Vindman wins the Democratic primary for Virginia’s 7th Congressional District

Eugene Vindman won the Democratic Party's nomination for Virginia’s 7th Congressional District on Tuesday. 

The race among Democrats comes after the incumbent Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger announced she would not seek re-election in favor of running for governor of the Old Dominion next year. 

Seven Democrats vied for the nomination in the crowded primary election, including: Prince County Supervisor Andrea Bailey; Prince County Supervisor Margaret Franklin; former state House Delegate Elizabeth Guzman; Virginia House Delegate Briana Sewell; Carl Bedell; Clifford Heinzer; and retired Army Col. Eugene Vindman. 

KEY TRUMP IMPEACHMENT FIGURE RUNNING FOR CONGRESS AS DEMOCRAT

Vindman and his twin brother, retired Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, gained national attention in 2020 during former President Donald Trump’s first impeachment. The brothers both worked for the National Security Council under the Trump administration, with the congressional candidate helping his brother blow the whistle on Trump’s phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy regarding first son Hunter Biden’s business dealings in the nation. 

FORMER SPECIAL FORCES SOLDIER LAUNCHES CAMPAIGN IN VIRGINIA TO FLIP SWING HOUSE SEAT FROM DEMOCRATS 

Alexander Vindman testified before Congress against the president amid the impeachment, while Eugene Vindman assisted his brother in raising concerns regarding Trump’s phone call with Zelenskyy. The congressional candidate filed a complaint with the Pentagon's Inspector General in August of 2020 after he was fired from the National Security Council, citing the White House retaliated against him for his role raising concerns regarding the phone call. 

Vindman benefited from massive campaign donation hauls during the primary, raising over $5 million, far more than both Democrats and Republicans working to win the seat, according to Virginia Public Access Project. Vindman outraised his closest competitor in the Democratic primary, Bailey, by roughly 15 times.

VIRGINIA DEMOCRATIC REP. ABIGAIL SPANBERGER TO LEAVE SWING DISTRICT TO RUN FOR GOVERNOR

"An advantage in terms of endorsements from top Democrats, the funding advantage that he has in terms of ability to raise money and the fact he has a name that is well-known — that puts him in a position to be better-known than the other candidates,"  Stephen Farnsworth, a political analyst at the University of Mary Washington, told NBC Washington of Vindman ahead of the primary election. 

The 7th Congressional District stretches from central Virginia to Northern Virginia, encompassing counties such as Orange, Culpeper, Spotsylvania, and parts of Prince William County outside of Washington, D.C. The district is currently considered one that leans or tilts towards the Democratic Party, according to various election ratings. 

SPECIAL FORCES VETERAN GETS MAJOR ENDORSEMENT FROM GOP HOUSE LEADER IN BID TO FLIP VIRGINIA SEAT 

Vindman’s fellow Democratic challengers knocked him as someone who is not well-acquainted with the area, noting he’s never held public office. 

"He does not understand the community. He's not very infused in the community. He's not been participating in the community as an advocate," Bailey told the Associated Press.

Vindman has defended his lack of political experience, arguing he will face "zero learning curve" if elected to office, the outlet reported. 

"The people that are attracted to my campaign are attracted to the values that I will bring to this job: the fact that I will fight for priorities, that I put a ready career on the line and lost my military career in standing up to Donald Trump," he said.

Why it seems like the entire GOP wants this Republican to lose his primary

Three states are holding major primaries on Tuesday, headlined by Virginia, where Donald Trump and Kevin McCarthy are both working to punish the chair of the Freedom Caucus for his disloyalty. Oklahoma is also on tap, while Georgia is holding runoffs in contests where no one earned a majority of the vote in the first round of voting on May 21.

Below, you'll find our guide to all of the top races to watch, arranged chronologically by each state’s poll closing times. When it’s available, we'll tell you about any reliable polling that exists for each race, but if we don't mention any numbers, it means no recent surveys have been made public.

To help you follow along, you can find interactive maps from Dave's Redistricting App for Georgia, Oklahoma, and Virginia. You can find Daily Kos Elections' 2020 presidential results for each congressional district here, as well as our geographic descriptions for each seat. You’ll also want to bookmark our primary calendar, which includes the dates for primaries in all 50 states.

We'll be liveblogging all of these races at Daily Kos Elections on Tuesday night, starting when the first polls close at 7:00 PM ET. Join us for our complete coverage!  

Georgia

Polls close at 7 PM ET.

• GA-03 (R) (64-34 Trump): Brian Jack, a former Donald Trump aide who has his old boss' endorsement, outpaced former state Sen. Mike Dugan 47-25 in the first round, making him the favorite to succeed retiring Republican Rep. Drew Ferguson in this seat in Atlanta's southwestern exurbs.

Jack consolidated his position by earning the backing of the third- and fourth-place finishers, Mike Crane and Philip Singleton, who took a combined 23% of the vote in the first round. Outside groups, including the crypto-aligned Defend American Jobs, have also deployed over $800,000 to help Jack in the runoff, while there's been no serious spending for Dugan.

Virginia

Polls close at 7 PM ET.

• VA-02 (D) (50-48 Biden): Two Democrats vying to take on Republican Rep. Jen Kiggans, who flipped a swing district based in Virginia Beach last cycle and will likely be a top Democratic target this year.

Navy veteran Missy Cotter Smasal, who lost a competitive race for the state Senate in 2019, has the support of the DCCC and all six members of Virginia's Democratic House delegation. Her rival is Jake Denton, an attorney whose late grandfather, Jeremiah Denton, represented Alabama in the Senate as a Republican in the 1980s.

Smasal has decisively outraised Denton, and there's been no outside spending in the primary.

• VA-05 (R) (53-45 Trump): Rep. Bob Good has spent his tenure as chair of the far-right House Freedom Caucus antagonizing GOP leaders and rank-and-file Republicans alike. Now, thanks to all the grief he's caused, the two-term congressman faces an uphill primary against state Sen. John McGuire for the right to keep representing this conservative district in central and southwest Virginia.

Good knows all about bitter intra-party battles: He first got to Congress by wresting the GOP nomination from then-Rep. Denver Riggleman at a Republican convention in 2020. But now a similar fate looms for him. Good infuriated Trump last year by endorsing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' doomed presidential campaign, prompting Trump to exact his revenge last month by endorsing McGuire.

