Democratic zeal is already generating speculation over what might happen if Swift publicly rallies around Harris.

If Swift did so, she’d be in good company among pop stars. British singer—and the summer’s it-girl—Charli XCX declared that “kamala IS brat,” referring to the title of her latest album, and the Harris campaign quickly adopted the album’s lime-green cover art as the backdrop on their X (formerly Twitter) account.

There’s plenty of room for more synergy between Harris and singers whose impact is great enough to shift economies. A 2018 post from Swift in which she endorsed two candidates in Tennessee helped propel a surge of roughly 65,000 new signups at Vote.org in just 24 hours.

Official endorsements from Swift, Beyoncé, and others might break the internet—and the will of Republicans who see the tide turning against them.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Harris Campaign Brings In Over $81M During First 24 Hours After Biden Nod

Harris Campaign Brings In Over $81M During First 24 Hours After Biden Nod

President Joe Biden endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris at 2:13 PM ET on Sunday afternoon. Almost immediately, donations to the Democratic fundraising site ActBlue exploded, reportedly peaking at over $12 million an hour on Sunday night.

On Monday afternoon, the Harris campaign reported that it had collected $81 million in the first 24 hours after Biden’s endorsement. That number is the largest 24-hour haul in the 2024 race so far, greatly exceeding the $52.8 million that Donald Trump reportedly brought in following his conviction on 34 felony counts. Harris’ campaign added 43,000 new recurring donors, with over half signing up for weekly donations, the campaign said in a press release on Monday.

But the good news doesn’t stop there. Because the burst of money into Harris’ campaign may have also generated millions for Democrats up and down the ticket.

ObservableHQ tracks contributions to ActBlue by regularly checking the site’s overall ticker. (The operator of ObservableHQ does note that we shouldn’t assume the ticker is as reliable as ActBlue’s FEC reports, however.) It reported a daily total of over $66 million for Sunday. On Monday morning, that number swiftly passed $80 million, and as the clock counted down to the same time as Biden’s Sunday endorsement, the total for the 24-hour period hit: $97.99 million. So close. About 30 minutes later, it topped the $100 million line.

As of this writing, the estimated amount raised since the endorsement stands at $107.7 million, with contributions still coming in at a rate of about $3 million per hour. This is still only Monday afternoon, and this is already the biggest week that ActBlue has seen through this election cycle.

In fact, Sunday’s estimated $66,813,025 in contributions put it at the top of ActBlue’s all-time best days, barely beating out Sept. 19, 2020, when a wash of contributions followed the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg. At 4:45 PM ET, Monday’s total stood at $40,924,752. That puts it in the top five days overall, with several hours of prime-time fundraising remaining.

The contributions being reported by ActBlue are not exclusively funds going to the Harris campaign. This is a compilation of all ActBlue candidate contributions over this period. Some part of these totals—hopefully millions—is sloshing over into Senate, House, and state government races.

In addition, Harris is certainly collecting money from other sources. ActBlue generally handles smaller contributions from individuals. It’s just one route for funds to reach Harris’ campaign. A single massive Zoom call on Sunday evening hosted by the organization Win With Black Women reportedly attracted so many participants that the COO of Zoom had to step in to raise the limits. That call alone raised approximately $1.5 million in grassroots contributions. When the final totals are in, the Harris team may have eclipsed their reported $81 million haul.

What’s clear is that Biden ending his campaign and endorsing Harris uncorked a flood of Democratic contributions. A lot of that money is going to Harris. Some of it is going elsewhere.

It’s all good.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Potential Challengers Unite Behind Harris After Biden Withdraws

Potential Challengers Unite Behind Harris After Biden Withdraws

Less than a half-hour after posting his announcement that he would not continue his campaign for a second term, President Joe Biden put out a second statement, in which he fully endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as the next Democratic nominee.

However, several other names have been tossed around as potential contenders over the last few weeks. If some in the party get their wish for some form of open convention or “mini-primary,” those may be the names involved.

Whether Harris moves directly into the role of Democratic nominee or has to fight for that position could be as significant to the party’s chances in November as Biden’s decision to stand aside. Potential rivals to Harris’ position as nominee are largely the most common, traditional sort of presidential candidates—governors. But there are others in Congress—and even within the Biden administration—whose names are being suggested.

Here’s what we know about the decisions of some of the names that more frequently appear on the list of possible contenders.

WHO’S OUT

PennsylvaniaGov. Josh Shapiro: Endorsing Harris

Shortly before Biden’s bombshell announcement, Shapiro gave an interview where he was asked directly whether he would run as vice president on a ticket headed up by Harris.

"I'm not going to get into hypotheticals,” said Shapiro. “The president has made clear he is running, [and] I am proud to serve as Pennsylvania governor.”

But it was only a few hours after Biden’s withdrawal before Shapiro joined in endorsing the vice president.

I’ve known Kamala Harris for nearly two decades—we’ve both been prosecutors, we’ve both stood up for the rule of law, we’ve both fought for the people and delivered results. Kamala Harris is a patriot worthy of our support, and she will continue the work of generations of Americans who came before us to perfect our union, protect our democracy, and advance real freedom. She has served the country honorably as Vice President and she is ready to be President.The best path forward for the Democratic Party is to quickly unite behind Vice President Harris and refocus on winning the presidency. … I will do everything I can to help elect Kamala Harris as the 47th President of the United States.

CaliforniaGov. Gavin Newsom: Endorsing Harris

In a statement made earlier this month, Newsom told the Los Angeles Times that he would not run against Harris if she became the nominee. CBS News’ sources indicated that was still the case following Biden’s withdrawal, saying that Newsom was "preparing to stand down," and that they did not believe he would challenge the vice president.

On Sunday afternoon, Newsom endorsed Harris writing, "With our democracy at stake and our future on the line, no one is better to prosecute the case against Donald Trump’s dark vision and guide our country in a healthier direction than America’s Vice President, Kamala Harris.”

Newsom is the only one of Harris’ potential challengers who is also not on the list of potential vice presidential candidates. Harris and Newsom are both from California, so the governor will likely have to wait out this cycle.

MarylandGov. Wes Moore: Will reportedly endorse Harris

Reports from both Axios and NOTUS indicate that Moore is expected to endorse Harris on Monday.

Moore’s statement on Biden’s stepping aside is probably the most personal and moving, noting that Biden is a man “deeply in love with his family, his country, and the promise of America.” It’s also the only message that extends thanks to first lady, Dr. Jill Biden.

MichiganGov. Gretchen Whitmer: Not running

Whitmer’s reaction to Biden stepping aside included this statement:

My job in this election will remain the same: doing everything I can to elect Democrats and stop Donald Trump, a convicted felon whose agenda of raising families’ costs, banning abortion nationwide, and abusing the power of the White House to settle his own scores is completely wrong for Michigan.

Whitmer certainly suggested that she would not be trying to take the lead role over the next three months, but her statement was far from definitive.

However, MichiganRep. Debbie Dingell appeared to confirm Whitmer’s position in a statement to MSNBC, in which she said that the governor was “not a candidate for any office this year.” That was backed up by a Bloomberg report in which a person close to Whitmer stated that Whitmer does not intend to challenge Harris for the nomination.

As of this writing, Whitmer has not formally endorsed Harris.

STILL IN FLUX

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear: Unknown

“President Biden will be remembered as a consequential president. Along with Vice President Harris, he led us through the aftermath of the January 6th attack on our Capitol and steadily steered us out of a global pandemic. … Now it is time for our nation to come together. We need to dial down the anger, rancor and noise, We have an opportunity to remember that we are taught to treat our neighbors as ourselves—and that we all each other’s neighbors.”

Beshear’s mention of Harris in his reaction to Biden ending his campaign would seem to suggest that he might be leaning toward an endorsement, but that’s not clear so far.

Beshear has managed to sustain high popularity while fighting against a Republican-dominated legislature in a deep red state, but compared to Whitmer or Shapiro, he may be less viable as a VP alternative simply because he may not been seen as boosting the ticket in a critical swing state.

