Florida Governor Ron DeSantis says bad faith actors are politicizing the state law that monitors what type of content is appropriate in school books — and he wants to limit the ability of the public to challenge the literature, the Herald-Tribune reported.
DeSantis said some schools are misinterpreting state laws and he is directing state education officials to "prohibit bad actors in school leadership positions from intentionally depriving students of an education by politicizing the book review process."
He also wants the state Legislature "to enact policies limiting ... bad-faith objections made by those who don’t have children learning in Florida."
"Members of the community, although we like people wanting to be involved in what's going on, to just show up and object to every single book under the sun, that is not an appropriate situation here and we've seen that occasionally," DeSantis said during a press conference in Orlando.
Former Fox News and MSNBC personality Megyn Kelly took to X to complain about Andra Day's performance of "Lift Every Voice and Sing" at the Super Bowl — a song also known as the "Black National Anthem."
"The so-called Black National Anthem does not belong at the Super Bowl," wrote Kelly, who has previously generated controversy for insisting that Jesus and Santa Claus are white and defending blackface exhibitions. "We already have a National Anthem and it includes EVERYONE."
Commenters on the site did not take kindly to Kelly's grievances — with some of them pointing out that the song she is attacking is, first and foremost, a Christian prayer.
"It’s good you’re too stupid to hide your racism," wrote author John Pavlovitz.
"It’s remarkable that there is right-wing backlash [to] the Black national anthem. The entire song is about honoring God," wrote former Congressional candidate Christopher Hale, quoting the song: "Lest our hearts, drunk with the wine of the world, we forget thee; shadowed beneath thy hand, may we forever stand, true to our God, true to our native land."
"Flags, on the other hand..." wrote One People's Project executive director Daryle Lamont Jenkins, who posted a screenshot of an editorial Megyn Kelly wrote in 2015 titled, "The Confederate Flag Needs To Be Raised, Not Lowered."
"Actually the United States has several official anthems," wrote a user going by the name of @DarlingEbony. "Why does this one, which was first performed to honor President Lincoln (who they claim to be the party of), bother her?"
The Super Bowl was already an object of some controversy this year for some Trump supporters, who were enraged at pop sensation Taylor Swift's romantic involvement with Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs, due to her civic support for voter registration and potential speculation she could endorse President Joe Biden, as she did in 2020.
During their "Amicus" podcast, Lithwick admitted that some of Alito's comments about a ruling against Trump would lead to "frivolous " lawsuits struck her as "mob-like" as in, "nice democracy you got, it’d be a shame if something happened to it."
Commenting on his "menacing tone," she explained, "Alito was saying: 'Well, if you allow Colorado to knock Trump off the ballot, there’ll be more lawsuits by people who are willing to weaponize the legal system.' And I guess there’s only one answer to that, the answer that Jason Murray gave, which was that courts actually do know what to do with frivolous, threatening lawsuits that have no point. But another answer could be: 'I’m sorry, Justice Alito, are you threatening me?'"
According to Stern, Alito's questioning also seemed menacing to him.
"It’s a threat that if a majority of the court allows Colorado to remove Trump from the ballot, justices like Alito are going to come out swinging for the frivolous, ridiculous cases that follow—which really should not be compared to this one, since it’s very much rooted in the Constitution," he explained. "It’s a threat that red states will try to retaliate, that Ron DeSantis will remove Joe Biden from the ballot because he’s a traitor or a Chinese spy or whatever other reason, just fill in the blank. And Sam Alito will be ready to let it happen."
Stern added that "fretting" questions from fellow conservative justices indicated they were less concerned with making the right constitutional ruling as much as they were worried about the repercussions for themselves in the future.
"Like Roberts and Alito, Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh kept fretting that a ruling for Colorado could lead to such dangerous places. If we let Colorado remove a presidential candidate from the ballot, we’ll have to get involved in each and every other case out of red and blue states alike. So we have to look at the consequences of our decision," he elaborated before later adding, "And yet on Thursday, it was all consequence-based judging! From top to bottom! And I think that’s another example of the hypocrisy disparity between the different sides of the court."
A long list of Democrats — as well as Never Trump conservatives like The Bulwark's Charlie Sykes, the Washington Post's Max Boot and former GOP strategist Tim Miller — have been warning that if Donald Trump wins the 2024 GOP presidential primary and defeats Democratic incumbent President Joe Biden in the general election, he will carry out a decidedly authoritarian agenda. And Trump, they warn, will be better able to do it than before because he will make a point of installing an army of unquestioning loyalists in the United States' federal government.
But history professor/author Nancy MacLean, in an article published by The New Republic on Feb. 8, argues that Democrats need to do a lot more than bash Trump in their defense of U.S. democracy. They also need to show voters that the "radical right" in general is a threat to democratic values.
"Lurking behind the full-frontal assault by Donald Trump and his enablers lies a more far-reaching threat," MacLean warns. "If the Republicans gain control of both Houses of Congress, expect a state-authorized constitutional convention to eviscerate core rights and protections most Americans hold dear. Imagine living in a country without Social Security, Medicare, the Affordable Care Act, the right to organize a union, civil rights enforcement, and clean air and water protections — let alone action to stop climate collapse."
According to the historian, Democrats should be "alerting every voter to what is in store for them if the radical right succeeds in its endgame to enchain American democracy."
"That's big talk, 115 years," MacLean comments. "Think it can't be done? Although the convention push has been all but ignored by the commentariat and national Democratic leaders, it has powerhouse backing. The Koch network and other dark-money donors are generously funding it. The corporation-underwritten American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has supplied 'model legislation' and training to Republican state legislators. Endorsers include Mark Meadows, Ron DeSantis, Greg Abbott, Sean Hannity, and many more."
MacLean adds that "the only way to permanently entrench minority rule by plutocrats and theocrats" is to "encase it in a dramatically altered Constitution."
"But this is madness, you will say," MacLean writes. "These reactionaries could never get away with rewriting the Constitution! Except they could…. For the American people to realize how much is at stake will require vast and to-the-point popular education."
Read Nancy MacLean's full New Republic article at this link.
Now, there’s a legitimate chance Donald Trump could be running for president, or even serving as commander in chief, from behind bars.
Two overriding factors contribute to this bizarre reality.
Firstly, there’s very little — legally speaking — preventing Trump from doing so.
Secondly, Trump himself has offered no indication he’ll step away. To the contrary, he’s as emboldened as ever to run for and win the presidency he lost in 2020.
Thus far, juries have found Trump civilly liable for the sexual abuse and defamation of writer E. Jean Carroll. He’s been ordered to pay more than $88 million combined in damages.
