Media

Since Donald Trump's Monday visit to Arlington National Cemetery, several aspects of the former president's visit to the historic of over 400,000 of US service members have been widely condemned.

The Washington Post reported, "Pentagon officials were deeply concerned about the former president turning the visit into a campaign stop, but they also didn’t want to block him from coming, according to Defense Department officials and internal messages reviewed by The Washington Post."

In an op-ed published by MSNBC Thursday, former US Army officer Brandon Friedman submits that, "to combat veterans, Arlington National Cemetery has the same power that all holy places have. And that is why Donald Trump’s recent behavior is so repulsive."

READ MORE: Trump’s Arlington scandal expands as Speaker Johnson’s role revealed: reports

Friedman writes:

Trump was so eager to use Arlington’s Section 60 as a backdrop for a campaign event this week that he may have broken federal laws against politicizing the burial ground to do it. Trump’s staff also shoved aside a cemetery official trying to stop them. He even posed for a photograph over a U.S. Marine’s gravesite, grinning and giving a thumbs-up. The moment was jaw-droppingly crass and vulgar, as all of Trump’s are. It defiled sacred ground.

Encouraging "All Americans" to take Trump's actions seriously, the ex-infantry officer specifically urged veterans to "remember that Donald Trump’s behavior at Arlington National Cemetery this week epitomizes not only how he is a menace to the United States, but how he is an enemy of everything we fought for."

Trump "harbors deep resentment toward the military and those who’ve sacrificed in service," Friedman writes – possibly referring to the fact the ex-president has called veterans "suckers and losers."

Emphasizing Trump's reputation of serving only himself, the columnist adds: "Even when he poses with a family — as he did at Arlington this week — he only does so to enhance his campaign or his political prospects. Trump’s use for the military and our dead extends only as far as it suits him."

READ MORE: Trump campaign targets secretary of the Army in Its latest attack over Arlington scandal

Friedman's full op-ed is available here.

A new ad released Thursday that warns against Donald Trump's influence on political violence across the country, puts the "stark contrast" between the former president's and Vice President Kamala Harris' rhetoric on display.

"Really American" — the grassroots organization behind the ad — shared the video via X, writing: "In stark contrast to Kamala Harris, Trump's own words have been the real and direct cause of countless senseless acts of violence."

In the video, viewers can hear Trump saying things like, "I'd like to punch him in the face," and "Knock the crap out of 'em," while Harris can be heard saying, "Violence is never acceptable. We will always speak out against violence, hate crimes and discrimination, where ever and whenever it occurs. It has no place in our democracy."

READ MORE: 'Officials at highest levels of military' warn political violence could 'escalate for a generation'

The video also includes a clip of the former president telling a crowd at an Ohio rally in March that he doesn't get elected in November, "there will be a bloodbath."

In 2020, ABC News published results from "a nationwide review conducted by" the news outlet, identifying "at least 54 criminal cases where Trump was invoked in direct connection with violent acts, threats of violence or allegations of assault."

ABC reported:

Reviewing police reports and court records, ABC News found that in at least 12 cases perpetrators hailed Trump in the midst or immediate aftermath of physically assaulting innocent victims. In another 18 cases, perpetrators cheered or defended Trump while taunting or threatening others. And in another 10 cases, Trump and his rhetoric were cited in court to explain a defendant's violent or threatening behavior.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: 'Look in the mirror': Expert on political violence calls out MAGA for unleashing on 'moderate GOP'

Donald Trump has made it clear that he fully supports North Carolina lieutenant governor and GOP gubernatorial candidate Mark Robinson — who has a "long history of wildly radical and unhinged moments," according to The New Republic's Greg Sargent.

During a June 30 speech at a White Lake, North Carolina church, the first Black lieutenant governor of the state said: "Some folks need killing. It's time for somebody to say it. It's not a matter of vengeance. It's not a matter of being mean or spiteful. It's a matter of necessity."

In an op-ed published by Rolling Stone Thursday, columnist Jay Michaelson — who describes himself as "a queer rabbi" — says he finds it "personally unsettling that" Robinson's remarks "have not drawn more condemnation, and that no one is asking Trump about them."

READ MORE: Mark Robinson's wife ordered to pay $132,000 following investigation

Michaelson notes that before becoming lieutenant governor, Robinson "built his name on being an internet troll, especially on Facebook. He has spread lunatic conspiracy theories about Jews, like claiming that Jewish people created Black Panther 'to pull the shekels out of your Schvartze [the Yiddish N-word] pockets' and that the Holocaust is being exaggerated for political purposes."

The Rolling Stone columnist highlighted the fact that not only does Trump back Robinson, he even declared that the gubernatorial hopeful is "better than Martin Luther King" during a North Carolina rally earlier this year.

"While Robinson himself is trailing badly in the polls — down by 14 points, as of Thursday — Trump is running neck-and-neck with Kamala Harris in North Carolina’s presidential race," Michaelson notes, adding: "There is zero accountability; Trump isn’t even asked about him."

He emphasizes, "Even by 2024 standards, this isn’t normal," and although "Robinson’s theology is his own business" — if the far-right candidate insists on marrying "that theology to the coercive and carceral power of the state, then it becomes everyone else’s too."

READ MORE: 'Some folks need killing': Far-right MAGA candidate praises violence in unhinged church rant

Furthermore, Michaelson adds: "As with Robinson’s racist, antisemitic, and homophobic beliefs, he’s entitled to be a paranoid internet troll if that’s what he wants to do with his life — but as lieutenant governor, and now a candidate for governor, he has the power to turn these lunatic beliefs into actual policies that affect people’s lives."