Illinois Gov. J. B. Pritzker: Unknown

Pritzker offered one of the longest statements in reaction to Biden’s announcement. In it he praised Biden, but notably spent a good deal of space criticizing Donald Trump, noting his felony convictions, and saying, “I will work every day to ensure that [Trump] does not win in November.”

That could just mean Pritzker would work to support Harris. However, he’s one of the few potential candidates with deep enough pockets that starting a campaign with empty coffers might not be an issue.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg: Highly unlikely to run

That a member of Biden’s Cabinet would stand up against his endorsed vice president is on the very high end of highly unlikely. However, Buttigieg remains very popular and his name has been frequently mentioned a potential member of a Democratic ticket.

On Sunday evening, Buttigieg added his name to those officially endorsing Harris.

"Kamala Harris is now the right person to take up the torch, defeat Donald Trump, and succeed Joe Biden as president," he said in a statement.

WHO KNOWS?

Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips: Calling for a “straw poll”

Dean Phillips is going to Dean Phillips. In this case, that includes reacting to Biden’s statement by saying that he got into the race “in the spirit of Paul Revere, not George Washington,” and finishing his thoughts on what may be the most critical political moment in decades with “Giddy up!”

Phillips then offered what seemed like an endorsement of Harris, calling her “talented, experienced, and well-prepared to beat Donald Trump and serve as our President.”

But an hour later, Phillips appeared to go all-in on a hackneyed plan for a popularity contest at the Democratic National Convention.

Conduct a straw poll among Dem delegates of potential candidates. Invite [Kamala Harris] and the top three other vote getters to a series of four, televised town halls w/audiences of delegates before voting at the convention.

If you’re wondering what that would look like, the top three vote-getters after Biden were Phillips, Marianne Williamson, and Jason Palmer—though all three were outpolled by “uncommitted,” which drew only 4.25 percent.

The best thing about this plan is that people are already very practiced at ignoring Dean Phillips.

During a Sunday evening interview with CNN’s Erin Burnett, Phillips predicted that Harris would win his little town hall contest, and insisted that “I do not wish to run.”

So what is Phillips actually supporting? Whatever will get him another 15 minutes in front of the cameras.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Behind Vance's Appalachian Fairy Tale, A Less Uplifting Reality

Behind Vance's Appalachian Fairy Tale, A Less Uplifting Reality

America loves a poor-kid-makes-it-big story—and J.D. Vance told a whopper. The then-venture capitalist’s 2016 memoir, “Hillbilly Elegy,” presented Vance as an impoverished Appalachian kid who escaped a violent childhood overshadowed by a drug-addicted mother, fled to an Ivy League university, and eventually found wealth among the coastal elite as a high-rolling investment banker.

And his success didn’t stop there. The book was so well received that it spawned a big Hollywood film. Refreshed by wealth and fame, Vance returned to his home state of Ohio and began a nonprofit organization to “make it easier for disadvantaged children to achieve their dreams.” Then he ran for Senate—and won. Then, less than two years later, Vance was selected to be Donald Trump’s new running mate after his previous vice president was mysteriously unavailable.

Roll credits.

Only the story that Vance is telling has holes more than large enough to accommodate Trump’s private 757 jet. For starters, Vance isn’t from Appalachia. His book was riddled with broad negative stereotypes clearly written to appeal to exactly the cultural critics who welcomed its publication. And his nonprofit organization was a thinly veiled platform to launch Vance’s political career.

Most people are more than they seem at first glance. J.D. Vance is a whole lot less.

The Oscar-winning film “American Fiction,” based on the novel “Erasure” by Booker Prize-shortlisted author Percival Everett, tells the story of accomplished Black author Thelonious "Monk" Ellison. Frustrated by the market’s appetite for books that present Black culture only as a product of “da hood,” Ellison writes a fake autobiography titled “My Pafology” satirizing those works with an extreme story of a man whose life consists only of drugs, violence, and the worst stereotypes of inner-city life.

It’s hard to believe that Vance didn’t read Everett’s 2001 novel, because that’s exactly what he wrote. “Hillbilly Elegy” is the “My Pafology” of working-class, rural white people.

Both books are full of only the worst imaginable stereotypes. Both books are meant to specifically appeal to an audience that loves to extend false pity while indulging itself in feelings of superiority.

As Monk’s character said in the film, “I'm sure white people in the Hamptons will delight in it.” When it comes to Vance’s book, they certainly did.

For people who actually grew up in the region, the reaction to Vance’s book was somewhat different.

“I barely read 30 pages before I saw the book Hillbilly Elegy for what it was: a political platform masquerading as memoir,” wrote Appalachian native Neema Avashia. “Before I saw J.D. Vance for what he was: an opportunist. One willing to double down on stereotypes, to paint the people of Appalachia with a culture of poverty brush, rather than be honest about the ways in which both electoral politics and industry have failed our region.”

Only a few months after the book was published, Vance announced that he was leaving his posh job as an investment banker in San Francisco—the triumphant conclusion to the Horatio Alger story he told—to start a nonprofit organization in his home state of Ohio. In a fawning interview at NPR, where Vance was described as a “frequent guest,” he described how the opioid crisis was “obviously very personally important to me.”

Vance didn’t say what he was going to do to help beyond conducting a “listening tour.” However, even before that interview, Vance had filed the paperwork to start a nonprofit organization called Our Ohio Renewal.

Following that link now leads only to a blank page. Vance’s nonprofit no longer exists.

As The New York Times reported in 2022, Vance’s group “raised only about $220,000, hired only a handful of staff members, shrank drastically in 2018 and died for good in 2021.” Vance may say that he is “proud of the work we did,” but that work seems to have accomplished exactly nothing in addressing the problems Vance claimed to be fighting.

But it did do something else: It gave Vance a platform to publish op-eds and raised his visibility within Ohio.

The New York Times said Vance was “irked” by the idea that he was returning to Ohio to run for political office. But in 2018, as Our Ohio Renewal was shedding the staff that was supposed to help it address real problems, the nonprofit was also paying for a political consultant who advised Vance about entering the upcoming Senate race.

It’s hard to say it better than this ad for Vance’s Senate opponent in 2022: Vance created a bogus nonprofit to advance his political visibility. As the small business owner featured in the ad intoned, “J.D. Vance was in a position to really help people, but he only helped himself.”

Vance created a nonprofit to give himself a platform. He used that nonprofit to pay for a consultant to prepare him for a Senate campaign. Once that campaign was underway, Vance discarded the organization. It's not a surprise that Our Ohio Renewal is dead; its real job is over.

Now that he’s in Congress, how much does the issue of drug addiction in Ohio really matter to Vance? As the Ohio Capital Journal reports, Vance did cosponsor anti-fentanyl legislation written by Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown. But when that bill came up for a vote, Vance voted against it.

Vance’s Senate office claimed that he voted against it because the bill had become attached to funding for Ukraine. The issue of drug addiction may be “very personal” to Vance. But apparently, it’s not as personal as his need to please Russian dictator Vladimir Putin.

As Avashia wrote in her review of Vance’s book, “Folks outside Appalachia devoured Hillbilly Elegy because it reinforced what they already believed about us: that we were lazy, homogenous, and to blame for the unemployment, addiction and environmental disasters that plagued us. Vance’s description of a Jackson, Kentucky, where ‘people are hardworking, except of course for the many food stamp recipients who show little interest in honest work’, allowed liberals and conservatives alike to write Appalachia off as beyond saving, and its problems as self-created, and thus, deserved.”

Vance was smart enough to know that there was an audience eager to buy into that narrative. That doesn’t just apply to the Republican delegates meeting this week in Milwaukee, but to the media guilelessly reporting on Trump’s replacement for Mike Pence.