Good also was one of eight House Republicans who last fall voted to end the speakership of Kevin McCarthy, who's now looking to get even. On top of that, several conservative megadonors close to the party's current leadership are tired of Good's antics and want him gone. All of this has led outside groups to throw down close to $6 million to attack Good and promote McGuire.

But Good's allies, including the hardline Club for Growth and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul's Protect Freedom PAC, haven't given up. They've spent almost $5 million on messaging arguing that Good, unlike McGuire, is an ardent conservative.

• VA-07 (D & R) (53-46 Biden): Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger decided not to seek reelection so she could focus on her 2025 bid for governor, spurring busy primaries on both sides for her district based in the southern exurbs of Washington, D.C.

The frontrunner in the seven-way Democratic contest is former National Security Council adviser Eugene Vindman, who, along with his identical twin brother, Alexander, was at the center of the scandal that led to Donald Trump's first impeachment in 2019.

Thanks to the siblings' high profile during that affair, Vindman has been one of the strongest fundraisers among House candidates in the nation. Vindman has also benefited from about $1.3 million in outside spending from a pair of super PACs: VoteVets, which promotes Democratic veterans, and Protect Progress, a group with ties to the crypto industry. The Washington Post, which has a large readership in Northern Virginia, is supporting him as well.

Vindman faces four current and former elected officials who have faulted him for not being active in politics in what's long been a competitive region and for sometimes displaying a lack of knowledge about local matters. However, the members of this quartet—Prince William County Supervisors Andrea Bailey and Margaret Franklin, Del. Briana Sewell, and Elizabeth Guzman—have each raised just a fraction ​of the money Vindman has at his disposal.

The only other third-party spending of note has come from a super PAC called Casa In Action, which has deployed $200,000 to promote Guzman, who would be the first Hispanic person to represent Virginia in Congress.

A late May internal poll for Vindman showed him beating Bailey 43-10, with his rivals taking single-digit support. No one has released any data to contradict the idea that Vindman is well-positioned to triumph in a contest where none of his many opponents have established themselves as the clear alternative.

Republicans, meanwhile, are hoping that Spanberger's absence will give them a chance to flip this seat. The main contender in the five-candidate field appears to be Green Beret veteran Derrick Anderson, who lost a close primary for this seat in 2022 and has House Speaker Mike Johnson's endorsement for his second try.

The other notable Republican is former Navy SEAL Cameron Hamilton, who has the support of much of the Freedom Caucus. Both veterans have been attacking the other from the right, and their allies have spent well over $1 million on behalf of each man. Anderson's main support has come from the American Patriots PAC, which is funded by Republican megadonors Ken Griffin and Paul Singer, while Rand Paul's network is supporting Hamilton.

• VA-10 (D) (58-40 Biden): A dozen Democrats are campaigning to replace retiring Rep. Jennifer Wexton in a district based in the southwestern suburbs and exurbs of Washington, D.C.

Wexton is backing state Sen. Suhas Subramanyam, who would be both Virginia's first Indian American and Hindu member of the House. Subramanyam has raised more money than most of his many opponents and has also gotten more than $500,000 in support from the Indian American Impact Fund.

Del. Dan Helmer, though, still enjoys a huge financial advantage over Subramanyam and the rest of this busy field. Helmer, an Army veteran and the top fundraiser in the race, has been the beneficiary of well over $5 million in outside spending. His largest ally is the crypto-aligned Protect Progress, while VoteVets is also spending to help him. In addition, the Washington Post has endorsed Helmer

However, few of Helmer's current constituents live in the congressional district he wants to represent, though he may have more serious concerns to worry about.

Four current and former officials in the Loudoun County Democratic Committee put out a statement during the final week of the race publicly accusing Helmer of engaging in "inappropriate behavior" with one of their number in 2018. One signatory told NOTUS that the committee's sexual harassment policy was adopted as a "direct result" of his actions. The candidate responded by denying what he called "baseless claims."

The race also includes four other current and former members of the state legislature: state Sen. Jennifer Boysko, Dels. Michelle Maldonado and David Reid, and former state House Speaker Eileen Filler-Corn. But while Filler-Corn has raised considerably more than the rest of this foursome, her old legislative seat doesn't overlap with Wexton's district at all. Boysko has the same problem, while Maldonado and Reid have struggled to raise money.

Two other names to watch are defense contractor Krystle Kaul, who has self-funded much of her campaign, and former state Education Secretary Atif Qarni. Kaul would be the state's first Indian American or Sikh member of Congress, while Qarni would be both its first Pakistani American and Muslim representative.

The only survey we've seen here in recent weeks was a Qarni internal poll from mid-May that showed Helmer edging out Subramanyam 17-16, with Qarni and Filler-Corn respectively at 12% and 9%. That survey, however, was conducted with almost a month left to go before the primary.

Oklahoma 

Polls close at 8 PM ET/7 PM local time. An Aug. 27 runoff would take place in any races where no candidate wins a majority of the vote.

• OK-04 (R) (65-33 Trump): Rep. Tom Cole faces an unexpectedly expensive primary battle thanks to the arrival of businessman Paul Bondar, who has spent over $5 million of his own money to portray the appropriations chairman as an insider who "voted with Democrats for billions in new deficit spending."

The 11-term incumbent, though, has benefited from almost $4 million in support from third-party groups. Those include the American Action Network, a nonprofit with ties to the House GOP leadership, which has been airing TV ads on the congressman's behalf. Cole and his allies have spent the campaign both touting his support from Trump and reminding voters that Bondar did not register to vote in Oklahoma until April—a month after he cast a ballot in the Texas primaries.

Three little-known candidates are also on the ballot, so it's possible that neither Cole nor Bondar will capture a majority of the vote on Tuesday. Bondar has been airing ads featuring that trio saying they'd back him in a hypothetical runoff.

No, bad news for Trump does not make him stronger

 When Donald Trump was found guilty on 34 felony counts, the Los 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 former 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% 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% 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.