Rolling Stone's full report is available at this link (subscription required).

In an interview with Politico, Donald Trump was put on notice by the head of an important organization that gets out the vote for conservatives that he can expect them to stay home in November if he refuses to come out in favor of the strictest of abortion laws.

Speaking with Politico's Ian Ward, Lila Rose, the longtime head of prominent anti-abortion group Live Action, fumed at the former president waffling on abortion rights as he takes on Vice President Kamala Harris who has made the right of a woman to control her body a key plank in her campaign.

Facing that, the former president has claimed he won't push for a national ban on abortions if re-elected — something his running mate J.D Vance was adamant about in recent interviews — and that, along with Trump saying he respects several exceptions, has Rose fuming and making threats.

Speaking with Ward, Rose raved, "The recent statements that they have been making — increasingly pro-abortion statements — and the positions that they are choosing to take are making it untenable for pro-life voters to get out the vote for them. This is, unfortunately, the path that they’ve chosen," adding, "I would not vote for Harris. If the election were today, I would not vote for Harris or Trump based on their policies and their statements and their positions."

Adding, "I think that it’s the job of the pro-life movement to demand protection for pre-born lives. It is not the job of the pro-life movement to vote for President Trump," she gave the former president a little wiggle-room saying he is getting "bad advice" from his inner circle to moderate his policies on abortion.

"In some cases, you can make the argument that it can be the right move to vote for the lesser of two evils. But part of our job is not to just accept whatever position we’ve been handed — especially from a politician who, in the past, has counted on our vote and has indicated that he is pro-life [before] changing his position," she explained but later added, "You can torture data to get it to tell you any number of things, but I think it’s completely false that pro-life is a losing issue. I think it completely depends on how it’s presented, on who’s presenting it, and of course the money involved. I know the state ballot initiatives are being trotted out as the reason why you can’t be pro-life in a federal election. I think that’s garbage."

"I think it’s very foolish what he’s doing. It’s politically unwise, it may cost him the election, and it’s morally unprincipled as well. Right now, it’s all about turnout. If he wants to galvanize his base, he needs to stop trying to pander to Kamala Harris’ base, because they’re never going to vote for him anyway," she warned before offering up, "It’s ironic that they might blame pro-lifers for an election but then they need pro-life votes. They’re kind of shooting themselves in the foot by blaming their own base."

Adding, "I think that it’s the job of the pro-life movement to demand protection for pre-born lives. It is not the job of the pro-life movement to vote for President Trump," she gave the former president a little wiggle-room saying he is getting "bad advice" from his inner circle to moderate his policies on abortion.

"In some cases, you can make the argument that it can be the right move to vote for the lesser of two evils. But part of our job is not to just accept whatever position we’ve been handed — especially from a politician who, in the past, has counted on our vote and has indicated that he is pro-life [before] changing his position," she explained but later added, "You can torture data to get it to tell you any number of things, but I think it’s completely false that pro-life is a losing issue. I think it completely depends on how it’s presented, on who’s presenting it, and of course the money involved. I know the state ballot initiatives are being trotted out as the reason why you can’t be pro-life in a federal election. I think that’s garbage."

"I think it’s very foolish what he’s doing. It’s politically unwise, it may cost him the election, and it’s morally unprincipled as well. Right now, it’s all about turnout. If he wants to galvanize his base, he needs to stop trying to pander to Kamala Harris’ base, because they’re never going to vote for him anyway," she warned before offering up, "It’s ironic that they might blame pro-lifers for an election but then they need pro-life votes. They’re kind of shooting themselves in the foot by blaming their own base."

You can read more at the link.

Meghan McCain, the former conservative co-host of The View, and daughter of former US Senator John McCain (R-AZ), took aim at Arizona senate hopeful Kari Lake in response to reports that the far-right candidate is polling lower than her Democratic opponent.

HuffPost's Yashar Ali reported via X: "A new Fox News poll reveals that Arizona Democratic Congressman Ruben Gallego is leading Republican Kari Lake by a whopping 15 points. Ruben Gallego: 56% Kari Lake: 41%."

The conservative media commentator replied: It’s almost like Kari may have needed some McCain republicans after all…"

READ MORE: 'No peace': Meghan McCain slams Kari Lake’s attempt to retract insult to her father

Lake lost McCain's respect after the senate candidate told supporters of the late John McCain to "get the hell out" of her gubernatorial campaign event in 2022.

When Lake attempted to apologize in February, Meghan McCain replied: "Kari Lake is trying to walk back her continued attacks on my Dad (& family) and all of his loyal supporters after telling them to 'get the hell out'. Guess she realized she can’t become a Senator without us."

The former television show co-host added: "No peace, b—h. We see you for who you are - and are repulsed by it."

Lake took a hit earlier this week when the Arizona Police Association — which "typically supports Republican candidates for elected office" — endorsed Gallego over her.

"The APA does not take our endorsement lightly; we recognize the importance of having a U.S. Senator that can bring people together to improve society for all," the group said in a press release. "We believe Congressman Gallego will be that U.S. Senator."

READ MORE: Kari Lake suffers fresh blow as key group makes surprise endorsement of her Dem rival

A campaign aide for former President Donald Trump deflected Wednesday over whether the campaign supports conspiracy theories put forth by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Corey Lewandowski refused to give a straight answer when confronted by MSNBC's Ari Melber over whether the campaign stands behind Kennedy's many fringe theories now that the Trump campaign is using him as a surrogate.

"I'll remind everyone, RFK Jr. has said that COVID itself was made to target 'both Caucasians and Black people,' that he 'won't take sides on 9/11,' that the CIA controls the American press," said Melber. "How much of this should we understand to be the Trump campaign's position, and can you tell us what role RFK Jr. would play in health policy? We're hearing reports he could be involved in the transition team."

