Joseph Tacopina, an attorney for Donald Trump, seemed to undercut the former president on Sunday by noting that the judge presiding over an upcoming arraignment did not appear to be biased.
During an interview on CNN, host Dana Bash noted that Trump had attacked Judge Juan Merchan as biased following the news that he would be indicted this week.
"The former president, your client, was lashing out against him," Bash said. "And the former president said that the judge hates him and was handpicked by the DA for this case for that reason. Are you going to ask for a different judge?"
"We are going to take the indictment, evaluate all our legal options, and pursue everyone most vigorously," Tacopina stated. "This is a case of political persecution."
"But let's talk about the judge," Bash pressed. "Will you ask for a different judge?"
"You know, I have no issue with this judge whatsoever," the attorney replied.
"Your client does," Bash observed.
"Well, my client has a right to have an issue with everything," Tacopina snapped. "He's been politically persecuted. Make no mistake about that, Dana."
"So you don't believe this judge is biased?" Bash asked.
"I have no reason to believe this judge is biased," the attorney stated. "I've not been before him on this matter. So we have to let this process play out."
A mugshot of former President Donald Trump will overtake Argentine Marxist icon Che Guevara as a symbol, Fox News host Will Cain predicted on Sunday.
"So, you know, one day will there be a public information request, and we'll see perhaps a mugshot if one is taken," Cain said on Sunday.
"Isn't it just clear to you that what he's guilty of is of winning?" co-host Rachel Campos-Duffy opined. "Because had he not won in 2016, this would not have happened."
"Probably the most popular photograph maybe in American history," co-host Pete Hegseth replied.
"I mean, replace, I mean, you know, the random, obviously no corollary, but like in popular culture, the Che Guevara t-shirt is a thing you see around, right?" Cain remarked, referring to the Marxist leader.
Trump is expected to be processed and arraigned on charges in New York on Tuesday.
During an appearance on MSNBC's 'The Alex Witt Show. the Guardian's Hugo Lowell claimed Donald Trump has been going through mood swings at the prospect of his indictment and now he is vacillating over being handcuffed when he appears at his arraignment in Manhattan next week.
"I know a couple of weeks ago, you reported that Trump wanted to be handcuffed, wanted to make a spectacle of his arrest," host Witt prompted. "Now that his arraignment is imminent, does he still want to be handcuffed in public? What are you hearing on that?"
"Yeah, it's difficult to get a sense of what Trump feels at this moment," the reporter replied. "You know, his mood has fluctuated in recent weeks -- he's gone from real anger towards the fact that he was going to get indicted, to this resignation that if he was going to get indicted then, you know, might as well come to New York and he wanted to be handcuffed."
"And he was very specific to aides about, you know, he wanted his hands behind his back and so he could project this sharp defiance--,'" he continued with Witt interrupting, "Hang on a second. Wait, wait he wanted his hands behind his back? We don't even see that anymore, don't we see people with the hands cuffed in front? So, he wanted to take the extra dramatic step to show himself, like, 'oh, you know,' ... that's strange."
"No, he was very specific in that instruction and I think it kind of took his aides by the surprise," Lowell replied. "They did not anticipate this level of insistence from Trump. Certainly when he then said, you know, 'I don't care if it's a security concern, I want to be a martyr,' I think that solidified in that moment what Trump wanted. But when the indictment actually came down, his response was much more muted and, I think, it's one thing to be talking about a potential indictment, but once you actually get hit with an indictment it is a completely different story."
With pundits and Republicans claiming the indictment of Donald Trump by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg will only boost his 2024 presidential prospects, not everyone on the conservative side sees a criminal indictment as a positive game-changer for the embattled former president.
According to a report from the New York Times, Trump's rivals for the 2024 presidential nod have not only balked at using it to their advantage -- for now -- but have lined up behind Trump and expressed outrage at the historic indictment, which can only end up increasing his chances of skating through the primary.
The report went on to add that Trump's team was surprised at the outpouring of support and he was urged by them to thank them -- but to no avail so far.
As much as the former president has solidified the GOP ranks behind him -- with the exception of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) being conspicuously silent -- big-money donors are reportedly not flocking to jump back on the Trump train.
As the Times reported, "One major donor, who is not yet committed to a 2024 candidate, doubted that the indictment would sway many deep-pocketed Republicans who have already made up their mind one way or the other about Mr. Trump, calling it a 'so what?' moment."