RELATED STORIES: 

Happy whatever, you losers and scum: 11 years of Trump's holiday wishes

VP wannabes find new ways to suck up to Trump

Campaign Action

 

House Republicans say Hunter Biden used dad’s role as VP to ‘discourage’ further SEC scrutiny in 2016 probe

FIRST ON FOX: House Republicans say Hunter Biden "gratuitously" used his father's role as vice president in an effort to "discourage" further scrutiny in a 2016 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation involving his business associates and their entities, Fox News Digital has learned. 

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, penned a letter to the chairman of the SEC as part of the ongoing impeachment inquiry against President Biden.

"In 2016, attorneys within the SEC’s Enforcement Division were investigating a tribal bond scheme in which several individuals were charged with violating federal securities laws. As part of this investigation, several of Robert Hunter Biden’s (Hunter Biden) business associates and inter-connected entities were implicated by the alleged conduct," Comer and Jordan wrote. 

HOUSE REPUBLICANS REFER HUNTER BIDEN, JAMES BIDEN FOR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION AMID IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY

As part of the investigation, the SEC subpoenaed individuals and entities "for documents, communications, and testimony."

At the time, the SEC subpoenaed Hunter Biden’s former business partner, Devon Archer, and Rosemont Seneca Bohai – an entity utilized by both Archer and Hunter Biden. 

Comer and Jordan revealed that Hunter Biden was also subpoenaed as part of the investigation in March 2016, while Joe Biden was serving as vice president. 

The subpoena for Hunter Biden compelled him to produce documents and communications regarding Rosemont Seneca Bohai. 

Comer and Jordan wrote that Rosemont Seneca Bohai "was directly implicated in the tribal bond scheme." 

Citing the initial complaint, Comer and Jordan noted that in October 2014, Rosemont purchased "the entirety of the Second Tribal Bond Issuance" for $15 million. 

Archer, during his interview before the House Oversight Committee last year, testified that Hunter Biden, at the time, was "a corporate secretary" of Rosemont and that "they had a handshake 50-50 ownership." 

Comer and Jordan also noted that last month the House Ways and Means Committee voted to release IRS documents that showed that Hunter Biden certified on a document that he was, in fact, the secretary of Rosemont Seneca Bohai. 

"According to Mr. Archer, ‘Rosemont Seneca Bohai was set up to hold the equity of BHR,’ which stands for Bohai Harvest Rosemont [Partners]. BHR was supposed to be a private equity fund based in China to engage in cross-border investments," they wrote. "The RSB bank account was used to funnel other foreign payments and benefits to Hunter Biden, including money from Ukraine and a new sports car from an oligarch in Kazakhstan." 

Comer and Jordan revealed that Hunter Biden was responsive to the subpoena in 2016 and provided 1,749 responsive documents to the SEC as part of the investigation. 

But Comer and Jordan said that, "concerningly," Hunter Biden’s attorney reminded in his response that his father was the sitting vice president. 

HOUSE GOP CLAIMS HUNTER BIDEN LIED UNDER OATH MULTIPLE TIMES DURING CONGRESSIONAL DEPOSITION

"As a threshold matter, we request that you treat this matter with the highest degree of confidentiality, consistent with Commission policy and applicable law," Hunter Biden’s attorney wrote on April 20, 2016. "The confidential nature of this investigation is very important to our client and it would be unfair, not just to our client, but also to his father, the Vice President of the United States, if his involvement in an SEC investigation and parallel criminal probe were to become the subject of any media attention." 

Comer and Jordan said Hunter Biden’s response "gratuitously invoked his father’s position as the Vice President in what could be interpreted as an effort to discourage further SEC scrutiny." 

Comer and Jordan also noted that on May 11, 2016, the SEC published its press release announcing the charging of seven individuals, with no mention or charging of Hunter Biden. 

His business associates Devon Archer and Jason Galanis, however, were charged. 

Galanis pleaded guilty to securities fraud based on bonds issued by a company affiliated with a Native American tribe in South Dakota. The funds were reportedly supposed to be used for certain projects but were instead used for his personal finances. He was sentenced in 2017 to 14 years. House Republicans interviewed Galanis from his prison cell as part of the impeachment inquiry. 

Archer was also tied to the scheme and convicted in 2018 for defrauding the Native American tribal entity and various investment advisory clients of tens of millions of dollars in connection with the issuance of bonds by the tribal entity and the subsequent sale of those bonds through fraudulent and deceptive means. Archer was sentenced to a year and a day in prison. 

As part of the ongoing impeachment inquiry, Comer and Jordan are demanding all documents and communications between the SEC and the White House, including the Office of the Vice President and all documents provided by Rosemont Seneca, Archer, and Hunter Biden in the SEC investigation.  

COMER INVITES BIDEN TO TESTIFY PUBLICLY AS PART OF HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY

They also are demanding the SEC’s "justification for seeking documents from Hunter Biden" in the matter; all internal documents and communications regarding Hunter Biden’s response; and any internal ethics opinions rendered by the SEC regarding Hunter Biden or then-Vice President Biden. 

Comer and Jordan are also asking the SEC to make Tejal D. Shah, a former staff attorney who led the investigation who now serves as a principal adviser, appear for questioning by the committees in the form of a transcribed interview. 

"In short, the records sought by this request are critical to the impeachment inquiry," they wrote. 

The requests come after the Comer, Jordan and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, earlier this month, sent criminal referrals to the Justice Department recommending Hunter Biden and James Biden be charged with making false statements to Congress about "key aspects" of the impeachment inquiry. 

One of the false statements allegedly made by Hunter Biden was regarding his role at Rosemont Seneca Bohai, LLC as corporate secretary. 

House Republicans allege that during his deposition before Congress earlier this year, Hunter Biden made false statements about holding a position at Rosemont Seneca Bohai. The committees describe the entity as one which was used to receive millions of dollars from foreign individuals and entities who met with then-Vice President Biden before and after transmitting money to the RSB account that then transferred funds to Hunter Biden. 

House Republicans are continuing their impeachment inquiry against the president. They are investigating his role and knowledge of his family’s international influence-peddling schemes that they say generated more than $18 million for Biden family members and their companies, and more than $27 million, when including the payments to their business associates, who they say were often used to transfer funds to Biden family members. 