New York Judge Arthur Engoron also found Trump and associates of his business empire liable for fraudulently inflating the value of the Trump Organization’s assets. Determination of damages in the civil fraud trial are expected this month — and could be well into the hundreds of millions of dollars.
And then there's the felony charges: 91 in total across four cases. If convicted, Trump could face significant prison time — totaling more than 700 years combined.
His trials are scheduled in the midst of the Republican presidential primary.
The indictments:
For the first time in U.S. history, a grand jury on June 8, 2023, federally indicted a former president — Trump — on 37 felony counts related to the alleged willful retention of classified documents and conspiracy to conceal them. District Judge Aileen Cannon set trial to begin May 20, but in February, special counsel questioned whether the FBI missed searching some rooms at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, ABC reported.
Then it happened again on Aug. 1 when Trump was indicted on four separate federal counts related to his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. He was set to be tried starting March 4, but U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan delayed the trial's start as Trump — unsuccessfully, so far — petitioned a federal appeals court to rule that he enjoys presidential immunity from such prosecution.
Trump also faces a criminal trial in Georgia related to election interference in the state, with trial requested for Aug. 5. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis admitted in February to having a romantic relationship with a special prosecutor overseeing the case but denied any tainting of the case, Raw Story reported.
Separately, Trump is charged in New York with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in relation to payments the Trump Organization made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. His trial is slated for March 25.
Such a laundry list of legal woes would seemingly sabotage any politician’s campaign efforts. But the cases haven’t slowed Trump down in his pursuit of a second term as president or slashed his chances — now as good as ever — of winning the 2024 Republican nomination.
Trump, who has handily won in the Republican primaries thus far, is almost certain to become the Republican nominee — and has made it clear he has no intention of dropping out of the race no matter how severe his legal battles become.
“I see no case in which I would do that,” Trump said in June during an appearance on a radio show hosted by political strategist Roger Stone, a longtime confidant. “I just wouldn't do it. I wouldn't do it. I had opportunities in 2016 to do it, and I didn't do it.”
But Allan Lichtman, a professor of history at American University, said campaigning for president and defending himself against criminal charges are two very different endeavors.
“He thinks he can win this case in the court of public opinion, but the truth is, Trump can huff, and Trump can puff, but he can't blow the courthouse down,” Lichtman said. “It’s a very, very different game once you enter a federal courthouse or a state courthouse. You can't just bluster. Anything that you present has to be proven, and you're subject to perjury.”
Still, Trump can continue to run his campaign while facing these charges — and he could even do so from prison in the event he were to be tried, convicted and sentenced before the 2024 election.
“Trump’s legal problems shouldn’t affect his campaign. Many of his supporters believe that he is being treated unfairly, and there is no prohibition against a defendant under indictment or even a convicted felon from serving as president,” said Neama Rahmani, a former assistant U.S. attorney and president of West Coast Trial Lawyers. “Theoretically, Trump could even be president while in prison.”
Indeed, the U.S. Constitution stipulates only that a presidential candidate be a natural-born citizen of the United States, be at least 35 years old and a U.S. resident for 14 years. Trump easily checks all those boxes. And congressional Democrats’ strongest efforts to potentially disqualify Trump from ever again seeking the presidency — convicting him following impeachment trials — failed.
So, what would it take for Trump to run a presidential campaign — or govern the nation — from prison?
Raw Story interviewed historians, legal experts, political operatives and former government leaders who pieced together a playbook for how he could do it — and the peril that he’d face along the way as he stands to secure the GOP nomination ahead of a general election rematch with President Joe Biden in November.
Campaigning from a cell
Each of the charges Trump faces in the classified documents federal indictment carries maximum prison sentences between five and 20 years. Across all four indictments, potential prison time could span hundreds of years.
Being behind bars would, of course, prevent Trump from campaigning in his signature fashion: at big, rowdy MAGA rallies.
But Amani Wells-Onyioha, operations director at Democratic political firm Sole Strategies, envisions Trump still figuring out ways to communicate with potential voters.
“There's no doubt in my mind that he would have some recorded press from the little prison phone. There's no doubt in my mind that he would set up press opportunities whenever he's out on the yard getting his recreational use in, that there would be cameras there,” Wells-Onyioha said. “He would be using every opportunity to campaign. I don't see him stopping at all, and I only see him using this as fuel to make him go harder.”
Keeping up his Truth Social posts from prison might not be such a challenge for Trump, Wells-Onyioha said, as some jails and prisons might allow internet access.
“I do see him using the internet because that's all that he has, and he's great at that already,” Wells-Onyioha said. “He's a huge internet, TV personality type of guy, so it really would just force him to be in a position to do something that he's the best at, which is unfortunate for the country, but as far as he's concerned, I think he thinks that this is political gold for himself.”
Plus, Trump isn’t building a campaign from scratch. His 2024 presidential campaign is flush with staffers. He enjoys the support of super PACs, which may raise and spend unlimited amounts of money on his behalf to promote the former president and attack his opponents.
He also has a roster of high-profile MAGA acolytes — from Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and Elise Stefanik (R-NY) to Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) and South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem — who gladly serve as Trump surrogates.
And save for former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who remains in the race despite losses in the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary, with dim prospects going forward, Trump has already vanquished his other main GOP challengers, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former Vice President Mike Pence and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy.
Meanwhile, few politicians are as good as Trump at presenting himself as a victim — he’s single-handedly vaulted the terms “witch hunt,” “deep state,” “hoax” and “fake news” into the contemporary political lexicon. As an inmate, Trump could become a martyr to the MAGA cause.
“You’re obviously handicapped to campaign, but in this electronic age, you can certainly campaign virtually, plus Trump's pretty well known. It’s not like he has to introduce himself to the American people,” Lichtman said.
If not prison, maybe jail
Former President Donald Trump arrives for his arraignment at Manhattan Criminal Court on April 04 in New York City. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
Although it seems unlikely Trump will be serving an active prison sentence before the November election, it’s conceivable he could wind up in pretrial confinement of some sort while campaigning.
This, several legal experts said, will depend on Trump himself.
“He has to behave himself during a trial, and that's not beyond the realm of possibility that he'll act up, thinking that somehow he can win over the jury, but that would be a mistake,” said Kevin O’Brien, a former assistant U.S. attorney and partner at Ford O’Brien Landy LLP who specializes in white-collar criminal defense.
His social media antics stand to put him in potential violation of pretrial instructions and release terms, raising the question of whether a judge would dare throw the former president in jail. So far, he’s been fined thousands for violating gag orders.