A top GOP strategist also suggested that the outrage by Trump zealots that the indictment is "political" won't move the needle for independent voters who stayed away from voting for the former president in droves in 2020 and contributed to his loss to Joe Biden.
According to the Times, "Mike DuHaime, a veteran Republican strategist, wrote on Twitter that Mr. Trump’s indictment 'wins back absolutely zero voters who left him between 2016 and 2020,'"
“No independent who voted for Biden thinks Trump is a martyr or victim suddenly worthy of support,” Mr. DuHaime wrote.
While Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump have taken to their social media platforms to viciously lash out at Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg for indicting their father on a reported 30 charges, Ivanka Trump posted a rather muted statement on her Instagram account which simply said, "I love my father, and I love my country. Today, I am pained for both. I appreciate the voices across the political spectrum expressing support and concern.”
According to Daily Beast conservative columnist Matt Lewis, the so-called "First Daughter," who served in the White House with her father, is trying to stay true to her former president dad, while distancing herself from his legal problems -- and it is not going to work for her.
As Lewis put it, Ivanka is "flailing" in her attempts to shed the memory of her participation in the Trump administration that reached its lowest point on Jan. 6 when supporters of Trump stormed the Capitol and sent lawmakers fleeing for their lives.
"It’s hard to argue with anything Ivanka says here, but it is not a statement of moral clarity. Nor is it (conversely) a statement of strong support for her father. She’s flailing and trying to have it both ways," Lewis wrote before adding, "Now, it’s understandable that a daughter might not want to utterly condemn her father. Further, children are not responsible for their parents’ sins. Except, of course, if you consider the fact that Ivanka served as the primary weapon in the 'Trump’s not such a belligerent pig as his four decades as a public figure would make you think' propaganda push."
Noting that Ivanka and her husband Jared Kushner -- who has baggage of his own -- both stuck with Trump in the White House for all four years, Lewis added, "As far as the former first daughter goes, she and her husband might be done with politics, but once you’ve been a party to an administration like Trump’s, it’s going to be a long time before politics is done with them."
"So, Ivanka, you want to have a seat at the cool apolitical kids’ table? You want to be once again accepted by the socially liberal billionaires’ children you used to go to the Hamptons with and now have Miami Beach playdates with? You want to enjoy the privileges of being a Trump with none of the shame? Good luck with that," he concluded.
WASHINGTON— At the U.S. Capitol, most Republicans don’t like being asked questions about former President Donald Trump.
Music, however, brings people together, right? And it turns out that if you play federal lawmakers the new song performed by Trump and the “J6 Prison Choir” — the one that’s soared to the top of the iTunes charts — lawmakers suddenly have a lot of questions of their own. Or things get really awkward. Or both.
Upon first listen, the song leaves many Republicans doubting their senses that the former president, who stands indicted in Manhattan and credibly accused in D.C. of fomenting an insurrection, is collaborating with many defendants accused of assaulting police officers.
A most awkward ‘Senators Only’ elevator ride
Last week at the Capitol, bells beckon senators to their storied chamber. During votes, most every U. S. senator scurries through the drab, dry passageways that tunnel through the Capitol’s remarkably unremarkable basement. In particular, three tram tracks — and the two walkways running alongside them — narrow into one hallway leading into the Capitol.
At the end, a bank of six elevators greets senators, though only one is permanently reserved for them.
As she waits for the “Senators Only” elevator, Raw Story asks Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) about Trump’s music track. She’s flanked by “There’s a choir?” Murkowski blurts out as Sen. John Barrasso, a fellow Republican who represents Wyoming, stands nearby.
“Is Matt making things up?” Barrasso quips from a distance.
“Right?” I reply through a wink and smile.
Barrasso is now legitimately interested.
“Is Matt Laslo making things up?” Barrasso asks again in an unusually giddy fashion.
“I think he is,” Murkowski replies, her eyes transfixed on my iPhone 12 screen.
The iTunes listing for "Justice for All," the single musical track featuring Donald Trump and the J6 Prison Choir. Screenshot
“‘Donald Trump’ artist,” I say, turning towards Barrasso, the third most powerful Senate Republican and one of Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s top lieutenants. “Have you heard of this?”
“I don’t know anything,” Barrasso says, turning his back and greeting the perpetually sauntering Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS).
“I think it’s just …” Murkowski says. “It can’t be.”
