Random

    Politics

    Home Politics

    Trump-Backed President-Elect Levels Stunning Coup Accusation At Colombia’s Leader

    By
    Patrick Houck
    -
    1
    Abelardo de la Espriella, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

    Colombia’s President-elect Abelardo de la Espriella suspended the presidential transition Tuesday and accused outgoing President Gustavo Petro of planning a coup to remain in power after Petro refused to recognize the results of the country’s election.

    Petro claims progressive Sen. Iván Cepeda actually won the popular vote in Colombia’s June 21 presidential runoff, despite official results showing de la Espriella prevailing by less than 1 percentage point.

    The certified tally gave de la Espriella 49.66% of the vote to Cepeda’s 48.70%.

    Petro alleges the result was manipulated through algorithms operated from California by Israeli private intelligence companies. He has not released evidence establishing that those companies altered the vote count or that the officially reported results were fraudulent.

    International election observers have likewise reported no evidence of irregularities that would have changed the outcome.

    De la Espriella alleges plan to ‘cling to power’

    De la Espriella, a conservative lawyer and businessman endorsed by President Donald Trump, responded in a video posted to social media.

    He accused Petro and Cepeda of attempting to “cling to power at all costs” through what he called a “coup d’état.”

    The president-elect called on Colombia’s armed forces to uphold the Constitution and disobey any unlawful orders from Petro. He also urged the international community to monitor the transfer of power and called on his supporters to “resist” until his scheduled inauguration Aug. 7.

    Transition process breaks down

    De la Espriella announced that he was suspending the formal transition process, known in Colombia as the “empalme,” during which the outgoing government provides information needed by the incoming administration.

    Petro’s government then halted its side of the handover.

    Finance Minister Germán Ávila, who is overseeing the transition for Petro’s administration, ordered his team to suspend its work in response. Ávila said the outgoing government had “nothing to hide” and criticized statements made by members of de la Espriella’s transition team.

    The breakdown followed days of increasingly hostile accusations between the outgoing president and his successor.

    Election observers defend vote count

    International observers have not supported Petro’s claims that the runoff was fraudulent.

    A European Union observer mission praised the transparency and efficiency of Colombia’s vote-counting process. The Carter Center described the system used to manage the results as reliable, transparent, and fully traceable.

    De la Espriella was formally declared the winner after defeating Cepeda, who had campaigned on continuing many of Petro’s policies.

    The result represented a major political setback for Petro, whose government has struggled with security concerns and a largely unsuccessful effort to negotiate peace agreements with several armed groups.

    Incoming government moves ahead

    Despite suspending cooperation with Petro’s administration, de la Espriella continued preparing to take office.

    He announced six additional Cabinet appointments Tuesday, adding to previously named choices for the defense, interior, finance, and environment ministries.

    The dispute has raised concerns about whether Colombia’s traditionally peaceful transfer of presidential power will proceed normally.

    For now, Petro remains scheduled to leave office and de la Espriella is set to be inaugurated Aug. 7.

    READ NEXT: Counterterrorism Takes Over Conservative Leader’s Death Probe

    No American Should Stand Alone Against Government Abuse. Help Change That.

    Trump Challenges Biden To Pre-Debate Drug Test

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Trump is throwing down the gauntlet…

    Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump challenged Joe Biden to take a drug test before this week’s televised presidential debate.

    “DRUG TEST FOR CROOKED JOE BIDEN??? I WOULD, ALSO, IMMEDIATELY AGREE TO ONE!!!” Trump wrote Monday on Truth Social.

    The former president has repeatedly suggested Biden could take a performance-enhancing drug before the debate, with some already discounting any well-received performance by the incumbent as a charade.

    In two other posts on Truth Social, Trump praised Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas), who sent a letter to the president and his physician Monday, demanding he take drug tests immediately before and after the debate.

    “Ronny Jackson was a brilliant Doctor, Admiral and now, a GREAT Congressman,” the presumptive GOP nominee wrote in one post. “He happens to be totally right about what is written in this MUST READ Article but, unfortunately, nothing will be done about it!”

