CNN media reporter Oliver Darcy says staffers in the network’s ranks have lost faith in CEO Chris Licht who has been at the center of controversy in recent weeks.
“There are a wide range of emotions coursing through the halls of CNN. Some staffers are frustrated. Others are angry. Many are sad about the awful state of affairs that has taken hold of an organization they love,” Darcy wrote in his Reliable Sources media newsletter late Monday. “There is one near-universal sentiment, however, that has been communicated to me: Licht has lost the room.”
On Monday, Lichet reportedly apologized to CNN staffers during the outlet’s morning editorial call over the negative press attention that has followed the publication of a lengthy profile of him.
In the piece, published Friday by The Atlantic, Licht was critical of the network’s coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic under the leadership of former top executive Jeff Zucker and discussed his ner vision for the network that focuses on facts rather than sensationalism.
“In the eyes of so many at CNN, there isn’t anything Licht can do at this point to win over their support,” Darcy wrote. “They’ve hit the wall with him. As one anchor texted me, in reference to Licht’s announcement on Monday that he will relocate his office to a newsroom floor at Hudson Yards: ‘We don’t want his office relocated to the 18th floor, we want it relocated out of the building’.”
Since taking the reigns at CNN, Licht has made a number of programming changes which say some of the network’s mainstays exit.
The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
President Donald Trump’s legal team has requested a Florida federal judge reject a request from the Wall Street Journal to dismiss a $10 billion defamation lawsuit over the paper’s reporting on the bawdy letter allegedly penned by Trump that appeared in a birthday book for disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
In a court filing late Monday, Trump’s lawyers argued that the July article and surrounding coverage were a “deliberate smear campaign designed to damage President Trump’s reputation” and subject the president to “public hatred and ridicule.” They also requested oral arguments over the Journal’s recent motion to dismiss.
“Defendants did not publish the Article on the front page of The Wall Street Journal based on a mere harmless joke between friends,” Monday’s filing said. “Indeed, such an assertion strains credulity beyond repair. The Article, and the surrounding media around it, were all a deliberate smear campaign designed to damage President Trump’s reputation.”
Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence for aiding and participating in Epstein’s trafficking of underage girls, told Justice Department officials in August that Epstein had asked her to organize contributions to his 50th birthday book from friends and associates, but said she could not recall if Trump, then a private citizen, was among those who responded.
Last month, the House Oversight Committee released records from Epstein’s estate that included a copy of a birthday book with the alleged letter from Trump that the newspaper had described.
Trump then filed a lawsuit against the Journal in July, and has continued to assert the letter is fake and that the signature on the letter is not his.
Acknowledging the release of the letter by the House Oversight panel, Trump’s lawyers alleged that the Wall Street Journal was still “deliberate and malicious” in its reporting by claiming that the letter was not only authored by Trump but also “on-brand” for the president.
The Wall Street Journal has stood by its reporting.
“Because Plaintiff has publicly admitted that he was Epstein’s friend in the early 2000s, his reputation cannot be harmed by the suggestion that he was friends with Epstein in 2003. Indeed, he was listed in the Birthday Book as a ‘friend’ of Epstein. The fact that his relationship with Epstein may now be a political liability — over 20 years after the Birthday Book was presented to Epstein — does not change this conclusion,” the Journal contended in its request for dismissal.
While the Journal’s reporting included a denial from President Trump, his lawyers argued in Mondays filing that the publication still acted with a “reckless disregard for the truth” because the request for comment was rushed and the reporting allegedly cast doubt on the president’s claim.
As Americans continue to wait for official midterm results to trickle in Republicans are already diving themselves into two camps: Ron DeSantis or Donald Trump.
Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley celebrated a symbolic victory in New Hampshire early Tuesday morning. Haley won all six votes in Dixville Notch, which kicked off the first-in-the-nation primary vote just past midnight.
The remaining voters headed to the polls later on Tuesday.
The final tracking poll before Tuesday’s primary showed Trump with a 22-point lead over Haley — his largest yet.