Her eyes now wide with confusion, Murkowski demands I play the song. She waves me into their exclusive, if cramped, elevator.
“Listen to it,” commands Murkowski — now touching my screen, almost as if she’s checking if it’s real — to no one and everyone.
“O say can you see, by the dawn’s early light …” the choir starts.
Murkowski seems mesmerized by the patriotic drone — monotone, expertly unproduced — coming from my phone’s tiny speaker. Her fellow Republican senator’s voices drop. They continue pleasantries while craning to listen, even as they’re deliberately avoiding eye contact.
As the elevator arrives on the Capitol’s second floor, Murkowski’s no longer laughing as she heads to the Senate floor.
After leading Trump’s Office of Budget and Management, Mick Mulvaney knows Trump.
“He’s going to win the Republican nomination, probably,” Mulvaney says as we walk across the Capitol grounds. “He can be beaten in a one-on-one race. I don’t think he can be beaten in a five-on-one race, and I think that’s what [the GOP primary] is going to end up being.”
Then I ask about Trump’s song.
“It’s leading iTunes,” I say.
“Is it really?” Mulvaney smiles.
Besides running OMB, Mulvaney also served as Trump’s acting-White House chief of staff for a time. But something doesn’t quite compute.
“There’s such a thing as the J6 choir?” Mulvaney asks, as the smile ran away from his face. “Is it real or is it something that somebody made up, that’s fabricated?”
“What do you think about that — flirting with the people who stormed the Capitol?”
“I don't have any…” Mulvaney says, before stopping himself.
He pauses, then tries again.
“That sounds like — that looks like something that somebody just clipped together from a bunch of other stuff.”
“One nation,” Trump then says on the sparse track. “Under God…”
Still, Mulvaney tells Raw Story he’s dubious, in part, because he doesn’t trust Trump’s team.
“I think he's got a bunch of grifters looking to get wealthy off of him,” Mulvaney says. “And why he permits it? I have no idea."
'You do so at your own peril'
Other Trump allies aren’t shocked by Trump’s foray into music. They know Trump, the businessman and marketer, who’s peddled Trump-branded clothing, bedding, water, wine, vodka, steaks, perfume, hotel rooms, golf courses and 101 other products and experiences.
And they know of Trump’s new song, even if it takes a moment to remember.
“Have you heard about this Donald Trump January 6 choir track?” I ask Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).
“What track?” Graham replies.
I click play.
“Oh — yeah,” Graham chuckles. “Yeah. Yeah.”
“He believes some of these people were treated unfairly,” says Graham — a JAG lawyer, in a past life. “Everybody deserves due process, including those being held for January 6.”
While familiar with the song, Graham maintains he’s not changing his personal tune when it comes to the attack on the Capitol, nor the alleged attackers.
“Here's my view on January 6, those who defiled the Capitol need to pay a price. There was nothing legitimate about what they did. They tried to basically interfere with a peaceful transfer of power,” Graham says. “And those who decided to do that need to face the full consequences of the law — as a deterrence.”
Graham is, seemingly, amused by the track.
“I think what he's going to be doing, you know, he feels — and some people on the right feel — these people have been denied due process. And if that's true, I'd like to correct it,” the senator says “But the average American is not going to be sympathetic to the idea that somehow January 6 wasn't a big deal. I’ll tell you this: You try to whitewash January 6, you do so at your own peril.”
Barking dogs
Over on the House side, Democrats — after impeaching him twice — say they expect the worst from Trump.
“Every time you think there’s a bottom, there is no bottom,” Rep. Pete Aguilar — a former select J6 committee member and now the No. 3 House Democrat — tells Raw Story of Trump and the J6 Choir. “That’s just the Donald Trump enterprise.”
Other Democrats agreed. Until we played Trump’s song.
“You gotta be kidding me,” says Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI), grabbing my phone out of my hand.
Kildee had been rushing up the Capitol steps leading to the House floor, agreeing only to a quick interview, so he didn’t miss votes.
But now, he finds himself in no hurry at all as the song plays — and it sinks in.
“Oh my god,” Kildee says. “Sick. Sick. Sick. Wow.”
After Raw Story asks about the former president’s purported “dog whistling,” the six-term congressman changes his tune.
“The ‘dogs’ are barking now,” Kildee says.
They’re also buying.
Since teaming up with prisoners accused of storming the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, Trump has reveled in legally hacking iTunes.