Brazenly defying a judge’s order or attempting to intimidate witnesses are among the more common ways a defendant can get himself thrown in jail or home confinement before or during his trial.
This isn’t merely conceptual, said Mike Lawlor, a criminal justice professor at the University of New Haven and former member of the Connecticut House of Representatives, who helped lead impeachment hearings against then-Gov. John Rowland, who ultimately pleaded guilty in federal court to political corruption.
Knowing Trump’s penchant for cutting outbursts, Lawlor can envision a judge sanctioning Trump for defying directives. Trump not only has one judge with whom to contend, but several, given the multiple legal actions against him.
“The opportunity to engage in contempt of court or witness tampering or obstruction of justice is fraught at this point. I’m not sure he has the self-control to keep himself from doing something that would get him confined pre-trial,” Lawlor said.
The U.S. House Jan. 6 select committee accused Trump of potential witness tampering, and Lawlor says he’s monitoring similar allegations here, especially because so many of the witnesses are GOP staffers of the former president.
“It’s so easy to imagine a situation where someone could be contacted and intimidated,” Lawlor said. “I think the temptation to do that for a guy like Trump is probably irresistible. I’m not sure his attorneys or the advisors he listens to can stop him from doing so. I don’t rule it out. As I said, it’s unlikely, but I can definitely see it happening.”
Using legal danger to fuel fundraising
The Trump campaign wasted no time in exploiting the indictments to raise money, leaning into a familiar claim that the candidate is a victim of a Democratic witch hunt.
Only one day after news broke about Trump’s first federal indictment, a fundraising appeal built around the charges appeared on the campaign website prominently displayed in a column on the left-hand side of the page, suggesting contribution amounts ranging from $24 to $3,300. The message lays out a bill of particulars with the former president at the center of the persecution narrative, beginning with the apocalyptic opener: “We are watching our Republic DIE before our very eyes.”
Trump Save America, the beneficiary, is a joint fundraising committee for Donald J. Trump for President 2024 and the Save America PAC, which supports Trump.
The fundraising appeal contends that a “witch hunt began when the FBI RAIDED my home and then staged it to look like a made-for-TV crime scene with police sirens and flashing red and blue lights.”
Alluding to his previous indictment in New York state, the appeals continued: “So, after a state prosecutor failed to break us, the Deep State sharpened their attacks and unleashed a FEDERAL prosecutor to TRY and take us down.”
Notwithstanding Trump’s claim, the charges in New York state remain pending, and Jack Smith, the special prosecutor appointed by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, was investigating Trump for allegedly mishandling classified documents four months before a grand jury in New Manhattan returned an indictment on the state charges related to the Stormy Daniels affair.
Minutes after the Aug. 1 indictment dropped, Trump started fundraising again, selling "I Stand With Trump" T-shirts featuring the indictment date, and Trump's mugshot from his booking at the Fulton County Jail helped him bring in more than $7 million after the Georgia indictment as he quickly took to selling mugs, shirts and other merchandise with the photo.
At least one prominent surrogate helped retail the fundraising push.
Kari Lake, a fellow election denier who lost her race for governor of Arizona in 2022, joined a Twitter Spaces co-hosted by Dustin Stockton and Jennifer Lynn Lawrence on the night news broke about Trump’s indictment on charges of mishandling classified documents.
Stockton and Lawrence helped organize the rally that provided the springboard for the Jan. 6 insurrection. During her appearance on Stockton and Lawrence’s Twitter Space, Lake, who is now running for U.S. Senate, told more than 1,300 listeners she had just gotten off the phone with Trump shortly after news broke about the indictment on June 8. Lake said it wasn’t enough for Republican voters to just say they stand with Trump or condemn the indictment.
“And if we really stand with him, we need to go to DonaldTrump.com and make a donation tonight,” said Lake, who is herselfpreparing a 2024 U.S. Senate run in Arizona. “Everybody, whether it’s $5, $10, $500 — whatever you can afford. Because if we’re gonna stand with him, we need to put our money where our mouth is tonight.”
The political monetization of Trump’s legal woes grows deeper by the month. Go to Trump’s campaign website and you’ll find several items on sale — a black-and-white ceramic coffee mug is $24 — featuring a fake mugshot of Trump above the words “NOT GUILTY”. Of late, Trump hassuggested that he would “end” his campaign in a deceptive bid to squeeze money from supporters.
The Federal Election Commission, which enforces federal campaign finance laws, would have no grounds to intervene in Trump’s fundraising efforts while facing criminal charges or even time in jail or prison, said Ann Ravel, who served as an FEC commissioner from 2013 to 2017, including one year as the commission’s chairwoman.
Trump's campaign is selling these black-and-white ceramic coffee mugs for $24. (Screen grab)
Trump’s campaign could easily continue sending supporters incessant fundraising emails and text messages in Trump’s name.
“The only problems for him would be if there's failure to disclose, or if people are giving more than the limits, all of the things that are traditional FEC issues, but they don't have the authority to do anything with regard to a person who's been indicted and is still fundraising,” Ravel said. “That in and of itself is not sufficient for the FEC to take any action.”
Lessons of Eugene Debs, incarcerated presidential candidate
Trump wouldn’t be the first candidate to run for president from prison if he were convicted.
In the weeks before the 1920 election, Eugene V. Debs, the Socialist Party candidate for president of the United States and an inmate in federal prison, touched on the significance of the moment.
“Has there ever been anything like it in American history before?” Debs said, as reported by the socialist newspaper Appeal to Reason. “Will there ever be anything like it in American history again? We must impress it upon the people that this scene is symbolic of what has befallen this country.”
There has been one other. Lyndon LaRouche, whom The New Republiccalled “The Godfather of Political Paranoia,” ran from prison in 1992 after being convicted of tax evasion and mail fraud.
His vice presidential running mate, the Rev. James Bevel, did most of the campaigning. This suggests that a jailed Trump could lean heavily on the presence of a charismatic vice presidential candidate — be it someone such as Lake of Arizona, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia or even banished Fox News host Tucker Carlson.
LaRouche received .02% of the popular vote — 26,334.
Debs, who was serving a 10-year sentence for decrying the United States’ involvement in World War I, received 3.4% of the popular vote — 919,799.
He received 6% of the vote as a candidate eight years earlier, in 1912.
While emphasizing that she’s speaking as an individual, Allison Duerk, director of the Eugene V. Debs Museum, located in Debs’ home in Terre Haute, Ind., said she cringes at comparisons between Debs and Trump. In material ways, the two men are polar opposites.
