Month: December 2024

Trump allies turn up the heat on GOP Senate holdouts in nomination battles

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

As President-elect Trump and his transition team steer his cabinet nominees through the landmines of the Senate confirmation process, top MAGA allies are joining the fight by putting pressure on GOP lawmakers who aren't fully on board.

"There will be no resource that we won’t use to go after those U.S. senators that vote against Donald Trump’s Cabinet picks or his other nominees," longtime Trump outside adviser Corey Lewandowski told Fox News this week.

Fueled by grassroots support for Trump and his nominees, the president-elect's political team and allies are cranking up the volume.

Exhibit A: Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa.

NEW POLLS REVEAL WHAT AMERICANS THINK OF THE TRUMP TRANSITION

Ernst, the first female combat veteran elected to the Senate, is considered a pivotal vote in the confirmation battle over Pete Hegseth, Trump's nominee for defense secretary.

Hegseth, an Army National Guard officer who deployed to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and who until last month was a longtime Fox News host, has been the focus of a slew of media reports spotlighting a series of drinking and sexual misconduct allegations, as well as a report alleging he mismanaged a veterans nonprofit organization that he once led.

FIRST ON FOX: HOUSE GOP MILITARY VETS ON NEW MISSION — BACKING HEGSETH

Hegseth has denied allegations that he mistreated women, but did reach a financial settlement with an accuser from a 2017 incident to avoid a lawsuit. He has vowed that he won't drink "a drop of alcohol" if confirmed as defense secretary.

Ernst, a member of the Armed Services Committee, which will hold Hegseth's confirmation hearings, took plenty of incoming fire after last week publicly expressing hesitance over Hegseth's nomination.

While Trump publicly praised Hegseth late last week, as the nomination appeared to be teetering, top allies of the president-elect took aim at Ernst, who is up for re-election in 2026 in red-state Iowa.

GET TO KNOW DONALD TRUMP'S CABINET: WHO HAS THE PRESIDENT-ELECT PICKED SO FAR?

Donald Trump Jr., the president-elect's oldest son and MAGA powerhouse, took to social media to target Ernst and other potentially wavering Republican senators.

"If you’re a GOP Senator who voted for Lloyd Austin [President Biden's defense secretary], but criticize @PeteHegseth, then maybe you’re in the wrong political party!" he posted.

Top MAGA ally Charlie Kirk quickly took aim at Ernst with talk of supporting a primary challenger to her.

"This is the red line. This is not a joke.… The funding is already being put together. Donors are calling like crazy. Primaries are going to be launched," said Kirk, an influential conservative activist and radio and TV host who co-founded and steers Turning Point USA.

Kirk, on his radio program, warned that "if you support the president’s agenda, you’re good. You’re marked safe from a primary. You go up against Pete Hegseth, the president, repeatedly, then don’t be surprised, Joni Ernst, if all of a sudden you have a primary challenge in Iowa."

Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird, a top Trump supporter in last January's first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses, wrote a column on Breitbart urging Hegseth's confirmation.

While she didn't mention Ernst by name, Bird took aim at "D.C. politicians" who "think they can ignore the voices of their constituents and entertain smears from the same outlets that have pushed out lies for years."

HEAD HERE FOR THE LATEST FROM FOX NEWS ON THE TRUMP TRANSITION

And longtime Iowa-based conservative commentator and media personality Steve Deace took to social media and used his radio program to highlight that he would consider launching a primary challenge against Ernst.

Ernst, who stayed neutral in the Iowa caucuses before endorsing Trump later in the GOP presidential primary calendar, may have gotten the message.

After meeting earlier this week for a second time with Hegseth, Ernst said in a statement that her meeting was "encouraging" and that she would "support Pete through this process."

But Ernst's office told Fox News that "the senator has consistently followed the process, which she has said since the beginning, and doing her job as a United States senator."

It's not just Ernst who has faced the fire from Trump allies and MAGA world.

Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, one of four remaining GOP senators who voted in the 2021 Trump impeachment trial to convict him, is also up for re-election in 2026 in a reliably red state. Cassidy is now facing a formal primary challenge from Louisiana Treasurer John Fleming, a senior adviser in the first Trump administration.

Sen. Mike Rounds, another Republican up for re-election in two years in GOP-dominated South Dakota, has also been blasted by Kirk, as well as by top Trump ally and billionaire Elon Musk.

And staunch Trump supporter Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama had a warning for Republican Senate colleagues who may oppose the president-elect's nominees.

"Republicans: If you’re not on the team, get out of the way," he told FOX Business.

Whether these early threats from Trump allies turn into actual primary challenges in the next midterm elections remains to be seen. And ousting a senator is no easy feat. It's been a dozen years since an incumbent senator was defeated during a primary challenge.

But Trump's team and allies are playing hardball in the wake of former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., the president-elect's first attorney general nominee, ending his confirmation bid amid controversy.

There has been a full-court press by Trump's political orbit to bolster Hegseth — in order to protect him and some of the president-elect's other controversial Cabinet picks.

"If Trump world allowed a couple of establishment senators to veto a second nominee, it would have led to a feeding frenzy on Trump's other nominees, and so the thinking in Trump world was we have to defend Pete not just for the sake of defending Pete, but also for the sake of defending our other nominees," a longtime Trump world adviser, who asked to remain anonymous to speak more freely, told Fox News.

Fox News' Emma Colton, Cameron Cawthorne, Julia Johnson, Tyler Olson and Chad Pergram contributed to this report.

Republicans are totally cool with Trump pardoning Jan. 6 rioters

Posted on by Walter Einenkel

Republicans are sucking up to Donald Trump in the best way they know how: by being cowards. 

The convicted felon has promised that when he takes office in January, he will pardon Jan. 6 insurrectionists and called for lawmakers who investigated the attempted coup to be punished. And GOP senators and Congress members, most of whom were hunkered down in the Capitol on that terrible day, are lining up to roll over for him. 