“It's No. 1 in every single category. No. 2 was Taylor Swift, No. 3 was Miley Cyrus,” Trump told supporters at a campaign rally March 25, in Waco, Texas. “So we have our moment, and that tells you that our people love those people. They love those people."
In a voice memo to Raw Story, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) decried the indictment of former President Donald Trump and vowed to stand by his side.
“Tonight I'm giving a Lincoln Day address in Gettysburg, here the most important battle of the Civil War was fought … And the irony could not be any stronger given that President Trump was just indicted by the Manhattan AG Alvin Bragg tonight,” Greene told Raw Story.
“I'll be reminding the audience of our great founding fathers who died, lost family members, were tortured, lost their businesses and all of their money because they stood against tyrants and stood against the most powerful King and his army," she said. "They stood for freedom and fought for freedom so that America could begin. History repeats itself and it seems to be that we're under similar circumstances. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg has made a very dangerous, and in my opinion, illegal mistake. And in the end he will be the one that looks like a fool because President Trump will be able to beat this indictment in court. It's easy to get a grand jury to give an indictment but it's a whole other matter to get a guilty verdict in court that Bragg will not get."
Greene continued: "I've always stood by President Trump and I will stand alongside him in this fight because the truth every single Republican in America needs to understand that they're not just coming after President Trump. They're coming after every single one of us. And right now President Trump is the only one standing in the way and he's the first one they want to take down.”
Greene's staff informed Raw Story she was on the move and hastily sent her thoughts as soon as she could, while the news was breaking.
WASHINGTON — In the minutes after news broke that former President Donald Trumphad been indicted by a Manhattan grand jury, Raw Story spoke with seven prominent politicians and political actors, past and present, to put the moment into perspective.
Here's their initial reactions to Trump becoming the first president or former president to face an indictment — in this case, for actions allegedly related to illegal hush money payments to porn actress Stormy Daniels:
Walter Shaub: Shaub, who served as director of the Office of Government Ethics during the early months of Trump's presidency, described the indictment to Raw Story as something years in the making.
"The Office of Government Ethics notified the Justice Department in 2018 that former President Donald Trump had omitted his debt to Michael Cohen for the hush money payment from his 2017 financial disclosure, and this indictment shows precisely why that sort of omission matters," said Shaub, who's now a senior ethics fellow at the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight. "We should all be wondering what else Trump may have omitted from his disclosures as president and, more recently, why he missed the deadline to file a required personal financial disclosure as a candidate this year."
Shaub noted that the hush money payment matter is years old and formally addressed by the Office of Government Ethics in 2018.
A 2018 letter from then-Acting Director of the Office of Government Ethics David Apol to then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA): The former 2020 presidential candidate said that "the indictment of a former president is a somber day for America. It’s also a time to put faith in our judicial system. Donald Trump deserves every protection provided to him by the Constitution and due process under our rule of law."
Swalwell urged the public to "neither celebrate nor destroy. As the former president continues to call for violence in his name, let all of us, as Democrats and Republicans, condemn his efforts to incite. We are better than that and justice benefits all of us.”
Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-PA): “No person is above the law," the five-term lawmaker said.
Former Rep. Denver Riggleman (R-VA): “About damn time,” said Riggleman, who also served as an adviser to the U.S. House's January 6 select committee and said he left the Republican Party last year.
Asked if he had advise for fellow Republicans, Riggleman replied: “Don’t back lawless and duplicitous con-men."
Former Rep. David Jolly (R-FL): “This is how the criminal justice process works," Jolly said. "Trump now has an opportunity to refute the charges. My concern is the case actually takes a back seat to genuinely destabilizing themes proffered by Trump allies on the Hill and in conservative media. [Rep.] Ronny Jackson has already gone there. Others won't be far behind.”
Former Rep. Reid Ribble (R-WI): Expect more indictments, said Ribble, who served in Congress from 2011 to 2017.
"It's unlikely it's going to be the only one," he said, noting investigations Trump faces in Washington, D.C., and Fulton County, Georgia.
Ribble urged all Americans to resist idle speculation about what Trump did or didn't do and not prejudge the legal process the former president is facing.
"People like to say nobody is above the law — until our guy gets attacked," he said.
Ribble noted that Trump's constant attempts to cast doubt on the legal process aren't helpful, and that Trump has personally used the courts to his benefit for decades.
"You live by the court, you might die by the court," the former congressman said.