“I bristle at recent casual references to the 1920 campaign — not because they are inaccurate on the surface, but because these two men and their respective projects are diametrically opposed,” she told Raw Story.
Duerk does believe Debs predicted the emergence of American political leaders such as Trump.
Illustration of Eugene Debs while running for president in prison. Indiana State University archives
“Take this quote from the speech that got him locked up,” she said, quoting Debs: “‘In every age it has been the tyrant, the oppressor and the exploiter who has wrapped himself in the cloak of patriotism, or religion, or both to deceive and overawe the people.’"
In an Appeal to Reason article, Debs said he believed in change “but by perfectly peaceful and orderly means.” He added, “Never in my life have I broken a law or advised others to do so.”
Unlike Trump, who nurses grievances daily, the article said of Debs, “Nothing embitters him. Injustice, oppression, persecution, savagery do not embitter him. It is a stirring, an uplifting thing to find a man who has suffered so much and remains so ardent and so pure.”
The U.S. government and the prison warden made small accommodations to Debs’ candidacy. He was, for one, allowed a single written message per week to voters.
“Where Debs had once stormed the country in a verbal torrent,” wrote Ernest Freeberg, author of Democracy’s Prisoner, “he would now have five hundred words a week.”
Debs still had some of the trappings of a political campaign, including a button that had his photo from prison with the words, “For President - Convict No. 9653.” He had printed material that said, “From Atlanta to the White House, 1920,” a reference to his residency inside the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary.
On election night, Debs received the results in the warden’s office and soon conceded the election to President-elect Warren Harding.
In his book Walls and Bars, Debs wrote that the question came up in the room about his potential ability to pardon himself as president — an action over which Trump has reportedly mused.
“We all found some mirth in debating it,” Debs wrote.
Serving as president from prison
If Trump ran a successful campaign from jail or prison, is there anything stopping him from assuming the Oval Office if he were elected president?
“There is nothing in our traditions or the Constitution that prevents someone who is indicted or convicted or, in fact, serving in jail, from also serving as the president,” said Harold Krent, law professor at the Chicago-Kent College of Law, who formerly worked for the Department of Justice. “Does it make any sense? No. But there is no Constitutional disablement from that happening. So, you could think of a scenario in which the case goes to trial, maybe after the primary and results in a prison time with President Trump and then he is inaugurated, and he gets to serve as president from some prison farm somewhere.”
Lichtman said “of course” Trump would just pardon himself of any federal crimes were he reelected president. There’s also the possibility of Trump attempting to preemptively pardon himself, with then-President Gerald Ford’s pardoning of Richard Nixon serving as an imperfect template.
But if Trump is convicted on any state-level charges, where federal pardons do not apply, that’s a different story.
“That's unprecedented, but the pardon power is pretty absolute,” Lichtman. “He can’t pardon himself for the New York case because that’s a state case. If he's convicted in New York, he's stuck. If ... he's convicted in Georgia, he can’t pardon himself from that either, because that's also a state case.”
Trump’s ability to pardon himself is widely debated in the academic community, Krent said.Federal document listing indictment counts against former President Donald Trump. U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida
“There's no law on the books that says you can't. You just have to reason from the idea of separation of powers and the Constitution or to think that it doesn't make any sense to have one person aggregate or accumulate so much power,” Krent said. “As a constitutional matter, I think that that would be too much of a conflict of interest to be able to pardon yourself.”
Interestingly, the classified documents federal indictment didn’t include counts related to 18 U.S.Code 2071, which deals with the concealment, removal or destruction of government documents. This would disqualify anyone found in violation of the code from running for office, Rahmani said.
“That particular provision was passed after Nixon as a disqualification provision that prevents anyone convicted of it from holding public office,” Rahmani said. “Trump's lawyers would have said that it's unconstitutional because only the Constitution can place limits on who could be president. You can be a felon. You can be in prison and still theoretically be president of the United States.”
The Constitution could be interpreted — ostensibly by the U.S. Supreme Court — that an imprisoned president wouldn’t qualify as capable of carrying out his duties, preventing him from taking the office, Ravel said.
“There's nothing to stop him from becoming president either because the provisions in the Constitution about the presidency and the requirements for presidency don't reflect any concern if a president has been indicted or is in jail,” Ravel said. “Although if he goes to jail, it would create a problem for him because the Constitution does have concerns about the inability to carry out the obligations of the office, which he certainly wouldn't be able to do in jail.”
Specifically, Section 4 of the Constitution’s 25th Amendment potentially empowers Congress to determine — via a two-thirds vote of both chambers — that a president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office” and thereby transfer presidential powers to the vice president.
But if Trump is elected in November, and trials end up taking place after the general election, some of his legal peril could subside — at least at the federal level.
“There's clear Department of Justice memos and policies. It's pretty clear that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted,” Rahmani said.
If Trump won and was convicted but on appeal, he would “probably” still be able to get inaugurated, Krent said.
“The question is whether they would stop the appeal and let him serve out the presidency before it would continue,” Krent said. “Uncharted waters in terms of how this would go. It's gonna affect the primary. It would affect the general election, and it certainly would affect his ability to conduct a presidency.”
Editor’s note: A version of this article was originally published on June 13, 2023, and has been updated to reflect numerous legal and political developments involving Trump.
A Christian activist known for his anti-LGBTQ views was rebuked by a Florida Democratic state senator during his public remarks supporting legislation endorsed by Republican Governor Ron DeSantis that would ban Pride flags being displayed at government buildings. The bill claims they represent a "political viewpoint."
The GOP-sponsored bill, SB 1120, says a "governmental entity may not erect or display a flag that represents a political viewpoint, including, but not limited to, a politically partisan, racial, sexual orientation and gender, or political ideology viewpoint. The governmental entity must remain neutral when representing political viewpoints in displaying or erecting a flag."
Equality Florida says the "bill was clearly designed to slander an entire community with baseless & malicious lies."
John Labriola of the Christian Family Coalition Florida, which calls itself a "human rights and social justice advocacy organization," had strong words opposing LGBTQ pride flags and in support of the controversial bill that would ban them from public buildings.
Labriola told lawmakers on the Florida State Senate Committee on Governmental Oversight and Accountability Tuesday evening the bill would prevent "would-be activist teachers from pushing indoctrination." (Full videohere.) He claimed the legislation was needed because "just a couple of years ago, a father of a 12-year old in Palm Beach County...sued the school district because the teacher was putting up rainbow flags and pushing that indoctrination in the classroom."
