WASHINGTON — The 2024 U.S. election is under threat from a growing number of foreign actors using ever more sophisticated methods to conduct interference, the country's top intelligence official warned Wednesday.
Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines singled out Russia, China and Iran as the worst offenders — but added the federal government had never been better prepared to protect American democracy from foreign influence.
A caller on C-SPAN's morning show explained that she had left the Republican Party because its lawmakers "do nothing but interfere" and "endorse everything [Donald] Trump does."
During Wednesday's Washington Journal program, a caller from Maryland named Mary said she used to be a Republican but changed her party affiliation to Independent.
"The reason I'm calling is to just say that anybody voting for a Republican is voting against their best interest," the caller announced. "Republicans are threatening Social Security and Medicare, which is going to affect millions of people, including us, who are seniors and who have been getting Social Security and dependent upon Social Security for paying our bills and taxes and everything."
ALSO READ: Trump is willing to trade our children’s future for a billion dollars
Mary then pointed to Trump as a reason for leaving the party.
"I can't imagine anybody in their right mind knowing what Trump is like," she said. "Trump is only for Trump. Nobody, nothing, nobody is more important than Trump. He works only for what is beneficial to him."
She spoke briefly about Maryland politics before returning her focus to the Republican Party.
ALSO READ: Trump’s Manhattan trial could determine whether rule of law survives: criminologist
"I used to be a Republican, then I moved because I realized Republicans do nothing but interfere," she explained. "They don't care for the middle class."
"All they want to do is endorse everything Trump does, and by that, I mean, he wants to give the biggest tax breaks to the richest."
Former President Donald Trump's acceptance of two presidential debate invitations spurred immediate mockery about teleprompters, fictional serial killers and a common medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
Trump and Biden have officially agreed to two debates on June 27 — before the Republican National Convention is expected to nominate the former president as the party's candidate — and on Sept. 10.
"Someone better get the teleprompter and Adderall ready!" a Trump parody account said on X.
Brett Meiselas had a question and a prediction: "What excuse will Trump come up with right before the debate to back out of participating?"
ALSO READ: Trump is willing to trade our children’s future for a billion dollars
X user Lady Edith also predicted Trump would find an excuse to bail but did not express regret.
"Trump is not up to the challenge of a debate," they wrote. "I suspect June 23, Trump will come up with his excuse. I like the idea of Biden going ahead and debating an empty podium."
X user @KnoBrain3r, recalled Trump's recent campaign speech mention of the cannibalistic "Silence of the Lambs" antagonist portrayed by Sir Anthony Hopkins.
ALSO READ: Trump told to pay up before rallying in N.J. town he previously stiffed
"Will Trump CRUSH Biden by telling that HILARIOUS Hannibal Lecter anecdote during the debates?" they asked.
Trump also brought up the infamous movie villain at an Iowa rally in Oct. 2023, during which he mixed up the character and the actor who portrayed him, saying, “Hannibal Lecter, how great an actor was he?”
There will be fewer red ties in Washington D.C. Thursday when Republican lawmakers plan to descend en masse on former President Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial, according to a new report.
Four Republicans told Politico Wednesday that a large number of House conservatives want to take a political field trip to the New York City courtroom where Trump faces charges that he cooked his books to pay hush money to an adult film star ahead of the 2016 presidential election.
About 16 members of the House Freedom Caucus are eyeing a trip to New York, one potential traveler told the news outlet.
“Every Republican should go support [former] President Trump,” said Chair Bob Good (R-VA). He declined to comment on whether he'd make the trip himself.
ALSO READ: 'Most transparent president' Trump won't meet financial transparency deadline. Again.
In recent days Trump has been accompanied to court by Republicans who include Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), Sens. J.D. Vance (R-OH) and Tommy Tuberville (R-AL).
Former presidential candidates Doug Burgum and Vivek Ramaswamy also appeared sporting matching blue blazers and red ties.
On Wednesday, Sen. Mitt Romney said he found the spectacle "difficult to watch."
"Going out and prostrating themselves in front of the public to try and, apparently, curry favor with the person who's our nominee is embarrassing," Romney said. “It's a little demeaning to show up in front of the courthouse — and particularly one where we're talking about an allegation of paying a porn star."