Former U.S. Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-NE): Kerrey, who served in the Senate from 1989 to 2001 and ran for president in 1992, urged the public to take a measured approach to Trump's indictment.
"You're not guilty because you're indicted. This is a step," Kerrey said. "Is this unprecedented? Everything about Donald Trump is unprecedented. Yes, it is without precedent. The fact that it is unprecedented means nothing. But this is a serious charge. It is not trivial."
Kerrey, however, said Trump is doing himself no favors.
"It's unfortunate that the former president is saying he's a victim in this process. He is not," Kerrey said. "Nobody is immune to an indictment by a grand jury, including a former president of the United States."
Kerrey added that Trump could, however, face his greatest legal peril in Georgia, where a grand jury in Fulton County is considering evidence that Trump tampered with results of the 2020 election.
"If you're looking for evidence, you have a phone call ... from Donald Trump," Kerrey noted.
Alina Habba, an attorney for Donald Trump, revealed that her client would travel to New York City to be processed and fingerprinted.
Habba spoke to Fox News anchor Bret Baier on Thursday after Trump was indicted by a Manhattan grand jury.
"I found out frankly minutes before it broke that of the indictment, but I'm equally as shocked, I would say, as the rest of the world right now," she told Baier. "And just knowing the facts as I know them, based on comments to the press by people like Michael Cohen, who they're resting their case on, I think his sentiments are that this is a result of him leading in the polls, doing incredibly well."
Habba said that the Secret Service would be involved in Trump's surrender.
"Obviously, this is not a normal individual," she explained. "This is the first time in history that anybody has done this to a former president and candidate. So, there will be a lot of coordination with the DA and the security team for the president, as well as his attorney's panel in this case."
"And of course, yes, there would be, I wouldn't call it a surrender, but there's a process and an arraignment, just like anyone else would do," Habba added.
The About Face Beauty Spa in Royal Oak, Michigan, a quiet suburb north of Detroit, offers a variety of skin and body services, from $10 lip waxing to a $150 “bridal make-up” session.
But while owner Robin Manoogian generally caters to a local clientele, you’ve likely seen her work.
That’s because the Republican National Committee has paid the beauty spa more than $17,000 in recent years to do Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel’s hair and make-up ahead of the powerful Michigander’s many appearances on national television.
The payments to Manoogian’s spa are just a fraction of the nearly $100,000 the RNC has paid various beauty professionals since 2017, when McDaniel became chairwoman, according to a Raw Story analysis of federal campaign finance data. They include several in the Washington, D.C., area, where McDaniel also spends significant amounts of time.
Describing McDaniel as “a delight to work with” and possessing "the most beautiful bone structure and sparkling eyes,” Manoogian told Raw Story she routinely meets the RNC chairwoman on-location at Detroit television studios.
“When she's got a live interview, we just keep working. Rain, sleet, snow,” said Manoogian, adding she totes a beauty kit with her for her appointments with McDaniel. “You know, the hit is scheduled for a certain time frame and she's got to be in the chair mic'ed ready with not a hair out of place. In and out. Done and done.”
The RNC’s hair-and-make-up spending comes at a time when the Republican Party is courting blue-collar voters and lambasting President Joe Biden for what conservative leaders assert is an elitist and ineffectual economic policy that’s causing “nothing but pain and misery for American families.”
A recent payment from the Republican National Committee to the About Face Beauty Spa, per Federal Election Commission records.
And it’s the latest example in a storied string of prominent political figures — both Democrats and Republicans — who’ve enjoyed top-shelf pampering while simultaneously wooing the proletariat.
‘Incredibly sexist’
An RNC spokeswoman defended the committee’s hair-and-makeup spending, which it characterized in federal campaign finance filings as “media preparation.”
“These payments were for hair and make-up for TV appearances for GOP voices, and as chairwoman of the RNC, part of the job is to spread our great Republican message on the airwaves,” RNC spokesperson Emma Vaughn told Raw Story. “It is incredibly sexist of Raw Story to attempt to smear women in politics for getting their hair and make-up done for TV appearances, something that has been done by men on both sides of the aisle for decades without criticism.”
But there has been criticism, often from Republicans.
In 2015, prominent Republicans panned then-Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton — perennially on television — for a $600 hair appointment at the posh John Barrett Salon in New York City, which put part of the Bergdorf Goodman department store on lockdown.