    Trump and Biden will square off Thursday night in a debate hosted by CNN, in what will be the first debate since the 2020 election. 

    Trump last week said he does not want to underestimate Biden ahead of the debate.

    “Well, all I can say is this: I watched him with Paul Ryan, and he destroyed Paul Ryan,” Trump said during an episode of the “All-In podcast” last week. “And he beat Paul Ryan, so, I’m not underestimating him.”

    DeSantis Leads Biden by a Larger Margin Than Trump in Ohio

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    4

    With less than a month until Election Day Americans are already looking ahead to the next presidential election.

    Former President Trump has repeatedly hinted for months about his plans to lunch a third presidential campaign however, despite Trump’s popularity among conservatives some Americans say he isn’t the right candidate to take on Joe Biden in 2024.

    Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ prolific rise to political stardom seems to have no end in sight and despite his sole focus on his re-election campaign Americans say he is the right man to unseat Biden.

    The most recent Emerson College Polling reports that the Florida governor leads President Joe Biden by a wider margin than the former president in a potential 2024 matchup in Ohio, according to The Washington Examiner.

    Polling head Spencer Kimball said, “For voters whom the economy is the top issue, 66% plan to vote for Vance and 22% Ryan. For those who say threats to democracy is their top issue, 81% plan to vote Ryan, and for those who say abortion is their top issue, 89% plan to vote for Ryan.”

    It tested Biden and found his approval underwater, like most everywhere in the country. But it also looked at his chance of winning a reelection vote in the state that picked Trump in 2020, 53%-45%.

    “Fifty-seven percent of Ohio voters disapprove of the job Joe Biden is doing as president, while 37% approve. In a hypothetical 2024 match-up between President Biden and former President Donald Trump, 48% would support Trump and 40% support Biden. Nine percent would support someone else and 3% are undecided. In a hypothetical match-up between Biden and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, DeSantis leads 49% to 38%. Seven percent are undecided and 6% would vote for someone else.”

    Emerson’s polling also shows Senate candidates Trump-backed J.D. Vance and Rep. Tim Ryan are in a dead heat.

    Trump Impeachment Star Witness Makes Longshot Run For Senate

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Retired Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a former National Security Council official best known for his role in President Donald Trump’s first impeachment, announced Tuesday that he is entering Florida’s 2026 U.S. Senate race as a Democrat, challenging Republican Sen. Ashley Moody.

    Vindman rose to national prominence in 2019 after testifying against President Trump over a phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky—testimony that became central to Democrats’ first impeachment effort. That impeachment ultimately failed, with the Senate acquitting Trump in a 52–48 vote largely along party lines.

    In his campaign launch video, Vindman leaned heavily on footage from the impeachment proceedings, framing his candidacy as an extension of his opposition to Trump. “The last time you saw me was here,” Vindman said, referring to the impeachment hearing. “Swearing an oath to tell the truth about a president who broke his.”

    Vindman went on to describe Trump as a “wannabe tyrant” and claimed the former president unleashed a “reign of terror and retribution” against him and his family—language that underscores how central anti-Trump activism is likely to be to his campaign pitch.

    A political newcomer with no prior electoral experience, Vindman faces steep odds in Florida, a state that has moved decisively to the right in recent election cycles. Trump carried the Sunshine State by 13 points in November 2024, and Republicans currently hold every statewide elected office. Florida has not elected a Democratic senator since Bill Nelson’s narrow reelection victory in 2012.

    Vindman, an Iraq War veteran, retired from the Army in 2020 after a decades-long military career. He later filed a lawsuit against Trump and several former aides, alleging “intimidation and retaliation,” but the suit was unsuccessful. His wife, Rachel Vindman, publicly criticized former President Joe Biden for declining to issue pardons to the couple at the end of his term.

    “Whatever happens to my family, know this: No pardons were offered or discussed,” Rachel Vindman wrote in a post on Bluesky. She added that she “cannot begin to describe the level of betrayal and hurt” she felt toward the Biden administration.