ALSO READ: Trump is willing to trade our children’s future for a billion dollars
The Republican's reported Manhattan-bound journey was also met with ridicule when the news hit social media.
"Its 100% about intimidation," replied X user LM Entertainment. "Disgusting. [They're] supposed to be 'working' on the taxpayers dime."
X user @MaximusDecimus0 added, "All bone heads and conspiracy theorists."
Bad economy, President Joe Biden loses; good economy, former President Donald Trump wins.
That was the theory Trump provided followers Wednesday in a nuanced Truth Social analysis of the effect his presidential election campaign has had, and will have, on the stock market.
ALSO READ: Trump told to pay up before rallying in N.J. town he previously stiffed
"The only reason the Stock Market is high is because I am leading in all of the Polls," Trump declared. "I don’t win, we will have a CRASH of similar proportions to 1929."
Trump of course was threatening readers with the prospect of another Black Thursday, the stock market crash that heralded the onset of the Great Depression.
The former president's basis for this claim is a Bloomberg News interview with one of his key backers, Scott Bessent, a George Soros protégé who told the news outlet this week he believed recent stock market rallies proved investor confidence in Trump.
"Thank you to Scott Bessent, one of the Great Prognosticators on Wall Street!" Trump wrote.
ALSO READ: 16 worthless things Trump will give you for your money
Bessent's recent foray into the conservative publishing industry saw him immediately sued and criticized for failing to disclose financial ties to the Democrat billionaire, according to a Washington Post report from March.
Trump often attacks Biden on financial grounds topics, condemning "Bidenomics" policies that include the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal of 2021 and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.
For his part, Biden says his administration is responsible for more than $860 billion in business investments, forgiveness for $153 billion in student loan debt for nearly 4.3 million people, and record job development in key swing states such as Georgia.
At a recent campaign stop in Wisconsin, Biden reminded voters of a development deal Trump promised the state that never materialized.
"They dug a hole with those golden shovels," Biden said, "and then they fell into it."
Hunter Biden will go on trial soon on felony gun charges, and White House aides are worry about its impact on the president — and the election.
The younger son of President Joe Biden is scheduled to stand trial starting June 3 in federal court and, while aides say the White House will not get involved in the case, the president will surely be following it closely, reported Politico.
“He worries about Hunter every single day, from the moment he wakes up to the moment he goes to sleep,” said an adviser. “That will only pick up during a trial.”
Biden checks on his son every day, usually in phone calls but sometimes by text, and advisers say he will continue to do so during the trial, but aides never bring up his legal problems for fear of an angry retort or an icy stare, two sources said.
The White House won't have any operation to push back against the political blowback from the case, and outside allies who defended him during the impeachment hearings will probably hold back until the trial is over, Politico reported.
“People are reluctant to become involved in this case,” said his attorney Abbe Lowell.
ALSO READ: Marjorie Taylor Greene delays financial disclosure day after motion-to-vacate debacle
Politico said the possible effect on the election is not being handled. "There is little-to-no appetite among his aides to discuss ways to politically manage it, even as the reelection campaign accelerates into a crucial phase," the site wrote.
However, one Biden ally said they might respond if Donald Trump or House Republicans include the president in their attacks on his son, though Politico reports GOP strategists believe they've extracted as much political benefit as they're going to get from the Hunter Biden saga.
“It will be used as a pivot point to go into the main talking points about the Bidens,” said one source who works for a pro-Trump group. “But him having a gun and snorting cocaine — that doesn’t go to the Biden Crime Family narrative and story.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-M.D.) appeared on CNN Wednesday to sing the praises of Angela Alsobrooks, who won the Democratic primary for the Senate race on Tuesday night and will face off against former Republican Gov. Larry Hogan.
But, after trashing Donald Trump for putting Republicans in the position for races to come down to who will codify reproductive freedom, Raskin took aim at a meeting Trump had with big oil companies where he allegedly offered a quid pro quo — and demanded action.
The Washington Post reported Trump met executives for oil companies where he offered major policy concessions if they would raise $1 billion for his campaign. The executives were reportedly "stunned."