"Well, RFK Jr. has been someone who's been very steadfast in making sure that when it comes to the decisions that affect your body, you get to choose, and what we saw was government mandates, whether you're a government employee at the local level, the state level or the federal level, being forced to take an injection in order to save your job, and RFK was against that," said Lewandowski."

At that point, Melber interjected.

"You're talking about policy, and you are referring to something that is true, there was a wide national debate about government requirements. I would just mention, I asked you, though, about RFK's actual conspiracy theories. Are you going to tell me that you and Donald Trump think COVID was hatched to target people by race, or are you going to reject that part of his agenda?"

Lewandowski declined to answer directly, saying Kennedy is "a big man" who has "been on television a number of times to answer his own questions."

"What I am here to tell you is that he has a microphone to an audience who's very concerned that the government-mandated vaccines into their children and themselves in order to keep their jobs, and there's real Americans who lost their jobs and their livelihoods because of what the government did to them, and I think when it comes to RFK, specifically those moms who have young children, they're very concerned about what is being injected into their children, whether it's through the food supply or through these vaccines, and RFK has an opportunity to go out and talk about the fact that he was right," said Lewandowski. "The government should not have had to mandate those. We don't know the full impact of what was mandated by the government on the long-term repercussions that it could potentially cause, so we're very much in line with RFK on that position."

Watch the video below or at the link here.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign team hit Donald Trump with just two words after the former president railed against the 2024 Democratic nominee — unprovoked — in his latest all-caps Truth Social post.

"IT'S ALWAYS FAKE WITH KAMALA," the MAGA hopeful wrote Wednesday. "WE'RE DOMINATING HER ON SOCIAL MEDIA, SO SHE MAKES UP A FAKE LIST OF HER NUMBERS VERSUS MY NUMBERS. ALL OF OUR ENGAGEMENT IS REAL AND ORGANIC, WHILE KAMALA HAS TO PAY FOR HER FAKE ENGAGEMENT. WE'RE BEATING HER 'LIKE A DRUM', LIKE WE WILL BEAT HER ON NOVEMBER 5TH. IT'S ALL FAKE, IT'S ALL MISINFORMATION AND DISINFORMATION. WE ARE DESTROYING THE DEMOCRATS ON SOCIAL MEDIA!"

Harris' official campaign account retweeted the post, writing, "Rent free."

READ MORE: 'Offensive': Trump turns Arlington visit into campaign TikTok as veterans condemn 'stunt'

According to Later, a social media management company, "'Rent free' is a slang phrase used to describe a situation where something is occupying a significant space in someone else’s mind."

Taking Points Memo founder Josh Marshall replied: "Kamala already driving down rents."

Conservative lawyer George Conway added: "Damn, it’s getting crowded in here!"

Vanity Fair contributing editor Franklin Leonard commented: "It’s especially impressive because Donald has a history of not renting to Black people."

READ MORE: Harris has a pathway to turn Trump into a 'blathering prop' during debate: analyst

DNC War Room, the account for The Democrats' rapid response team, said: "Not all of us have to pay for friends, @realDonaldTrump"

Donald Trump has turned his highly-controversial and possibly unlawful campaign event at Arlington National Cemetery into a campaign TikTok video, complete with background music and his remarks as the voiceover. Arlington, the final resting place for about 400,000 of America’s service members, many of whom died in service to their country, has strict rules against using the grounds for political purposes, rules that are backed up by federal law.

Not only did the Trump campaign possibly violate federal law, according to a statement released by Arlington, but NPR reports members of the campaign allegedly got into a verbal and physical altercation with an Arlington official who apparently was attempting to enforce the rules.

“Video from Section 60, where recently buried U.S. service members are interred, later appeared in a Trump campaign Tik Tok in which he criticizes President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, his Democratic rival for the presidency,” USA Today reports.

Veterans and veterans’ groups are outraged, as are some members of the general public.

Former Trump Secretary of Defense Mark Esper told CNN, “I think it should be investigated.”

READ MORE: CNN’s Jennings Slammed for Calling Walz Harris’s ‘Emotional Support Animal’ Over Interview

Esper says when he served as Secretary of the Army he was effectively the “custodian of Arlington Cemetery, since the Army has responsibility for it. There is no more hallowed ground in this nation than Arlington Cemetery.”

“Bottom line: The principle is that no person or party, either side, should ever use Arlington National Cemetery – or any of our cemeteries or battlefields – for partisan political purposes.”

The progressive veterans’ organization VoteVets blasted Trump for “using footage and photos his campaign took at Arlington National Cemetary for political purposes — against the rules and laws that govern this hallowed ground.”

Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Gen. Wesley Clark called the Trump campaign’s event “deeply offensive” and a “stunt.”

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

The nonpartisan organization Veterans For Responsible Leadership called the Trump campaign’s actions “disgraceful.”

Army combat veteran and former Lincoln Project executive director Fred Wellman, who has sat on the boards of several military-related nonprofits, blasted Trump.

RELATED: ‘Campaign Stunt’: Did Trump Event ‘Desecrating’ Arlington Cemetery Violate Federal Law?

In his video for Vote Vets, Wellman notes he is a retired Lt. Colonel who served for 22 years. He says the Arlington official who allegedly got into the altercation with the Trump campaign staffers “wasn’t trying to stop ‘Trump,’ he was trying to defend the graves of a couple of thousand of our brothers and sisters…who were being used as a prop.”