“As we found from Hunter Biden, the president’s pardon authority is pretty extensive. That’s obviously a decision he’ll have to make,” incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune told The Hill about Trump’s promised pardons.

While he plans to let the rioters off scot-free, Trump recently told “Meet the Press” host Kristen Welker that former Rep. Liz Cheney and other members of the Jan. 6 committee should “go to jail.” 

“I don’t have a comment really on those statements,” Thune said.

Thune’s timorous stance on pardoning the rioters was parroted by fellow Republican senators.

“We’ll see what he does. I mean it’s been four or five years [since the attack]. The ones that hurt cops, they’d be in a different category for me, but we’ll leave that up to him,” said South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham.

Trump has repeatedly made false claims that the Jan. 6 committee destroyed evidence that would exonerate him. He has also publicly fantasized about committee co-chair Cheney facing a firing squad, and House Republicans including Second Amendment apologist Tim Burchett of Tennessee seem fine with Trump’s interest in political witch hunts.

“If they broke the law, then they should [be imprisoned],” Burchett told The Bulwark. “Now we know that they’ve manipulated evidence, so—if that’s the case, then absolutely.” 

As always, some Republicans were eager to minimize Trump’s threats.

“It was my understanding that he backed off that statement in a subsequent interview,” said Maine Sen. Susan Collins. “So I don’t really think that there’s—since he’s backed off on it, I don’t think there’s really any need for me to comment on it.”

Other GOP leaders cheered Trump’s vendetta on—even if it means targeting their own colleagues.

“With politicians, if you’ve used a congressional committee and you’ve lied and tried to set people up and falsely imprisoned people, then you should be held accountable,” said Rep. James Comer, who is no stranger to using House committees and scant evidence to attack political opponents.

“I haven’t kept up with the January 6th stuff like other people,” Comer told The Bulwark. “I don’t know exactly what Trump was referring to. But I have two years of experience working with one of the January 6th committee members, and I can tell you he’s been nothing but completely dishonest,” Comer said, clearly referring to Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin.

Every traitorous revelation from the Jan. 6 committee hearings was terrifying. The nearly 850-page final report by the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol illuminating—and damning. 

Most voters oppose Trump’s plan to pardon convicted insurrectionists, but what most voters want has never been the Republican Party’s bag. 

Daily Kos is on Bluesky! We’ve made it easy for you to join us with the Daily Kos Bluesky Starter Pack. Click this link to follow Daily Kos and start curating your lists.

McConnell’s still whining about Trump—even though he voted for him

Posted on by Emily Singer

Outgoing Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell once again sat for an interview in which he crapped all over Donald Trump, warning that the president-elect’s foreign policy ideas pose a danger not only to the United States but to the whole world.

In an interview with the Financial Times, McConnell said Trump and the Republican Party's isolationist views are a threat, as “the cost of deterrence is considerably less than the cost of war."

“To most American voters, I think the simple answer is, ‘Let’s stay out of it.’ That was the argument made in the ’30s and that just won’t work,” McConnell told the Financial Times. “Thanks to [Ronald] Reagan, we know what does work—not just saying peace through strength, but demonstrating it.”

Yet in that very same interview, McConnell admitted that he voted for Trump anyway.

“I supported the ticket,” McConnell said, refusing to even utter Trump's name.

What’s more, McConnell declined to say whether he should have done more to stop Trump from becoming president for the second time. McConnell had the chance to prevent Trump from running for president again during the Senate impeachment trial over Trump’s actions on Jan. 6, 2021. McConnell voted to acquit Trump, even though he said Trump was responsible for the insurrection at the Capitol that sought to overturn the free and fair election of Joe Biden.

It's not the first time McConnell has spoken ill of Trump. In October, excerpts from a McConnell biography were released in which McConnell called Trump “stupid,” a “narcissist,” and a “despicable human being." 

Yet despite thinking Trump is an awful person, McConnell endorsed Trump's 2024 comeback as he made those same attacks against the leader of the Republican Party.

“It is abundantly clear that former President Trump has earned the requisite support of Republican voters to be our nominee for President of the United States. It should come as no surprise that as nominee, he will have my support," McConnell said in March.

But McConnell's hypocrisy is not a surprise. Earlier in December, McConnell accused federal judges of playing politics by reneging on their decisions to retire in order to prevent Trump from choosing their replacements. But McConnell wrote the book on playing politics with the courts, as he stole a Supreme Court seat from former President Barack Obama, as well as a number of other judicial seats on lower courts. 

He also blocked a bicameral commission to probe the Jan. 6 insurrection, even though he believed Trump was responsible for the riot that led to the assault of more than 140 law enforcement officers.

While McConnell won’t be part of Senate GOP leadership next year, he is sticking around Capitol Hill. He claimed to the Financial Times that without the constraints of being in leadership, he will now push back on Trump and his own party’s isolationist policies.

“No matter who got elected president, I think it was going to require significant pushback, yeah, and I intend to be one of the pushers,” McConnell said.

But given that he’s always capitulated to Trump, color us skeptical. 

Campaign Action

Biden could pardon these Trump adversaries amid Dem fears that ‘revengeful first year’ is looming

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

President Biden’s days in office are coming down to the wire, and amid President-elect Donald Trump’s transition into the Oval Office, the 46th president is reportedly considering pardoning high-profile allies and fellow Democrats who are viewed as Trump's political foes.

After Trump’s election win over Vice President Harris last month, Massachusetts Democrat Sen. Ed Markey said he expects Trump to act in a "fascistic way" as president and called on Biden to pardon Democrats and the party's allies who could face prosecution under a second Trump administration.

"I think that, without question, Trump is going to try to act in a dictatorial way, in a fascistic way, in a revengeful first year at least of his administration toward individuals who he believes harmed him," Markey said during a local radio interview last month.

