Stories Chosen For You
Trump supporters were confused why his big event wasn't such a big event: Daily Show's Jordan Klepper
The Daily Show's Jordan Klepper revealed another of his videos on the show this week, but in a CNN interview with Jim Acosta, he exposed MAGA fans that were very confused at the latest event.
While there was the typical denialism around former President Donald Trump being out of office, what was dramatically different is that the attendees at the recent event couldn't understand why it wasn't a significant rally as it usually is.
"And what was it like? I mean when you were there. You know, Trump is talking about these smaller gatherings as if it's a plus. You know, we know Trump and how he likes large crowd sizes, and we don't need to go down that road, but what is your sense of how his campaign is shaping up so far?" asked Acosta.
"Well, it was interesting. You know, if you were expecting a spectacle, you weren't getting it there. It was confusing," said Klepper. "There were people who came assuming it was a rally. Other folks called it a rally. Others called it an intimate event. There were MAGA people who were disappointed it wasn't a big, giant, event. Some thought it was a reelection kick-off, some a reinstatement kick-off. Some a rifle t-shirt super sale. There's confusion in the air, which should be expected with a Trump campaign. I think overall, there's hope, at least interior-wise, that this is a new, better Trump 3.0. Something that should be underlined with this event is these ideas were coming from people who went inside, who were invite-only. So, the folks that we ended up talking to out here, most of them went inside, and they went inside because they're important enough to have invitations to be in the front row of this GOP discussion."
See the interview with Kelpper below or at the link here:
Lots of confusion at recent MAGA event www.youtube.com
Trump changes his tune about Chinese spy balloon — now claims he would have made 'the greatest deal EVER'
For days, former President Donald Trump and his allied Republicans have railed against President Joe Biden for not shooting down a Chinese spy balloon as it made its way across the United States.
According to the Pentagon, the balloon first came into the U.S. space in Alaska at the end of January, but Biden wasn't told about it until several days later. At that point, it was nearing Montana when Biden told the military to shoot it down when safe to do so.
They also announced Sunday that there were at least three incidents of spy balloons flying over the United States under Donald Trump's administration, which his aides have denied. The Pentagon came out with a clarification, saying that it wasn't caught at the time and only after the fact. There was no further elaboration.
Trump then claimed: "The Chinese would never have floated the Blimp ('Balloon') over the United States if I were President!!!"
So, it's unclear if the Pentagon or the White House will be willing to provide evidence or further information on the previous incidents.
But then Trump decided to backtrack on his idea that he would have shot the balloon down immediately.
"Who sends a Billion Dollar blimp, with the most sophisticated equipment in the World, and large enough to hold ten cars or 3 large buses, into a complex pattern over the United States, without it quite possibly being manned, such as the 'manned spacecraft?'" Trump asked.
The Pentagon announced last week that the balloon "has the ability to maneuver” and that it likely wasn't as sophisticated as something like a satellite would be.
Trump then came up with the idea of the negotiations: "China should have been called to ask. If 'no,' shoot it down, if 'yes,' negotiate the greatest deal EVER!"
He didn't elaborate on what that "deal" would be. The comments also come after Trump said he would have shot the balloon down by now.
Former Manhattan DA lawyer Mark Pomerantz will appear on two major outlets ahead of the publication of his tell-all book next week. Excerpts of the book have been reported over the past several days, attacking District Attorney Alvin Bragg for refusing to go after Donald Trump over a slate of crimes.
Pomerantz walks through the information he was able to gather from the investigations into Trump and dishes about the debates he had with former DA Cy Vance and new DA Bragg about Trump charges. After a successful case convicting Trump's companies of 17 charges, Bragg announced he would go after Trump personally, which he said he wouldn't do after taking over the office.
“After closely reviewing all the evidence from Mr. Pomerantz’s investigation, I came to the same conclusion as several senior prosecutors involved in the case, and also those I brought on: More work was needed,” Bragg said in a statement, according to The Newe York Times.
Meanwhile, there is a discussion about the fraud involved in the Stormy Daniels hush money payments.
All of it has prompted New York University law school professor and former senior Robert Mueller prosecutor Andrew Weissmann to ask questions about the details he's reading in the book.
"A question I have for Pomerantz: if the former DA, Vance, categorically approved charging Trump (as you said in your resignation letter which was leaked to the press), then why didn't you do so when Vance was in office?" Weissmann asked.
Pomerantz's story recalls Cy Vance coaxed him out of retirement to work specifically on the Trump case. He called the investigation "floundering" when he began but was able to home in on the hush-money payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal. That seemed too risky to prosecute, however, which is why he began to focus on the federal racketeering laws on the books.
Weissmann also said that Pomerantz claims "Bragg was slow to engage, but when did his transition team first ask to be briefed and when were they? Your book concedes they were excluded from a key 'summit meeting,' so how do you then fault them for not being up to speed?" He also wants to know why Bragg is getting all of the flack and not Vance.
At one point in the book, Pomerantz said that he pondered charging Trump as a "victim" of extortion, but the DA rejected the idea. Weissmann said that it's the right move and that it would make "no sense and smacks of reverse engineering charges."
Weissmann also wants to know where the feds are on charging Trump for tax evasion and financial fraud over the hush money payments. He also wants to know why Trump was never charged with the 10 obstruction charges the Mueller report outlined.
"The new Pomerantz book underscores again the lack of activity here," said Weissmann.