He then denounced "the idea that the flag, the rainbow flag is inclusive," because "there is no color there for 'heterosexual.'"
Labriola told lawmakers the pride flag is "deeply offensive" to people of faith, and "gaslighting."
"We don't want government pushing an ideology," he added, before claiming there are "victims" of the LGBT movement. He named one alleged "victim of the indoctrination, a victim of the rainbow flag, and everything that that represents."
"It is demonic. We are the Christian Family Coalition and we believe that this is demonic. Why Should Christians be forced to to subsidize something that is demonic, the idea that a child can change their gender that's included in the in the rainbow flag, that's an ideology that's included in the rainbow flag. Heterosexuality isn't as I said, but that is and so let's talk about the victims of the LGBT movement."
He also praised the bill, saying, "it takes the ideology and the indoctrination out of the school room and also empowers taxpayers to not have to subsidize the ideology that has harmed so many people, both parents and children."
But then Committee Democratic Vice Chair Tina Polsky had a few questions for Labriola.
"Can you explain how, under this bill, a poster of a rainbow flag will be allowed? So if that's the case, I want to make sure we're all aware of the terrible dangers that await our students," she said, apparently sarcastically. "How does a rainbow flag indoctrinate students?"
"A rainbow flag is intended to indoctrinate," he replied, matter-of-factly. "A rainbow flag is intended to promote the concept to students that there's such a thing as transgender, that you can change gender, that sexuality, you know should be celebrated if it goes against heterosexuality because it doesn't, it doesn't promote heterosexuality. It promotes homosexuality. It promotes bisexuality, it promotes everything except heterosexuality. So that's indoctrination."
He then claimed that the "label 'queer' has to do with sexual activity. And if the child is below 18, that is a form of grooming, that is a form of sexual grooming, and really pedophilia, when you say a 'queer student.' That should not be those two words should not be juxtaposed –" he added before Senator Polsky interrupted him.
"You should stop talking," she told him, but was ignored.
"That is grooming and that is pedophilia whether you like it or not, you do not put that label on a child because you're essentially saying that child can be sexually active."
A child or adult who identifies as LGBTQ is not stating they are sexually active -- being LGBTQ is not an act, it is an identity.
"I'm not sure what any of this has to do with flags," Polsky added. "I'm done with this person."
Watch a short clip of Labriola's remarks below or at this link.
Florida Christian anti-LGBTQ activist falsely says "that label 'queer' has to do with sexual activity," and using the term "queer students" is "a form of grooming."pic.twitter.com/3zRzYQDzO5
— David Badash (@davidbadash) February 7, 2024
A prominent Moms for Liberty chapter in Pennsylvania that once numbered 200 members has collapsed due to a lack of interest after having dwindled down to just three participants.
According to a report from the Daily Beast's Michael Daly, the last three members of the Lehigh County chapter recently met at a local diner and decided to call it quits when none of the three volunteered to take charge and keep the right-wing moms' group alive.
In an interview, local chapter founder Janine Vicalvi admitted it took too much time and there was too little interest to make it worthwhile, explaining, "Between homeschooling and working two jobs, it’s just a lot. And I guess there wasn’t as much willingness to do the work that’s required to propel the movement forward.”
Following the recent diner get-together, she posted a message on her chapter's Facebook page, stating, "So we had our meeting this evening and are going to dissolve our chapter.”
The dissolution of the Pennsylvania chapter is yet another blow to the national organization that has been labeled by the Southern Poverty Law Center as "a far-right organization that engages in anti-student inclusion activities and self-identifies as part of the modern parental rights movement."
According to a recent New York Times report, a recent school board meeting in Florida where the banning of another book was to be discussed — a central mission of the organization that has made school board meetings a living hell — drew only one Moms for Liberty member.
In analyzing the group's demise Pennsylvania's Vicalvi said that "I think that most successful political movements are one-issue movements. And unfortunately, parental rights is kind of amorphous. Everyone has a different idea of what parental rights looks like."
Not everyone took the news as unfortunate, however.
Brevard County, Florida school board member Jennifer Jenkins — a frequent target of Moms for Liberty — celebrated the group's demise on Facebook by posting, "Another one bites the dust."
The super PACs backing former President Donald Trump's political rivals for the 2024 nomination were "money pits" that did next to nothing to challenge the former president's dominance, former GOP strategist Tim Miller wrote in a scorching analysis for The Bulwark.
This comes after extensive reporting about Never Back Down, the super PAC of failed Trump rival and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who himself called out how inept their efforts had been.
"Much can be said about about the incompetence, self-dealing, and cowardice of the Republicans who were charged with challenging Donald Trump during the 2024 campaign. Marc Caputo covered it colorfully and thoroughly earlier this week," wrote Miller. "But after you have cut through all the tweets and trivia and backbiting and biorhythmic disruption that spilled out of the DeSantis 'campaign' — if you can even call it that — there is one strategic choice that stands out."
Namely, wrote Miller, records show that the major super PACs representing the non-Trump Republican candidates -- like DeSantis, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, and South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, which raised a combined $225 million -- spent just 2 percent of their revenue targeting Trump, versus supporting their candidates and attacking the non-Trump rivals.
And when these super PACs did target Trump, contended Miller, they only released "limp-wristed" efforts.
"With these resources, Trump’s opponents availed themselves of the best Republican consultants money could buy," wrote Miller. "Those political strategists in turn had titans of industry — millionaires and billionaires — at their disposal. These wealthy individuals were willing to offer their private-sector expertise and burn ungodly sums of their personal fortune to advance the interests of Tim, or Nikki, or Ron. DeSantis even had the world’s richest man giving him free rein and free PR in his personal global town-square on the campaign’s announcement day."
A similar pattern happened in 2016, noted Miller. But "at least in 2016, those choices were defensible. We had never seen a candidate like Trump before, and there was reason to believe that in the end, Republican voters would come to their senses — as they had in every other nominating contest in living memory. We didn’t know what we didn’t know."
"There was no excuse to make the same mistakes this time," he concluded.
Though typically the idiom “second to none” is a compliment, for former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, it means her third defeat in the Republican presidential nomination process. And a humiliating one.
With nearly half the statewide vote counted Tuesday night, Haley was trailing “none of these candidates” in the Nevada presidential preference primary. Haley had 33% of the vote, to 60% for “none,” and The Associated Press called the race for “none.”