And … that’s about it. Vance is smart enough to know the narrative the media loves and hypocritical enough to say whatever it takes. That makes him a most appropriate sidekick for Trump.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Climate Change

Project 2025 Would Wreck Our Daily Lives -- Including Weather Forecasts

A lot of disaster is packed into the 900+ pages of the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025. Between the scheme to turn the federal government into the servant of an imperial president, and the plan to force Christian nationalism into every aspect of American life, it’s easy to get lost in the details.

One of those details is the plot to gut the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, including the National Weather Service. Project 2025 calls for that agency to “be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories.”

Why get rid of an agency providing such singularly useful information not only used by many Americans daily, but also the basis for forecasts that appear on most local radio and television stations? There are three reasons. One of these is profit. The other two are … also profit.

Project 2025 doesn’t hesitate to explain the primary reason why it has put such a vital agency in the crosshairs. According to Heritage, the various components of NOAA:

... form a colossal operation that has become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity. This industry’s mission emphasis on prediction and management seems designed around the fatal conceit of planning for the unplannable. That is not to say NOAA is useless, but its current organization corrupts its useful functions. It should be broken up and downsized.

In other words, the problem with the weather service is that it tries to predict the weather. And all too often that involves making people aware that we are experiencing an unprecedented period of rising heat around the globe. That’s something Project 2025 means to stop.

Protecting the fossil fuel industry is a key feature of the plan. Blocking any expression of concern about the climate crisis is so important to Project 2025’s goals that it calls on the National Security Council to block the promotion of any military officer who expresses concern over climate change or “other polarizing policies.” (This is currently on page 52 of the plan, but page numbers have been altered several times since the plan’s first publication, making it more difficult to reference components of Project 2025.)

As The Atlanticreports, the NWS provides Americans with current weather conditions; short-term and long-term forecasts; and warnings for tornadoes, hurricanes, severe storms, floods, and excessive heat. It does all this at a cost of about $4 per person.

But Project 2025 wants to hand over these tasks to commercial services, specifically mentioning commercial firm AccuWeather. It admits that services like AccuWeather completely depend on data provided by NOAA, and wants that to continue; It just wants to hide the government service behind the commercial product, ensuring profit and keeping citizens from connecting their government with such a useful service.

That way commercial services get the profit, and the credit, while what remains of the government agency toils thanklessly in the background. Also, Americans don’t get exposed to the idea that government bureaucrats and scientists are doing something of value.

According to the actual report, Project 2025 also wants to eliminate most of the National Oceanic Service and National Marine Fisheries Service, turning over survey functions to the United States Geological Survey, and ending functions that are designed to protect large areas of the ocean from overfishing by commercial fleets. That includes weakening protections to seals, otters, and whales under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act.

The reduction of these offices would also limit NOAA’s ability to provide permits for offshore wind power. According to Project 2025, permitting wind facilities generates a “detriment of fisheries and other existing ocean-based industries.” In other words, your clean energy is getting in the way of our overfishing and oil platforms.

But the biggest target of the plan is the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research:

OAR is, however, the source of much of NOAA’s climate alarmism. The preponderance of its climate-change research should be disbanded.

Put it together and Project 2025 isn’t stealthy about what it wants to do:

  • Protect the profits of the fossil fuel industry by eliminating the ability of NOAA to research and report on the climate crisis and by restricting the permitting of wind farms.
  • Project the profit of commercial weather services by eliminating features that Americans get now from the National Weather Service and making Americans reliant on for-profit forecasts.
  • Protect the profit of commercial fishermen by eliminating offices that oversee protected areas and weakening rules around causing harm to the environment and endangered animals.

As Ben Jealous writing for the Sierra Club points out, not only is Project 2025 the product of one of the largest Republican think tanks, more than 100 other right-wing groups have signed on to the plan. This isn’t the design of one splinter group; This is a Republican effort spearheaded by a massive organization that is the primary sponsor of the RNC and employed dozens of former Trump staffers in Project 2025’s creation.

When talking about climate change, the parable of the boiling frog is often used. A frog, says the myth, if placed in a pot of cold water, will remain in that water even as it gets hotter and hotter, never escaping before being boiled alive.

Project 2025’s big plan for NOAA is designed to keep Americans in the pot until it boils. And make sure they never get a free look at the thermometer.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

A 'Sign Of Weakness'? Trump Sucks Up To RFK Jr. For Endorsement

Donald Trump placed a phone call to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and then met with him in Milwaukee in an apparent attempt to get Kennedy to drop his third-party presidential bid and endorse Trump at the Republican National Convention. A video of the call has now leaked online.

In the video, Trump appeals to the infamously anti-vaccine Kennedy by expressing skepticism about vaccines and claiming that he has seen infants “radically change” after being vaccinated. Then Trump calls on Kennedy to do something “big.” Trump reportedly followed up with a meeting in which he sought Kennedy’s endorsement.

The biggest takeaway is that, no matter what pundits are saying about how Trump’s victory is all but certain, he still thinks he needs more help to win in November. Selecting Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance as his running mate was a play to Trump’s MAGA base. Getting Kennedy to endorse him may be the closest Trump can come to anything resembling national unity.

Kennedy has apologized for the release of the video, which was reportedly leaked online by his son, Bobby Kennedy III. In his apology, the elder Kennedy blames the recording on an unnamed “videographer” while saying that he is “mortified” by its release.

The video that has been made available is incomplete, clearly beginning after the conversation is underway and cutting off before it ends. Throughout the video, Kennedy listens while Trump speaks, trying but failing to interject.

At first, Trump tries to secure Kennedy’s cooperation by appearing to agree with him on the use of vaccines.

Something’s wrong with that whole system. And it’s the doctors, you find. Remember I said I want to do small doses? Small doses. When you feed a baby, Bobby, a vaccination that is like 38 different vaccines, and it looks like it’s meant for a horse, not a, you know, 10-pound or 20-pound baby. It looks like you’re giving … you should be giving a horse this. And do you ever see the size of it, right? You know, it’s just massive. And then you see the baby all of a sudden starting to change radically. I’ve seen it too many times.

Trump moves on to trying to talk Kennedy into doing something—which may have been discussed earlier in the call, based on the way Trump describes it at this point.

Anyway, I would love you to do stuff. And I think it would be so good for you, and so big for you. And we’re going to win. We’re going to win. We’re way ahead of the guy.

After that, Trump discusses Biden calling him following Saturday’s assassination attempt, including a section in which Trump implies that he literally dodged a bullet by “moving to the right.”

Based on the in-person meeting reported by Politico, the objective of Trump’s call was likely to secure Kennedy’s endorsement. The GOP nominee met with Kennedy on the sidelines of the RNC in Milwaukee, where Trump reportedly wanted him to announce an endorsement of Trump. A Kennedy spokesperson said that he intends to remain in the race as a third-party candidate, but did not address any potential endorsement.

Trump’s selection of Vance as his running mate has already drained any suspense from the Republican National Convention. And by selecting Vance—a radical conservative and one of his most hardcore supporters—Trump has discarded anything that might have looked like an effort to reach across the lines, even within the GOP. Vance does nothing to expand his base or bring more moderate voters to Trump.

The outreach to Kennedy may have been designed to address that shortfall, generating the so-called unity narrative that the national media seems so anxious to write. Both the call and the in-person meeting indicate that Trump is a lot less confident about his chances in November than he claims in rallies. A number of recent polls show that the race remains close despite the furor over Biden’s performance in the first debate.

Trump reportedly did not know that the call was being recorded. But his obsequiousness toward Kennedy and his efforts to solicit some “big” action together show how anxious Trump is to secure support from the anti-vaccine candidate whose most recent headlines have centered around his admitted brain worm, his denial of eating a dog, and accusations of sexual assault.

Kennedy’s son reportedly posted this video on X along with a message criticizing Trump for failing to pick his father for vice president. That since-deleted post contained more anti-vax claims, including calling for Dr. Anthony Fauci to be jailed and dismissing Vance’s selection as a surrender to drug company Pfizer.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Donald Trump

Mainstream Media Suddenly Remember Trump Is Crazy Dangerous

On Thursday, The New York Times published an editorial accurately noting that Donald Trump is "dangerous" and "unqualified" to be president.