While addressing a crowd of supporters Trump tore into Haley after his win in New Hampshire.
“I have to tell you — it was very interesting, because I said, ‘Wow what a great victory,’ but then somebody ran up to the stage all dressed up nicely when it was at 7, but now I just walked up, and it was at 14,” Trump said, mocking Haley for delivering remarks to supporters after the race was called in his favor.
“Let’s not have somebody take a victory when she had a very bad night. She had a very bad night,” Trump said.
Later, he added that he couldn’t let his former United Nations ambassador “get away with bullshit.”
“But I felt I should do this, because I find in life, you can’t let people get away with bullshit,” he said. “You can’t. And when I watched her in the fancy dress … I said, ‘What’s she doing?’ We won. And she did the same thing last week.”
Former FBI Director James Comey will not appear before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee as part of Republicans’ ongoing investigation into the federal government’s handling of Jeffrey Epstein.
Comey had been subpoenaed in August by Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) to answer questions about any knowledge of Epstein during his time as deputy attorney general (2003–2005) and later as FBI director (2013–2017). But in a letter sent to Comer on Oct. 1, Comey declined to testify, insisting he has “no knowledge or information relevant to the Committee’s investigation.”
“I offer this letter in lieu of a deposition that would unproductively consume the Committee’s scarce time and resources,” Comey wrote.
Republicans on the panel are investigating whether federal law enforcement or intelligence agencies overlooked or mishandled information about Epstein, the convicted sex offender who died in federal custody in 2019. The probe covers activities dating back to 1990 — a period that includes Comey’s high-level DOJ and FBI service.
Comey stated unequivocally:
“At no time during my service at the Department of Justice or the FBI do I recall any information or conversations that related to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.”
(Maxwell, Epstein’s longtime associate, is serving 20 years for sex trafficking minors.)
The letter carries weight — knowingly making false statements to Congress is a federal crime. After receiving Comey’s response, Comer withdrew the subpoena, saying it would not be productive to proceed. Comer has also recently rescinded subpoenas for former Attorneys General Eric Holder and Merrick Garland, who similarly said they had no relevant information.
Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have also been subpoenaed to appear privately before the Oversight Committee this month however, it’s currently unclear if those meetings will go ahead as scheduled.
Top Republicans, including President Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson (La.), have voiced support to continue the Oversight probe, arguing that it represents the most effective way to get information promptly. Comer has already released thousands of documents obtained under subpoena from the Justice Department and Epstein’s estate.
Kari Lake speaking with supporters at a "Stand for Freedom" rally at the Embassy Suites by Hilton Scottsdale Resort in Scottsdale, Arizona. [Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons]
ANALYSIS – The polls are showing a national GOP rally which again points to a potential ‘Red Tsunami’ in November.
This means that the GOP will almost certainly be retaking control of the House, and may even narrowly win back the Senate, effectively making Joe Biden even more of a ‘lame duck’ than he already is.
But as encouraging and critical as this is, what is frightening Democrats the most may be the governor’s race in Arizona.
And they should be afraid. Very afraid.
There, ‘ultra MAGA’ Kari Lake is neck-and-neck in the polls for Governor against Democrat Katie Hobbs.
Many experts have concluded that almost all pollsters undercount conservative Republican voters, often because they have simply ‘opted out’ of the process until the election.
So, when the polls show races are close, this likely means the Republicans are ahead.
And this means Kari Lake, a smooth and charismatic former local TV news host, and novice politician backed strongly by Donald Trump, could very well win the state’s gubernatorial race.
As Dems see it, this means that the 53-year-old Lake, who left journalism and the media in 2021, and has questioned the 2020 election results, could ‘threaten Arizona’s 2024 election processes.’
They also see her as a potential Trump vice presidential candidate or even a post-Trump presidential candidate.
As Axios reports, key Democrat strategists are clearly panicked by Lake:
David Plouffe, the architect of Barack Obama’s 2008 victory, told Axios that Lake looks like a “plausible presidential candidate.”