Then-GOP presidential frontrunner and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker tweeted a list entitled “The Economics of Hillary’s $600 Haircut.” The money spent on Clinton’s coiffure could buy a family “138 pounds of beef” or “buy four years’ supply of eggs,” Walker asserted. Hashtag: “#OutOfTouch.”
The College Republicans tweeted two photos of Clinton, her hair shorter and sleeker in the second image. “Before and After @HillaryClinton's $600 haircut #WeCanDoBetter,” it read.
In another tweet, the College Republicans scoffed: “.@HillaryClinton's $600 haircut: meanwhile college students struggling to pay for books this semester #WeCanDoBetter”
For example, Trump has called actress Rosie O’Donnell a “fat pig” and “slob” and media executive Arianna Huffington a “dog” and “ugly both inside and out.”
“I tell you what it really was shocking to see it because you’re right it must be, it was massive. Her hair became massive,” he told conservative radio host Mark Levin in 2017.
Levin warned Trump, whose own hair is the subject of endless fascination and mockery, that his comments might get him in trouble.
“I don’t care. I’m a person that tells the truth,” Trump said. “You know it was interesting to see but I’ve never seen Hillary with that hairdo so I think that’s an OK thing to say, but it was very different.”
More recently, Trump slammed the Super Bowl halftime performance of Rihanna, a longtime critic of the former president.
"Without her 'Stylist' she'd be NOTHING. Bad everything, and NO TALENT!" Trump wrote on his Truth Social site.
As the news spread about the possibility of a Trump indictment for the hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels, the former president lashed out, calling her “horseface” and misspelling her name.
Political expense? Or personal?
There's a fine line between what the public will consider a legitimate political expense and a personal extravagance.
"If political donors knew their contributions would be funding $16,000+ spa retreats, $1,000+ haircuts, and thousands of dollars for suits, dresses, and makeup, many of these contributors likely wouldn't donate," said Aaron Scherb, senior director of legislative affairs at Common Cause, a government accountability group. "While these expenses likely aren't illegal, these examples show how big money continues to dominate politics and funds lavish lifestyles for certain political figures. We need reforms like those contained in the Freedom to Vote Act to get big money out of politics to help elevate the voices of everyday Americans in politics."
The COVID-19 era proved that TV talking heads, stuck in their living rooms and home offices with studios off-limits, could still do national media hits without the help of professional artists.
One prominent politician — Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) — boasted in a fundraising message to donors about his cut-rate approach to grooming.
“Just like my $12 flattop haircut from my local barbershop back home and my collection of dirt-stained t-shirts, my background is a big part of the reason I remain grounded and focused amid the partisan politics and nonsense happening in our government,” Tester said.
Nevertheless, politicians of all stripes will sometimes use donors’ campaign cash — often a little, occasionally a lot — to put on their best face.
Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA) paid a makeup artist $300 in August 2022. When Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland represented New Mexico in the U.S. House, she once spent $275 on a makeup artist.
And when Carla Sands, who served as an ambassador to Denmark during the Trump administration, ran for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania in 2022, she labeled her $845 makeup artist as "media prep.”
There are others: Rep. Emilia Sykes (D-OH) spent less than $300 on "media prep" at Macy's and Dillards. During her 2014 and 2016 campaigns, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a Democrat-turned-independent who now works as a Fox News contributor, spent just under $7,000 in campaign cash for makeup and hair expenses.
Raw Story also examined Rep. Nancy Pelosi's expenses, finding that among her campaign accounts and political PAC, the former Democratic House speaker used campaign money to fund $2,900 worth of makeup and hair expenses between 2014 and 2024.
But according to campaign finance reports, the former speaker didn’t regularly use political or campaign cash to have her makeup and hair done for public appearances. Rather, she paid for it out of her own pocket and not at the donors’ expense.
Pelosi’s appointments continued to make news during the past decade. Fox News, for example, reported on Pelosi having her hair done in San Francisco on Aug. 31, 2020 — during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, when trips to the beauty salon or barber shop came with perceived risk.
Campaign finance reports show that during the same month, the RNC paid District Bridal Company of Washington, D.C., $2,496 for hair and makeup services.
In the midst of these hair and makeup expenditures, the Republican National Committee stands apart for the frequency and amount of money it spends for such services, Raw Story’s analysis of federal campaign finance data indicates.
Among the charges the RNC had for hair and makeup includes $750 for a Michigan salon and a “celebrity” makeup artist that appears to work with Fox, who charged $2,546.97.