“[Trump] has demonstrated an utter lack of respect for the Constitution, the rule of law and the American people,” the Times’ editorial board wrote. He is “animated by a thirst for political power: to use the levers of government to advance his interests, satisfy his impulses and exact retribution against those who he thinks have wronged him.”

That’s all true. And it would be better if it didn’t come several paragraphs into an editorial that starts off complaining about “the post-Covid era of stubborn inflation, high interest rates, social division and political stagnation.” Not to mention running it on the same morning that inflation dropped to three percent, raising the strong possibility of an interest rate cut, with the biggest concern being that unemployment rates are too low.

But at least the New York Times has taken a moment to notice that Trump still exists. It's a nice change after a week in which it, and every other media outlet, have been dominated by stories of anyone with a passing thought about President Joe Biden’s campaign.

Numerous papers have dropped editorials calling for Biden to drop out of the race following an unsteady debate performance. They are still at it. Before the Times ran their column on Thursday, only The Philadelphia Inquirer made a similar call for Trump to depart after his debate responses were filled with lies and fantasies about everything from immigration to the January 6 insurrection.

Thursday’s Times not only carries that editorial declaring that Trump is unqualified, but it also carries a front page notably less cluttered with thoughts on Biden’s viability as a candidate. That seems like a good sign ahead of the president’s press conference on Thursday.

Still, there seems to be more concern in the media over noting every entertainer who has a thought about Biden—or even those who might have a thought—than in the long list of former Trump officials who want nothing to do with their old boss. It might seem like the fact that Trump’s former vice president is refusing to endorse him might rate more attention than any actor. It should.

The challenge for the New York Times and others isn't whether they will give Trump’s nastiness an occasional mention, but whether they will provide the kind of sustained and focused coverage that has been devoted to Biden's status post-debate.

Because, believe it or not, there has been good news for the media over the last week.

Analysis shows that among Black voters who watched Biden’s debate performance, 21 percent had their view of Biden negatively impacted while 70 percent said the debate had made them more likely to vote for the president. However, 57 percent of Black voters who didn’t see the debate said they were now less likely to vote for Biden, with only 43 percent more likely.

The big negative effect for Biden came not from the debate, but from people talking about the debate.

How is that good news? It’s good news for the national media in the sense that shows how much power remains in their control. The sustained media coverage concerning Biden’s debate performance, and of Democrats dithering in response, has been much more impactful than Biden’s actual debate performance.

That may come as a surprise to Politico writer and MSNBC correspondent Sam Stein.

As it happens, there is a whole industry that is supposed to be telling voters about that good news. They could do that. They could explain that we’re not seeing “stubborn inflation” and that economic conditions have improved vastly following Trump’s departure. They might even point out that the Trump economy was absolutely awful, no matter what he claims.

They could give Trump’s lies the kind of intense, sustained scrutiny that they provided to Biden’s every stumble. They could provide the same breathless attention to every former Trump cabinet official who refuses to get near him today, as they’ve given to every Democrat worried about Biden’s prospects. They could talk about the lies Trump told at his debate and continues to tell at his rallies.

They could do that. And people would listen.

What the last week has demonstrated is that the media really can give concentrated attention to a single issue, and that attention can still sway the opinions of voters in an age where the role of the media is frequently in doubt. Good for them.

Now they just need to make it good for America—by pointing this power in the right direction.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

With Progressive Wins In UK And France, Liberal Democracy Is Far From Dead

With Progressive Wins In UK And France, Liberal Democracy Is Far From Dead

French voters defied the expectations of pollsters on Sunday as a progressive alliance soared to victory over right-wing nationalists in the country’s legislative elections. On Monday, President Emmanuel Macron, whose own centrist party came in second, refused the resignation of France’s prime minister. A new government is expected to emerge from a coalition of the progressive New Popular Front, which took the greatest number of seats, and Macron’s Ensemble alliance. Forming that coalition government may not go smoothly, but the nationalist National Rally was relegated to a third-place finish.

Marine Le Pen, the de facto leader of National Rally, had promised to curtail French support of Ukraine, end birthright citizenship, block immigrants from accessing social services, and align France with Russia. But on Monday, National Rally leaders found themselves complaining that progressive parties had cheated as they faced another cycle in the political wilderness.

The result follows a landslide victory for U.K.’s center-left Labour Party, which sent the Conservative Party packing after a 14-year hold on the British government. Labour leader Keir Starmer was sworn in as the new prime minister shortly thereafter, and the more progressive leadership promises to repair more than a decade of damage done to the national health care system, raise the minimum wage, provide free meals to schoolchildren, improve environmental protections and public transportation, and create a new, publicly owned energy company.

In other words, despite the rising threat against democracy in many places around the world (and at home), liberal democracy isn't dead just yet.

There has been story after story suggesting that liberal democracy is on its last legs. That’s been particularly true over the last few years when authoritarian populists celebrated and supported by Russia have dominated reports on election cycles, both in America and Europe.

Stories continue to herald the rise of a new authoritarian right in Europe, but the nationalist leaders who often dominate headlines share one thing in common: They usually lose. Nigel Farage, leader of the far-right Reform U.K. party, may have given a so-called “victory speech” following his country’s elections, but his party took just 14 percent of the vote. That’s more than Reform earned in previous elections, but the result earned them only five seats in the U.K.’s 650-seat House of Commons—five seats that are worth a lot less without a right-wing government in charge.

Germany’s far-right Alternatives for Germany party may have increased its support in the last round of elections, but it still earned less than 16 percent of the vote in the European Parliament elections held on June 9. That’s slightly below what polls showed a week from the election, and far below what they showed a few months earlier.

Outside of Europe, Mexico celebrated a substantial progressive victory last month, when Claudia Sheinbaum and her left-wing Morena party took the highest percentage of the vote in that nation’s democratic history. In India, parties on the left overperformed expectations, though they failed to displace a right-wing leader.

The pundits ready to play taps for democracy in Europe need to take off their funeral suits because it doesn’t seem like liberal democracy is going anywhere this week. If anything, it’s the right-wing parties that have emerged from recent elections rattled by voters who moved to install more progressive leadership. It seems like nationalists may have had their big moment in 2016 with the unexpected victory of Donald Trump in the United States and the shocking vote for “Brexit” in the U.K.

Since then, Brexit has been recognized as a mistake, with recent polling showing that most Britons want to rejoin the European Union's single market, and now voters in the U.K. have kicked out the Tories, who were responsible for the Brexit vote. And in the U.S., voters held up their end in 2020.

Now we just have to do it again.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Kevin Roberts

Meet The Outfit Behind Trump's Fascist 2025 Agenda

The large red fingerprints of the Heritage Foundation seem to be everywhere in the news. The group authored Project 2025, which would empty the federal government, populate it with MAGA loyalists, and, in its own words, “deconstruct the administrative state.” As The New Republicputs it, Project 2025 is “a remarkably detailed guide to turning the United States into a fascist’s paradise.”

They’re thrilled by the Supreme Court’s recent immunity ruling, deeply involved in attacks on diversity and equity initiatives, and obsessed over strange things like Prince Harry’s visa.

And they promise not to kill all leftists—as long as we sit quietly and acquiesce to their dominion over the nation.

The Heritage Foundation so kindly offering to let us have our lives in exchange for our freedom is a malignancy that has festered in the group for decades. Though it benefits from a name and a network of donors stretching back five decades, today’s Heritage Foundation is a much more dangerous beast.

It has wealth. It has connections. And it has democracy in its sights.

The Heritage Foundation was founded in 1973 by the founder of Coors Brewing and conservative strategists Paul Weyrich and Ed Feulner. They thought that President Richard Nixon had moved too far to the left and that other Republican organizations were too timid. They promoted a strong anti-communist message and a social conservatism that didn’t recognize a wall between church and state, and pushed for a smaller government.

