A Fox News host uncorked a bizarre on-air tirade against Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico, calling him a "demon in human skin."Emily Compagno appeared to lose her composure on Friday's edition of "Outnumbered" while discussing Talarico, a 37-year-old state representative now in a statistical tie with embattled Republican nominee Ken Paxton. Compagno was reacting to a conservative PAC attack ad featuring Talarico calling the American flag a "complicated" symbol for many Americans."Every single voter [in Texas] needs to understand exactly who they would vote into office, which is an anti-business, anti-commerce, anti-capitalist, anti-Texas Texan," Compagno railed.She then escalated sharply."This person is a demon in human skin, and they need to make sure he does not go anywhere — to the nation's capital, where he can actually do some real damage other than his horrible words that he keeps spewing," she said.A Talarico spokesman responded that the campaign could confirm the candidate is "in fact a human, and not a demon in human skin."The outburst lands as the race tightens into a genuine toss-up. A New York Times/Siena survey released Monday found Paxton and Talarico deadlocked at 47 percent among likely voters, with Talarico leading 58-31 among independents and 61-29 among Hispanic voters.Paxton defeated four-term Sen. John Cornyn in a May 26 primary runoff after President Donald Trump threw his backing to the state's scandal-plagued attorney general. Paxton was impeached by the Texas House in 2023 before being acquitted by the state Senate, and he has faced years of criminal securities fraud allegations and accusations of abusing his office.Trump himself has appeared unsettled by Talarico's rise. In a Truth Social post after the runoff, the president refused to use the Democrat's name, instead branding him "Alfred E. Neuman" and "the worst TEXAS candidate I have ever seen."On "Outnumbered," Compagno added that Talarico's past remarks were "patently disqualifying for any American senator."Compagno on Talarico: This person is a demon in human skin pic.twitter.com/BM5nohCvxT— Acyn (@Acyn) July 3, 2026
During a recent appearance on the Sean Hannity Show, Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania revealed the one thing that would make him leave the Democrat Party.
The post Senator John Fetterman Reveals the One Thing That Would Make Him Leave the Democrat Party (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
Trump v. Barbara may ultimately come to be remembered not as the final word on birthplace citizenship but as another constitutional detour waiting to be corrected.
Former Democrat-turned-Independent Senator Joe Manchin is urging Sen. Fetterman to follow in his footsteps as his former party lurches left. Manchin bucked the Democratic Party in 2024 […]
Iran’s joint military command on Thursday warned of a “forceful response” if all the oil tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz do not follow the approved routes. “Any failure to comply, deviation from the designated route, or disregard for the navigation protocols of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Strait of Hormuz will…
The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship this week. The Times said the decision "capped a more than decade-long effort by Mr. Trump to use the issue as a political tool." A relief, to be sure, but no cause for celebration. A plain reading of the 14th Amendment would bring anyone to the same decision. The court was split, however, with some justices unable to resist the temptation to dehumanize immigrants by calling them "foreign birth tourists." The majority didn't check the president, though that's how most people will see it. A more accurate interpretation would be that it encouraged him, or some future authoritarian, to try again. Change a few things, including who's on the court, and a plain reading of the 14th Amendment won't matter anymore. All it would take to destroy equal citizenship would be five rogue justices pretending that history didn't happen and words don't have meaning.The high court can't be allowed to continue in its present form, not when it profanes the Constitution, perverts the rule of law, and comes within a hair of transforming America into de jure apartheid state. It has already legalized corruption. It has already gutted the Voting Rights Act. Yesterday, it said that the US Congress (meaning we, the people) has no rights which a Republican president is bound to respect. All things being equal, it's only a matter of time before the current court finds a way to turn "white makes right" into law. The Republican won't stop it. Will the Democrats?I can't say I'm encouraged after reading Dana Milbank's latest. A former Post columnist who now writes for NOTUS, Milbank wanted to know if the unitary executive powers amassed by Trump and blessed by this court can be used to launch what he called "a new Progressive Era, in which a Democratic president imposes by executive fiat government run health care and many other ideas liberals have long dreamed about but lacked the votes to enact." Milbank interviewed "veterans of previous Democratic administrations and liberal policy wonks" to ask "what would it look like if the next Democratic president wielded power the way Trump does?" The answer, Milbank said, is like "an embryonic Project 2029," though no one called it that. "The advocacy arms of the Roosevelt Institute, the Center for American Progress and other influential groups on the left are already assembling lists of ways a Democratic president could use the breathtaking executive power Trump has seized."On that list are some golden nuggets. They include (and here I'm quoting Milbank almost verbatim): creating a government-run health insurer; seizing patents from drug makers that developed their products with government funding; establishing government-run grocery stores; cutting off funds for businesses that don’t significantly raise their wages; taking “golden shares” in, or other forms of government control over, frontier AI firms, banks, pharmaceutical firms and others; dismantling the Department of Homeland Security; and breaking up media monopolies like Paramount's merger with Warner Bros. Discovery. I'm sampling what is a truly mouth-watering list of progressive objectives, but two aspects stand out from the full list. One is that it's limited to policy. Two is that there's nothing on the list about reforming the Supreme Court. Indeed, there does not seem to be awareness among Milbank's sources that the Supreme Court will strike down every one of these policies if given a chance, no matter how good or popular they might become. Worse, a kind of magical thinking seems to be driving the debate. None other than Neera Tanden suggested what's good for a Republican is good for his Democratic successor in the eyes of the court. "Trump has discovered, or created, powers that no president has ever had that have been sanctioned by a rightwing Supreme Court,” said the head of the Center for American Progress. “Trump has widened the aperture of the powers the federal government has.” That aperture, Tanden said, can be used by a Democrat to "create a kind of new social contract.”Not if John Roberts has anything to say about it. It doesn't matter how much "Trump has widened the aperture of the powers the federal government has." The next Democratic president can't change America without changing the court. It is not politically neutral. It does not serve the law. It is profoundly corrupt. And only a fool would forget that what this court gives, this court can take away. It must be held accountable for its impunity for the law, same as everyone. So expand its number, impose term limits, strip its jurisdiction, throttle its budgets – whatever it takes, because there will be no new dawn as long as there's a rightwing supermajority that's prepared to veto it.
Former New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio freaked out on Fox News’ Sean Hannity live on-air as the pair clashed over the recent socialist takeover of New York City.