"If it’s clear by Jan. 19 that that is his intention, then I would recommend to President Biden that he provide those preemptive pardons to people because that’s really what our country is going to need next year."

MOTHER OF HUNTER BIDEN'S DAUGHTER DEFENDS PARDON, SAYS HE'S 'TARGETED BECAUSE OF WHO HIS DAD IS'

The comments were soon echoed by other Democrats and ​​some legal experts in a bid for Biden to sink any prospect of Trump getting "revenge" against his political enemies.

"Biden should keep going with his pardons: Trump, Jack Smith & team, Mueller & team, and a blanket pardon for all on Trump’s enemies list for any and all political statements before December 25, 2024! Merry Christmas," John Dean, CNN contributor and former President Nixon’s White House counsel during the Watergate scandal, posted to social media this month. "​​Take the wind out of retribution/revenge!"

HOW BIDEN – AND TRUMP – HELPED MAKE THE PARDON GO HAYWIRE

As Biden wraps up his final days, Fox News Digital compiled a list of prominent Trump antagonists who have been rumored to be among those considered for pardons.

Cheney, the Republican former Wyoming congresswoman, and Rep. Bennie Thompson, the Jan. 6 House Select Committee chair, were the targets of Trump's ire during a recent interview on NBC's "Meet The Press."

"Cheney did something that’s inexcusable, along with Thompson and the people on the un-select committee of political thugs and, you know, creeps," he said in the interview. "They deleted and destroyed all evidence."

"And Cheney was behind it, and so was Bennie Thompson and everybody on that committee," he continued. "For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail."

The Jan. 6 committee was founded in July 2021 to investigate the breach of the U.S. Capitol earlier that year by supporters of Trump ahead of President Biden officially taking office on Jan. 20. The Jan. 6 committee’s investigation was carried out when Democrats held control of the House.

BIDEN'S PARDONING OF HUNTER INDICATES HE HAS 'A LOT MORE TO HIDE': LARA TRUMP

Cheney slammed Trump’s remarks in a statement this week, saying they were a "​​continuation of his assault on the rule of law," but she did not address a potential blanket pardon or whether she would accept such an offer.

"There is no conceivably appropriate factual or constitutional basis for what Donald Trump is suggesting – a Justice Department investigation of the work of a congressional committee – and any lawyer who attempts to pursue that course would quickly find themselves engaged in sanctionable conduct," Cheney said in her statement. 

Thompson’s office also slammed Trump’s comment in a statement provided to Fox Digital this week, arguing that "no election, no conspiracy theory, no pardon, and no threat of vengeful prosecution can rewrite history or wipe away his responsibility for the deadly violence on that horrific day."

"We stood up to him before, and we will continue to do so," he added.

The former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci, was a keystone of the nation's pandemic response, including advising then-President Trump in 2020 on how to handle COVID-19 as it swept across communities.

Fauci’s tenure under the first Trump administration, however, devolved with Trump slamming him and fellow pandemic task force adviser Dr. Deborah Birx as "two self-promoters trying to reinvent history to cover for their bad instincts and faulty recommendations."

FAUCI RIPPED OVER NEW PAPER CRITICIZING TRUMP ON CORONAVIRUS, PROMOTING NATURAL ORIGIN THEORY: 'EMBARRASSMENT'

Conservatives, including lawmakers such as Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., slammed Fauci for his promotion of mask mandates, vaccine mandates and strict lockdown orders that upended the day-to-day lives of Americans.

"Dr. Fauci should be voluntarily removed from TV because what he says is such a disservice, and such fearmongering and almost all of what he says isn’t even matched by the science of his own institute," Paul, who is a doctor, said in 2021 during an appearance on Fox Business.

"It doesn’t obey the science," he said at the time. "There is no scientific evidence that the lockdowns in Michigan have done anything or in California. In fact, the daily incidents of the disease in the last two months has been about almost one and a half times greater in California than it has been in Florida. The death rate is lower in Florida. So there is no real correlation between economic lockdowns, mask mandates or any of this."

Trump allies, including tech billionaire Elon Musk and Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr, have endorsed calls to prosecute Fauci if evidence is found of any crimes during the pandemic, including the Wuhan lab leak in China.

BIDEN, TRUMP BOTH RIP DOJ AFTER PRESIDENT PARDONS HUNTER

"If there were crimes that he committed, of course I would tell the attorney general to prosecute him, not hold off," Kennedy said on Fox News last year.

Fauci has denied any wrongdoing amid the pandemic, and he told CNN this year, "I don't know what one would prosecute me for. … I played a major role in the development of the vaccine that was responsible for the saving of millions of lives. … I'm definitely guilty of that."

New York Attorney General Letitia James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg have been at the forefront of legal cases aimed at Trump ahead of the 2024 election, frequently landing in the upcoming president’s line of fire for criticism as he battled lawsuits he slammed as "shams."

James, a former City Council member in New York and public defender, launched her run for New York AG during the 2018 cycle while emphasizing that if she were elected, she would aggressively pursue charges against Trump. 

"What is fueling this campaign, what is fueling my soul right now, is Trump and his abuses, abuses against immigrants, against women, against our environment. We need an attorney general who will stand up to Donald Trump," James said on the campaign trail in 2018.

NEW YORK AG LETITIA JAMES SAYS SHE WON'T DROP CIVIL FRAUD CASE AGAINST TRUMP

About three months after taking office, James announced an investigation into the Trump Organization, alleging there was evidence indicating the president and his company had falsely valued assets to obtain loans, insurance coverage and tax deductions. The investigation began after Trump’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, who had previously served federal prison time for violating campaign finance laws, testified before Congress that the Trump Organization exaggerated the value of his assets.

James officially sued Trump, the Trump Organization and its senior leadership for allegedly falsely inflating "his net worth by billions of dollars to induce banks to lend money to the Trump Organization on more favorable terms than would otherwise have been available to the company, to satisfy continuing loan covenants, to induce insurers to provide insurance coverage for higher limits and at lower premiums, and to gain tax benefits, among other things."