In the case of one makeup artist, who was paid $1,560 in 2018 and $778 in 2017, the same person was listed on OpenSecrets for "travel expenses," totaling $3,473 in 2017.
The RNC told Raw Story that, by its count, the DNC spent over $47,000 in hair and makeup expenses during the 2021-2022 election cycle.
The DNC refused to comment for this story. But a person familiar with the DNC expenditures told Raw Story the costs are not just for hair and makeup but for a variety of people and purposes.
FEC data indicated the DNC lists hair and makeup expenses using the catch-all term “event production,” which also includes site rentals, stage set-ups, lighting, filming, and event consultants for conventions. It’s all mixed together, making it difficult to suss out the exact amount out of the $167,817 of “event production” for the past decade.
The names of hair and makeup vendors that appear in the DNC’s financial disclosures also for the past year match the names of makeup artists that have posted photos touting their work with first lady Jill Biden during the 2020 campaign for her photoshoot with Vanity Fair.
Another DNC expense during the 2021-2022 years comes from the hair and makeup company Conceptual Beauty.
While they haven’t posted any photos of their work with political leaders in the past two years, they did share pics of Pelosi, tagging the location of the photos as the Capitol Visitor’s Center following Donald Trump’s 2019 State of the Union address.
Many of the DNC's hired hair and makeup artists are proud to publicly promote their clients, whether political or media. But DNC Chairman Jaime Harrison never turned up in the social media images for these hair and makeup artists.
It doesn’t mean he hasn’t utilized any services — but there’s no federal record indicating such expenditures have occurred. The DNC declined to comment on Harrison, as well.
The artist was hired via the communications department during Anthony Scaramucci’s short tenure. Then-White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ makeup changed enough during her time in front of the cameras that comedian Michelle Wolf joked about her “perfect smoky eye” during a White House Correspondents Association dinner.
‘Personal image to maintain’
According to Manoogian, McDaniel has never physically visited her spa in Michigan.
And while McDaniel may rank among Manoogian's most notable clients — the late Queen of Soul Aretha Franklin is another — Manoogian told Raw Story that she has worked for decades doing hair and makeup for television programs and more recently did the makeup for an episode of NBC show “Dateline.”
Manoogian’s spa website explained that she has worked for numerous clients and network television during her nearly 40 years in the business.
Manoogian emphasized that the money she’s made from the RNC came over a six-year period and that she does McDaniel's makeup and hair every time she's appearing on television from Michigan. Most cable news networks have their own hair and makeup staff in New York and Washington, but that might not be the case at the affiliates where the guest, such as McDaniel, appears via satellite.
RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel appears on Fox News in November 2018.
RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel appears on CNN in February 2023.
"I absolutely just go to the studio facility prior to the interview to handle getting her ready, and that's my craft," Manoogian explained. "I mean, with six years together, do the math. When she's in D.C., I know she's got her normal crew but, I know she travels all the time, so she's either coming or going."
Manoogian clarified that she has a "kit" and drives directly to the studio to meet McDaniel each time.
"It's not much per year for how many visits there are," Manoogian said. "And essentially, you have to go where the satellite is to reach the national, live. It's standard."
Manoogian also explained that one of the biggest problems with television is that it takes a three-dimensional world and renders it in two dimensions, which is why people always look like they've gained weight on camera. Light reflecting off the oils on the face also contributes. So, the most important thing a person can do when appearing on camera is to ensure there's no shine, she said.
“As a professional, you have a personal image to maintain, just like movie stars," Manoogian told Raw Story.
Politicians, tangled
Former President Bill Clinton and former U.S. Sen. John Edwards (D-NC)Photos by Gage Skidmore/Wikipedia and Peter Smith/Flickr
In a political era where the image is often everything, one can trace modern grooming and beauty brouhahas to President Bill Clinton, who once shut down part of Los Angeles International Airport with Air Force One’s engines running so his mononymous Beverly Hills hairstylist, Cristophe, could board the presidential jet and tend to the commander-in-chief’s salt-and-pepper locks.
Democrat John Edwards, a U.S. senator and 2004 and 2008 presidential candidate, drew gasps and pearl-clutching when this “son of a mill worker,” who championed impoverished Americans, used $1,250 worth of donor dollars to bankroll a traveling hairstylist who tended to his Kennedy-like coiffe.