    Sen. Ashley Moody, a Republican and former Florida attorney general, was appointed to the Senate by Gov. Ron DeSantis to fill the seat vacated by Marco Rubio after Rubio became secretary of state. Moody is running for reelection with the backing of President Trump and the National Republican Senatorial Committee, giving her a significant institutional and fundraising advantage.

    The Cook Political Report currently rates the race as “solid Republican,” its strongest rating for GOP-held seats—reflecting Florida’s recent political realignment and Democrats’ continued struggles to remain competitive statewide.

    The 2026 contest is a special election to serve the final two years of Rubio’s term. The winner will need to run again in 2028 to secure a full six-year term.

    Vindman has lived in Broward County since 2023, a Democratic stronghold in South Florida. His twin brother, Eugene Vindman, represents a safely Democratic House district in northern Virginia, further highlighting the family’s close ties to Democratic politics.

    Nationally, Democrats face a difficult map in 2026 as they attempt a longshot effort to retake control of the Senate. To do so, they would need to defend vulnerable seats in states like Michigan and Georgia while flipping at least four Republican-held seats—an outcome most analysts consider unlikely.

    Donald Trump Jr. just endorsed Byron Donalds for Governor! But he needs all the help he can get to keep Florida red. Grassroots supporters like YOU can make a HUGE impact! [Help Byron Donalds TODAY]

    ‘Decoy’ Senate Candidate Under Investigation Over Alleged Voter Confusion Scheme Targeting Trump-backed Candidate

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    President Donald J. Trump visits the El Arepazo Doral restaurant, Monday, March 9, 2026, in Miami, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

    A Senate candidate nicknamed “Decoy Dan” is under investigation by Alaska election officials amid allegations that he entered the race to confuse voters and siphon support from Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan, a key ally of President Donald Trump.

    Alaska Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom announced Monday that the state has opened a formal investigation into Daniel James Sullivan Jr., a Petersburg resident who recently launched a campaign for the U.S. Senate while sharing the same first and last name as the incumbent senator.

    The probe will determine whether Sullivan’s candidacy was filed in “good faith” or whether it was part of a deliberate effort to mislead voters ahead of Alaska’s Aug. 18 primary election.

    “The Division of Elections has a fundamental obligation to protect the integrity of Alaska’s elections and ensure voters are not deceived about the identity of the candidates on their ballot,” Dahlstrom said in a statement announcing the investigation.

    In a letter sent to Sullivan, Dahlstrom said state officials are examining what she described as “credible allegations” that the candidate entered the race to exploit voter confusion by sharing both the name and party affiliation of the sitting senator.

    “There are credible allegations that you declared your candidacy in coordination with another candidate and campaign out of intention to confuse and manipulate voters by capitalizing on the fact that you share a first and last name with the incumbent senator and have selected the same political party affiliation,” Dahlstrom wrote.

    The controversy erupted after Daniel J. Sullivan switched his candidate filing to Republican shortly before entering the race, placing him on the ballot alongside Sen. Dan S. Sullivan, the Republican incumbent seeking a third term in the Senate. Critics say the move intensified concerns that voters could mistakenly support the wrong candidate.

    The National Republican Senatorial Committee has also weighed in, urging Alaska election officials to reject the candidacy. In a letter to state election authorities, NRSC General Counsel Blake Murphy argued that the filing appears designed to “confuse voters and undermine confidence” in the election process.

    Sen. Sullivan’s campaign has accused Democrats of orchestrating the effort to benefit former Democrat Rep. Mary Peltola, who is mounting a high-profile challenge in one of the nation’s most closely watched Senate races. Republicans currently hold a narrow Senate majority, making the Alaska contest a key battleground in the fight for control of the chamber.

    “Everybody in Alaska knows I’m Dan Sullivan-R,” the senator said last week. “He’s purposely trying to trick my constituents.”

    Peltola’s campaign has flatly denied any involvement.