Trump charged that James had launched a "witch hunt" against him after she explicitly campaigned on a platform to prosecute the president. Trump and his family denied any wrongdoing, with the former president saying his assets had been undervalued.

James was also caught on camera appearing gleeful as Donald Trump Jr. took the stand at his father's civil trial in November, after frequently sitting in the courtroom amid proceedings.

Judge Arthur Engoron ruled in September last year in the non-jury trial that Trump and his organization had committed fraud while building his real estate business by deceiving banks, insurers and others by overvaluing his assets and exaggerating his net worth. Trump appealed the ruling in September this year.

James said this week that she will not drop Trump’s civil fraud judgment after his win last month. 

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg emerged as another Trump political foe, leading the charge in his criminal trial this year after charging Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records.

Trump was found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records after his Manhattan criminal trial in May. Bragg's office worked to prove that Trump falsified the business records to conceal a $130,000 payment to former porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election to quiet her claims of an alleged affair with Trump in 2006. Trump has maintained his innocence in the case, and he has argued that it was "lawfare" promoted by the Biden administration and Democrats to injure his re-election efforts. 

Sentencing in the case was indefinitely postponed after Trump’s election win, with his legal team calling on the presiding judge to drop the case altogether.

Trump was hit with four separate indictments issued between March and August 2023, including Special Counsel Jack Smith prosecuting Trump in two of the cases: a classified documents case and a election interference case. 

In the classified documents case, the FBI agents seized 33 boxes of documents in August 2022 from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida, spurring another legal battle that Trump has called a "scam." Smith, who Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed to the job, oversaw the case and charged Trump with 40 felony counts, including allegedly violating the Espionage Act, making false statements to investigators and conspiracy to obstruct justice.

PROSECUTORS REQUEST STAY IN TRUMP NY CASE UNTIL 2029 AS DEFENSE PLANS MOTION FOR DISMISSAL 'ONCE AND FOR ALL'

In the election interference case, which focused on alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, Trump was charged with 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.

Both cases were dropped after the presidential election, but Trump’s repeated criticisms and condemnation against Jack Smith, who he commonly referred to as "deranged," and other prosecutors have continued.

"These cases, like all of the other cases I have been forced to go through, are empty and lawless, and should never have been brought. Over $100 Million Dollars of Taxpayer Dollars has been wasted in the Democrat Party’s fight against their Political Opponent, ME. Nothing like this has ever happened in our Country before," Trump posted on social media after the election. 

In that same social media post, Trump also took issue with Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis, ​​who led the prosecution of Trump in connection to a racketeering indictment for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election in Georgia. Trump pleaded not guilty in that case and has maintained his innocence.

"They have also used State Prosecutors and District Attorneys, such as Fani Willis and her lover, Nathan Wade (who had absolutely zero experience in cases such as this, but was paid MILLIONS, enough for them to take numerous trips and cruises around the globe!)" Trump posted. "It was a political hijacking, and a low point in the History of our Country that such a thing could have happened, and yet, I persevered, against all odds, and WON. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" 

California Sen. Adam Schiff, who won election to the Senate last month after serving in the U.S. House, has been a common target of Trump’s for spearheading the first impeachment trial.

The House impeached Trump in 2019 over allegedly leveraging U.S. military aid to Ukraine for political favors involving investigations of the Biden family. Schiff, who served as chair of the House Intelligence Committee, said Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy "reads like a classic organized crime shakedown," opening the floodgates of Trump’s criticisms aimed at the Democrat.

TRUMP FIRES BACK AT 'CORRUPT' SCHIFF, 'PHONY' MAINSTREAM MEDIA DURING FIERY REMARKS ON IMPEACHMENT

The Senate ultimately acquitted Trump in the first impeachment as well as his second impeachment involving allegations he incited an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021. Trump and Schiff have continued trading barbs since the impeachment saga.

"We have two enemies. We have the outside enemy, and then we have the enemy from within. And the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous than China, Russia and all these countries," Trump told Fox News’ "Sunday Morning Futures" in October.

"But the thing that’s tougher to handle are these lunatics that we have inside, like Adam Schiff – Adam ‘Shifty’ Schiff," Trump added.

As speculation mounts over who Biden could pardon ahead of his White House exit, Schiff has balked at calls for blanket pardons for those viewed as Trump’s political foes.

​​"I don't think the idea of a blanket pardon of some kind is a good idea. And I would recommend against it," he told CBS News last week. ​

Just days ahead of the election, news broke that the former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, retired Gen. Mark Milley, slammed Trump as a "fascist" and "the most dangerous person to this country" in Washington Post editor Bob Woodward’s latest book.

Trump has repeatedly slammed Milley since leaving office, including after the United States' botched withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 when he called Milley a "loser who shamed us in Afghanistan and elsewhere!"

RETIRED GEN MILLEY SAYS AMERICA WILL 'BE OK' UNDER TRUMP AFTER REPORTEDLY SAYING HE WAS 'FASCIST TO THE CORE'

After the election, Milley apparently backtracked his characterization of Trump as a "fascist," saying ​​America will "be OK" under Trump’s second administration.

Trump minced no words on the 2016 campaign trail that if elected president, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton could face jail time, perhaps previewing a Biden pardon for the Democratic stalwart years later.  

It is "awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country," Clinton said during a presidential debate against Trump.

HILLARY CLINTON'S NEW STATE DEPARTMENT PORTRAIT INSPIRES MOCKERY ON SOCIAL MEDIA: 'YOU SHOULD BE IN JAIL'

"Because you’d be in jail," Trump shot back in a mic-drop moment that earned praise from conservatives and condemnation from Democrats.

"Lock her up" became a common chant during Trump’s 2016 rallies.