U.S. Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) has asked for the report Arlington National Cemetery filed to be made public:

“It’s sad but all too expected that Donald Trump would desecrate this hallowed ground and put campaign politics ahead of honoring our heroes. This is a man whose own military generals have disavowed, a man who has called heroes like John McCain suckers and losers, a man who has insulted Gold Star families. His behavior and that of his campaign is abhorrent and shameful.”

One veteran not expressing outrage but rather full-throated support for Trump’s actions: his vice-presidential running mate, JD Vance, a former U.S. Marine Corps military journalist. He discounted the reported “verbal and physical altercation” as a media creation.

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: Grand Jury Indicts Trump Again for J6: If He Loses ‘He’s Going to Jail,’ Expert Predicts

With the first — and possibly only — presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former president Donald Trump set to take place in just under two weeks, one Washington Post political analyst proposed a path to take on Trump differently from what has occurred in previous face-to-face standoffs.

In his column, Matt Bai surmised that it is likely that the Harris campaign will lean toward baiting Trump into one of his infamous spasms of interruptions and insults which, in the long run, arm him with viral moments and soundbites to be used to make later claims that he won.

According to the columnist, Harris showed at the Democratic National Convention a Trump-less approach in her acceptance speech that seems to have struck a chord with voters as evidenced by her boost in the polls.

That, he suggested, should be the path to take relegating Trump to looking like a "blathering prop" as she pays him little heed.

Pointing out that Harris' inner circle "is pushing for open mics, hoping Trump will lose his composure while she’s talking and say something especially unhinged," Bai wrote the VP should avoid making the debate about the former president and what he might do and make it about herself and what she has to offer comparatively.

"I'd put all my energy, instead, into embodying generational change and the modern American story, as she did so ably at the convention. Talk about your mixed race, your mother, your hope for all of our daughters" he wrote before advising, "When Trump blusters, brush him off gently like a cranky old neighbor who has forgotten to take his pills."

"Voters don’t need to see contempt and moral posturing from Harris. They want a candidate who can respond to craziness with grace, warmth, humor and confidence — all the things Trump so painfully lacks. They want someone to get us unstuck from a long moment of useless fury," he wrote.

You can read more right here.

Mike Nellis, a veteran Democratic operative and former senior adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris, on Wednesday shared that he was subpoenaed by House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) — which Nellis says is another one of the GOP leader's "a baseless right-wing conspiracy" theories.

"BREAKING: We have just received a subpoena from Jim Jordan and the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee," Nellis wrote via X. "This is yet another abuse of power, aimed at promoting a baseless right-wing conspiracy theory that links our company, Authentic, to Donald Trump’s fraud trial. We are thoroughly reviewing the subpoena with our legal team and will provide updates as soon as we have more information."

He continued, "Let us be clear: these allegations against our company are completely false and purely politically motivated. This is a blatant attempt to intimidate us and divert attention from Donald Trump’s conviction. We refuse to be bullied, and we will not allow House Republicans or MAGA extremists to spread lies about our work. We remain steadfast in our mission and are deeply grateful for the unwavering support of our friends and family during this time."

READ MORE: 'False' and 'irresponsible': DOJ smacks down Jim Jordan’s 'conspiracy' in sharp letter

Jordan's subpoena is connected to his belief that New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan — who presided over Donald Trump's hush money case — faced a conflict of interest due to his daughter's past work with Nellis' firm, Authentic Campaigns Inc.

The Associated Press reported earlier this month, that Loren Merchan "met Harris occasionally in 2019 but never 'developed an individual relationship' with her," according to Nellis.

The news outlet noted that Authentic Campaigns Inc. has not worked for Harris’ campaign during the 2024 election cycle.

MSNBC's Katie Phang replied to Nellis' post, writing: "Jim Jordan IGNORED a Congressional subpoena issued by the January 6th House Select Committee. But Jordan insists that others comply when it’s nothing but a baseless harassment campaign? In Jim Jordan’s world, it’s 'Rules for thee, but not for me.'"

READ MORE: Merchan’s daughter got 'credible' death threats 'requiring intervention' after Trump attacks

Former US Rep. Mike Gallegher (R-WI) was hired last week by the software company Palantir Technologies, after departing Congress earlier this year.

In an op-ed published by The Washington Post Tuesday, columnist David Ignatious, who recently interviewed the former GOP lawmaker, explains why Gallagher's exit is "a case study in what’s broken in national politics — and maybe how to fix it."

Although "very conservative," Ignatious notes that Gallagher "fears that conservative values aren’t the defining point for Republicans any longer."

READ MORE: 'Fiery' closed-door meeting highlights bitter infighting among House Republicans

He told the columnist: "How conservative you are can’t be measured by loyalty to the party or the president."

Ignatious notes that Gallagher left Congress following "a cruel hoax" claiming that the ex-congressman "had been shot in the face and that his wife and two young daughters" were being held hostage in December of last year.

That incident "proved to be a breaking point" for the former Wisconsin lawmaker, Ignatious emphasizes.

Gallagher really knew it was time for him to go when he didn't vote for the GOP-led impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

READ MORE: Trump rips 6 House Republicans by name for 'stupidly' failing to pass controversial amendment

"Gallagher’s exit says that "Congress in the age of Trump is becoming a toxic echo chamber. Members and their families are targets of extremist rage," Ignatious writes.

However, "The arc of Gallagher’s career illustrates several things that matter in this election year," the columnist continues. "First, despite all the bickering, bipartisanship is still possible. Gallagher led a select panel on China that developed nearly 150 bipartisan recommendations for legislation helping the United States to compete more effectively with Beijing."