    “Our campaign has no involvement with either Sullivan campaign,” spokesman Harry Child told The Associated Press.

    The Alaska Democratic Party has likewise denied any connection to the candidate.

    For his part, Daniel J. Sullivan insists his campaign is legitimate and rejects claims that he is serving as a political decoy.

    “I have every right to run for whatever office I’m qualified for, and I’m qualified for this office,” Sullivan told the AP. “I think I’m doing what most Americans would think would be a patriotic thing to do when you’re unsatisfied with the status quo.”

    The challenger, a retired teacher and former U.S. Forest Service employee, said he has had “zero, none, zilch” contact with Peltola’s campaign or Democratic operatives and maintains that running for office was entirely his own decision.

    The unusual dispute has drawn national attention because of the stakes involved. Sen. Sullivan, who has represented Alaska in the Senate since 2015, has been endorsed by President Donald Trump and is viewed as a crucial Republican incumbent in the battle for Senate control. Trump previously praised Sullivan for supporting his agenda and backed his reelection efforts.

    Under Alaska’s election system, all candidates appear on the same primary ballot regardless of party, with the top four finishers advancing to the general election. While candidates will be identified by their middle initials on the ballot, Republicans argue that the presence of two Republican candidates named Dan Sullivan could still create significant voter confusion.

    State officials have not yet announced whether Daniel J. Sullivan will ultimately be allowed to remain on the ballot. The investigation remains ongoing.

    Inside The White House Correspondents’ Dinner Suspect’s ‘Manifesto’

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    3

    The man accused of opening fire outside the White House Correspondents’ Dinner left behind a detailed “manifesto” describing his intent to target members of the Trump administration, “prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest,” according to a copy obtained by CBS News.

    Cole Allen, 31, allegedly sent the writing to family members before the attack. In it, he stated that while law enforcement, hotel employees, and guests were not his intended targets, he was willing to harm them if necessary to reach administration officials. “I really hope it doesn’t come to that,” he wrote.

    Authorities say Allen charged a security checkpoint outside the Washington Hilton on Saturday night armed with a shotgun, a handgun, and knives. President Donald Trump and other officials were quickly escorted from the event, which was later canceled. A Secret Service agent who was shot during the incident, while wearing a bulletproof vest, has since been released from the hospital.

    The suspect’s brother reportedly alerted police in Connecticut after receiving the email, prompting law enforcement to intervene. Investigators later recovered additional writings from Allen’s home in Torrance, California, and his hotel room at the Hilton.

    A chilling and ironic tone

    Throughout the message, Allen adopted a matter-of-fact tone, at times veering into irony.

    “Hello everybody!” he began. “So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today.”

    He apologized to his parents “for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for ‘Most Wanted,’” and to colleagues and students for claiming he had a personal emergency. He suggested that by the time the email was read, he might already require medical attention, referring to potential injuries as “self-inflicted status.”

    Declared targets — with one exception

    Allen wrote that he chose to act because he did not want the administration’s alleged “crimes” to “coat [his] hands.” While he did not explicitly name Trump or the event, he described a plan to target officials in descending order of rank.

    He made one notable exception: “not including Mr. Patel,” he wrote, referencing the FBI director, who was also in attendance.

    Allen added that he would avoid targeting Secret Service, Capitol Police, or National Guard personnel unless necessary. “I hope they are wearing body armor,” he wrote.

    He also detailed tactical decisions, claiming, “In order to minimize casualties, I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls).”

    Anticipating criticism

    The manifesto included a section addressing hypothetical objections to his actions, along with rebuttals.

    “As a half-black, half-white person, you shouldn’t be the one doing this,” he wrote as a potential criticism. “Rebuttal: I don’t see anyone else picking up the slack.”

    He also referenced his Christian faith, writing that some might argue he should “turn the other cheek.”

    “Rebuttal,” he continued, “Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed.”

    Allen then described various unnamed individuals experiencing hardship, in some cases attributing their struggles to the administration.

    “I don’t expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it,” he added.