FBI Director Christopher Wray, who Trump appointed during his first administration, is set to be fired or voluntarily resign from the position as Trump tees up his new pick for FBI chief, Kash Patel, and as conservatives slam Wray for "failing" his duties at the FBI.

The FBI director has also repeatedly come under fire from Trump, including during his Sunday interview on NBC for the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago in 2022.

GRASSLEY RIPS WRAY'S 'FAILED' LEADERSHIP AT FBI WITH 11 PAGES OF EXAMPLES IN BLISTERING 'NO-CONFIDENCE' LETTER

"He invaded my home. I’m suing the country over it. He invaded Mar-a-Lago. I’m very unhappy with the things he’s done. And crime is at an all-time high. Migrants are pouring into the country that are from prisons and from mental institutions, as we’ve discussed. I can’t say I’m thrilled," Trump said during the interview.

The FBI declined to comment.

Legal experts have grappled for years with whether a president could pardon himself, but no president has yet tested the waters and actually issued a self-pardon.

Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution states that the president has the power to "grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." The Constitution does not stipulate who a president can and can't pardon, instead granting them power to pardon any federal crime.

In Biden’s case, Trump has repeatedly slammed his Oval Office successor, including in June when he said Biden is a "criminal."

​"Joe could be a convicted felon with all of the things that he’s done," Trump said of Biden in June. 

"This man is a criminal. This man – you’re lucky. You’re lucky. I did nothing wrong. We’d have a system that was rigged and disgusting. I did nothing wrong."

Trump’s pick for FBI director, Patel, is known as a "deep state" crusader, who detailed in his book, "Government Gangsters," an alphabetical list of alleged "deep state" members who are either currently or formerly employed in the executive branch.

Among those on the list are Vice President Harris, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and Biden.

Patel has advocated for the firings of "corrupt actors" within the FBI and the federal government overall, "aggressive" congressional oversight over the agency, complete overhauls of special counsels, and moving the FBI out of Washington, D.C. His list of alleged "deep state" actors could indicate which political players could face investigation during a second Trump administration, and if Patel is confirmed by the Senate.

Fox News Digital's Gabriel Hays, Tyler Olson and Kristen Altus contributed to this report.

GOP congressman just won’t quit his war on the Bidens

Posted on by Walter Einenkel

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer just can’t stop running to Newsmax to demand endless investigations on the Biden family. Just a week ago he was on “Rob Schmitt Tonight” to complain about President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son Hunter. On Tuesday he was on Newsmax’s “Wake Up America,” trying to again stir up trouble. 

Comer, whose 15-month investigation failed to reveal a shred of evidence proving President Joe Biden or his family participated in criminal activity, has been running to the less factually curious right-wing outlet to say his piece.

“The ball is now going to be in the Trump justice Cabinet’s court,” Comer told Newsmax. Despite his embarrassing failures, Comer remains insistent on accusing the Biden family of more crimes despite offering no evidence to support his allegations. 

“You can go forward, there's still avenues to hold Hunter Biden accountable,” he continued. “I believe that Kash Patel and Pam Bondi are serious about reforming what we all refer to as the deep state,” Comer added. 

Trump’s choices of deep state fetishist and fan-fiction writer Kash Patel to head the FBI and former corrupt government official-turned-foreign agent Pam Bondi for U.S. attorney general has given Comer a second chance at harassing GOP political opponents.

“I believe that we can use our investigation of Hunter Biden as the blueprint for how to hold these bureaucrats accountable,” Comer said in what may be his plea to the Trump administration to remain head of the Oversight Committee.

YouTube Video

During the House Oversight Committee investigation, the Republican lawmaker repeatedly accused Biden of doing things that it was later reported Comer himself had also done. Whether it was using pseudonyms in government correspondence, or paying his own brother under the umbrella of “loans” in land swap deals, the evidence that Comer might be involved in corrupt dealings was far more convincing than anything he dug up on Biden.

Daily Kos is now on Bluesky—and we want to make it easy for you to join us! Click here for the Daily Kos Blueskey Starter Pack.

How Biden – and Trump – helped make the pardon go haywire

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The pardon debate – individual, group, partisan, preemptive – is spinning out of control.

In his "Meet the Press" interview, Donald Trump mocked Joe Biden’s repeated assurances about Hunter: "‘I’m not going to give my son a pardon. I will not under any circumstances give him a pardon.’ I watch this and I always knew he was going to give him a pardon."

In a portion of that interview that did not air but was posted online, the president-elect complained to Kristen Welker:

"The press was obviously unfair to me. The press, no president has ever gotten treated by the press like I was."

BIDEN'S PARDONING OF HUNTER INDICATES HE HAS 'A LOT MORE TO HIDE': LARA TRUMP

Why did he appear on "Meet the Press"? "You’re very hostile," Trump said. Her response: "Well, hopefully, you thought it was a fair interview. We covered a lot of policy grounds."

"It’s fair only in that you allowed me to say what I say. But you know, the answers to questions are, you know, pretty nasty. But look, because I’ve seen you interview other people like Biden."

"I’ve never interviewed President Biden," Welker responded. Trump said he was speaking "metaphorically."

"I’ve seen George Stephanopoulos interview. And he’s a tough interviewer. It’s the softest interview I’ve seen. CNN interview. They give these soft, you know, what’s your favorite ice cream? It’s a whole different deal. I don’t understand why."

The strength of Welker’s approach is that she asked as many as half a dozen follow-ups on major topics, making more news. When she asked, for instance, whether he would actually deport 11 million illegal immigrants, as he’d said constantly on the campaign trail, he answered yes – which for some reason lots of news outlets led with. But a subsequent question got Trump to say he didn’t think the Dreamers should be expelled and would work it out with the Democrats.

As for Trump, he reminded me of the candidate I interviewed twice this year. He was sharp and serious, connecting on each pitch, fouling a few off. This was not the candidate talking about sharks at rallies. 