David Axelrod, another key former Obama adviser, offered this assessment of Lake’s 20+ years in Arizona local TV before her entrance last year into politics: “If you get a candidate who has the performance skills of a major-market local TV anchor and the philosophy and thinking of Steve Bannon, that’s a potent and dangerous combination. … Look at Italy.”
…Former senior Hillary Clinton adviser Karen Finney said Lake represents “a more polished version” of MAGA.
Meanwhile, Lake isn’t just a MAGA candidate, she has been embraced by the GOP establishment, with all the powerful benefits that this brings.
Doug Ducey, Arizona’s outgoing GOP governor and chair of the Republican Governors Association, opposed Lake in her primary. But now, he’s backing her with great energy.
Lake has also charmed Arizona GOP donors, including members of the state’s political establishment…
In private meetings and on calls with donors, RGA officials have made clear they are prepared to spend aggressively to get Lake across the finish line. “Voters have a clear choice and we’re confident they’ll make Kari Lake their next governor…”
Bottom line:If Lake wins the governorship of Arizona, expect her to be the next big rising MAGA star. She may also be Trump’s 2024 VP, and/or even a top contender for 2028 GOP presidential candidate.
“Ultra MAGA” Kari Lake may be the GOP woman to watch in November.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
On Sunday, Nikki Haley said she plans to pardon Donald Trump if she is elected to the White House.
Asked the question directly by an audience member at a Fox News town hall in South Carolina, where she once served as governor, Haley said a pardon would be in the country’s “best interest” so Americans can work to “leave the negativity behind” without being further divided.
“If you’re talking about pardoning Trump, it’s not a matter of innocence or guilt at that point, because that means he would have already been found guilty,” Haley said at the town hall, hosted by John Roberts. “I believe, in the best interest of bringing the country together, I would pardon Donald Trump. Because I think it’s important for the country to move on.”
“We’ve got to leave the negativity and the baggage behind,” she added. “I don’t want this country divided any further. I don’t think it’s in the best interests for America to have an 80-year-old president sitting in jail and having everybody upset about it. I think this would be the time that we would need to move forward and get this out of the way.”
Trump currently faces four criminal indictments, including two on the federal level brought by special counsel Jack Smith
In January, Haley said she would not consider a preemptive pardon for Trump but would issue a pardon if he were found guilty.
“I think you only do it if someone’s found guilty. So, you know, what I’ll say is this is about moving the country forward, and the last thing we want to see is an 80-year-old former president sitting in jail,” she said on Fox News when asked if she would pledge to pardon Trump preemptively or only if he was found guilty.
“Instead, we want to say, ‘OK, how do we put the past behind us and move forward as a country?’ And I think that by pardoning him, that absolutely would move the country forward, instead of dividing it further. And so I think you always have to look at what’s in the best interests of the country,” she added.
After chaotic rounds of voting last year to select a House Speaker, Republican firebrand Marjorie Taylor Greene is hoping this year is a little smoother.
Rep. Greene (Ga.) who unsuccessfully sought to oust House Speaker Mike Johnson from the speakership last year, said that she will vote on Friday for Johnson to retain the gavel.
Last year, the congresswoman lambasted Johnson as “the Uniparty Speaker,” asserting that he “is exactly what is wrong with the Republican establishment” and had “done nothing for conservatives and given everything to Joe Biden and Democrats.”
But she now plans to vote on Friday for Johnson to remain in the leadership post.
“Let’s put aside our pride, let’s put aside our egos, and let’s put aside the infighting,” she said in a video, adding that it is time for the GOP to join together and “do whatever it takes to make sure that we deliver the mandate that the American people told us to do.”
However, despite the Congresswoman’s newfound support, Johnson’s path to the Speaker’s gavel isn’t clear.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) who supported the effort to oust Johnson last year, has declared that he will not support the speaker’s bid to remain in the role.