Gallagher also understand that infighting and insulting gets Congress no where. "We’ve turned Congress into a ‘green room’ for Fox News and MSNBC, instead of being the key institution of government," he told Ignatious. "Being a bomb-thrower on TV or crapping on my colleagues has never interested me."

Ignatious emphasized, "Thinking about Gallagher reminds me that politics is a character test — not just of the candidates but of the system itself. If good people leave Congress or don’t run for office at all, we’ll get legislators who are coarser and more extreme — creatures of this broken process."

READ MORE: 'Republicans are in deep trouble': Ex-GOP rep says Dems will retake House by large margin

Ignatious' full report is available at this link (subscription required).

A Washington, D.C. grand jury has handed up a superseding indictment against Donald Trump in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of the ex-president for election subversion. The indictment, legal experts say, is in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling granting presidents broad immunity for official acts, and appears to remove any narratives or evidence that might be construed as falling under that grant.

MSNBC’s Adam Klasfeld, a veteran legal journalist, reports that “Jack Smith’s team says that the superseding indictment was ‘presented to a new grand jury that had not previously heard evidence in this case,’ [and] which separately charged Trump with the same crimes.”

Politico’s Kyle Cheney reports the superseding indictment retains “the same four core charges against him for trying to subvert the election.”

Effectively, even without the evidence the Supreme Court might have said falls under its new presidential immunity definition, a new grand jury reached the same conclusion as the original one did on which charges to approve.

READ MORE: ‘Unimaginable Is Difficult to Imagine’: Lincoln Project Explains New Dystopian Abortion Ad

According to the 36-page document, those charges still are: Conspiracy to defraud the United States, Conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, Obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and Conspiracy against rights.

Former federal prosecutor of thirty years, Glenn Kirschner, points to the length of the document and writes: “Here’s why today’s NEW TRUMP INDICTMENT is good news. The first indictment against Trump was 45-pages long. This new one is 36-pages long BUT it includes the same 4 felony charges. Jack Smith took some info out to conform to the Supreme Court decision BUT all 4 crimes survive!”

Calling Smith’s move “Brilliant!” Kirschner adds: “the statement issued by Jack Smith’s office saying a NEW grand jury issue[d] this indictment removes any argument that the prior indictment was tainted because the first grand jury was presented with evidence that violates the Supreme Court absolute immunity ruling.”

Attorney Luppe B. Luppen explains the importance of Special Counsel Smith having a new and different grand jury indict Trump:

“The news is an entirely new grand jury decided to re-indict Trump on the same election subversion counts without seeing the evidence that the Supreme Court barred from consideration—i.e. the DOJ corruption stuff and any other conspiring with federal officials.”

CNN legal analyst, Norm Eisen, a former U.S. Ambassador and current Brookings senior fellow sums it up: “If Trump loses, he’s going to jail.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘It Was Your Own White House’: Trump Says ‘2020 Presidential Election Was Rigged’

When Donald Trump agreed to a ABC News debate against Kamala Harris Tuesday, the former president appeared to suggest that the fight over whether the pair's microphones will be muted or not had been squashed.

However, Business Insider's Bryan Metzger reported via X: "Harris campaign indicates debate over mics at Sept 10 debate remains ongoing as Trump says the same rules as CNN debate have been agreed to."

Metzger also shared a screenshot of a statement from a Harris spokesperson, which reads: "Both candidates have publicly made clear their willingness to debate with unmuted mics for the duration of the debate to fully allow for substantive exchanges between the candidates - but it appearsDonald Trump is letting his handlers overrule him. Sad!"

READ MORE: Harris calls Trump's bluff on debate

In the Truth Social post Trump wrote, agreeing to the September 10 debate, he said that "the rules will be the same as the last CNN debate, which seemed to work out well for everyone."

That debate against then-Democratic nominee, President Joe Biden, involved muted microphones.

CNN reports that "the Harris campaign maintains that discussions are ongoing with ABC over whether microphones will remain on during September’s presidential debate, according to a source familiar with the matter."

READ MORE: Trump’s tone is 'noticeably different' with possible Harris debate: analysis

A CNN panel discussion turned into a debate over the realities of abortion in GOP-led red states now and across the country if Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump wins the November election and if he implements Project 2025 polices. Lincoln Project strategist Stuart Stevens smacked down CNN senior political commentator Scott Jennings who attempted to mock the ad and its producers.

The Lincoln Project’s new ad, “State Line,” depicts a father in a dystopian America in the not-too-distant future under a Project 2025 abortion ban driving his daughter out of a red state to obtain medical services. A police officer pulls them over and starts to interrogate the daughter, having very personal and specific information about her pregnancy, her sister’s whereabouts, and the GPS coordinates of their destination “in one of those abortion states.”

“What are you, about eight weeks pregnant?” the officer says. “I see you’ve been spotting recently. You had any cramps, or nausea?”

“You been taking your prenatal vitamins?” he also asks.

As the interrogation heats up, the teenager says, “We have the right to travel.”

The police officer shakes his head and says, “Not anymore.”

READ MORE: ‘It Was Your Own White House’: Trump Says ‘2020 Presidential Election Was Rigged’

The ad concedes with text that reads: “With Project 2025, a nationwide ban on abortion with out exception is enforced by anyone with a badge.”

CNN host Abby Phillips opened the discussion as two of the panelists were suppressing their laughter.

CNN’s Scott Jennings, a Karl Rove protege who has worked for President George W. Bush’s campaigns and in the Bush White House, began the commentary by mocking the ad and its producers.

“Well, I’m glad to see we have very serious people putting out very serious advertising,” snarked Jennings, who has also worked for Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell.

He then turned his attention to The Lincoln Project’s Stuart Stevens, asking: “You make this?”