Trump’s lead just won’t budge: Why the debates may be Biden’s last shot

The presidential campaign is as frozen as the Arctic Circle.

Virtually nothing seems to melt the ice caps that have encased the race. 

The former president convicted of 34 felonies? Feels like it happened months ago, without exactly dooming the Trump candidacy.

TRUMP FOUND GUILTY BUT, FACING BIDEN, COULD STILL WIN BACK THE WHITE HOUSE

The current president’s son, also convicted of felonies? Now that’s deemed a mere distraction by those who used an impeachment inquiry to try to sink the Biden campaign.

Each attack, each smear, each controversy dominates the news and then quickly yields to the next real or perceived outrage, leaving little lasting impression on the shape of the race.

All this is bad news for Joe Biden, who has an anemic 38 percent approval rating and is on track to lose, despite the apparent closeness of the contest.

While Trump’s lead in such core battleground states as Michigan and Pennsylvania is often just 2 to 3 points, it’s been remarkably consistent (with the president having a slight edge in Wisconsin). If Scranton Joe can’t win Pennsylvania despite endless trips there, the election is over.

That’s why Biden abruptly challenged Trump to two debates, with the first one, on CNN, in less than 10 days. It’s really his last chance to bring some heat and shake up the race.

Now I could make the argument that the Trump team has lowered expectations for Biden to the point that if he avoids major gaffes and doesn’t fall off the stage, he wins. The CNN rules – two-minute answers, no notes, muting the opponent’s mike – will also favor the president.

VEEPSTAKES VERVE: CONTENDERS CREATE MEDIA BOOMLETS WITH LEAKS AND MANIPULATION

But debates can be overrated. Mitt Romney clobbered Barack Obama in their first debate and it didn’t matter. Hillary Clinton arguably won two or even three of her debates against Trump and it didn’t matter. 

The pressure is on Biden, who’s drilling with former top aide Ron Klain, to show that he’s aggressive and feisty as well as knowledgeable. Trump, who is doing only informal prep, will be hailed by his base no matter what he says or does.

In short, it will take something highly unusual to change many minds. Most Americans already know what they think of these guys.

The same goes for the Trump veepstakes. As Donald Trump told me, it doesn’t matter much because people vote for the top of the ticket. I think Doug Burgum has a somewhat better chance than when I first interviewed him three weeks ago, on this shorter short list that seems to include Tim Scott, Marco Rubio and J.D. Vance. 

But I can’t see that changing the race’s trajectory. What’s striking is that the anchors are now handling these as "vetting" interviews about each candidate’s record, because they believe one of them may well be moving into the vice president’s mansion.

Trump’s GOP unity day on the Hill got muddied when he criticized Milwaukee, the host city for next month’s convention. Even though Trump said he was talking mainly about crime in the city – which is actually down substantially this year – I’m not sure why he needed to go there.

The 78-year-old Trump is so anxious to depict the 81-year-old Biden as mentally unfit for the job that minor incidents are being exaggerated and distorted. There’s no question, as I said on the air, that Biden often comes across as frail and confused. 

But after a $30-million L.A. fundraiser over the weekend, Obama grabbed his arm and then kept touching his back as they exited the stage. This went viral as the former president was depicted as "leading" his onetime VP away.

Earlier, the New York Post, taking its lead from the RNC, misleadingly cropped a photo as if Biden was talking to no one at the G-7 in Italy. A wider angle showed Biden was saying a few words and giving a thumbs up to a skydiver who had landed next to the world leaders before the Italian prime minister led him back to the group. 

THERE’S ‘CORROSION’ IN HOW THE MEDIA COVERS POLITICS: LUCY CALDWELL

Despite a couple of flashy media headlines, I did not criticize Fox’s coverage, though sometimes that comes with the job. I made a point of saying that the coverage by "Fox & Friends" was perfectly straightforward. We played a clip of Sean Hannity criticizing Biden, but there was no suggestion that he didn’t show the proper footage; he was paired with Joe Scarborough hitting Biden’s critics, as we often do to convey the range of commentary.

In my view, there’s little doubt that most of the media believe Trump will win the election, and here’s the proof.

The New York Times just ran a deep dive on how the Trump resistance is already laying the groundwork to battle and stymie him in a second term.

These groups "are drafting potential lawsuits in case he is elected in November and carries out mass deportations, as he has vowed. One group has hired a new auditor to withstand any attempt by a second Trump administration to unleash the Internal Revenue Service against them. Democratic-run state governments are even stockpiling abortion medication.

"A sprawling network of Democratic officials, progressive activists, watchdog groups and ex-Republicans has been taking extraordinary steps to prepare for a potential second Trump presidency, drawn together by the fear that Mr. Trump’s return to power would pose a grave threat not just to their agenda but to American democracy itself." 

SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE'S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST, A RIFF ON THE DAY'S HOTTEST STORIES

A newspaper simply doesn’t devote the enormous resources the Times did to this investigative piece without believing a Trump victory is at the least very likely.

Some groups are described as "wary" of discussing their plans for fear of signaling a lack of confidence in the Biden campaign, which is exactly what it signals.

And that brings us back to the CNN debate.

Biden is really running out of time to change the narrative of the race. The debate will probably be a wash, but it’s his only shot. Otherwise, the frozen campaign will wind up freezing him out.

House Republican wants to have attorney general arrested just because

GOP Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, best known for fabricating her entire life story, told Fox News that she has a plan to get the sergeant-at-arms to arrest Attorney General Merrick Garland. 

“Several months ago, I introduced a resolution for something called inherent contempt of Congress. This is something that Congress has the authority to do, and it hasn’t been done since the early 1900’s,” she told host Maria Bartiromo on Monday. 

Luna was responding to questions about the Justice Department’s announcement that it would not prosecute Garland for not turning over audio of President Joe Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur.

“And what that allows Congress to do is really be the punitive arm and really hold Garland accountable by using the sergeant-at-arms to essentially go and get him,” Luna went on, “as well as the tapes, bring him to the well of the house and really be a check-and-balance on the Department of Justice.”