The group quickly gained power under President Ronald Reagan, who embraced its “Mandate for Leadership”—a 1,100-page document of policies—and distributed it among his staff. Much of what came to be known as “the Reagan doctrine,” both domestically and internationally, was a repackaging of this product from the Heritage Foundation.

Having established deep inroads in the Republican Party, Heritage maintained that position through both Democratic and Republican administrations. They were largely responsible for shaping Republican positions to oppose the universal health care plan offered by President Bill Clinton. The Heritage plan, "Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans," would go on to be the basis of then-Gov. Mitt Romeny's health care plan for Massachusetts and eventually form the core of the Affordable Care Act. By this time, the Heritage Foundation was attacking it.

Like many organizations, Heritage has seen turnovers in leadership, staff purges, shifts in philosophy, and difficulties in maintaining its place in a changing political environment. But the Heritage Foundation that exists today is practically a toddler. With a razor blade.

This iteration of the Heritage Foundation dates to the pandemic, when the group's previous leader, Kay Coles James, made the mistake of trying to follow safety guidelines, including closing the group’s offices for an extended period and putting up signs that encouraged masking. That led to her replacement by conspiracy theorist Kevin Roberts, who had been on Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's COVID-19 task force and immediately pushed Heritage into suing to stop any vaccine mandate.

Under Roberts, the group moved swiftly away from its traditional conservative positions—and into Christian nationalism. It retained its funding and deep roots in the Republican Party, but it began pushing for the ouster of existing Republican leadership and for the historically hawkish organization to oppose military aid to Ukraine.

The organization also switched from supporting former Vice President Mike Pence in the months after the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection to condemning Pence for his failure to go along with Trump’s plans and ordering members to take down posts opposing Jan. 6 violence.

If the MAGA movement is the red-hatted equivalent of “brownshirts,” Heritage is now the SS—the real power behind the throne. It does the plotting and planning, so Trump can stand around and rail against wet batteries.

Anyone on the right who is currently amused by Roberts’ none-too-subtle hints about killing progressives who oppose Trump might want to think again. When the long knives come out, Heritage will be there for them, as well.

Because whatever heritage this group stands for, it definitely isn’t American democracy.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Joe Biden

What Should King Joe Do With New Power Bestowed By High Court?

No one seems to be worried that President Joe Biden will jump on the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity to call out SEALTeam Six to do some housekeeping. Or to introduce the six conservative members of the court to their new offices at McMurdo Station in Antarctica. Or, frankly, to do any of the things that Donald Trump seems to dream about every day.

That’s because Biden is a fundamentally decent person. He doesn’t need a court to keep him from stealing from charity, scamming people out of their life savings in the name of education, or laundering money for Russian mobsters. Somehow, even without the promise that he would never face prosecution, Biden has made it through over three years as president without once calling on the military to shoot people in the streets or trying to blackmail a foreign government into helping with the election.

The Supreme Court didn’t give the presidency any new powers. It only shielded the president from being prosecuted for almost anything that could be construed as related to their official duties. On the other hand, if that freedom from prosecution extends to assassinating your opponents, and you control the most powerful government on the planet, then what isn’t possible?

Here are a few suggestions for Biden. Please add to the list.

  • Nationalize Trump golf courses, turn them into national parks, and offer free access to all Americans. Skip that $300,000 membership fee and come on in. It’s not like Trump didn’t already put “national” right there in the name of most of his courses. Speaking of which, renaming all the courses seems like a good idea. The E. Jean Carroll National Golf Park seems like a good place to start.
  • Requisition Trump hotels to provide housing for the homeless. Now that the court has ruled it’s illegal to sleep while poor, a lot more shelter space is needed. Conveniently, there are already Trump towers sitting in several locations where they could be put to use, including Las Vegas, Chicago, and New York. Special floors should be set aside in case Texas Gov. Greg Abbott or Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis send any immigrants to town.
  • Cap CEO salaries at 10x the lowest employee, and make Elon Musk distribute his $50 billion bonus to his workers. Corporate executives make ridiculous amounts of money, corporate workers don’t. Let corporations settle that either way they want, by cutting the salary of the person at the top of the pyramid or raising the salaries at the base. And no funny it’s-not-a-salary-it’s-a-bonus malarkey. King Joe is not amused.
  • Take Clarence Thomas’ RV and ban him from Walmart parking lots. Most of these suggestions are designed to do some active good while also providing a soupcon of justice. This one is all justice. A guy who has taken $4,000,000 in bribes can afford to shell out for his own transport. And for God’s sake, Clarence, spring for the $20 to rent a spot at the nearest state park and stop lurking at the edge of the parking lot like a giant murder van.
  • Trains, trains, trains. How many miles of train track can be laid between now and the end of the year? King Joe has at least four more years to make the map of passenger rail in the United States look more like Europe and Asia. And when you have the whole Army to clear the way and level the ground, things can go much more quickly.
  • Immediate citizenship to anyone who tags a Republican senator. Want to jump the lines at immigration and avoid those endless hearings? Chase down Ted Cruz and put a big slap on his back. Bonus points if you tag Josh Hawley. He runs fast.
  • Replace Fox News with actual foxes. Foxes hunting. Tiny fox kits being cute. Arctic foxes bouncing through the snow and desert foxes prowling across the dunes. It would not only be much more interesting, but the national IQ would immediately rebound.
  • Put a shark-filled moat around the White House. How do you make sure that Trump never comes near the Oval Office? Surround it with the most fearsome predator this side of a wet battery.
  • Turn Mar-a-Lago into the new Ellis Island, welcoming immigrants into the nation with daily flights from the border on the former Trump jet. Also, immigrants get to enjoy the endless shrimp bar.

Don’t forget to add your own suggestions!

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

GOP Celebrates Presidential Immunity-- So Long As It Doesn't Mean Biden

GOP Celebrates Presidential Immunity-- So Long As It Doesn't Mean Biden

Monday’s Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity invites the nation’s leader to participate in a four-year crime spree, including doing away with opponents, while secure in the knowledge that they enjoy blissful elevation above the law.

Republicans are, of course, extraordinarily pleased.

Donald Trump started the ball rolling on his Truth Social site, calling the ruling a “BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION,” even though there is no direct mention of presidential immunity in the Constitution. Other Republican lawmakers are piling on, expressing their satisfaction with a ruling that sets the president up to be a dictator.

So long as it doesn’t apply to the actual sitting president.

Every Republican lawmaker who’s spoken on the matter seems to agree that this ruling means that special counsel Jack Smith, who has indicted Trump in two different investigations, has to pack it up and go home.


While there are plenty of other Republicans eager to show Trump that they’re happy about his new, shiny armor, two of the responses are extra special.

While House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer shakes a fist at weaponizing the legal system for political gain, and House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan takes a punch at “hyper-partisan prosecutors,” neither says a word about the multiple investigations Republicans have run into President Joe Biden and members of his family.

Because, of course, they don’t read this ruling as protecting the sitting president. They read it as being specific to Donald Trump.

Even as they’re cheering for how this ruling allows presidents to act now and worry about the consequences never, Republicans are still complaining that Biden is a “dictator.”

The “Biden dictatorship” has become the way that Republicans talk about the incumbent president. It both gives their base something to whine about, and helps defuse Democratic statements warning about Trump’s actions should he return to power.

Here’s Doug Burgum, North Dakota’s governor and a shortlisted candidate for Trump’s vice president, appearing on Sunday’s edition of “Meet the Press”:

“Going into 2024, I think both parties are going to be very focused on [the election],” Burgum said. “I think the threat to democracy, as a governor in North Dakota today, I’ve been living under what I call the Biden dictatorship because of all the rules and regulations.”

Burgum was called out on this statement by host Kristen Welker, who pointed out that not only has Biden issued far fewer executive orders than Trump, he’s also issued fewer than Burgum has as governor. So does that make Burgum a dictator?

Burgum changed the subject.