Haley was the only active candidate on the Republican primary ballot – Donald Trump deliberately didn’t file and is instead participating in Thursday’s
state-run caucus. But there had been a quasi-campaign on the part of Trump forces urging people to vote for “none of these candidates” in the primary. Gov. Joe Lombardo, who has endorsed Trump, has said he would vote for “none” in the primary and then caucus for Trump Thursday night.
Trump himself had not been willing to publicly back the “none” campaign, and in his recent Las Vegas rally
told supporters not to “waste time” on the Republican primary. Introducing Trump at rallies in both Reno and Las Vegas, Nevada Republican Party chairman Michael McDonald similarly told the crowds to ignore the primary.
But Nevada Republican Committeewoman Sigal Chattah, an ardent Trump backer,
told Mother Jones “We’re telling people to vote ‘none of the above,’” in the hope of landing another blow to Haley’s continued presence in the Republican race.
Haley initially was joined on the primary ballot by former Vice President Mike Pence and South Carolina U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, though both candidates suspended their campaigns in the fall of 2023.
Nevada’s confusing condition
Featuring both Tuesday’s primary and Thursday’s caucus, Nevada’s third spot on the Republican nominating calendar has led to confusion – and that was not an accident.
The Nevada Legislature attempted to move the state away from party-run caucuses by passing a bill in 2021 mandating state-run presidential primaries be held. Tuesday’s was Nevada’s first primary under the new law.
The Nevada Republican Party led by McDonald, a recently indicted fake elector who has been accused of forging documents in an effort to overthrow the 2020 presidential election results, objected to the state primary, and chose to run a caucus.
State law allows parties to determine how delegates will be awarded in the presidential nominating process, and the Nevada Republican Party declared that only those competing in the caucus could win any of Nevada’s 26 delegates to the Republican National Convention this summer.
Leading up to the election, the secretary of state’s office said “the top issue we get called about” was Trump not appearing on the primary ballot.
Bethany Drysdale, a spokeswoman for Washoe County, said voters on Tuesday were still confused about Trump’s name not being featured, but said the county was referring people to the Republican Party “to learn more about the caucus.”
“There has been some additional confusion from voters who are nonpartisan and did not realize they couldn’t vote in this election,” she said. There hadn’t been any reports of election workers getting harassed, she added.
But confusion – and anger – could be found at the polls.
Nahabedian, a 58 year old voter who did not provide his last name, walked out of the Desert Breeze Community Center in Las Vegas without casting a vote after seeing that Trump was not on his ballot.
“I came out to vote for the primary thinking that the primary was going to include the Republican Party nominees. And the one Republican Party nominee that’s excluded from the state of Nevada is Donald Trump,” he said. “This is the first time I’ve ever been denied the right to vote.”
Haley skipped the state
Trump has won the first two states of the 2024 nominating process: the Iowa Caucus Jan. 15 and the New Hampshire primary Jan. 23.
Trump received 51% of the vote in Iowa. Haley came in a distant third place at 19%, narrowly trailing Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’s 21%. DeSantis dropped out of the campaign days later prior to the New Hampshire primary.
Haley then received 43% of the vote in New Hampshire while Trump won the state with 54%.
Though Nevada is the third state on the Republican presidential nomination calendar, Haley has skipped efforts to compete and has turned her attention to her home state of South Carolina, for decades considered a decisive contest in Republican presidential nomination fights.
“In terms of Nevada, we have not spent a dime nor an ounce of energy on Nevada,” said Haley campaign manager Betsy Ankney,
The Hill reported on Monday.
It wasn’t the first time Haley’s campaign referred to the caucus as “rigged.”
When asked why after finishing second in the New Hamphsire primary, Haley responded, “Talk to the people in Nevada: They will tell you the caucuses have been sealed up, bought and paid for a long time. That’s the Trump train rolling through that. But we’re going to focus on
the states that are fair.”
Haley was scheduled to campaign in California Wednesday, one of the delegate-rich Super Tuesday states holding primaries March 4.
A low turnout affair
The lack of a Trump-Haley head-to-head matchup, the inevitability of Biden’s nomination, and a widely held lack of enthusiasm for a Biden-Trump rematch all combined for slow voting primary voting day in the state.
According to the Nevada Secretary of State’s office, there are 560,000 registered active Republican voters in Nevada. As of Saturday morning, after the week of early voting, less than 58,000 of them had voted. The Democrats performed a little better. Out of 596,000 registered voters, about 94,000 voted during early voting week. In both parties, the early voting week tallies were predominantly people who voted by mail.
Drysdale, the Washoe County election officials, said only 1,000 people had shown up in person ot vote in the county by noon.
Outside the Desert Breeze Community Center in Las Vegas, a slow trickle of voters braved the rain and cold to vote in the primary.
The lack of voter enthusiasm revealed in the week leading up to the primary continued throughout the day Tuesday. Empty voting booths lined the community center with none of the long lines characteristic of the popular voting location. Poll workers, with no one to direct, waited for in-person voters to arrive.
Steady rain Tuesday didn’t help the turnout.
The scene lacked the fervor and enthusiasm typical of prior presidential preference elections in Nevada, including four years ago when Biden came in second place in the Democratic caucus, behind Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Voters who spoke to the
Nevada Current echoed that lack of enthusiasm.
Becky Ulrey, 74, said she came out to vote Tuesday because she always votes and hasn’t missed an election in decades.
“I decided to stick to my regular routine,” Ulrey said.
The registered Democrat explained that she voted for Biden “because there was no one else on the ballot that I was really excited about.”
“I think he is our best bet,” she said.
David Launay, a 64 year old registered Republican, was equally disillusioned. He voted “none of these candidates.” While he plans to participate in the Republican run caucus Thursday to make his vote count, he hopes Republican front runner Donald Trump gets serious competition.
“I’m not enthused at all as far as some of the things Trump’s done,” Launay said. “I’m actually looking at Robert Kennedy now.”
“If (Trump) does win the caucuses, then I will probably end up voting for him. Yet-to-be-determined right now. This is the first year that I’ve been on the fence,” Launay continued.
April Corbin Girnus and Hugh Jackson contributed to this story.
Nevada Current is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nevada Current maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Hugh Jackson for questions: info@nevadacurrent.com. Follow Nevada Current on Facebook and Twitter.
Donald Trump on Tuesday ignited fury for some conservatives, who say the former president was wrong to promote the controversial Bud Light.
Trump earlier in the day offered a full-on defense of the beer brand, which was criticized for partnering with a transgender woman in one of its minor promotions.
"The Bud Light ad was a mistake of epic proportions, and for that a very big price was paid, but Anheuser-Busch is not a Woke company, but I can give you plenty that are, am building a list, and might just release it for the World to see," Trump said.