“You can pull all my fingernails out, you can shove bamboo up in them, you can start cutting off my fingers, I am not voting for Mike Johnson tomorrow,” Massie declared during an appearance on “The Matt Gaetz Show.”
Watch:
Rep Thomas Massie (KY) says he’s not voting for Mike Johnson.
“No. You can pull all my fingernails out. You can shove bamboo up in them. You can start cutting off my fingers. I am not voting for Mike Johnson.” pic.twitter.com/RHJ1wkFhFa
President-elect Donald Trump endorsed Johnson for the job earlier this week.
“Speaker Mike Johnson is a good, hard working, religious man. He will do the right thing, and we will continue to WIN. Mike has my Complete & Total Endorsement. MAGA!” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.
Trump, in a Truth Social post, praised Johnson as a “fine man of great ability, who is close to having 100% support.”
“A win for Mike today will be a big win for the Republican Party, and yet another acknowledgment of our 129 year most consequential Presidential Election!!” Trump wrote.
Johnson responded to the post and thanked Trump for his support.”Thank you, President Trump! Today is a new day in America,” Johnson wrote in a post on X Friday morning.
“Congressional Republicans must stay united to quickly deliver President Trump’s America First agenda. Let’s get it done.”
President Donald J. Trump is presented with a 10th Combat Aviation Brigade challenge coin following an air assault and gun rain demonstration at Fort Drum, New York, on August 13. The demonstration was part of President Trump's visit to the 10th Mountain Division (LI) to sign the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019, which increases the Army's authorized active-duty end strength by 4,000 enabling us to field critical capabilities in support of the National Defense Strategy. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Thomas Scaggs) 180813-A-TZ475-010
This week, Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) said that he believes the U.S. military could serve as a constraint on President Donald Trump’s administration, arguing that senior uniformed leaders remain primarily loyal to the Constitution rather than any individual political figure.
Speaking during an appearance on “MS NOW” Wednesday morning, Warner previewed questions he said he plans to ask U.S. Navy Adm. Frank M. Bradley when Bradley testifies Thursday before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Warner serves as the committee’s vice chair.
Warner said his questions will focus in part on concerns surrounding Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the administration’s recent military actions, including strikes in the Caribbean. Warner said he trusts Bradley, but raised doubts about Hegseth’s public statements.
“Remember, this is an administration that has treated the uniformed military with unprecedented disrespect when they were all brought to get a pep rally in front of Hegseth and Trump,” Warner said. “This is an administration that’s fired uniform generals from the head of the NSA, the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency.”
He added: “And I think in many ways, the uniformed military may help save us from this president and his lame people like Hegseth, because I think their commitment is to the Constitution and obviously not to Trump. And I expect Bradley to adhere to that.”
Warner’s comments follow similar remarks from other Democrats who have suggested service members could resist unlawful directives. Earlier this year, six Democratic lawmakers urged members of the military to resist “illegal” orders.
Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) made a related argument in an interview last month with Don Lemon, saying he has spoken with service members who view their oath as a safeguard.
“What gives me hope, and I talk to service members all the time. They tell me that I don’t appreciate enough and the public doesn’t appreciate enough that while Congress is not a check on the president anymore, and the judiciary at the Supreme Court is hardly a check, military members have told me, ‘We can be a check,’” Swalwell said.
He continued: “They’re essentially saying, ‘We’re not going to betray our oath to the Constitution because this guy tells us to.’ While it’s not codified that way — they’re not a branch of government on their own— their honor and integrity might just save us.”
Former President Barack Obama also addressed the issue Monday, saying he has seen signs of “resistance” within the military to what he described as politicization, while adding he does not believe that politicization has fully taken hold.
“I would not expect the politicization of the Justice Department or our military,” Obama said. “And I don’t think that’s happened. I think there’s been resistance, particularly in the military, to that, but the degree to which that has been encouraged, you know, that used to be something that I would lecture other countries not to do.”