“I didn’t make it but I’m with The Lincoln Project and I think it’s going to be a very effective ad,” Stevens replied.

As Jennings began to respond, Stevens calmly continued talking, saying: “You know, the problem with the unimaginable is, it’s difficult to imagine.”

“And what you have here are these laws that are being passed – this actually has happened,” Stevens told Jennings, who appeared to be bobbing up and down. “I mean, they did criminalize someone going out of state in Ohio.”

READ MORE: Could RFK Jr. Be Trump’s Project 2025 Liaison? Asked to ‘Help Pick’ Government Officials

“When you get these states that ban abortion, you know, they are going to track all of this,” Stevens added, apparently referencing the police officer’s comments to the teenager in the ad. “When you make something criminal – you’re a woman, and you’re using an app to track periods that could become evidence against you in a trial. That is the world here. And one thing about it is we only banned abortions in states like Mississippi for poor people, because everybody I grew up with in Mississippi who had money and something, went to get an abortion, they would get an abortion. And that is still going to happen, and it is absolutely more impactful on those [in a] lower economic status.”

“And this is what has happened. And the idea that you just sort of say, ‘well, you know, it’s just policy,’ something that people thought was a constitutional right for almost two generations has been taken away. And I think it is about liberty, and it is about the heavy hand of government.”

Panelist Katie Frost, a former communications director for Alabama’s Roy Moore’s failed Senate bid, said the ad to her felt like “fan fiction.”

She also claimed that abortion is “the only issue that [Vice President Kamala] Harris and the Democrats think they can run on. Every single other issue, they’re absolutely going to get destroyed on.”

Harris is currently beating Trump by 3.5 percentage points according to the FiveThirtyEight polling average.

“This is excellent,” observed award-winning producer, author, and filmmaker Melissa Jo Peltier, commenting on the Lincoln Project ad. “The idea that women would not be able to travel freely throughout the country…that their personal health would be monitored…it’s beyond creepy. It’s barbaric. What comes next? Menstrual huts?”

Watch the Lincoln Project’s new ad above, the entire CNN panel discussion below, or both at this link.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

READ MORE: Expert Predicts ‘Smith Will Win’ as Special Counsel Appeals Trump Docs Case Dismissal

Former President Donald Trump has once again agreed to a debate with Vice President Kamala Harris on ABC News on September 10th.

Writing on his Truth Social platform, Trump said that he had "reached an agreement with the Radical Left Democrats for a Debate with Comrade Kamala Harris" on ABC, which he then accused of being the "nastiest and most unfair" network for him.

"The Rules will be the same as the last CNN Debate, which seemed to work out well for everyone except, perhaps, Crooked Joe Biden. The Debate will be 'stand up,' and Candidates cannot bring notes, or 'cheat sheets,'" Trump claimed. "We have also been given assurance by ABC that this will be a 'fair and equitable' Debate, and that neither side will be given the questions in advance."

The Harris campaign had tried to get Trump to agree to leave microphones unmuted during the debate, which was a change from the first debate between Trump and Biden.

However, it seems that Trump's mic will be muted at the debate if the former president's statement is accurate.

Donald Trump — the former president responsible for the end of Roe v. Wade — last week claimed in a post published to Truth Social that if he wins the White House in November, he will turn into a reproductive rights advocate.

"My Administration will be great for women and their reproductive rights," he wrote, worrying staunch pro-life Republicans, like Trump's former Vice President Mike Pence.

NPR noted that the ex-MAGA official "called Trump’s comments 'concerning,'" and, "In a statement to the National Review, Pence said, 'The former President’s use of the language of the Left, pledging that his administration would be ‘great for women and their reproductive rights’ should be concerning for millions of pro-life Americans.'"

READ MORE: The 'lie' that keeps evangelicals 'praising Trump with faint damnation': columnist

In an op-ed published by The Atlantic Tuesday, columnist Peter Wehner submits that "the pro-life justification for supporting Trump has just collapsed," and that evangelical Christians — who have long supported Trump, particularly for his pro-life views — have been betrayed by the former president.

Wehner now wonders whether staunch anti-abortion Republicans will condemn Trump's flip-flopping ways or if they plan to usher him into the presidency no matter what.

Aside from switching up his stance on the issue of reproductive rights, the columnist points out that "ending Roe is not the same thing as reducing the number of abortions in America." He adds, "In fact, the number of abortions has increased since the 2022 Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe. As Philip Klein wrote in National Review, 'overturning Roe was only the necessary first step of a much longer battle to protect the lives of the unborn. And on that battle, it increasingly looks like Trump is joining the other side.'"

Wehner writes:

Who in the pro-life movement—Al Mohler, Mike Huckabee, Franklin Graham, Eric Metaxas, Marjorie Dannenfelser, Ralph Reed, Tony Perkins, Robert Jeffress, and countless others—will speak out, publicly and forcefully and relentlessly, against Trump’s about-face? Will they tell the full truth, which is that abortions increased during the Trump presidency, that the pro-life movement is weaker than at almost any time in its history, and that, when it comes to making the Republican Party the home of the pro-life cause, Trump is doing unprecedented damage?

READ MORE: Harris could get 'the highest level of evangelical support since Carter' — here’s how: pastor

Although The Atlantic columnist emphasizes, "This is not a hard call," Wehner recognizes that this level of boldness is unlikely.

"Trump deserves the disapprobation of evangelical Christians, not their vote," Wehner writes, "But he will get their vote, in overwhelming numbers, even if he has sold out the very cause they once professed greatest devotion to."

Wehner's full op-ed is available at this link.