To make it a little extra clear, another of Trump’s potential VPs, Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance, was over at “Face the Nation” on Sunday, explaining that without a ruling of absolute immunity, presidents might be prosecuted for almost anything.

But when it came to Biden, Vance had a different message. When host Margaret Brennan asked if Biden might be prosecuted under a Trump administration, Vance replied that it “would be the responsibility of the attorney general, Margaret.”

Republicans seem to have read this ruling as if it said "Trump" everywhere the Supreme Court wrote "president.” To be fair, that's probably what this partisan court meant. However, there is one former Republican official who seems to understand that this ruling can be applied more broadly.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

John Roberts

As Trump Promotes Military Tribunals For Revenge, Court Unleashes Him

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts admonished liberal members of the court in his opinion that vastly expanded the idea of presidential immunity on Monday. The court’s three liberal members were only “fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals,” he wrote.

That finger-wag toward terrified, dissenting justices came only a few hours after Donald Trump signaled his desire for “televised military tribunals” that would try former Rep. Liz Cheney for treason.

In less than a week, the Supreme Court has issued a string of rulings that demolish the ability of the government to regulate safety, labor, and the environment. Effectively, they’ve made being homeless illegal and being a Trump insurrectionist perfectly fine. And now they’ve presented a vast expansion of presidential power that exceeds the greatest dreams of Richard Nixon.

Everything that the Supreme Court has done in these rulings paves the way for Trump and his allies’ Project 2025 to complete the purge of democracy that this court has already begun. And it all makes defeating Trump infinitely more important.

There was a time when Roberts was seen as a moderating voice on the Supreme Court, as someone who was concerned about the court being accused of partisanship, and who was willing to ally with the court’s more liberal elements to keep a new conservative majority under control. But the court-watchers who made such predictions could not have been more wrong.

Despite his odes to stare decisis, Roberts has consistently voted to overturn long-standing precedent. Since gaining the support of three Trump-appointed radicals, Roberts has become a reliable member of a series of 6-3 decisions that have redefined the traditional role of the three branches of government.

In the decision on presidential immunity, Roberts is trying to dismiss the dissents of the three remaining liberal judges as overblown, but if anything, they are a subdued response to this ruling.

  • The ruling extends absolute immunity to anything that falls within the “‘outer perimeter’ of the President’s official responsibilities, covering actions so long as they are ‘not manifestly or palpably beyond [his] authority,’” Roberts writes.
  • In determining whether an act is official, “courts may not inquire into the President’s motives.”
  • Also, courts can’t “deem an action unofficial merely because it allegedly violates a generally applicable law.”

If you’re having trouble seeing how anyone is permitted to question any action of the president under this ruling, you’re not the only one.

As Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson writes in her dissent, “Departing from the traditional model of individual accountability, the majority has concocted something entirely different: a Presidential accountability model that creates immunity—an exemption from criminal law—applicable only to the most powerful official in our Government.” She makes it clear that the court creates a “multilayered, multifaceted threshold” that would have to be cleared to charge a president under any circumstance, meaning that “no matter how well documented or heinous the criminal act might be,” it can still be dismissed.

And when it comes to the theoretical example that was raised during oral arguments, yes, “a hypothetical President who admits to having ordered the assassinations of his political rivals or critics” or who “indisputably instigates an unsuccessful coup” still has “a fair shot at getting immunity” for those actions.

Don't tell me the conservative justices don't believe in abortion rights. They are currently trying to abort democracy in the 992nd trimester. And if they get Trump onto the throne they’ve built, the odds of ever finding America again are slim to none.

President Joe Biden may be the last remaining politician in Washington who maintains endless respect for the institutions we have inherited and the network of implicit agreements that kept our democracy patched together over two centuries. As recently as a year ago, he rejected the idea of expanding the number of justices or taking other actions to restrain a court veering dangerously away from its traditional role.

Biden needs to reconsider. The damage this court has done, in just a matter of days, is inestimable, and those horrific decisions are stacked on top of years of increasingly nonsensical rulings, including the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

This is a highly partisan court whose primary interest is in enacting a radical MAGA agenda. It’s also a court that has repeatedly made clear that it holds itself above the law and has nothing but contempt for anyone trying to hold it accountable. Now it wants to extend that privilege to Trump.

This court must be tamed. But most of all, this court must be prevented from joining the man whose throne they have been preparing. This nation can’t survive this court and Donald Trump.

Joe Biden is going to have to beat them both. And we’re going to have to help him.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Steve Bannon

House Republicans Attempt To Shield Bannon As Prison Looms

Steve Bannon, the former adviser to Donald Trump, was convicted of contempt of Congress in July 2022. He lost his first appeal this past May. He lost his second appeal last week. He is due to report to prison on Monday, July 1.

But Republicans are doing everything they can to throw him a rope—and not the kind some of them offered to Mike Pence. Instead, Republicans in the House are making an extraordinary effort to repudiate a past Congress, disowning the whole investigation of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, in hopes this will somehow make Bannon’s conviction no longer count.

That House Republicans are willing to erase history—so long as it doesn’t involve a Confederate statue—should come as no surprise. After all, this is the same group that tried to unimpeach Trump. But what’s amazing is that they’re willing to go to such lengths for a third-rate podcaster who is likely to be in prison by Election Day no matter what they do.

If this Republican time machine is successful, it sets an amazing precedent for each Congress to examine and attack the actions of its predecessors—making it even more difficult for Congress to take any large legal actions since courts often move slowly and House terms are brief.

That hasn’t stopped Republicans from going all in for Bannon.

On June 21, Bannon sent an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court. In it, Bannon’s attorney suggested that the purpose of his imprisonment was to keep a key player off the stage in the days leading up to the election.

“There is also no denying the fact that the government seeks to imprison Mr. Bannon for the four-month period immediately preceding the November presidential election,” attorney Trent McCotter wrote.

House Republicans seem to agree with the importance of preventing Bannon from suffering a single day behind bars so that he can keep on promising that Trump’s opponents will all be going to jail once Team Orange is back in power.

“You are going to be investigated, prosecuted, and incarcerated,” Bannon warned Democrats at a convention in Detroit earlier this month. “This has nothing to do with retribution. It has nothing to do with revenge. Because retribution and revenge might be another order of magnitude. This has to do with justice.”

But justice has a different meaning for Republicans. On Tuesday, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson made a mockery of the chamber’s Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group as it voted along party lines to send an amicus brief in support of Bannon to the Supreme Court.

A joint statement from Johnson, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, and House Majority Whip Tom Emmer said that the House will “withdraw certain arguments made by the House earlier in the litigation about the organization of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol during the prior Congress.”

The trio also disowned the entire Jan. 6 Select Committee, saying that they believed “Speaker Pelosi abused her authority when organizing the Select Committee.”

Johnson followed up with a Fox News appearance in which he told host Sean Hannity that “the Jan. 6 committee was, we think, wrongfully constituted. We think the work was tainted. We think that they may have very well covered up evidence and maybe even more nefarious activities.”

The speaker provided no evidence for any of these accusations.

In 2021, Senate Republicans blocked efforts to institute an independent investigation of the Jan. 6 assault on Congress. And in March, House Republicans issued a report seeking to exonerate Trump from any wrongdoing and discredit the findings of the select committee. That report made absolutely no mention of Trump’s role in the attack and instead blamed the Capitol Police for “a failure to provide proper security.”

Trump has already saved Bannon once by throwing him a pardon during his final hours in office. That pardon saved Bannon from facing the consequences for his central role in a border-wall-related fraud case, where one of his partners in crime is currently serving a four-year sentence in federal prison.

But Bannon faces a New York state trial in September over the same acts of criminal fraud. And Trump's pardon can't save him from a state charge.

Bannon’s trial was originally slated to be conducted by Justice Juan Merchan, the judge who presided over Trump’s recent hush-money trial. Bannon’s trial has now been reassigned to Justice April Newbauer because of a reported conflict in Merchan’s schedule. However, the date for the trial hasn’t changed.