    Criticism of security

    In a postscript, Allen sharply criticized security measures at the event.

    “PS… what the hell is the Secret Service doing? … No damn security. Not in transport. Not in the hotel. Not in the event,” he wrote.

    He claimed that if he had been a foreign agent, he could have brought in heavier weaponry without detection. Officials note that while the Washington Hilton hosted the event, it remained an operational hotel with public access, and only specific areas were secured.

    Family warnings and prior behavior

    Allen’s sister reportedly told investigators that he frequently used “radical” rhetoric and had previously discussed doing “something” to address what he saw as problems in society and government.

    She also revealed her brother was a regular visitor to the shooting range, was a member of a group called “The Wide Awakes” and had previously attended a “No Kings” rally in California. 

    Political reaction and unanswered questions

    The motive behind the attack remains under investigation.

    Former President Barack Obama emphasized the lack of confirmed details while condemning political violence broadly.

    “Although we don’t yet have the details about the motives behind last night’s shooting… it’s incumbent upon all of us to reject the idea that violence has any place in our democracy,” Obama wrote. He also praised the Secret Service, calling their work “a sobering reminder of the courage and sacrifice” they show.

    During a “60 Minutes” interview, Trump reacted angrily after host Norah O’Donnell read excerpts from the alleged manifesto.

    “You read that crap from some sick person? I got associated with all stuff that has nothing to do with me,” Trump said, adding, “You should be ashamed of yourself… You’re a disgrace.”

    More than 2,500 people had gathered for the annual dinner, which celebrates the First Amendment. Trump, who has typically declined to attend during his presidency, had made a historic appearance this year and has since said he hopes to reschedule the event within 30 days.

    The Full Manifesto

    To read Allen’s full 1,052-word manifesto as published by The New York Post, with minor edits to improve profanity, see below:

    Hello everybody!

    So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today. Let me start off by apologizing to everyone whose trust I abused.

    I apologize to my parents for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for “Most Wanted.”

    I apologize to my colleagues and students for saying I had a personal emergency (by the time anyone reads this, I probably most certainly DO need to go to the ER, but can hardly call that not a self-inflicted status.)

    I apologize to all of the people I traveled next to, all the workers who handled my luggage, and all the other non-targeted people at the hotel who I put in danger simply by being near.

    I apologize to everyone who was abused and/or murdered before this, to all those who suffered before I was able to attempt this, to all who may still suffer after, regardless of my success or failure.

    I don’t expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it. Again, my sincere apologies.

    On to why I did any of this:

    I am a citizen of the United States of America.

    What my representatives do reflects on me.

    And I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.

    (Well, to be completely honest, I was no longer willing a long time ago, but this is the first real opportunity I’ve had to do something about it.)

    While I’m discussing this, I’ll also go over my expected rules of engagement (probably in a terrible format, but I’m not military so too bad.)

    Administration officials (not including Mr. Patel): they are targets, prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest

    Secret Service: they are targets only if necessary, and to be incapacitated non-lethally if possible (aka, I hope they’re wearing body armor because center mass with shotguns messes up people who *aren’t*

    Hotel Security: not targets if at all possible (aka unless they shoot at me)

    Capitol Police: same as Hotel Security

    National Guard: same as Hotel Security

    Hotel Employees: not targets at all

    Guests: not targets at all

    In order to minimize casualties I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls)

    I would still go through most everyone here to get to the targets if it were absolutely necessary (on the basis that most people *chose* to attend a speech by a pedophile, rapist, and traitor, and are thus complicit) but I really hope it doesn’t come to that.

    Rebuttals to objections:

    Objection 1: As a Christian, you should turn the other cheek.

    Rebuttal: Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed. I’m not the person raped in a detention camp. I’m not the fisherman executed without trial. I’m not a schoolkid blown up or a child starved or a teenage girl abused by the many criminals in this administration.

    Turning the other cheek when *someone else* is oppressed is not Christian behavior; it is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes.