Political experts are criticizing Donald Trump after the ex-president doubled down on a proposal he made last week, saying that people who burn the American flag should be jailed.

MSNBC's Jordan Rubin noted in an article last week:

The legal problem with that proposal is that it violates the First Amendment. The Supreme Court addressed the issue in the 1989 case Texas v. Johnson, when conservative icon Antonin Scalia joined the high court majority in deciding that a conviction for burning the flag was unconstitutional.

Trump repeated the proposal during his speech at the National Guard convention in Detroit Monday.

READ MORE: Trump could empower the Supreme Court to gut the First Amendment: analysis

"You burn an American flag, you go to jail for one year," the ex-president said. "Gotta do it. We gotta do it. They say, 'sir, that's unconstitution.' We'll make it constitution."

David J. Bier, director of immigrant studies at the Cato Institute, commented: "He didn’t say 'unconstitutionAL' or 'constitutionAL'; he says 'unconstitution' and 'constitution'. He says it four times. How did our country survive this person having the most powerful position in the history of the planet?"

The Bulwark's Tim Miller wrote: "Yesterday @RobertKennedyJr said he was endorsing Trump because the Democrats support censorship. Today Trump wants to change the first amendment so that he can jail people for flag burning."

The New York Times' Jane Coaston replied: "Censorship *of him.* Censorship of other people is fine."

READ MORE: What 'praying judge' Alito gets fundamentally wrong about faith and the First Amendment: analysis

Sarah Longwell, publisher of The Bulwark, added: "Periodic reminder that Trump doesn’t care at all about free speech."

Lawyer Andrew Fleishman noted: "First Amendment stuff is the best part of the current Supreme Court and so, thankfully, I don't think this will happen."

Lawyer Bradley P. Moss added: "'Well make it constitutional' @RichLowry (somewhere) - 'See, that’s the type of character and belief in the rule of law we need.'"

Rich Lowry is editor of the conservative National Review.

READ MORE: 'Big donors no longer essential': The 'psychological' advantage Harris has over Trump

Watch the video below or at this link.

Six weeks after U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon’s decision to throw out Jack Smith’s Espionage Act/classified documents case against Donald Trump, the Special Counsel has filed a very specific appeal requesting the ruling be overturned and the case be remanded back to court.

Smith had been prosecuting ex-president Donald Trump on 40 criminal felony charges, including 34 under the Espionage Act, over his allegedly unlawful removal, retention, and refusal to return classified documents from the White House. Among them, some of the nation’s top nuclear secrets, classified at the highest levels.

Judge Cannon, a Trump-appointee, using what amounted to a template from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, dismissed the case by claiming Special Counsel Smith was wrongfully appointed. She went even further, saying all special counsels are as well, while claiming his office had been unlawfully funded.

READ MORE: Florida in Play? Trump Campaign Just Bought Thousands in Ad Time in ‘Deep-Red’ State

MSNBC’s Lisa Rubin on-air (video below) reports that Smith did not request Judge Cannon’s removal from the case. But Smith is appealing to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has previously been extremely critical of some of Cannon’s actions.

National security attorney Brad Moss surmised that “Smith likely concluded, as many suggested, that the Circuit would be unlikely to agree to that [removal] based on the existing record.”

Also notably, Rubin reports Smith is showing the November 2024 election, in which Trump is running for president, has no bearing on his timeline. Indeed, Politico’s Josh Gerstein notes today’s brief from the Special Counsel “came in 1 day ahead of deadline.”

Rubin reported, “the Special Counsel’s office hasn’t come to the [11th] Circuit and requested expedited oral argument, for example, or anything that would really move this along. It appears that they’re acting the same way that they’re acting in the case before Judge Chutkan, which is not to rush things along before the November election, but to do everything they can to shore up what is remaining of these cases, neglecting or even ignoring the fact that there’s an election in the background, just trying to do their jobs with blinders on to the impact on the election.”

READ MORE: ‘Everything Set’: Harris Camp Calls Trump’s Bluff After He Says ‘Doesn’t Matter’ About Mics

Bloomberg’s Zoe Tillman also reports, “Prosecutors didn’t ask to fast-track this appeal ahead of the Nov. 5 election — Trump is due to respond in 30 days, and then the specialcounsel‘s office can have 21 days to file a reply. The 11th Circuit hasn’t set a date for arguments yet.”

Rubin also explains Smith accuses Cannon of ignoring Supreme Court precedent, “when she found that the four statutes that [Attorney General] Merrick Garland had invoked in order to appoint Jack Smith, did not comport with the Constitution.”

In his appeal, Smith argues that “Congress has authorized the Attorney General to commission attorneys ‘specially retained under authority of the Department of Justice’ as ‘special assistant[s] to the Attorney General or special attorney[s]’ and has provided that ‘any attorney specially appointed by the Attorney General under law, may, when specifically directed by the Attorney General, conduct any kind of legal proceeding, civil or criminal , . . . which United States attorneys are authorized by law to conduct.”

CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen, a Brookings Senior Fellow, remarked: “Judge Cannon’s decision was totally lawless & Smith will win.”

Watch Rubin’s report below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Black Jobs’: Trump Clarifies What He Meant

Could Florida go blue? Democrats have been saying yes since at least April, when the Biden campaign declared the state “winnable” after launching Latinos con Biden-Harris in South Florida and running TV ads aimed at the Hispanic community one month earlier. Strategists chimed in, in agreement, after two major ballot initiatives were approved for the November election: abortion and marijuana.

With Vice President Kamala Harris now at the top of the ticket, a recent Florida Atlantic University poll has her within the margin of error.