Like most of what Luna says, there are all kinds of facts being misrepresented here. For one, her assertion that she introduced her inherent contempt of Congress resolution “several months ago” is belied by the fact that she actually announced it on May 7. And while that is technically more than one month, it is far less than several months. Though, to be fair, her announcement could have been missed, since it came the same day that Stormy Daniels was testifying … in Trump’s criminal trial.

The sergeant-at-arms is "the chamber’s primary law enforcement official and protocol officer, responsible for maintaining security on the House floor and the House side of the U.S. Capitol complex.” 

The case from the “early 1900’s” that Luna is referring to is something some legal scholars felt was more apropos to the unwillingness to comply with requests from Congress by the Trump administration.

The Teapot Dome scandal, which involved President Warren G. Harding’s Secretary of the Interior Albert Bacon Fall’s no-bid contract to lease federal oil fields in Teapot Dome, Wyoming, happened in 1922. Attorney General Harry M. Daugherty was heavily criticized at the time for not more thoroughly investigating Fall, who was later convicted of taking a $100,000 bribe.

The scandal escalated to the Senate committee subpoenaing Mally S. Daugherty, the attorney general’s brother. 

When Mally Daugherty refused to show up to testify before Congress, the Senate Sergeant at Arms David S. Barry deputized John J. McGrain to arrest him and bring him to Washington to testify.

The Republicans’ fixation on getting audio, despite having already received the entire transcript of Hur’s interview with Biden, has been a transparently political endeavor. Hur, a Republican, released a 375-page report in February saying that no charges were warranted and that Biden had likely kept the documents as a private citizen by “mistake.”

Since then, House Republicans voted to hold Garland in contempt. Speaker Mike Johnson vowed to take the Garland contempt case to court after the DOJ announced it planned no further action. But whether Johnson will bring Luna’s resolution to a vote remains to be seen.

There has been very little tangible action that has come out of the GOP’s neverending political theater. This past year it spent an inordinate amount of time attacking Biden’s border security while trying to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas—a stunt that failed miserably. 

Luna’s newest resolution is the GOP’s latest political stunt to create a cloud of doubt over Biden’s reelection campaign against convicted felon Trump.

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.

Campaign Action

White House stymied bipartisan support for presidential ethics bill, says top House Dem

A Democratic member of the House Oversight Committee alleged Monday that several in her party who had initially indicated support for a bipartisan presidential ethics bill got cold feet after talking to the White House.

Rep. Katie Porter, D-Calif., previously announced the filing of a "landmark federal ethics reform bill" with Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., the committee’s chairman, targeting financial disclosures, family members joining official travel junkets and other issues.

Comer and Porter announced the Presidential Ethics Reform Act in late May, which itself reportedly stemmed from a back-and-forth between lawmakers during a March hearing on the impeachment inquiry into President Biden.

Porter, who lives in Orange County, California, claimed Monday that after she and Comer worked to recruit an equal number of bipartisan co-sponsors, the deal imploded while she was in the air on her way back to Washington.

FORMER HUNTER BIDEN BUSINESS PARTNER OFFERED CRITICAL TESTIMONY: COMER

"I … was proud that I had found three senior Democratic co-sponsors. When I landed, I was really disappointed to learn that those co-sponsors had decided not to support the bill and had had conversations with the White House," Porter claimed in comments to The Hill newspaper.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment, as the paper cited three Democratic lawmakers it reported to be whom Porter was referring – Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., Kweisi Mfume, D-Md., and Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill.

Mfume declined comment and the other two lawmakers did not respond. Porter’s office also did not provide comment.

A source familiar with the situation, however, confirmed reports on the matter to Fox News Digital.

The ethics bill did garner at least one major public supporter, as billionaire "Shark Tank" investor Mark Cuban posted, "All for this."

Congress’ official website shows Comer introduced the legislation on May 22 and listed Porter as its only current co-sponsor. Congress.gov indicated the bill has since been referred to the Oversight Committee.

SCHWEIZER: HUNTER'S TIES TO CHINESE BUSINESSMAN ‘SUPERCHAIRMAN’ SHOULD DRAW SCRUTINY

During a March 20 Biden impeachment inquiry hearing, Porter said the probe hit a "dead end" and that the next step should be to "stop bipartisan attacks on each other."

"The American people think that the rules that prevent corruption are way too weak to stop politicians from both sides of the aisle from influence peddling," Porter added. 

After she ended her remarks, Comer interjected to say he believed the Democrat was "sincere" and that he "look[ed] forward to working with [her] on that legislation" in the future.

The bill would require presidents and vice presidents to record and disclose payments or "items of value" given to them by foreign sources two years prior to and after their terms, as well as while they are in office.

It would also require the two top national executives to disclose inter-familial payments of more than $10,000 during that same time period, and also provide stricter rules regarding disclosure of conflicts-of-interest.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"Influence peddling is a cottage industry in Washington, and we’ve identified deficiencies in current law that have led to a culture of corruption," Comer said of the bill.

"By creating this bipartisan legislation to provide greater transparency to the financial interactions related to the office of the president and vice-president, we can ensure that moving forward, American presidents, vice presidents, and their family members cannot profit from their proximity to power."

House GOP probes whether special counsel office helped retaliate against Hunter Biden whistleblowers

EXCLUSIVE: House Republicans are investigating whether the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) has contributed to the alleged retaliation and "smear campaign" against IRS whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, who brought claims of political influence in the Hunter Biden investigation to Congress. 

Fox News Digital has exclusively obtained a letter penned by House Speaker Mike Johnson; House Majority Leader Steve Scalise; House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer; House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan; and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith to the Office of Special Counsel. 

The top Republican lawmakers are seeking a briefing to determine whether there has been improper influence surrounding the IRS whistleblowers’ claims pending before the OSC. 

"IRS whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler have been wholly consistent in their testimony about misconduct and politicization in the Department of Justice’s criminal investigation of Hunter Biden," the Republican leaders said in a joint-statement to Fox News Digital. "They did exactly what an honorable government employee should do: when they witnessed wrongdoing, they reported it responsibly and made legally protected disclosures." 

ADVOCATES FOR IRS WHISTLEBLOWERS ACCUSE SPECIAL COUNSEL WEISS OF RETALIATION, MISLEADING: ‘SMEAR CAMPAIGN’

The lawmakers said that "because of their bravery and integrity, we are finally beginning to see steps toward accountability." 