But many conservatives were upset, as they haven't given up on the beef with the famous beer brand.
Jaimee Michell, founder and President of Gays Against Groomers, had promised not to criticize Trump, but fell back on Tuesday.
"I said I was gonna keep my mouth shut but he makes it SO DIFFICULT," she wrote Tuesday. "And yes, Bud Light is still served at all of his establishments. Why is he this way."
Former Trump attorney Jenna Ellis shared the comments by Michell.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis supporter, Pedro Gonzales, also had an issue with Trump's embrace of Bud Light.
"Trump is defending Anheuser-Busch/Bud Light and trying to undermine the most effective boycott of a company for pushing transgenderism," he wrote on Tuesday. "Remember that Team Trump initially tried to stop this boycott but failed. Now they’re at it again, likely due to some financial arrangement."
In a follow-up post, Gonzales added, "Americans boycotted Anheuser-Busch when it shoved transgenderism down people’s throats. It’s been one of the most effective protests in recent memory."
"Trump just called for the boycott to end. Why?" he asked. "Because a lobbyist for AB plans to host a fundraiser for him next month. The lobbyist in question, Jeff Miller, is also a close confidant of Kevin McCarthy. Some tickets are selling for $10,000 each, which is enough to get Trump to undermine one of the rare instances in which Americans successfully stood up to a major corporation that tried to force some ideological obscenity on us and never apologized for it."
Conservative commentator Erick Erickson also said, "The problem here is that once you've tried other beer, you realize just how shitty Bud Light is. So only the cult members will go back to it."
The Republican war against Bud Light, and the beer brand's parent company Anheuser-Busch, has long simmered down — but former President Donald Trump still saw fit to take to his Truth Social account on Tuesday and post a defense of the company and brand.
The boycott initially began after the Bud Light brand partnered with transgender woman Dylan Mulvaney in a promotion.
"The Bud Light ad was a mistake of epic proportions, and for that a very big price was paid, but Anheuser-Busch is not a Woke company, but I can give you plenty that are, am building a list, and might just release it for the World to see. Why not, the Radical Left does it viciously to well run, Conservative companies - and people! Very nasty, but it’s the way they play the game!"
"On the other hand, Anheuser-Busch spends $700 Million a year with our GREAT Farmers, employ 65 thousand Americans, of which 1,500 are Veterans, and is a Founding Corporate Partner of Folds of Honor, which provides Scholarships for families of fallen Servicemen & Women," Trump continued. "They’ve raised over $30,000,000 and given 44,000 Scholarships. Anheuser-Busch is a Great American Brand that perhaps deserves a Second Chance? What do you think? Perhaps, instead, we should be going after those companies that are looking to DESTROY AMERICA!"
Trump was notably silent on the issue during the actual boycott, and his eldest son Donald Trump Jr. even called for it to end.
According to a Business Insider report at the time, the former president actually owned up to $5 million in Anheuser-Busch stock.
WASHINGTON – Maxwell Frost has not been shy about criticizing Joe Biden’s administration – from climate change to border policy to Israel’s war in Gaza.
But the nation’s first Gen Z congressman has nevertheless seen his profile inside the Democratic Party rise. And despite Frost’s concerns, the 27-year-old Floridian is becoming an increasingly essential surrogate for the 81-year-old Biden.
To Frost, that push and pull is part of any relationship, and he doesn’t know why it should be any different in politics.
“I just refuse to fall for this, ‘I hate you or I love you thing,’” Frost said in an interview. “I'm going to be honest with you. And if I think that our values align, I'm going to work with you. And I think my values align with President Biden.”
That dichotomy between publicly dissing Biden and supporting him, while unusual for a presidential campaign surrogate, reflects how Gen Z broadly feels about a certain Silent Generation commander-in-chief who’s off seeking a second term.
It also helps explain Frost’s appeal among young voters who are wary of Biden but aghast at the prospect of Donald Trump returning to power. Frost stands as a willing bridge to a new and skeptical generation of voters that the president urgently needs for general election success.
Much like Biden, Frost also sees a second term for former President Donald Trump as an “almost existential threat for this country,” one reason he is motivated to reelect Biden.
Florida is “the epicenter of fascism rising in this country,” Frost said of the home state he shares with Trump, and the former president “obviously represents that movement on such a larger scale.”
‘See themselves reflected in this administration’
While backing Biden is an easy decision for Frost, he said he realizes it might not be for other voters.
That’s why he wants to engage with them as he did recently in Southern Nevada, a state that will be a presidential battleground in 2024 — and one where an uptick in youth turnout during the 2022 midterms proved key in the state’s three competitive House contests and pivotal Senate race. The congressman headlined a roundtable with students at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas who had experienced the December 6 mass shooting at the school. He then held a happy hour with other college Democrats, where he spoke about Biden and addressed concerns the students had about the Biden administration.
“He is a symbol for Gen Z that they can see themselves reflected in this administration and in Congress and in Washington,” said a Nevada Democrat who worked with Frost on the trip.
Biden’s age creates an understandable distance with these young voters, the Democrat added, but the people Frost met with came away saying, “If this guy, who is like me, is saying we should get on board, then we should get on board.”
Frost’s ability could become a campaign super-weapon for Biden, the oldest president in American history who, upon serving a complete second term, would be 86 years old the day he leaves soffice in early 2029.
Polls show younger voters are unsure about Biden, citing many of the same critiques – climate change and Gaza, primarily – as reasons to question him. Some are considering third-party candidates, such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. or Cornel West. Others are open to not voting at all, an outcome that top Democrats think could lead to losses nationwide.
That’s why Frost, who has said he will do whatever he can to re-elect Biden, wants people to understand the effect of non-participation.
“The main opponent here for me is not even Donald Trump,” he said. “As a campaigner, what I'm thinking is, ‘Our main opponent is the couch,’ it is no action at all. And that's how Republicans win, right?”
U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL) gives a thumbs-up outside the Capitol after voting to continue funding the government for 45 days. Philip Yabut/Shutterstock
People who have worked with Frost said he gives younger voters cover for their anti-Biden feelings and demonstrates how you can both criticize a man who is old enough to be your grandfather and support him for four more years in office.
“Maxwell Frost gives younger voters the opportunity to see both sides of the coin,” said Jasmine Burney Clark, founder of Equal Ground Education Fund and Action Fund, a civic engagement organization in Florida that has worked with Frost. “The congressman has been critical of this administration and has applauded this administration at the same time. He has made that complexity available for other folks who are sitting in their [own] complex situations as well around whether to support or not.”