BIDEN, TRUMP BOTH RIP DOJ AFTER PRESIDENT PARDONS HUNTER

With one significant misstep, he made the case that he was not seeking retribution – even backing off a campaign pledge that he would appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Biden.

That misstep, when Trump couldn’t hold back, was in saying of the House Jan. 6 Committee members, including Liz Cheney: "For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail."

He did add the caveat that he would let his attorney general and FBI chief make that decision, but it allowed media outlets to lead with Trump wanting his political opponents behind bars. For what it’s worth, there’s no crime in lawmakers holding hearings, and this business about them withholding information seems like a real stretch.

Now back to the pardons. This mushrooming debate was obviously triggered by the president breaking his repeated promise with a sweeping, decade-long pardon of his son, a 54-year-old convicted criminal.

But then, as first reported by Politico, we learned that the Biden White House is debating whether to issue a whole bunch of preemptive pardons to people perceived to be potential targets of Trumpian retaliation.

But the inconvenient truth is that anyone accepting such a pardon would essentially admit to the appearance of being guilty. That’s why Sen.-elect Adam Schiff says he doesn’t want a pardon and won’t accept one.

MEDIA ADMITS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS TOO 'WOKE' AFTER KAMALA HARRIS' 2024 LOSS

But many of those potential recipients don’t even know they’re under consideration for sweeping pardons covering anything they may or may not have done.

It is a truly awful idea, and with Biden and Trump both agreeing that DOJ engages in unfair and selective prosecutions – which in the Republican’s case made his numbers go up – the stage is set for endless rounds of payback against each previous administration.

I remember first thinking about the unchecked power of presidential pardons when Bill Clinton delivered a last-minute one to ally and super-wealthy Marc Rich.

So it’s time to hear from Alexander Hamilton, who pushed it into the Constitution. Keep in mind that in that horse-and-buggy era, there were very few federal offenses because most law enforcement was done by the states.

In Federalist 74, published in 1788, Hamilton said a single person was better equipped than an unwieldy group, and such decisions should be broadly applied to help those in need.   

"In seasons of insurrection or rebellion," the future Treasury secretary wrote, "there are often critical moments, when a welltimed offer of pardon to the insurgents or rebels may restore the tranquillity of the commonwealth."

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

Otherwise, it might be too late.

But another founding father, George Mason, opposed him, saying a president "may frequently pardon crimes which were advised by himself. It may happen, at some future day, that he will establish a monarchy, and destroy the republic. If he has the power of granting pardons before indictment, or conviction, may he not stop inquiry and prevent detection?"

An excellent argument, but Hamilton won out.

As Hamilton envisioned, George Washington, in 1794, granted clemency to leaders of the Whiskey Rebellion to calm a fraught situation.

Something tells me that Biden, Trump and their allies aren’t poring over the Federalist papers. But it’s still an awful lot of sweeping power to place in the hands of one chief executive, for which the only remedy is impeachment.

Lindsey Graham wants to rewrite the Constitution to suck up to Trump

Posted on by Morgan Stephens

On Sunday, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, a sycophant to President-elect Donald Trump, praised Trump's push to end birthright citizenship.

“We are one of a handful of countries in the world that allows birthright citizenship,” Graham said in his post. “If you’re born in the United States, you’re automatically an American citizen. This and birth tourism from developed countries like China have become one of the biggest magnets for illegal immigration.”

“I have introduced legislation to end birthright citizenship, and I’m now working on a constitutional amendment to put an end to this practice once and for all,” Graham added.

To end birthright citizenship would mean amending the U.S. Constitution, whose 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States.” For a new constitutional amendment to take effect, it needs to be passed by a two-thirds majority vote in each chamber of Congress as well as ratified by 38 of 50 state legislatures.

Graham’s comments followed Trump’s Sunday appearance on NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” where he declared he would move to end birthright citizenship.

“We’re going to end that because it’s ridiculous,” Trump said in the interview. “We’re the only country that has it, you know.”

Trump’s claim that America is the only country with birthright citizenship is false. More than 30 countries have it, according to a 2018 report by the Library of Congress. However, that mattered little to Graham, who was focused on how it “cheapens” American citizenship. 

"I believe legal immigration is important to our economy and future," Graham continued. "However, birthright citizenship and birth tourism … cheapen American citizenship." 

He concluded with his usual flair: "I look forward to working with President Trump to go beyond his executive order and end this disastrous policy once and for all."

Such a move would directly challenge the landmark 1868 Supreme Court decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which upheld the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of full citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parent's immigration or citizenship status.

Graham has long advocated for ending birthright citizenship. In 2018, during Trump’s first term, he said, “Finally, a president willing to take on this absurd policy of birthright citizenship. And in a series of posts railing against the constitutionally protected right, he declared his plans to introduce legislation in the Senate. 

This past September, he did just that. 

“This legislation will change the laws that exist today,” he said in a press conference announcing his bill, the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2024. “There’s an 1898 Supreme Court ruling that basically suggested that if you’re born in America, you’re automatically a citizen. I do not believe that is a sound policy to have, and the Supreme Court will revisit this if challenged.”

This push to end birthright citizenship comes on the heels of a 2020 Trump administration policy that sought to curb “birth tourism”—a purported practice where foreign nationals travel to the U.S. to give birth, hoping their child will be granted American citizenship. Through the State Department, the Trump administration restricted access to temporary visitor visas for foreign nationals hoping to give birth on American soil, though the administration didn’t provide a clear explanation of how it might know the intentions of pregnant travelers. (It also exempted 39 countries, most in Europe, from the rule.)

Graham’s relationship with Trump has been, to put it mildly, a rollercoaster. 

In 2015, amid the Republican presidential primary, Graham called Trump a “jackass,” and Trump called Graham an “idiot.” 

Eventually, Graham and Trump developed a friendship over their shared disdain for the Affordable Care Act. Since Trump’s first term, Graham has often aligned himself with Trump, from calling Trump’s impeachment hearings a witch hunt, to publicly defending Trump in the media. 