Florida’s WTSP last week reported, “as enthusiasm among Democrats surges for Kamala Harris, local party chairs have different attitudes on the state of the race and if they think Florida is in play. They do agree on this: Vice President Kamala Harris’s rise in the polls, including in Florida, is real.”

The FAU poll shows Trump up by just three points over Harris, 50-47, within the margin of error.

READ MORE: ‘Everything Set’: Harris Camp Calls Trump’s Bluff After He Says ‘Doesn’t Matter’ About Mics

“Florida is definitely in play,” Pinellas County Democratic Committee Chair Jennifer Griffith told WTSP. “The mood is lifted, the enthusiasm is up.”

“We’re not too worried,” Hillsborough County Republican Party Chair Tom Gaitens told the news station. “She’s had this coronation for 29 days. She’s going to get another week of it because of the convention.”

“From our standpoint, we want them to think that it’s narrowing here in Florida,” Gaitens added. “Every dime they spend here is a dime they can’t spend in Pennsylvania or some of the other more competitive states.”

That doesn’t explain why the Trump campaign “is placing new ad spending on cable news nets on the Effectv interconnect in West Palm Beach, Fla.,” according to Medium Buying. “Start date is tomorrow, 8/27; 15-second spots.”

Democratic pollster and strategist Matt McDermott remarked, “Got to love when a campaign has to spend vital resources on an ad buy to boost candidate ego.”

The Bulwark’s reporter in Florida, Marc Caputo, says, “Trump is in little danger of losing Florida. But his staff is in great danger of incurring his wrath if he —and his Palm Beach pals— don’t see his ads at Mar-a-Lago.”

READ MORE: ‘Black Jobs’: Trump Clarifies What He Meant

But Florida Democratic Party Executive Director Phillip Jerez, a Harris campaign senior adviser, says, “Donald Trump is scared of losing Florida.” And U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL) agrees: “Trump is spending money on TV ads in Florida now. He’s worried and he should be.”

Nearly two weeks ago, former Obama campaign spokesperson Kevin Cate, an award-winning progressive campaigns filmmaker and strategist wrote: “I think Trump spends first TV dollars in Florida (for his ego and against his team’s advice). And that’s how you’ll know we’re in landslide territory.”

Meanwhile, Florida Democratic Party chair Nikki Fried on MSNBC declared, “Donald Trump and [GOP Senator] Rick Scott are in trouble here in the state of Florida. And we all know that Trump can’t win the presidency without the state. So, all eyes are going to continue being on the state of Florida.”

Watch below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Sold His Endorsement’: RFK Jr Suspends, Backs Trump – Running Mate Wants Vaccine Apology

Economist Paul Krugman on Sunday shared numbers from a recent survey conducted by YouGov, "surprised" that more people are not discussing the results.

"Surprised that these survey results from YouGov aren’t getting more attention," the New York Times columnist wrote via X.

"As president, which candidate do you think would be more likely to lower health care costs?" the survey reads, with 44 percent of people surveyed choosing Harris, and 33 percent choosing Trump.

READ MORE: Former Bush strategist warns against top GOP pollster’s data: 'Wrong in nearly every election'

The next question was, "As president, which candidate do you think would be more likely to lower housing?"

Forty percent of adults chose Harris, while 36 percent selected Trump.

Lastly, the survey asked, "As president, which candidate do you think would be more likely to lower food costs?"

Thirty-nine percent of surveyees chose Harris, while 38 percent believe Trump would lessen food costs.

During a North Carolina appearance last week, Harris vowed to "'make it a top priority to bring down costs' if elected president and touted her new plans to tackle foodand housing costs, slash prescription drug prices and expand the child tax credit," according to NBC News.

READ MORE: 'Straight up housing discrimination': How Trump 'denied Black people the American dream'

“Costs are still too high," the 2024 Democratic nominee said. "And on a deeper level, for too many people, no matter how much they work, it feels so hard to just be able to get ahead. As president, I will take on the high costs that matter most to most Americans, like the cost of food. We all know that prices went up during the pandemic, when the supply chains shut down and failed, but our supply chains have now improved and prices are still too high."

In the midst of a wide-ranging interview with Sen. Lindsey Graham, CNN "State of the Union" host Jake Tapper blindsided the South Carolina Republican with a clip of Donald Trump telling a CBS reporter he doesn't listen to Graham's advice.

Brought on to talk about the current presidential campaign pitting Trump against Vice President Kamala Harris, host Tapper first pointed out that Graham has lightly criticized the former president for centering his campaign on personal attacks on Harris instead of addressing policy differences.

Last week Graham said on NBC, “President Trump can win this election. His policies are good for America, and if you have a policy debate for president, he wins. Donald Trump the provocateur, the showman, may not win this election."

After referencing that comment, Tapper showed a clip of Trump firing back on CBS by stating, "Look, I like Lindsey, I don't care what he says. Lindsey wouldn't have been elected if I didn't endorse him. So, South Carolina ... Lindsey's my friend, but if I didn't endorse him he would have had no chance of getting re-elected."

"'I like Lindsey, I don't care what he says,'" Tapper repeated to his guest before dryly commenting, "He doesn't seem receptive to your advice."

With a small laugh, Graham replied, "Well, I talked to him a couple of days ago and now and all I can say is that president Trump, when he was president of our country, we had the most secure border in 40 years. Gas was at $1.87, Russia wasn't invading Ukraine, the Arabs were making peace with the Israelis."

Continuing to sidestep Trump's dismissal of him, he added, "Me and him are good. We're going to be together. I'm going to Georgia with him. We're going to try to have a unity event in Georgia to bring this whole party together. I will be by his side in this election and I am proud of what he did as our president."

Watch below or at the link.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com