The congressman has “Gen Z gravitas,” added Burney Clark, who has seen Frost campaign with young voters.
Gen Z — four generations removed from Biden’s Silent Generation — is defined by the Pew Research Center as anyone born between 1997 and 2012. When voters elected Frost in 2022, the then-25-year-old became Congress’ first Gen Z member ever.
Frost’s victory, therefore, became a milestone that garnered considerable attention, landed Frost on cable news and led Biden, then president, to call and congratulate him. He was also one of the few bright spots for Florida Democrats in that cycle, which otherwise saw the state’s ranks decimated by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ political operation.
“He is one of the few positive things out of Florida right now,” said a Democratic operative working in Florida who requested anonymity to speak openly about the shabby state of Democrats in the state.
Bashing — and boosting — Biden
But his election was not the first time Frost found himself in the public eye.
Frost grew up as an organizer, volunteering for Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. He survived his own brush with gun violence in 2016 at a Halloween event in Orlando, eventually leading him to become the national organizing director for March for Our Lives, the gun control organization sparked by the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that killed 17 people.
And Frost was a Biden critic long before he came to Congress.
In 2019, while working for the American Civil Liberties Union, Frost reportedly filmed a colleague confronting Biden about the Hyde Amendment, which significantly restricts federal funding for abortion.
“The goal of the program is to impact candidates,” Frost reportedly said at the time.
That would not be the last time Frost has confronted Biden.
When the Biden administration approved a large new oil drilling project in Alaska, Frost said he was “very disappointed” and argued that Biden was disrespecting young voters.
“Youth voter turnout was at its highest in 2020 & young folks supported him because of commitments such as no more drilling on federal land,” Frost wrote. “That commitment has been broken. We deserve a livable future.”
When the Biden administration decided to build additional miles of border wall, Frost called the decision “equivalent to sticking our heads in the sand,” adding he was “deeply disappointed in the Biden Administration for this hazardous move as the climate crisis looms and the humanitarian crisis deepens.”
After war between Israel and Hamas broke out in Gaza, Frost called for an “immediate ceasefire,” a position that directly opposes the Biden administration’s support for Israel in the wake of the October 7 terrorist attack by Hamas that killed more than 1,200 people.
It would be hard to imagine a campaign surrogate speaking out against Trump’s positions and remaining on Team MAGA.
But part of the reason Frost said he’ll work to get Biden reelected is that administration officials have “never” asked him to tone down the rhetoric.
“In fact, they’ve said, ‘Talk to us, tell us what's up!’ They've listened to us,” he said. “It hasn't been some sort of House of Cards thing, where it's like you're shunned or you're blacklisted or you're strong-armed.”
In 2023, Biden opened the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, an idea Frost helped spur. In the announcement of the office, Biden thanked Frost for his work as they stood together in the Rose Garden, said he was a “big reason why I’m so optimistic about America’s future” and joked, “I remember when I was young.”
Frost said the office is doing “amazing things” and his city of Orlando received about $1.5 million in federal funds for community violence intervention.
“When I was protesting in Orlando, and I was tear-gassed and I was maced and I went to jail in the district that I represent, one of the things I was protesting for was money to communities to end gun violence, and President Biden has done that,” he said.
While he has disagreed with him on climate policy, he also credited Biden for pausing approvals of liquefied natural gas exports and for signing the Inflation Reduction Act, Biden’s signature law to fight climate change.
“Some of us joke that the Inflation Reduction Act is the downpayment of the Green New Deal,” he said, referring to the preferred climate change proposal of the far-left. “I care about that, and that’s a huge win.”
National Democrats have noted this balancing act, believing that Frost – unlike some other progressive members of Congress – represents the views of America’s youngest voters.
“It is normal to have disagreements. You can’t expect anyone to be with you 100 percent of the time,” said a national Democratic strategist close to the Biden campaign. “What’s important is that you can have these disagreements and still be on board, and that’s reflective of the strength in the diversity of the Democratic Party.”
That ability to balance criticism with help has helped Frost navigate internal Democratic politics. In just a few years as an elected official, top Florida Democrats say, Frost is now seen as a “power center” in Florida Democratic politics.
“He is essential to the party apparatus in the state,” said Nikki Fried, chairwoman of the Florida Democratic Party who unsuccessfully ran for governor in 2022.
“He ran a very grassroots campaign when he first got elected in 2022. And he created an atmosphere of hope,” said Fried, who has been open about how Florida Democrats were in a troubling place when she became chair in early 2023. “He's really important to not only energize our base, but to show the rest of the elected in the state of Florida what it looks like to be a true public servant.”
When a document surfaced over late summer foreshadowing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' GOP primary debate strategy in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, its origin had been anonymous.
The document told DeSantis “to take a sledgehammer” to rival Vivek Ramaswamy and make sure to "defend Donald Trump" when he's cut down by former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and repeatedly "attack Biden and the media."
That mask was lifted after a report confirmed the leak of the play-by-play strategy for the super PAC Trust in the Mission PAC, which had been backing former candidate Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), according to The Bulwark's Marc Caputo.
"Tim Scott secretly fueled the division — chiefly by discovering and leaking a debate advice memo Jeff Roe clandestinely penned for DeSantis," reads Caputo's report. "It caused major suspicion inside the DeSantis campaign—and between it and the super PAC—about who the leaker was."
The documents peered into the DeSantis gameplay.
“There are four basic must-dos,” one of the memos urges Mr. DeSantis, whom the document refers to as “GRD” according to Axiom Strategies.
“1. Attack Joe Biden and the media 3-5 times. 2. State GRD’s positive vision 2-3 times. 3. Hammer Vivek Ramaswamy in a response. 4. Defend Donald Trump in absentia in response to a Chris Christie attack.”
In his bid to win the GOP candidacy from Trump and company, DeSantis and various super PACs burned through $160 million.
Late January, DeSantis, who lost Iowa, where he had posted stumping in every county and was only pulling single digits in New Hampshire — dropped out of the 2024 presidential contest. He then pledged his support behind the frontrunner and 45th president, Donald Trump.
Former President Donald Trump arrives for his arraignment at Manhattan Criminal Court on April 04 in New York City. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
Trump's campaign is selling these black-and-white ceramic coffee mugs for $24. (Screen grab)
Illustration of Eugene Debs while running for president in prison. Indiana State University archives
Federal document listing indictment counts against former President Donald Trump. U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida
U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL) gives a thumbs-up outside the Capitol after voting to continue funding the government for 45 days. Philip Yabut/Shutterstock