However, earlier this year, the relationship hit a rough patch after Trump reportedly refused to back a federal abortion ban, leading to some reported tension between the two. Yet Graham has remained a staunch supporter of Trump’s immigration policy—one of the agendas that swayed American voters to catapult him back into the White House. 

By challenging the 14th Amendment, Graham and Trump are not just targeting immigration policy—they’re aiming to rewrite what it means to be an American.

Campaign Action

Hunter Biden: A look at how the saga spanning over six years unfolded

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

President Biden pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, ending a saga that has lasted for more than six years, with wide-ranging investigations by the Justice Department and both chambers of Congress related to his conduct and business dealings. 

Hunter Biden was found guilty of three felony firearm offenses stemming from Special Counsel David Weiss’ investigation. The first son was also charged with federal tax crimes regarding the failure to pay at least $1.4 million in taxes. Before his trial, Hunter Biden entered a surprise guilty plea. 

BIDEN PARDONS SON HUNTER BIDEN AHEAD OF EXIT FROM OVAL OFFICE

The charges carried up to 17 years behind bars. His sentencing was scheduled for Dec. 16. 

Here’s a look back at how it all began: 

The federal investigation into Hunter Biden began in 2018.

The probe was predicated, in part, by suspicious activity reports (SARs) regarding foreign transactions. Those SARs, according to sources familiar with the investigation, involved funds from "China and other foreign nations."

Fox News first reported the existence of some type of federal investigation involving Hunter Biden in October 2020, ahead of the last presidential election. It became known then that in the course of an existing money laundering investigation, the FBI had subpoenaed the laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden.

Stories about the laptop were widely panned by Democrats and mainstream media outlets as Russian disinformation. At the time, then-Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe confirmed that the laptop was "not part of some Russian disinformation campaign," but that claim was rejected by Democrats and many in the media.

Social media companies like Twitter and Facebook censored and limited the circulation of stories related to Hunter Biden's laptop before the 2020 presidential election.

Only in 2022 did media outlets verify that the laptop did belong to Hunter Biden and did hold legitimate records belonging to him.

Twitter, under the new ownership of Elon Musk, released records surrounding the company's decisions to block the circulation of the Hunter Biden stories – even though he had been under federal investigation at that point for nearly two years.

Hunter Biden confirmed the investigation into his "tax affairs" in December 2020, after his father was elected president.

But Hunter Biden’s business dealings were also, simultaneously, being investigated by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., in 2019. Specifically, the senators were investigating Hunter Biden’s business dealings with Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings. 

Grassley and Johnson released a report in September 2020 saying that Obama administration officials "knew" that Hunter Biden’s position on the board of Burisma was "problematic" and that it interfered "in the efficient execution of policy with respect to Ukraine."

Hunter Biden joined Burisma in April 2014 and, at the time, reportedly connected the firm with consulting firm Blue Star Strategies to help the natural gas company fight corruption charges in Ukraine. During the time Hunter Biden was on the board of the company, Joe Biden was vice president and was running U.S.-Ukraine relations and policy for the Obama administration.

Also in 2019, Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine came into the spotlight during the first impeachment of now-President-elect Donald Trump. 

House Republicans wanted to call Hunter Biden to testify in the impeachment proceedings in the fall of 2019. 

HUNTER BIDEN INVESTIGATORS LIMITED QUESTIONS ABOUT 'DAD,' 'BIG GUY' DESPITE FBI, IRS OBJECTIONS: WHISTLEBLOWER

Trump was acquitted in Feb. 2020 on both articles of impeachment against him — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — after being impeached by the House of Representatives in December 2019. 

Trump was impeached after a July 2019 phone call in which he pressed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to launch investigations into the Biden family’s actions and business dealings in Ukraine, specifically Hunter Biden’s ventures with Burisma and Joe Biden’s successful effort to have former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin ousted.

At the same time as that call, Hunter Biden was under federal investigation, prompted by his suspicious foreign transactions. 

Trump's request was regarded by Democrats as a quid pro quo because millions in U.S. military aid to Ukraine had been frozen. Democrats also said Trump was meddling in the 2020 presidential election by asking a foreign leader to look into a Democrat political opponent.

Republicans had been investigating Hunter Biden’s business dealings, specifically with regard Burisma. House Republicans, who were in the minority at the time, made several requests to subpoena Hunter Biden for testimony and documents related to the impeachment of Trump and his business dealings that fell at the center of the proceedings.

Biden has acknowledged that when he was vice president, he successfully pressured Ukraine to fire Shokin. At the time, Shokin was investigating Burisma and Hunter Biden had a highly lucrative role on the board, receiving thousands of dollars per month. The then-vice president threatened to withhold $1 billion of critical U.S. aid if Shokin were not fired.

FLASHBACK: DEMOCRATS CLASH WITH REPUBLICANS OVER PROSPECT OF CALLING HUNTER BIDEN IN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL

"I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.' … I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’" Biden recalled telling then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. Biden recollected the conversation during an event for the Council on Foreign Relations in 2018.

Meanwhile, once President Biden took office, the House Oversight Committee led by Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., began investigating Hunter Biden’s business dealings and the business dealings of the Biden family. Comer ultimately found that the Biden family and its associates had received more than $27 million from foreign individuals or entities since 2014.

But it wasn’t until 2023 that whistleblowers from the IRS, Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, brought allegations of politicization in the federal probe of Hunter Biden to Congress. 

The two alleged that political influence had infected prosecutorial decisions in the federal probe, which was led by Trump-appointed Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, who they said had requested to become a special counsel. 

After Shapley and Ziegler testified publicly, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Weiss as special counsel to continue his investigation of the first son and, ultimately, bring federal charges against him in two separate jurisdictions — Delaware and California. 

House Republicans continued to investigate allegations of politicization brought by Ziegler and Shapley, as well as findings related to the Biden family’s business dealings from Comer’s probe. 