"But this has not come without great cost to them," they added. "Mr. Shapley and Ziegler have faced retaliation for doing the right thing." 

IRS WHISTLEBLOWER SHAPLEY SAID HE 'COULD NO LONGER PURSUE' HUNTER BIDEN SUGAR BROTHER KEVIN MORRIS DUE TO CIA

"The U.S. Office of Special Counsel, which is tasked with protecting whistleblowers, must conduct an impartial investigation of the claims of Mr. Shapley and Ziegler without improper influence from those seeking to smear these courageous individuals." 

Shapley, who led the IRS’ portion of the Hunter Biden probe, and Ziegler, a 13-year special agent within the IRS’ Criminal Investigation Division, have alleged political influence surrounding prosecutorial decisions throughout the Hunter Biden investigation, which began in 2018.

Shapley has said decisions "at every stage" of the probe "had the effect of benefiting the subject of the investigation."

And Ziegler has said that Hunter Biden "should have been charged with a tax felony, and not only the tax misdemeanor charge," and that communications and text messages reviewed by investigators "may be a contradiction to what President Biden was saying about not being involved in Hunter’s overseas business dealings."

Ziegler also alleged that federal investigators "did not follow the ordinary process, slow-walked the investigation, and put in place unnecessary approvals and roadblocks from effectively and efficiently investigating the case," including prosecutors blocking certain questioning and interviewing of Hunter Biden’s adult children.

IRS OFFICIAL SAYS HE WAS FRUSTRATED DOJ DID NOT BRING CHARGES AGAINST HUNTER BIDEN FOR 2014, 2015 TAX YEARS

Fox News Digital exclusively obtained the letter they wrote to OSC Acting Principal Deputy Special Counsel Karen Gorman, which notifies her that they are investigating whether the OSC "has contributed by action and/or inaction to retaliation" against Shapley and Ziegler. 

The House Republican leadership and committee chairmen requested a briefing to "better understand OSC’s conduct and to ensure that there has not been any improper influence on OSC’s investigation." 

Shapley and Ziegler both have whistleblower retaliation claims pending before the OSC.

"In particular, SSA Shapley made protected disclosures about the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware, alleging prosecutorial misconduct in the Hunter Biden investigation," they wrote, adding that Shapley alleges that then-U.S. Attorney, now-Special Counsel David Weiss "began retaliating against him in November 2022 upon learning of the disclosure of his Office’s wrongdoing." 

The Republicans said that in March of this year, Weiss filed a redacted document related to the whistleblowers with the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. 

HOUSE REPUBLICANS REFER HUNTER BIDEN, JAMES BIDEN FOR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION AMID IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY

They noted that "the phrasing of and redactions to the filing have led to media speculation about whether the whistleblowers themselves are under investigation for wrongdoing," but said they have received information to prove that Shapley and Ziegler "are not under investigation." 

Last month, Shapley and Ziegler said they would seek an inspector general investigation into Weiss, alleging he "hid and twisted" information – prompting more angst on Capitol Hill amid inquiries into Biden family conduct and alleged politicization of the Justice Department.

Empower Oversight, the legal group representing Shapley and Ziegler, alleged that Weiss’ team – in a March 11 federal court filing – deliberately misled the public by suggesting an unnamed federal agency was investigating the two whistleblowers for misconduct. However, the vague reference to the "potential investigation(s)" is a reference to a probe the whistleblowers sought, alleging the Justice Department and IRS were retaliating against them for their disclosures.

"David Weiss has been retaliating against Gary Shapley ever since Shapley objected a year and a half ago to letting the statute of limitations lapse on 2014 felony tax charges against Hunter Biden," Tristan Leavitt, president of Empower Oversight, told Fox News Digital last month. "Weiss then learned from internal IRS communications that Shapley had been telling his IRS chain of command about Weiss' office pulling punches in the Hunter Biden probe."

Empower Oversight at the time also asked the OSC to clarify for the record that the two agents are not under investigation.

Meanwhile, the House GOP leaders noted that President Biden’s nomination of now-Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger caused senators to express "deep concern" about his ability to "fairly" investigate the whistleblowers’ claims given his past work. 

Dellinger worked at Boise Schiller law firm "with Hunter Biden on various Burisma-related matters." 

Dellinger recused himself from the OSC’s investigation related to whistleblowers’ claims. 

OSC did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment. 

Weiss indicted Hunter Biden on federal gun charges in Delaware. Hunter Biden was found guilty on all counts last week. Hunter Biden had pleaded not guilty. 

Weiss also charged the first son with federal tax crimes. That trial is set to begin on Sept. 5 with jury selection in California. Hunter Biden pleaded not guilty. 

With new rules, the Texas GOP seeks to keep its elected officials in line

The state party plans to limit primaries to registered Republicans and keep elected officials it censured off the ballot. It’s unclear if it can without legislative approval.

By James Barragán, The Texas Tribune

Republican voters in Texas sent a strong message this primary season about their expectations for ideological purity, casting out 15 state House GOP incumbents who bucked the grassroots on issues like school vouchers or the impeachment of Attorney General Ken Paxton.

At the same time this spring, the party itself has been making moves beyond the ballot box to keep its elected officials in line.

At its biennial convention last month, the Texas GOP tried to increase its party purity by approving two major rules changes: One would close the Republican primary elections so that only voters the party identifies as Republicans can participate. The other would bar candidates from the primary ballot for two years after they had been censured by the state party.

Jon Taylor, a political science professor at the University of Texas at San Antonio, said the moves are clear political shots by the increasingly dominant right wing of the party to root out dissenters and shape the party in its image.

“It says something about this battle, this civil war that’s broken out in the Republican Party of Texas that one side has gotten so concerned that they haven't been able to solidify their control of the party that they want to close their primary,” he said.

But the ideas have drawn pushback from inside and outside the party, with many questioning whether the GOP has the power to enact them without action from the state Legislature.

James Wesolek, a spokesperson for the Republican Party of Texas, said the party will be pursuing the policies regardless. He added that “an overwhelming majority” of Republican voters supported the ideas when they were included as propositions in the GOP primary this year.