    Objection 2: This is not a convenient time for you to do this.

    Rebuttal: I need whoever thinks this way to take a couple minutes and realize that the world isn’t about them. Do you think that when I see someone raped or murdered or abused, I should walk on by because it would be “inconvenient” for people who aren’t the victim?

    This was the best timing and chance of success I could come up with.

    Objection 3: You didn’t get them all.

    Rebuttal: Gotta start somewhere.

    Objection 4: As a half-black, half-white person, you shouldn’t be the one doing this.

    Rebuttal: I don’t see anyone else picking up the slack

    Objection 5: Yield unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.

    Rebuttal: The United States of America are ruled by the law, not by any one or several people. In so far as representatives and judges do not follow the law, no one is required to yield them anything so unlawfully ordered.

    I would also like to extend my appreciation to a great many people since I will not be likely to be able to talk with them again (unless the Secret Service is *astoundingly* incompetent.)

    Thank you to my family, both personal and church, for your love over these 31 years.

    Thank you to my friends, for your companionship over many years.

    Thank you to my colleagues over many jobs, for your positivity and professionalism.

    Thank you to my students for your enthusiasm and love of learning.

    Thank you to the many acquaintances I’ve met, in person and online, for short interactions and long-term relationships, for your perspectives and inspiration.

    Thank you all for everything.

    Sincerely,

    Cole “coldForce” “Friendly Federal Assassin” Allen

    PS: Ok now that all the sappy stuff is done, what the hell is the Secret Service doing? Sorry, gonna rant a bit here and drop the formal tone.

    Like, I expected security cameras at every bend, bugged hotel rooms, armed agents every 10 feet, metal detectors out the wazoo.

    What I got (who knows, maybe they’re pranking me!) is nothing.

    No damn security.

    Not in transport.

    Not in the hotel.

    Not in the event.

    Like, the one thing that I immediately noticed walking into the hotel is the sense of arrogance.

    I walk in with multiple weapons and not a single person there considers the possibility that I could be a threat.

    The security at the event is all outside, focused on protestors and current arrivals, because apparently no one thought about what happens if someone checks in the day before.

    Like, this level of incompetence is insane, and I very sincerely hope it’s corrected by the time this country gets actually competent leadership again.

    Like, if I was an Iranian agent, instead of an American citizen, I could have brought a damn Ma Deuce in here and no one would have noticed s**t.

    Actually insane.

    Oh and if anyone is curious is how doing something like feels: it’s awful. I want to throw up; I want to cry for all the things I wanted to do and never will, for all the people whose trust this betrays; I experience rage thinking about everything this administration has done.

    Can’t really recommend it! Stay in school, kids.

    John Kennedy here. The last fundraising deadline passed — and we came up short. Now the woke crowd is celebrating, saying “Kennedy’s finished.” Let’s prove them wrong. Chip in $25, $50, or whatever you can to close the gap and keep fighting.

    Republican Senator Calls Trump’s Migration Plan A ‘Huge Mistake’

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    10
    Trump at the border wall via Wikimedia Commons

    Kentucky Senator Rand Paul (R) thinks President-elect Donald Trump should reconsider his deportation plan.

    On Monday, Trump responded to a Truth Social post by Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, who said that Trump is reportedly “prepared to declare a national emergency and will use military assets to reverse the Biden invasion through a mass deportation program.”

    “TRUE!!” Trump posted.

    Trump made a historic mass deportation campaign a cornerstone of his 2024 campaign, and his top officials have repeated that promise since he was elected this month.

    In an appearance on Newsmax, on Tuesday, Paul expressed his opposition to such a plan.