"You want an investigation," said CNN host Dana Bash. "What in there is illegal? What do you think that he did that broke the law?"
"We know that the ex-president pocketed nearly $8 million from foreign governments, including China, Saudi Arabia, and other autocratic regimes in violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause when he was president," he said.
Raskin concluded that this is an ongoing pattern for Trump.
"But now, amazingly, he goes to the CEOs and executives of gas and oil companies and says, you guys should raise me $1 billion because you're gonna get a lot more back from me in everything that I'm going to give to you in terms drilling rights, and changing the pro-environment policies of the Biden administration."
ALSO READ: Trump is exploiting, abusing, playing, bending and breaking the legal system
He said if that is not against the law, because he's not currently president, then "it should be against the law."
Raskin asked for an investigation, calling it, "Very clearly a quid pro quo arrangement that was advanced by Donald Trump, who remains a one-man crime wave. We will follow the investigation and see where it goes."
The U.S. Senate is "likely" to take up the investigation, said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
See the comments from Raskin below or at the link here.
'One-man crime wave': Lawmaker demands probe into Trump quid pro quo with big oil www.youtube.com
On Wednesday morning, President Joe Biden issued a challenge to Donald Trump to agree to 2024 presidential debates with a set of rules that would restrict his ability to bluster his way through them.
According to MSNBC's Willie Geist, should the former president agree to them, he will get "steamrolled."
The New York Times reported early Wednesday, "The Biden campaign has proposed rules — including the automatic cutting-off of microphones — to ensure Mr. Trump does not blow through his time limits and talk over Mr. Biden as he did relentlessly during their first debate in 2020."
ALSO READ: Trump is willing to trade our children’s future for a billion dollars
In a letter to the embattled ex-president, a representative for Biden wrote, "There should be firm time limits for answers, and alternate turns to speak — so that the time is evenly divided and we have an exchange of views, not a spectacle of mutual interruption.”
That news was greeted with no small amount of amusement by the panel members on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" who said agreeing to those terms would be a disaster for Trump.
"Donald Trump cannot agree to these terms because he will be steamrolled in that format," co-host Geist said with a smirk. "He can't carry on with no audience cheering him on, without a friendly moderator. He cannot win that debate on the merits and the issues. He also doesn't like having the terms of a debate dictated to him and he's not going to say 'Sure, I'll agree to that even though he said 'Any time, any place."'
Co-host Joe Scarborough interjected, "I mean this is a guy who dodged so many debates. He hasn't debated anybody since 2020 because he lost those two [2016] debates I guess and he didn't want to debate the Republicans. "
"Well, we'll see if the Trump campaign has a response any time soon about this, but I agree with the table," co-host Mika Brezinski added, "I don't think he's going to let this happen to himself because it's too scary for him, it's too fair, it's actually a debate. He can't win that, but he could loudmouth his way through a situation."
Watch the video below or at this link.
MSNBC host Joe Scarborough went on an extended rant on Wednesday morning over a recent questionable — according to analysts— New York Times/Siena poll that showed Donald Trump with unusually huge leads in battleground states, with the "Morning Joe" host accusing the venerable newspaper of publishing "garbage" to create news.
According to the NYT poll, President Joe Biden is struggling with young voters and voters of color. However, as co-host Mika Brzezinski pointed out, polling experts have taken to social media to rip the pollsters' methodology apart saying the final results have been "skewed" in Trump's favor.
According to Scarborough, he truly believes the Times has been pushing sketchy polls showing Trump leading because it allows them to get multiple stories out to drive the news cycle.
ALSO READ: 8 ways Trump doesn’t become president
Scarborough pointed out, "We do this every time when this poll comes. It's always an outlier and the New York Times" always gets 15 or 16 articles out of them that everybody rushes to because it says: 'Earth ends at five o'clock. Hit link,' New York Times, fifteen times and they keep writing articles about it."
"Morning Joe" regular John Heilemann contributed, "I understand your level of sophistication reading the media, why you think that is true. What I'm trying to say is I agree with you. The best bulwark against any polls, outliers or anything else for people who are actually consumers of this information is to not let these — any given news outlet or any given poll shape your perception of the race unduly."
