Or, Finally, a Debater who Understands Trump Psychology. If the June 27, 2024, presidential debate was decisive for Joe Biden, the September 10, 2024, presidential debate was decisive for Donald Trump.
To her campaign, something else is more important. read more
The mother of the suspected Apalachee High School gunman said that she called the school on the morning of the shooting and warned a counselor about an "extreme emergency." read more
Miami Dolphins wide receiver Tyreek Hill was handcuffed outside Miami's Hard Rock Stadium just hours before the Dolphins were scheduled to kick off against Jacksonville. However, Hill has been released and plans to play, according to his agent. read more
The elections analyst Dave Wasserman assesses Black support for Donald Trump and explains a state-level primary that's a national bellwether. read more
Pushing The Limits
@PTLRadioShow
Trump supporter in Vegas today claims that "not only Haitian immigrants are eating pets, but they're also eating human beings"
x.com
Tom Rogers and Susan Del Percio were on Morning Joe this morning talking about court reform. Here's an opinion piece they did today on the topic:
Engendering Support for Supreme Court Reform Is a Matter of Gender
www.newsweek.com
Here is an older op-ed on the topic:
The Case for Expanding the Supreme Court Has Never Been Stronger
newrepublic.com
Although I personally find a number of recent SC decisions potentially persausive reasons for Democrats to stack the court, the one decision I feel is the most compelling reason to do so in order to rebalance the current Supreme Court's extreme right-wing bent is the case on presidential immunity. I agree with the above author when she writes:
"These Supreme Court decisions have been based on tortured originalist readings. While one might disagree with the outcome, and the extent of the intervention, at least one felt there was a certain logic behind these cases, a logic by which the decisions could be engaged and challenged. But the decision in Trump v. United States had no such reasoning, not even a pretense of constitutional interpretation. The sweeping decision, more than any other over the past decade and more, exposed a raw partisanship and lack of principle. It not only set a dramatic new precedent that changes 235 years of understanding about the role of the president but it rewrote the Constitution, unbalancing it in favor of the president--and without apology. It made no pretense of considering the potential costs or risks of its dramatic intervention, as has been the norm for major Supreme Court decisions. It arguably removed most checks on presidential power."
And that's not a Democrat vs Republican observation. Staunch conservatives like Judge Luttig also agree that the SC erred grievously in their decision in the presidentail immunity case and in such a way as to undermine the Constituion and our democracy in a substantially harmful way.
Newsom responded on X that Trump was revealing who he was.
"Every voter should be made aware of this. @realDonaldTrump just admitted he will block emergency disaster funds to settle political vendettas," Newsom wrote. "Today it's California's wildfires. Tomorrow it could be hurricane funding for North Carolina or flooding assistance for homeowners in Pennsylvania. Donald Trump doesn't care about America--he only cares about himself."