Considering that others in the case have been found guilty, that’s a good indication that, no matter how much rope House Republicans unspool, it’s likely that Steve Bannon will be watching the election results on prison TV.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

New Fox Poll Shows Biden Surging Ahead, So Trump Shrieks 'Trash!'

New Fox Poll Shows Biden Surging Ahead, So Trump Shrieks 'Trash!'

Fox News released a new poll Wednesday showing a three-point shift toward President Joe Biden, putting him ahead nationally at the highest number since last October.

Biden is ahead of Donald Trump at 50 percent to 48 percent, and there was an even bigger swing in an extended poll that included Robert Kennedy, Jr., Cornel West, and Jill Stein. In that poll, Biden now edges out Trump by 42 percent to 41 percent, a four-point shift from May.

Not only does this poll indicate that Trump's conviction was not an automatic boost for his campaign as so many Republicans have claimed, it also shows the best numbers on the economy that Biden has received in a Fox poll.

Meanwhile, Trump has discovered that he hates Fox News.

Naturally, Fox, which has made a habit of blasting out even the most unlikely results from polls that showed Trump ahead, has gone silent about these new results.

As The Washington Postreports, evening news host Bret Baier handed out the top lines on the Wednesday night broadcast, saying that the difference between Biden and Trump was “within the margin of error.” Which it is.

Baier swung immediately to a story about immigrant violence, though he did have a Washington Times commentator on at the end of his segment to explain how elections “don’t turn on amorphous things like the future of democracy” but on things that really matter—like the danger of immigrants.

For the rest of the evening, hosts focused on other topics, like defending their heavily edited videos claiming that Biden had “wandered away” or had forgotten the name of a Cabinet secretary.

Earlier in the evening, pundit Jesse Watters—the latest to hold the Sean Hannity/Tucker Carlson chair of fear and loathing—appeared on another program to insist that the polls were “locked in” with Trump in the lead. When it came time for his own show, Watters forgot to mention that the polls had moved.

Laura Ingraham also apparently didn’t get the new numbers. She not only didn’t mention the new poll results on her program, but she was insistent that Trump is ahead. Ingraham was also on message about why democracy doesn’t matter.

“The top concerns of voters remain the economy, border, inflation, the cost of everything. And Biden has made it all worse,” she said.

Hmm. The economy, inflation, and the cost of everything? That’s almost like … all the same thing.

But it’s funny that she would focus on this, as the Fox poll also had some changes on that front.

Fifty-nine percent say they are getting ahead or holding steady financially, up 5 points since last summer, and 44% feel optimistic about the economy, up 9 points compared to 2023.

The economic numbers don’t sound great. They’re not. But the movement is all in Biden’s direction. Despite the concerted efforts of a news media that seems fixated on telling people how bad things are, it seems like they might have noticed all of the not-collapsing around them.

But even worse for Ingraham—and Trump—is that she is fundamentally wrong about voter concerns. Because the item at the top of the poll, the one that voters found most important about the coming election, was “the future of American democracy.” The economy slid to second place, with “stability and normalcy” a close third.

It was this suggestion, that Americans are concerned about America, that really put Trump on full boil.

“The #1 issue in this Country is not protecting democracy,” Trump railed. “It is INFLATION and IMMIGRATION!”

Funny how Trump and Ingraham were so exactly aligned. Guess they didn’t mention this poll when everyone was getting together for the morning talking points.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Biden's Mastery Of Global Oil Markets May Be His Biggest Coup

Biden's Mastery Of Global Oil Markets May Be His Biggest Coup

In the last two years, President Joe Biden grabbed the oil markets by the throat and shook them. He’s not just lowered the price that Americans are paying for gas as they head out on summer vacation, he has sent a shockwave of fear through OPEC leaders like Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

It’s something that everyone thought was impossible. Biden lifted a threat that loomed over the nation for over 50 years, severely weakened America’s enemies, revealed a new realm in which the U.S. holds unprecedented strength, benefited the average consumer, and turned a profit all at the same time.

And that achievement is getting next to no attention.

The final year of Trump’s term in the White House was an almost immeasurable disaster. His mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic created an economic crash, bringing on a recession and the highest unemployment rate since the Great Depression. In this uncertain environment, oil prices plummeted. To shore up profits for U.S. oil producers, Trump went to Saudi Arabia and demanded they cut production in an effort to keep oil prices up.

Bin Salman, facing a falling global market, was happy to give Trump what he wanted. In the last full year of Trump, oil production fell by 8%. Prices remained low in the following months because demand was low, but the capacity of the system—both to produce oil and refine it into products like gasoline—were severely constrained.

The world was set up for a shortage when the economy recovered from Trump’s abuse. And that’s exactly what happened. The recovery that began after Biden took office saw oil prices rise sharply as renewed demand outpaced supply.

In 2022, Biden went to Saudi Arabia and asked Trump’s friend bin Salman to delay planned production cuts to help lower oil prices. Bin Salman refused. Prices had doubled in a year, and as long as supply could be held below demand, they would only keep going up. The need to sanction Russia after their invasion of Ukraine only made the situation worse. For bin Salman, it must have seemed like a great time to snub U.S. requests.

But Biden didn’t come home and sulk. Instead, he started on a plan to end the threat that OPEC has represented since it nearly destroyed the U.S. economy in the 1970s. By the end of 2023, the results of that plan were becoming clear, as this Wall Street Journal article headlined “Meet America’s Newest Oil-Trader Extraordinaire: Joe Biden” reported.

President Biden’s unprecedented release of oil from America’s petroleum reserves in 2022 turned the White House into an unusually active player in the volatile crude market. The flood of emergency supplies helped arrest surging oil prices after Russia invaded Ukraine, and pulled billions of dollars into the Energy Department’s coffers in the process.

What Biden seems to understand better than anyone before him—in or out of the White House—is that the U.S. is both the world’s largest oil producer and has the largest readily available reserves. That combination means that Biden can move the market by pushing out a significant mass of oil from the reserves, and have enough control over the market to actually refill those reserves at a profit.

In a May 2024 article titled “Joe Biden, Master Oil Trader,” The Economist took up the theme:

Joe Biden also seems to have a knack for the oil trade. Two years ago his administration initiated the largest ever sell-off from America’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve (spr), an emergency store of crude oil, to counteract price surges caused by Russia’s war in Ukraine. Back then, dwindling stocks left observers twitchy. What if there was another shock to the system? So far, however, Mr Biden has got away with the gamble.

Biden has more than gotten away with it. He’s turned the strategic reserve into a source of revenue, a tool for giving the economy a boost, and a diplomatic lever that can be used to bludgeon enemies without even waking up the military. Even right-wing outlets have been forced to admit Biden’s mastery of this issue.

This is a master class in recognizing potential and finding a new approach. It has largely defanged a threat that’s hung over the nation for decades and signals that nations that have long gotten away with hideous records on everything from human rights violations to grotesque murders need no longer be indulged just because they have oil.

All of this would have been worth a considerable investment of U.S. dollars. Instead, Biden’s shrewd handling of the market is set to add half a billion dollars to the treasury.

Biden’s moves have also been good for U.S. oil companies, who have enjoyed record production and record profits. Trump wants oil execs to give him a billion-dollar bribe. Biden gave them a 160% increase in profits.

But they’re sure to support Trump. Because not everyone is as smart and adaptable as Joe Biden.

Hopium Chronicles' Simon Rosenberg joins Markos to discuss the “red wave-ification” of the economy and how prepared Democrats are for November. There is still work to do but we have a better candidate—and we have the edge.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

No, Bad News For Trump Doesn't Make Him 'Stronger'

No, Bad News For Trump Doesn't Make Him 'Stronger'

When Donald Trump was found guilty on 34 felony counts, theLos Angeles Times had their response ready. “The guilty verdict only makes Donald Trump stronger,” read the headline to the May 30 article by Scott Jennings, a CNN commentator and special assistant to former President George W. Bush.