"But John, that is not realistic. And I'll tell you why," Scarborough interrupted. "I know people come up to you after every New York Times/Sienna poll comes out — it completely changes the political battlefield out there for about a week, week and a half. It distorts the questions that are asked of the White House. It distorts the questions that are asked of Donald Trump. It distorts all of the opinion, it distorts everything."
"That keeps happening every month when this comes out and then about two weeks later after the residue of the New York Times/Siena poll leaves, people go, 'Oh, I think Joe Biden is on a winning streak,'" he continued. "And then two weeks later it comes out again and it's garbage. It's an outlier. And yes, the New York Times, when they have all of these experts questioning the methodology, when they are calling 20 percent of the people likely voters who had never voted before or didn't vote in the last two primaries or never voted before, when they are even quoting people who say they are switching their vote from Joe Biden who have never voted before? I'm sorry! The New York Times has to know what they are doing!"
MSNBC 05 15 2024 06 13 50 youtu.be
Donald Trump continued his winning streak in Tuesday's primaries, emerging victorious in Maryland, Nebraska and West Virginia — but there are new warning signs for him when it comes to November's general election.
Much like in Indiana's primary last week, a substantial percentage of Republican voters are still balking at voting for the former president, choosing instead to back former Gov. Nikki Haley (R-SC) who dropped out almost 45 days ago.
What should alarm Trump campaign officials even more is the fact that Maryland and Nebraska were closed primaries limited to Republicans only, while Indiana's primary allowed voters from both sides of the aisle to cross party lines to vote.
ALSO READ: 8 ways Trump doesn’t become president
According to a report from Politico's Steven Shepard and Madison Fernandez, "Donald Trump showed weakness in the suburbs in Tuesday’s primaries" which continues to cast a cloud over his November hopes.
"A week after Nikki Haley earned 22 percent of the vote in Indiana’s open GOP primary, the widespread expectation was that different rules in the states voting on Tuesday would take a huge chunk out of support for her zombie presidential candidacy. That didn’t exactly happen," they wrote before noting, "... significant pockets of Trump resistance among Republicans in Maryland and Nebraska."
After admitting, "It wasn’t shocking to see Haley break 30 percent in the affluent D.C. suburbs of Montgomery County, Maryland, " they continued, "it’s more concerning for Trump that she’s at 23 percent in Douglas County, Nebraska, the population center for that state’s 2nd Congressional District. Now-President Biden won the Omaha district’s electoral vote in 2020 thanks to GOP defectors, and Tuesday’s primary showed they’re still not on board with Trump."
You can read more here.
Stormy Daniels and her family will likely flee the country should former President Donald Trump be found not guilty in his criminal hush money case, her husband said Tuesday in an exclusive interview with CNN.
Barrett Blade appeared on "Out Front" about one week after Daniels testified about the affair she says she had with Trump — who denies the encounter — at the heart of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's criminal case.
"I think if it's not guilty we got to decide what to do," Blade said. "It's a good chance we'll probably vacate this country."
Blade, also an actor in the adult film industry, said his wife is hounded by Trump loyalists who blame Daniels for putting him in this legal predicament.
ALSO READ: Trump is willing to trade our children’s future for a billion dollars
"She's got to deal with all the hate that feel like she's the reason," Blade said. "So I don't see it as a win situation either way."
Trump has pleaded not guilty to charges that he falsified business records to hide hush money paid Daniels ahead of the 2016 presidential election.
Daniels, who was born Stephanie Clifford, testified in court last week about the affair she said she had with Trump in a Lake Tahoe hotel room in 2006.
She also faced a lengthy battle of wits with Trump's attorney Susan Necheles, who called out Daniels for her career in the sex work industry and tried to get her to compliment Trump's golf prowess.
“You have lot of experience making phony stories about sex appear real,” Necheles said during her questioning.
“That’s not how I would put it,” Daniels replied. “The sex in the films is very much real — just like what happened to me in that room… The sex is very real. That’s why it’s pornography and not a B movie.”
Blade said Tuesday that Daniels struggled with reliving painful moments, but called his wife a "warrior" for fighting to tell her story. He also said Daniels wasn't unfamiliar with to Necheles' comments.