During the 2008 campaign, the RNC spent $150,000 not on hair and makeup but on a wardrobe for vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her family, Politico reported at the time. Ahead of the Republican Convention in Minneapolis that year, the committee spent $75,062.63 at Neiman Marcus.
Trump’s White House didn’t use political donors’ money to handle hair and makeup, however.
Taxpayers funded Trump’s White House hiring a full-time artist to work at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. and handle anyone there who appeared on television.
The RNC’s first financial report for 2023, covering spending in January, indicated more spending with Manoogian’s business, as well as other vendors that provide various hair, makeup and eyelash services — although it’s unclear exactly what services they provided the RNC.
Since the conclusion of the 2022 midterms, the RNC dropped another $3,867 on hair and makeup costs in January 2023. In February 2023, they had another $1,725 payment to the Michigan spa. It’s a total of $5,592 for 2023. The Democratic Party has spent $4,333.25 on "event production" during the same time period.
That put the Republican Party over $90,000 in donor-funded hair and makeup expenditures since McDaniel took over.
The RNC told Raw Story that they don’t intend to change their process of spending donor funds on the chair’s hair and makeup.
Former President Donald Trump claimed on Wednesday that former President Barack Obama would have caused a nuclear war if he was allowed to serve a third term.
During a phone interview with conservative host Ed Henry in East Palestine, Ohio, Trump congratulated himself on diplomacy with North Korea.
"We started off rough. If you remember, little rocket man and all the different things it was said," Trump recalled of his negotiations with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. "I said, I have a bigger button, and my button works."
"If you had Obama stay, if that were possible, or if Hillary came in, you would have had a nuclear war between them and the United States," he added. "And I met with Obama after, you know, you do the ritual, and I met with Obama. The single biggest thing he brought up was North Korea."
Jesse Binnall, an election fraud lawyer for Donald Trump, expects former Vice President Mike Pence to take his case all the way to the Supreme Court after a court ordered him to testify in special counsel Jack Smith's Jan. 6 investigation.
The Trump attorney told Newsmax that he was not very concerned about a federal court's ruling that said Pence must testify about conversations he had with Trump prior to attacks on the U.S. Capitol.
"This right now is just a trial court decision," Binnall asserted. "And the trial court decisions are reviewable by the Court of Appeals, the Federal Court of Appeals in DC, that's the DC circuit."
"And then ultimately an important question of privilege on something like this is gonna be decided very possibly by the Supreme Court of the United States," he added.
Binnall called the decision "wrong" even though he had not yet read it.
"And it's important that we actually haven't gotten to read the entire opinion; it's just reporting on what the opinion says since it's under seal," he explained. "But I think it's wrong and I think there's both issues with presidential executive privilege."
Conservative podcast host Steve Bannon showed up in E. Palestine on Tuesday to comfort victims of a recent train derailment by offering them coupons for $80 off water filtration systems.
At his "town hall" event in E. Palestine, Bannon claimed that the town had been "abandoned" by the Biden administration while he praised former President Donald Trump's visit.
Bannon used the event to sell audience members water filtration systems and other gear. He repeatedly allowed a representative from his sponsor, My Patriot Supply, to speak to residents.
"Joe Rieck, tell us about one of the products there," Bannon said, motioning at a table holding merchandise. "We wanna make sure everybody in East Palestine and at home knows about it."
"So today I brought our Alexapure Pro water filtration system," Rieck replied. "This is a must for every family. Every family in America needs to be filtering their water. You cannot trust what your local authorities are telling you what is in your drinking water. So everybody can save $80 today on our Alexapure water filtration system here at MyPatriotSupply."
"We want to show our support to the people of East Palestine," he added. "That is why we're here. We will be here along with Steve, along with John, educating people on what to do for different emergencies, how to get better prepared, what items you might need, anything from water filtration to long-term emergency food to power banks so you can power your cell phone if the power goes out."
Bannon has previously faced federal charges for defrauding donors to his We Build the Wall charity. But then-President Trumppardoned him before the case could go to trial. Bannon has since been charged with money laundering and conspiracy in a similar case in New York state court.
The iTunes listing for "Justice for All," the single musical track featuring Donald Trump and the J6 Prison Choir. Screenshot
A 2018 letter from then-Acting Director of the Office of Government Ethics David Apol to then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
Former President Bill Clinton and former U.S. Sen. John Edwards (D-NC)Photos by Gage Skidmore/Wikipedia and Peter Smith/Flickr