“We hope the legislature takes action, but we will move forward as our rules dictate,” Wesolek said in an email last week.

Questions remain about how that would work.

Eric Opiela, a longtime Republican who previously served as the state party’s executive director and was part of the rules committee at this year’s convention, said moving forward on closing the primary without legislative action would lead to legal challenges.

Because party primaries are publicly financed and perform the public service of selecting candidates for elected office, they must adhere to the state’s election law, said Opiela, who has also served as a lawyer for the state party.

Currently, any voter can participate in a Democrat or Republican primary without having to register an affiliation. Without a change to state law, the Texas GOP could open itself to liability if it barred voters from participating in its primary elections, Opiela said.

Under the rules approved by the GOP, a voter would be eligible to cast a ballot in a primary if they voted in a GOP primary in the past two years or submitted a “certificate of affiliation with the Republican Party of Texas” prior to the candidate filing period for that election. They also could register with the state party, though the party hasn’t yet unveiled a process to do so.

A voter under 21 could also vote in the primary if it were their first primary election.

But critics are concerned that the party is underestimating the amount of work required to vet a person’s voting history. And Opiela also said that there are concerns about how to provide proper notification to new voters, especially military voters, who might have recently moved into the state and are not covered under the proposal as written. He said such concerns are why these changes should be left to the Legislature, where lawmakers can consider obstacles to implementation and come up with solutions.

“I don’t know that the process was given much thought,” said Opiela. “Those of us who have run an election know that this isn’t easy to pull off.”

Texas is among 15 states that currently have open primaries, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Ten states currently have closed primaries.

Closed primaries are a particularly hot topic in the GOP due to frustration among some in the conservative grassroots over House Speaker Dade Phelan’s primary runoff victory.

Phelan oversaw the passage of major conservative victories including restricting abortion and loosening gun laws in recent years. But he has become a target of the hard right for failing to pass school voucher legislation, appointing some Democrats to chair legislative committees and presiding over the impeachment of Paxton, who is a darling of the hard right.

He finished second in his March primary, but won his primary runoff against right wing candidate David Covey by fewer than 400 votes. Covey and his supporters blamed Phelan’s victory on Democratic voters who crossed over into the GOP primary runoff to vote for Phelan.

It’s difficult to say whether that’s true; Texas doesn’t track party registration. About 4% of the people who voted in the GOP primary this year had most recently voted in the Democratic primary, according to data compiled by elections data expert Derek Ryan, a Republican. But party leaders, such as recently departed party Chair Matt Rinaldi, have pointed to the Phelan race as a reason for a need for change.

“The time is now for Republicans to choose our own nominees without Democrat interference,” Rinaldi said in May.

Taylor, the UTSA professor, said the push to close the primaries was in line with the right wing’s push to force GOP candidates to follow the party line.

“You’re engaging in a form of ideological conformity, you’re demanding 100% fealty to the party,” he said.

But Daron Shaw, a political science professor at the University of Texas, pushed back against those crying foul.

“It is completely unclear to me how it is the ‘right’ of a voter in Texas, particularly one that does not identify as a Republican, to vote in the selection of Republican candidates,” he said. “Ultimately, a party is a private association and if it chooses to select extreme candidates, then presumably the general electorate will react accordingly.”

The rule to bar candidates who had been censured by the state party has also been met with skepticism.

Opiela said that if a candidate turned in an application that otherwise met the requirements for running for office, a court would likely order the party to allow the candidate on the ballot. He also said the provision could open up precinct and county chairs to criminal liability for rejecting applications that met the requirements.

The state party rule tries to cover for that potential liability by stating it would provide legal representation for any party official who is sued for complying with the rule.

Asked by The Texas Tribune to assess the legality of the idea, Rick Hasen, a UCLA professor and election law expert, called it “dicey.”

Taylor, from UTSA, said the move was also a pretty transparent message to elected officials like Phelan and U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales to fall in line. Phelan was censured in February for overseeing Paxton’s impeachment and appointing Democrats as committee chairs. Gonzales was censured for supporting a bipartisan gun law in the wake of the 2022 Uvalde shooting, which occurred in his district, and his vote for a bill that codified protections for same-sex marriage.

The censure rule in particular has been denounced as undemocratic, an increasingly common criticism from the GOP’s loudest critics. At the same party convention, the state party changed its platform to call for a new requirement that candidates for statewide office must also win a majority of votes in a majority of Texas’ 254 counties to win office, a model similar to that of the U.S. Electoral College.

That proposal, which represents the official position of the party but does not have any power of law, has been panned as unconstitutional.

“There’s a very good argument that such a system would violate the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court,” Hasen said.

Under the proposal, the 4.7 million residents of Harris County would have the same voting power as the 64 residents of Loving County.

“It’s basically a tyranny of the minority,” Taylor said. “This is designed to potentially go a step further in nullifying the concept of one person-one vote.”

The proposals come even as the GOP has dominated Texas politics for decades, and the hardline conservative movement continues to grow its influence. Brian W. Smith, a political science professor at St. Edward’s University in Austin, questioned the moves on a political level.

“Texas is already gerrymandered to elect ideologically pure candidates. We’re not seeing a lot of Republicans or Democrats moving to the middle to attract a broad swath of voters,” he said. “The Dade Phelans of the world are not winning because of independents or Democrats, they’re winning because they’re more popular among Republicans than their opponents.”

Campaign Action

Tracking URL: https://www.texastribune.org/2024/06/10/texas-republican-closed-primaries-rule-changes/

VP hopeful JD Vance called Trump ‘America’s Hitler.’ What changed?

If you want to be happy in your relationship, find someone who looks at you the way Sen. J.D. Vance looks at Donald Trump after 34 felony convictions, a monthslong coup plot, a deadly insurrection, multiple stolen top secret documents, and a $354 million business fraud judgment. And let’s not forget an $83 million sexual abuse/defamation judgment and endless games of “would you rather?” involving shark attacks and Joe Biden’s woke, America-destroying flotilla of Evil pleasure boats.