"People have been trying to slut shame her since day one," Blade said. "I don't think she's ashamed at all."
Daniels' husband said she prepared for her battle with Necheles by playing her favorite sport: "Twitter."
Moving forward, Daniels hopes to return to focusing on raising her daughter and staying out of the limelight.
"She just wants to get on with their life, and the fact that it keeps coming back over and over and over, it creates a lot of stress," Blade said. "It breaks my heart."
Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) was subjected to ridicule Tuesday over his emotional explanation as to why he decided to join former President Donald Trump at his criminal hush money trial.
Vance, considered a potential running mate for the presumptive Republican nominee, did not speak of politics during his Fox News interview, but of friendship.
"I was there to support a friend," said Vance. "Recognizing that sometimes it's a little bit lonely to sit up there by yourself, I offered to, you know, come in and just maybe be a friendly face in the courtroom."
President Joe Biden's campaign leapt at the words "lonely" and "friendly face" when they shared a video clip of Vance's statement on social media Tuesday afternoon.
ALSO READ: Trump told to pay up before rallying in N.J. town he previously stiffed
Followers on X were quick to take the bait and offer their own opinions on Vance's purported friendship with Trump.
"At what point are we going to talk about how truly crazy/pathetic/bizarre it is that grown men are acting like this?" wrote former President Barack Obama strategist Jim Messina.
Another X user argued Vance's presence in Manhattan criminal court on Monday only highlighted the absence of former First Lady Melania Trump.
"Why isn't his loyal, devoted wife by his side?" wrote @ScoopTheGhost.
ALSO READ: Trump is willing to trade our children’s future for a billion dollars
X user @HansonRitta resorted to satire with a comment comparing Trump's treks to court to a little boy going to school.
"There was once a kid so bad he didn't have any friends," they wrote. "His Mom had to tie a steak around his neck to get the dog to play with him. Basically that is trumps trial. The campaign had to convince politicians to come."
X user @brothersjudd challenged Vance's claim to friendship.
"Donald couldn't pick him out of a police line-up, he wrote. "Which is pretty much where this career trajectory ends."
A key shortlister for former President Donald Trump's vice presidential running mate thinks America should crack down on how many people are allowed to have divorces.
Ben Carson, a former neurosurgeon and Republican presidential candidate who served as Trump's Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, outlined his plan in his book, "The Perilous Fight," released on Tuesday, for getting rid of "no-fault divorce" laws, according to NBC News.
“The reason this matters is that no-fault divorce legally allows marriages to end much more quickly than in previous decades," wrote Carson. "When there are relatively few legal or financial consequences connected with divorce, it’s natural for people to gravitate toward that option when their marriage hits a rough patch."
ALSO READ: 8 ways Trump doesn’t become president
According to the report, Carson claims that people pursuing divorce have not taken into consideration the impact separation will have on their children.
“What those people often don’t consider, however, is the harm — both present and future — inflicted on their children once a divorce is finalized," Carson wrote. "For the sake of families, we should enact legislation to remove or radically reduce incidences of no-fault divorce."
In earlier eras, divorce required a partner to prove misconduct by their spouse, such as domestic violence or infidelity — and state judges rarely granted divorces even in such cases, which led to millions of people, particularly women, being trapped in dangerous or toxic environments.
Today, all 50 states, beginning with California in 1969 under legislation signed by then Gov. Ronald Reagan, now have no-fault divorce laws, which allow any married couple to divorce simply by attesting to "irreconcilable differences," without the need to legally prove anything.
Studies have found these laws reduced domestic violence and suicide rates among women. Despite this, there is an ongoing desire among some right-wing activists, particularly the Christian nationalist movement, to reverse these laws.
Ironically, even as divorce has become easier to obtain, it has become less frequent. Divorce rates peaked around 1980 at 5.4 per 1,000 people per year, after laws around it were liberalized, but have trended back downward ever since and are currently around 2.4 per 1,000 people per year — even as marriage rates are simultaneously rising.
Copyright © 2026 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 |
Masthead
|
Privacy Policy
|
Manage Preferences
|
Debug Logs
For corrections contact
corrections@rawstory.com
, for support contact
support@rawstory.com
.
