House Dem lashes out at GOP efforts to probe foreign donations with stunning claim on motive
Rep. Terri Sewell claims the GOP probe into ActBlue and CEO Regina Wallace-Jones is part of a pattern of Trump DOJ harassment of Black women in power.

The Trump administration's legal arguments for why federal courts should not interfere in the controversial UFC fight set to take place on the White House lawn were derided as ridiculous by former White House ethics lawyer Norm Eisen on MS NOW's "Deadline: White House" Wednesday.The match, part of Trump's series of events ostensibly celebrating America's 250th anniversary, has come under fire as an event that Trump has a personal financial stake in and stands to profit massively from. Veterans in Washington, D.C. are currently suing to stop it.Anchor Nicolle Wallace cited the key argument from Justice Department lawyers that "final weight cutting is already underway" for 14 fighters, and a delay "could jeopardize the health of the 14 professional athletes involved in the event."Eisen wasn't having it."First of all, the arguments that they're making are so ludicrous," said Eisen, who also worked on Trump impeachment litigation. "Why is the United States Department of Justice making arguments about these fighters? Would they be healthier if, after losing all that weight, they didn't get into that ring?"Ultimately, he said, the arena being erected next to the White House is "a symbol of the way he's defaced Washington, D.C. It's like a graffiti artist run amok in our city," similar to Trump illegally putting his name on the Kennedy Center. "The ring has to come down the same way.""Donald Trump is in a steel cage match with the American people," Eisen added. "He is battering them in the pocketbook because, as you pointed out, this stuff is not free. When he does his $1.8 billion slush fund, it comes out of all of our pockets. It's the same with all of these outrageous projects, and I think the people are sick of it." - YouTube www.youtube.com
Rep. Terri Sewell claims the GOP probe into ActBlue and CEO Regina Wallace-Jones is part of a pattern of Trump DOJ harassment of Black women in power.
The U.S. military said it launched new attacks on Iran on Wednesday, with President Trump saying it's time for the regime to "pay the price." Ed O'Keefe reports.
President Donald Trump has put himself in a "weak" position in his war against Iran, the conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote in an analysis published on Wednesday."For nine weeks, the cease-fire has let Iran dictate events in the Gulf," wrote the board. The way things have progressed, they argued, Iran itself "gets to start each 'skirmish' — shooting at U.S. forces, U.S. allies, or commercial ships — and then decide when the exchange ends," all while attacking Israel through its Hezbollah proxies in Lebanon and using the conflict there as "an excuse to stall talks with the U.S."Through all this, the board wrote, Trump has downplayed Iran's offensives, calling fire on U.S. troops "a trifle," an Iranian bombing of a Kuwaiti airport “not a big deal,” and even saying something almost identical about the Iranian downing of an Apache helicopter.Ultimately, wrote the board, "Mr. Trump limited Israel’s strikes and previewed his own in public. When the U.S. says 'proportional,' Iran hears 'weak.' Offering the regime such forward guidance signals that Mr. Trump still fears a return to war" — all of which tells Iran they have wide latitude to continue violating the ceasefire with minimal to no response from the U.S. military."Mr. Trump won’t want to hear it, but he has been dancing to Iran’s tune," the board concluded. "He will have to break from it or go down as losing the war politically despite the early military gains."This comes as the latest round of talks to resolve the war fail, and new economic data shows inflation surging again as the Strait of Hormuz and much of the world's oil shipping remain blocked.
A new report on Wednesday showed inflation rising 4.2 percent in May, marking its highest level in three years and underlining how hard the Iran war is hitting consumers. The Labor Department report is unwelcome news for President Trump and the GOP in an election year where affordability is the dominant issue. Democrats were already…
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) confronted North Dakota U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Mack Traynor during his 8th Circuit Court of Appeals confirmation hearing, after Traynor repeatedly refused to directly answer who won the 2020 presidential election. When Blumenthal asked the straightforward question, Traynor claimed it was political controversy and inappropriate for a sitting judge to address, citing Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's precedent. Blumenthal pressed further, demanding Traynor state as fact who received more votes, but Traynor continued deflecting his answer. Blumenthal accused Traynor of using a scripted response dictated by the White House, arguing he was protecting the President's election lie by refusing to acknowledge a simple fact. Blumenthal said, "Everybody in this room knows the answer. You're unwilling to state it." The exchange highlighted Trump-nominated judges' coordinated avoidance of confirming basic electoral facts during Senate confirmation hearings.Watch the video below. Your browser does not support the video tag.
An election expert exposed the "great irony" behind Speaker Mike Johnson's claims that the recent California primary elections were "rigged" in a new podcast interview. Stephen Richer, a fellow at the Cato Institute, told Adam Klasfeld of All Rise News on Wednesday that Johnson's claim that election fraud exists "so far upstream that it's hard to prove" shows how illogical the GOP's argument about election fraud is. Several of the party's top officials, including President Donald Trump himself, have said Republican candidate Spencer Pratt was cheated in the election because Democratic candidate Nithya Raman leapfrogged Spencer late in the race due to mail-in ballots. However, the officials have not provided any evidence of fraud. "While we might dislike the way that California administers its elections, and while we might be impatient for the final results, and while we might wish that the media networks could call the election on election night, none of that is evidence of irregularity," Richer said. Instead, Richer noted that Johnson's claim about election fraud being hard to prove was a veiled suggestion that everyone in California is "completely incompetent." "So, this is very frustrating. This is very illogical, and of course, this is bad actors taking advantage of a California system that I believe should be changed, but again, is not fraudulent," Richer said.
The Wall Street Journal is arguing that one detail matches its reporting about President Donald Trump's connection to Jeffrey Epstein.In a new legal filing, lawyers for Dow Jones, the company that owns the Wall Street Journal, argued that Trump "cannot" dispute that a signature appearing on a typewritten note and a sketch of a naked woman sent to Epstein resembles his own.Trump sued the Wall Street Journal over an article about a book of letters compiled for Epstein's 50th birthday in 2003. He alleged that the paper defamed him by noting that the letter and sketch bear his signature. Earlier this year, a court accepted the Journal's motion to dismiss because Trump couldn't prove actual malice in the article. Trump was able to revive a defamation claim, but Dow Jones's lawyers are again seeking to dismiss Trump's lawsuit in their new legal filing.The defense lawyers are telling the court to throw out Trump's lawsuit because "the article is true." After the Journal reviewed the letter and sketch with Trump's signature, Epstein's estate released the "Birthday Book" to the House Oversight Committee in September."The article is true because the description of the letter 'bearing Trump's name' in the article is an entirely accurate description of the letter as it appears in the Birthday Book," the filing read. "The article states that the Journal 'reviewed' the letter before publication and described its contents in detail (which exactly match the contents of the letter released by Congress)," the legal filing argued, adding that Trump doesn't even dispute the resemblance of his signature to the one in the birthday book "because he cannot."