As we now know, Vance is among the hopefuls vying to serve as Trump’s next mewling toady/vice president/volcano sacrifice, and so he’s sticking to the Trump bandwagon like white on Mike Pence. But he wasn’t always a squealing MAGA-phone.

Of course, Vance is currently one of Trump’s staunchest defenders. He pretended to be outraged by Trump’s recent criminal conviction and is so hopelessly debauched he’s even trying to claim Donald Trump Jr. is a real boy. (He recently xweeted that Don Jr. is “one of the best people I’ve met in politics.” Which is a little like saying convicted murderer Ed Gein was a widely respected giant in the textile industry.) 

But as with many Republicans, Vance’s Trump-focused sycophancy represents a stark departure from the way he used to describe America’s Hitler. For instance, he once worried that Trump, if elected, could turn out to be “America’s Hitler.”

Well, now, as the author of “Hillbilly Elegy”—a book Trump has totally read and/or forced his Diet Coke gofer to search through for mentions of his name—seeks the inside track to the GOP VP nomination, CNN is reporting that Vance’s past criticism of Trump was even “more widespread and scathing than previously known.”

CNN:

A majority of the newly uncovered social media activity dates from the last five months of the 2016 presidential campaign. They include Vance liking a number of anti-Trump posts on Twitter, including those criticizing Trump’s immigration policies, acknowledging antisemitism from Trump supporters, questioning the integrity of voting for Trump over Clinton and even raising concerns over Trump having access to the country’s nuclear codes as president.

In February 2016, Vance liked a tweet featuring a photo of Trump, two women and O.J. Simpson with the caption, “Here is an old picture of one of USA’s most hated, villainous, douchey celebs. Also in picture: OJ Simpson.”

[...]

While promoting his memoir and appearing on news programs in 2016, Vance liked a series of tweets calling then-candidate Trump a “monster” and a “nemesis of the GOP.” He also liked a tweet acknowledging “threats and derogatory terms Trump supporters hurl at Jews.” He even liked a tweet from CNN anchor Jake Tapper criticizing Trump’s tweet about a woman’s appearance amidst then-first lady Melania Trump’s campaign against cyberbullying.

And that’s not all! According to CNN’s review, during the roiling “Access Hollywood” controversy prior to the 2016 election, Vance also liked a tweet that read, “Maybe the Central Park 5 could take out a full-page ad to condemn the coddling of thug real estate barons who commit serial sexual assault,” referring to Trump’s admission on tape that he, well, commits serial sexual assault.

In a 2016 interview with Charlie Rose, Vance was particularly blunt about Trump’s shit-flinging howler monkey of a political career: “I’m a Never Trump guy,” he said. “I never liked him.” And in another 2016 tweet, Vance simply stated, in reference to Trump, “My god what an idiot.”

So what happened? Did the scales suddenly fall from this Yale Law School graduate’s eyes, allowing him to see that, whatever Trump’s flaws, we desperately need a leader with the courage to address the twin Damoclean scimitars of killer boat batteries and whale-murdering windmills?

Of course not. Vance clearly has the smarts to know Trump is an anti-democratic disaster for this country. He just doesn’t have the courage to call it out. Which, these days, simply means he’s an elected Republican.

The adults who often restrained Trump during his first go-around have long since left the building, and his next administration would be marked by a nonstop cavalcade of Stephen Millers and J.D. Vances: a toxic mix of true believers and ass-kissers who either push Trump to be more extreme and cruel, or simply go along with any fool thing he wants to do, whether legal or not.

Trump’s past statements and actions—as well as his exhaustively documented character flaws—make it clear that he’ll accept nothing less than his VP pick’s groveling gratitude and immortal soul, so Trump’s running mate is bound to be marginally less dignified no matter what anyone says or does. But that doesn’t mean elected Republicans who clearly know better need to go along with this sham. Let Trump choose between Mike Lindell or among the small handful of other prominent Republicans who actually believe him.

In fact, every formerly democracy-believing Republican—whether they’re up for the VP slot or not—should be pushing back on Trump at every opportunity.

But that is not the case. This unblinking loyalty is a huge problem, of course, because more than any other president—or elected official, for that matter—Trump needs people around him to push back on his worst impulses. We’ve seen credible reporting that Trump wanted to nuke a hurricane; build a moat at the border with alligators in it; shoot migrants in the legs; attack Mexico and North Korea while trying to blame it on someone else; shoot Americans protesting the murder of George Floyd; and more.

Meanwhile, his fascist plans for the future—which he proudly shared during an April Time magazine interview—augur an existential American crisis. Unless we stop him.

Sadly, any remaining hopes for a Republican come-to-Jesus moment are clearly misplaced. Even Sen. Mitch McConnell, who unequivocally blamed Trump for the “disgraceful” acts that led to the deadly Jan. 6 Capitol riot, has now declared his support for the ocher hoaxer

The best you’ll find by way of GOP pushback these days is Sen. Lisa Murkowski essentially saying she wouldn’t attend Trump’s Thursday meeting with Republican senators because she’s maybe-probably washing her hair.

Lisa Murkowski not going to Trump meeting with GOP senators on Thursday. “I have a conflict,” she said. She’s one of the handful of GOP senators who haven’t endorsed Trump — and voted to convict him in impeachment trial after Jan. 6

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) June 11, 2024

Of course, rescuing the country from a wannabe tyrant is a heavy lift—and we’re being forced to do this shit for the second time in four years—but as Vance, et al., have made abundantly clear, we can expect no help from the Grand Old Party, because they’ve long since flushed their dignity in exchange for a seat at the incorrigible kids’ table.

So it’s up to the rest of us—i.e., Democrats, independents, and non-MAGA Republicans—to save democracy. Again.

It sure would be nice to get a helping hand from a Republican not named Liz Cheney or Adam Kinzinger for once, but as a wise old owl turd once said, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want

We’ve done this before, and we’ll do it again. Believe it. And, please, do whatever you can in your power to make it so.

RELATED STORIES: 

Trumpers want mandatory military service so Americans have 'skin in the game'

Kristi Noem is out. Doug Burgum is up. Trump's VP shortlist gets shorter

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.

Daily Kos’ Postcards to Swing States campaign is back, and I just signed up to help. Please join me! Let’s do this, patriots! Democracy won’t defend itself.