    Watch:

    “I think what I would do if I were in charge of the immigration situation would be to first to go after those who have committed crimes. You know, the big news right before the election was that there were 15,000 people in our country who have committed murder, there are about 13,000 that have committed sex crimes, violent sex crimes. That’s 28,000 people. Why don’t we start with that 28,000?” began Paul. “I’m not in favor of sending the army in uniforms into our cities to collect people. I think it’s a terrible image. And that’s not what we use our military for, we never have. And it’s actually been illegal for over 100 years to bring the army into our cities. Army and our military are trained to shoot the enemy. They’re not trained to get a warrant to do what they’re doing. The police have a difficult job, but the people removing people from our country need to be a police enforcement domestic agency, not the military. So while I’m all for ‘Remain in Mexico,’ I will not support an emergency to put the army into our cities. I think that’s a huge mistake.”

    “Do you think that’s what what Trump is intending to do?” asked host Rob Schmitt.

    “Well, that’s what he said yesterday or his spokesman said, the stories all said he would declare an emergency to use the military to remove people. I’m not for that. I’m not for really most presidential emergencies because they smack of martial rule. They smack of of no congressional approval. They smack of no checks and balances,” replied the senator. “So, look, I’m supportive of President Trump. I’m supportive of removing people illegally here, particularly people who have committed crimes. But I’m not for the Army marching up and down our streets. I think it’s a terrible image to send the world. It’s a terrible image for us as citizens. And so I hope he will think twice about trying to use an emergency edict to have the army patrolling our country.”

    Trump Snaps Over DeSantis’ Endorsement of Colorado Senate Candidate

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    4
    Donald Trump via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Has Florida Governor Ron DeSantis inadvertently sparked a feud with Donald Trump?

    DeSantis’ decision to endorse Colorado Republican Senate candidate Joe O’Dea has sparked Trump’s fury, calling the endorsement a “huge mistake.”

    “Hello this is Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. America needs strong leadership and desperately,” said DeSantis in a robocall. “That’s why I’m endorsing Joe O’Dea for U.S. Senate. Colorado, please vote for Joe O’Dea.”

    Trump later shared The Washington Examiner piece on his social media site TRUTH Social and wrote, “A BIG MISTAKE!”

    Over the summer, Trump opted to support state Rep. Ron Hanks during the primary and since then has traded insults with the Republican candidate. O’Dea has publicly derided Trump as a “black eye” for the United States and has said he plans to actively campaign against him if he launches a presidential campaign in 2024.

    “There’s this RINO character in the Great State of Colorado, Joe O’Dea, that is running against the incumbent Democrat for the United States Senate, who is having a good old time saying that he wants to “distance” himself from President Trump, and other slightly nasty things. He should look at the Economy, Inflation, Energy Independence, defeating ISIS, the Strongest EVER Border, Great Trade Deals, & much more, before he speaks. MAGA doesn’t Vote for stupid people with big mouths. Good luck Joe!” Trump shared in a TRUTH Social message.

     “President Trump is entitled to his opinion, but I’m my own man and I’ll call it like I see it,” O’Dea responded. “Another Biden-Trump election will tear this country apart. DeSantis, Scott, Pompeo or Haley would be better choices. These elections should be focused on Joe Biden’s failures supercharged inflation, a broken border, rampant crime, a war on American energy, not a rehash of 2020.”

    Trump has all but confirmed his 2024 plans but has stopped of making any formal announcement that would tie him to specific campaign finance laws. DeSantis has also been named an early presidential contender but has maintained his only focus is winning his gubernatorial re-election.

    Marjorie Taylor Greene Worries Trump Will Try To Cancel 2028 Election

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    Marjorie Taylor Greene -Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, via Wikimedia Commons

    Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene warned this week that she fears President Donald Trump could attempt to delay or cancel the 2028 presidential election if the United States remains involved in an ongoing war with Iran.

    Greene made the comments during an interview Thursday with Alex Jones, where she argued that remarks Trump previously made about elections during wartime have raised concerns for her.

    “I’m concerned,” Greene said. “And he said it jokingly. But at the same time, knowing President Trump, I looked at that, and I thought, I don’t know if he’s saying it joking.”

    Greene pointed to comments Trump made last year during a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky regarding Ukraine’s delayed elections amid its war with Russia.