“It was jarring to hear my CNN colleague Jake Tapper say ‘guilty’ 34 straight times,” wrote Jennings. “And it was equally jarring to see text after text pop up on my phone from decidedly non-MAGA Republicans, but also not Never Trumpers, all sounding the same note: ‘I don’t like this man, and now I think I have to vote for him.’”

Some ideas get so embedded in people’s heads that even those who should know better start to accept them automatically. One of those ideas is that any time Trump is attacked—whether it is through impeachment, indictment, being held responsible in a civil trial, or being convicted in a criminal trial—it only makes him stronger.

That idea is bullshit. Or to put it in technical terms, colossal bullshit.

I do not think Jennings was getting “text after text” from people who didn’t previously support Trump telling him “now I think I have to vote for him” because he had become a convicted felon.

Again, I call bullshit.

It doesn’t take a lot of searching to find similar opinions to Jennings. One day later, Fox News contributor and CEO of the Harris Poll, Mark Penn, wrote that conviction would make “the right rally and coalesce even more around former President Donald Trump.”

Penn blew off overnight poll results showing that people seemed ready to abandon Trump over the conviction, which seems like a somewhat questionable position for a man who runs a polling organization. Instead, Penn bet that Trump would gain “more energized, angry voters.”

“This is ultimately what angers the voters—the idea that there is one system of justice for some and another for their choice if it’s Donald Trump,” Penn wrote.

Except that there’s one bit of calculus that Penn and every other Republican seems to be ignoring: the vote of an angry, energized, Trump supporter convinced that their man got a raw deal in court is worth exactly one vote. It’s hard to believe that any of those “angry” or “energized” by Trump’s verdict were not already Trump supporters going in. And all the anger and energy in the world won’t make their vote worth any more than the most disinterested voter who pulls the lever for President Joe Biden.

The idea that Penn and Jennings are selling is that narrative that Republicans, and Trump, want everyone to believe: It’s the “every time he gets knocked down again, he gets up stronger” thesis. And it is, what’s that word again? Bullshit.

Every time Trump is held accountable, every MAGA account on X seems to spew “Democrats just elected Trump!” Because, somehow, they seem to be convinced that everyone else is just as angry about a slight to Trump as the folks in their Let’s Go Brandon support group.

We’re not.

Three weeks after Trump’s conviction, the latest poll from The Hill/Ipsos shows that 21 percent of independent voters are less likely to support Trump following his conviction. Those same voters say that the guilty verdict is “very important” to how they will vote in November.

If Republicans genuinely believed that non-Trump supporters would be angered by the idea that a powerful billionaire might be held to account for a host of crimes—that Donald Trump would not be held to the rules that apply to anyone else—they were wrong.

If Republicans need more evidence, they might want to roll back to this Kathleen Parker opinion piece in The Washington Post after Trump’s first impeachment.

“I’ll be brief: President Trump will not be convicted by the U.S. Senate, and his positioning for reelection will have been strengthened by the process,” Parker wrote in 2019.

She went on to rail against the “Mother Superior Nancy Pelosi, the prim and pursed-lipped Adam Schiff and grumpy scold-meister Jerrold Nadler” while explaining that impeachment would only encourage people to “take their chances with a player like Trump.”

Trump supporters were right there with Parker. So was Trump. He told those attending his rally that he intended to use his impeachment against Democrats. Trump supporters cheered him on and reassured their candidate that they were sticking with him.

Spoiler alert: Other people did not go with the “player” because he got impeached. Trump lost decisively in 2020. Impeachment did not make him stronger. Neither did indictment. Neither did conviction.

Earlier this month, an ABC poll of independent voters found a majority wanted Trump to drop out of the race. In fact, 16 percent of Republicans felt that Trump should withdraw.

I’m guessing that none of those people were texting Jennings to tell him that they guessed they had to vote for Trump.

On Monday, the Trump-worshiping Washington Examiner moved to the next stanza in the "Trump Always Comes Back Stronger" theme song.

Republicans are warning Democrats that if former President Donald Trump’s sentence in his New York criminal case prevents him from attending the Republican National Committee convention, it will guarantee a red wave for the 2024 election.

They’re “warning” us, are they? I think there’s only one answer to this. And it’s just one word.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

The Madness Of King Donald Should Terrify Republicans

The Madness Of King Donald Should Terrify Republicans

Donald Trump's big return to Capitol Hill Thursday morning was supposed to be an opportunity for Republicans to kiss the ring and for everyone to coordinate policy for the election. When he appeared at the gathering, there was plenty of the former, with Republicans who had dared to criticize his attempted coup breaking out their best apologies. But when it came to discussion on policy, Trump mostly just talked about Taylor Swift, Nancy Pelosi, and his good friend Hannibal Lecter.

It's clear from Trump's rally speeches that he has become increasingly incoherent and scattered. That’s never been more obvious than when a teleprompter outage in Las Vegas left Trump on an extended rant about sharks vs. batteries that corporate media has been working very, very hard to overlook.

But what Republicans saw on Thursday should have scared them silly. Well ... sillier. Because this is a guy who can't even hold it together long enough to say something reasonable during a gathering in his honor.

As USA Today put it following his post-conviction press conference, "Trump's cheese slid off his cracker. It ain't coming back."

Felon Donald Trump arose glassy-eyed from his crypt of self-pity Friday morning to remind Americans he’s not just the first convicted criminal to run for president – he’s also a rambling, incoherent mess. …The man some actually believe is qualified to be president of the United States also claimed that witnesses in his trial were “literally crucified,” said President Joe Biden wants to “stop you from having cars” and said the judge who will sentence him on July 11 is “really a devil.”

Trump has lost it. It's never been clear that he had it. But now he isn't near it, doesn't remember it, and wouldn't even know it if he found it.

During the meeting, Trump congratulated Steve Scalise for having a wife who visited him in the hospital while saying “some wives wouldn’t care.” This is something Trump has mentioned before. He apparently finds a carrying wife to be something of a wonder.

Then Trump complained about Taylor Swift endorsing President Joe Biden. Which she hasn’t.

“Why would she endorse this dope,” Trump said. “He doesn’t know how to get off a stage.”

What that means isn’t clear, but Trump established in his latest biography that he thinks about Swift a lot.

“I think she’s beautiful—very beautiful! I find her very beautiful. I think she’s liberal. She probably doesn’t like Trump. I hear she’s very talented,” he said. “I think she’s very beautiful, actually—unusually beautiful!”

Trump didn’t quite break down into sobs of “why doesn’t she like me back?” in front of the congressional crowd on Thursday, but Swift continues to occupy plenty of rent-free space in the Orange Dome.

But that might not be the creepiest moment of his return to the Capitol. Soon after, Trump turned his attention to his obsession with House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi.

“Nancy Pelosi’s daughter is a whacko,” Trump reportedly said. But he didn’t stop there.

“Her daughter told me if things were different, Nancy and I would be perfect together, there’s an age difference though,” he added.

The age difference between Trump and Pelosi is only six years, but the sanity difference has to be measured in parsecs.

Pelosi’s daughter Christine Pelosi has responded to Trump’s statement: “Speaking for all 4 Pelosi daughters, this is a LIE. His deceitful, deranged obsession with our mother is yet another reason Donald Trump is unwell, unhinged and unfit to step foot anywhere near her—or the White House.”

Finally, Trump talked about “good man” Hannibal Lecter.

Like the shark story, the Lecter riff has been a part of Trump’s standard stump speech for weeks. And like the shark story, it has become so tattered around the edges that Trump appears to have forgotten the set up, the punch line, and the point. Though, to be fair, it’s not clear the Lecter story ever had a point.

It's no wonder Biden can't wait to get Trump on stage for their June debate so he can be asked a few questions without a teleprompter. And it's equally unsurprising that Trump is laying the groundwork to back out.

Republicans might have been able to brush off concerns about Trump by keeping him at a distance. But now that they've seen the latest iteration of Dear Leader up close, many of them must be desperately breaking out those "thoughts and prayers."

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.