ANALYSIS – With just three weeks to go until the U.S. midterm elections, a New York Times/Siena poll of likely voters finds the Republican party is gaining momentum national over the Democrats as concerns over the economy, inflation, illegal immigration, and crime, grow among voters.
When the the Times sounds the alarm, even in an understated way, expect things to be far worse for the Democrats than reported.
But when the Times “Chief Political Analyst” resorts to breaking down the numbers in the most comical and petty way, to lessen the impact on Dems, expect a red wave.
According to this poll, 49% of likely voters plan to vote for a Republican to represent them in Congress on November 8, compared with 45% who plan to vote for a Democrat.
That’s a four-point lead, versus a one-point lead Democrats reportedly had over Republicans just last month, making the total swing in voter preference in just a few months five points.
That’s a significant shift.
Rising inflation and declining stocks are making the economy the number one concern for voters, who believe Republicans are better equipped to deal with these concerns.
And this could mean that not only will the GOP most certainly win back the House but may gain control of the Senate too.
As the New York Times writes:
… [that’s a] notable swing from last month, when Democrats led by one percentage point among likely voters. Since then, the warning signs for Democrats have begun to add up, including Republican polling gains in key Senate races like those in Nevada, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, and surprising Republican strength in districts in Rhode Island and Oregon where Democrats would normally be safe.
The Times explains that this isn’t a one-off poll:
It adds, as I have predicted it would since the Roe vs Wade reversal:
The evidence for a shift toward Republicans appears to be underpinned by a change in the national political environment. Gas prices went up again. The stock market is down. A variety of data suggests that the electorate’s attention is shifting back to issues where Republicans are on stronger ground in public opinion, like the economy, inflation, crime and immigration, and away from the summer’s focus on democracy, gun violence and abortion, where Democrats have an edge.
In other words, the conditions that helped Democrats gain over the summer no longer seem to be in place.
But America’s “paper of record” can’t help itself so it desperately still tries to spin the narrative in a less damaging light for the Dems.
So, Nate Cohn, The Times’ chief political analyst, formerly with liberal New Republic, then goes on to laughably diminish the GOP four-point advantage into “only” a three-point advantage due to “rounding” of the poll result numbers.
He further goes on to spend a great deal of time discussing the intricacies of polling, and how imperfect polling is.
Something that I totally agree with.
However, this level of inane wonkery to diminish polls showing one party’s advantage nationally is something I’ve never seen in over 30 years of politics.
Meanwhile, many experts point out that the biggest error in polling in today’s political environment is how undercounted conservative Republicans are in the polls.
This was highlighted in a recent Washington Post piece that used Ohio as an example:
A look at the Marist poll’s fine print suggested something that should make Democrats nervous in the run-up to Nov. 8: Pollsters might be seriously undercounting the Republican electorate — specifically, the working-class White voters who were crucial to Trump’s electoral success.
What caught my attention in the poll’s details was the information that 45 percent of respondents had a college degree. A check of the most recent census data indicates that in Ohio, only about 29 percent of the adult population has a bachelor’s degree or higher.
The writer, Mark Weaver, an election law attorney, and communications consultant,adds something I have discussed before – that conservative Republicans and Trump voters have been cowed into silence, but they still vote.
He notes:
This isn’t just about a single poll or a single state. I regularly talk with pollsters and campaigns, and I hear a common lament: Trump voters distrust pollsters and the media that reports on poll results, and simply won’t participate, out of protest or paranoia.
He continues discussing undercounted ‘shy’ or ‘submerged Trump voters’:
Trump supporters might have the added worry of being attacked for frankly stating their views. Stories of those affiliated with Trump being arrested, subpoenaed, doxed or mocked — with Trump providing angry amplification — result in a lower social trust of strangers inquiring about political views.
So, if the the Times “Chief Political Analyst” wanted to be a real polling wonk, perhaps he should ask why the polls have been so wrong about Republicans recently.
And instead of doing intellectual summersaults to diminish a four-point GOP lead, admit the GOP lead is probably MUCH, MUCH, greater.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