    “So you say, during the war, you can’t have elections,” Trump said at the time. “So let me just see. Three and a half years from now — so you mean if we happen to be in a war with somebody, no more elections? Oh, that’s good.”

    Greene suggested that repeatedly raising the concept — even in a joking context — could normalize the idea in the minds of voters.

    “So, that type of behavior is someone planting an idea over and over,” Greene said. “Again, he constantly says it so that he can normalize the idea and test support and test people’s reactions. Saying it over and over normalizes the idea, and I think it’s incredibly dangerous.”

    She added that any effort to seek a third term or cancel elections would conflict with constitutional limits.

    “There cannot be a third term, no. That’s against our laws. That’s against the Constitution,” Greene said. “And if this country is at war, no, our election should not be canceled.”

    Greene’s comments mark another sharp break from one of Trump’s once-most-visible allies in Congress. For years, Greene was among the president’s strongest defenders on Capitol Hill, frequently aligning herself with his agenda and political messaging.

    But the relationship has deteriorated over the past year as Greene increasingly criticized Trump on several issues, including U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts, the administration’s handling of materials related to the Epstein investigation, and what she has described as a departure from the “America First” priorities that helped fuel Trump’s political rise. Reports have also indicated Trump declined to support Greene in a potential Senate campaign before she left Congress earlier this year.

    Her remarks also come as Trump has increasingly raised concerns about the political consequences of the 2026 midterm elections. Trump has argued publicly that if Democrats regain control of Congress, they would likely pursue new impeachment proceedings against him, reviving investigations and political battles that defined much of his first term.

    Trump has framed the possibility of a Democrat midterm victory as carrying major implications for his presidency, while allies have argued that maintaining Republican control of Congress will be critical to advancing his agenda and preventing renewed efforts to investigate or challenge his administration.

    Greene’s warning reflects a growing divide within some corners of the broader MAGA movement, particularly among figures who argue that foreign military involvement risks pulling Trump away from the domestic-focused “America First” platform that many supporters backed.

    We don’t have to guess what the Democrats will do if they win in November; they already told us. Fill out this quick survey and let the President know if he can count on you.

    Team Harris Taps Liz Cheney To Shore Up Support In Birthplace Of GOP

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    6
    Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Kamala is getting desperate…

    Vice President Kamala Harris has reportedly tapped former Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney to help sway Republicans.

    A senior Harris campaign official says that the vice president on Thursday will team up in battleground Wisconsin with former Republican Rep. Liz Cheney, a former rising conservative star in the GOP who became her party’s most visible anti-Trump leader.

    The campaign event will take place in Ripon, Wisconsin, where a one-room schoolhouse was designated a national historic landmark due to its role in holding a series of meetings in 1854 that led to the formation of the Republican Party.

    Ripon is not the only town that claims to be the birthplace of the GOP. Exeter, New Hampshire also has some bragging rites, as it was the site of meetings in 1853 – a year ahead of the Ripon gatherings – by disenchanted political leaders who discussed the formation of a new party of Republicans.

    But officials in Ripon said the group in Exeter never actually formed a political organization, or chose officials, as they did in Wisconsin.

    Cheney — who has argued that the former president is a “liar,” a “con man” and a potential “tyrant” who, if elected again, would “torch the Constitution” — vowed after leaving Congress that “I will do everything I can to make sure [Trump] is never anywhere near the Oval Office again.”

    According to her campaign, Harris plans to spotlight the significance of that moment and that place – as she makes another direct appeal to Republican voters frustrated that Trump is their party’s presidential nominee – and as she reiterates her pledge to be a president for all Americans.

    The Harris campaign says that the vice president, at her event with Cheney, plans to note that while Republicans may not agree with her on every issue, she promises to uphold the Constitution, America’s fundamental principles, and the rule of law.

    I Am Donald J. Trump. FEAR NOT! There are those who will do whatever it takes to stop us, but I will never stop fighting for you. I will never surrender! Your support means everything to me. Together, through our UNITY, we will Make America Great Again!

    123...61Page 1 of 61
    © Great America News Desk 2022