BIDEN COMMITTED ‘IMPEACHABLE CONDUCT,’ ‘DEFRAUDED UNITED STATES TO ENRICH HIS FAMILY’: HOUSE GOP REPORT

Comer, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith came together and launched an impeachment inquiry against President Biden to determine whether he had any involvement in his son’s business dealings. Biden repeatedly denied having any involvement, despite evidence placing him at meetings and on phone calls with his son and his foreign business partners.

In August, House lawmakers released their final report, spanning 292 pages, saying that Biden had engaged in "impeachable conduct." They said he had "abused his office" and "defrauded the United States to enrich his family."  

Republicans said there is "overwhelming evidence" that Biden had participated in a "conspiracy to monetize his office of public trust to enrich his family." They alleged that the Biden family and their business associates had received tens of millions of dollars from foreign interests by "leading those interests to believe that such payments would provide them access to and influence with President Biden." 

In the summer of 2023, Hunter Biden pleaded guilty to federal gun charges as part of a plea deal that collapsed before a federal judge in Delaware. In a stunning reversal, Hunter Biden was forced to plead not guilty and sat for a trial this year. 

Before his trial for federal tax crimes, Hunter Biden pleaded guilty. 

President Biden’s pardon of his son came after months of vowing to the American people that he would not do so. 

But on Sunday, the president announced a blanket pardon that applies to any offenses against the U.S. that Hunter Biden "has committed or may have committed" from Jan. 1, 2014, to Dec. 1, 2024. 

"From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted," Biden said. "There has been an effort to break Hunter — who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me — and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough."

Biden added, "I hope Americans will understand why a father and a president would come to this decision." 

What does martial law look like in the U.S.?

Posted on by Alix Breeden

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol briefly declared martial law Tuesday amid alleged “anti-state” forces that he claimed were plotting rebellion and supporting North Korea, despite offering no evidence. 

But roughly six hours after Yoon called martial law and armed forces flooded the streets, the National Assembly voted to end the declaration. Yoon soon faced calls to resign or be impeached. However, an impeachment vote on Saturday failed due to a boycott from Yoon’s party, which was “apparently more concerned about a return to progressive leadership than about Yoon’s actions,” according to The Washington Post. But that seems to have only intensified protests, and the national police have opened an investigation into Yoon for treason. 

As the drama continues to unfurl, many Americans are now looking warily toward President-elect Donald Trump, trying to understand how something like this might play out in the states. 

Trump has a long history of admiring authoritarians. And in 2020, he deployed the National Guard to break up protestors in Washington, D.C., and Portland, Oregon, during protests over a police officer’s murder of George Floyd. But while controversial, that wasn’t martial law. 

However, Trump also reportedly asked about shooting those protestors but was stopped by skeptics in his administration. Which there will be fewer of this time around. And this year, he openly discussed the idea of deploying the military against “the enemy from within.”

A law expert who wished to remain anonymous told Daily Kos that while there is a small possibility that today's conservative-led Supreme Court would support the precedent of Trump declaring martial law, present concerns are “likely overblown.”

Still, ahead of Trump’s second administration, Daily Kos is taking a look at what martial law might look like—and has looked like—in the U.S. 

What is martial law?

Martial law is when the government approves military authority to temporarily step in for civilian government. It’s usually declared during times of war, rebellion, or natural disaster, per the Office of Justice Programs.

Essentially, what happens is that the military steps in to enforce laws and assist local governments in an area in place of local law enforcement. This can also include bringing people accused of crimes before military tribunals—where military officers function as the judge and jury—rather than civilian courts.

Has martial law been used in the U.S.?

Martial law has been declared at least 68 times in U.S. history, with the most recent federal declaration being made in the then-territory of Hawaii during World War II, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, a left-leaning public policy institute.

Following Japan’s devastating attack on Pearl Harbor, military officials were highly suspicious of Japanese-Hawaiians and often doubted their loyalty, journalist Erin Blakemore wrote for History.com. The three-year-long military rule created an oppressive living situation for Hawaiians, especially those of Japanese descent. 

While fear of a potential threat from Japan ran high, military control of food rations and a state-wide curfew made day-to-day living stressful as well. 

Even photography was banned in certain instances over fears of espionage.

Can a U.S. president declare martial law?

Probably not. 

A sitting U.S. president cannot declare martial law in the same way that Yoon did. In the U.S., the president needs approval from Congress first. 

However, as Joseph Nunn of the Brennan Center points out, laws surrounding the idea remain murky. Per Nunn’s article, a sitting president “has ample authority under current law to deploy troops to assist civilian law enforcement” (emphasis in original) but not necessarily replace it. 

That said, states can—and have—declared martial law more frequently, so long as a state’s declaration does not oppose the Constitution.

As Nunn points out, states have deployed military to step in at the local level to assist in things like natural disasters, which grants some power to military personnel on the ground. 

Nunn also told Daily Kos that the history of the United States’ founding goes against the premise of martial law, which was “part of the reason the American Revolution happened,” he explained.

“If you look at the Declaration of Independence, one of the charges that lay at the feet of King George is rendering the military power superior to the civilian [or enacting martial law] in the colonies,” he said. “So, everything about our constitutional system refutes the notion that martial law can exist.”

However, Nunn added that while martial law may be an overblown concern for Americans, the lack of limitations surrounding the Insurrection Act should have people concerned.

“The Insurrection Act gives the president virtually unlimited discretion to use the military as a domestic police force, even if they're operating in a supportive role [with local law enforcement],” he told Daily Kos. 

Nunn explains how “dangerous” it can be to send trained soldiers to act as police officers—a role far different from what they are trained to do in war zones. 

He argued that the president has “far too much discretion” over when to invoke the Insurrection Act, and that it gives “dangerously broad authority to the president to use the military as a domestic weapon.”

Campaign Action