“Economic Terrorism”: Teamsters President Finally Slams Trump

During his interview with Elon Musk Monday night, Donald Trump praised the tech CEO for firing organizing workers, drawing the ire of labor unions and those who care about workers’ rights.

It also reflected poorly on Sean O’Brien, the president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, who became the first union leader to speak at the Republican National Convention last month.

“Firing workers for organizing, striking, and exercising their rights as Americans is economic terrorism,” O’Brien said in a statement Tuesday to Politico’s Playbook.

In his conversation with Musk, Trump laughed at Musk’s union-busting practices. “I look at what you do,” Trump told Musk. “You walk in and you just say, ‘You wanna quit?’ They go on strike—I won’t mention the name of the company—but they go on strike and you say, ‘That’s OK. You’re all gone. You’re all gone. So, every one of you is gone.’”

The Teamsters are one of the only major unions that have not yet endorsed Kamala Harris for president, a surprising stance considering historic Democratic support for labor unions. Pressure is building against O’Brien from within the union’s rank-and-file members, as the Teamsters National Black Caucus voted unanimously to endorse Harris on Tuesday.

In a statement, the caucus said that Harris and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz have an “unwavering commitment to workers and their families.”

“Their records reflect a deep dedication to advancing labor rights and supporting working-class Americans,” the statement said.

Meanwhile, the United Auto Workers has not only endorsed Harris, but also filed federal labor charges against Musk and Trump for “illegal attempts to threaten and intimidate workers who stand up for themselves by engaging in protected concerted activity, such as strikes.”

O’Brien has said that the union will endorse a presidential candidate after the Democratic National Convention, and has invited all of the candidates for interviews. Harris was invited last month, but has not yet had an interview with the Teamsters. O’Brien said on Tuesday that he had not received an invitation to speak at the Democratic National Convention.

Donald Trump appears to be losing the support of the one demographic that has reliably backed him, and is essential to winning the White House: white voters without a college degree.

CNN’s senior data reporter Harry Enten appeared on Out Front with Erin Burnett Tuesday to discuss what a recent New York Times/Siena College poll showed about Trump’s “core group” of white working class voters—the very same people who helped him break down the blue wall in 2016.

While the poll found that Trump still led among white voters without a college degree, his favorability appeared to have taken a massive hit in light of his new match-up against Vice President Kamala Harris.

In May, Trump was leading President Joe Biden among white voters without a college degree in the swing states Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania by a whopping 25 points. This latest poll shows that Trump’s lead has been nearly cut in half: in August, Trump only leads Harris by 14 points with this demographic in those swing states.

Harris’s apparent surge in support comes just as the vice president has managed to pretty much erase Trump’s edge on the economy, according to a new survey the Financial Times published last week, signaling a crucial shift in momentum for the Democratic candidate. Enten explained that Harris was doing slightly better among those voters, in those key states, than even Biden had in 2020.

“Those are the types of numbers that Kamala Harris needs to put up in order to win. And of course, Joe Biden was like, ‘I don’t want to drop out of the race, because I’m not sure that Kamala Harris can break into the group,’ but it turns out she absolutely can,” Enten said.

“The margin is shrinking, and elections are all about margins,” Enten continued. He explained that these numbers were significant more broadly as well, because non-college educated white voters make up 50 percent of the electorate in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

Trump’s advisers previously revealed that the former president tapped J.D. Vance as his running mate to pick up white working class votes. The campaign needed “a white guy to get the white guys we lost,” MAGA political operative Vish Burra told The Bulwark. If this recent polling is any indication, it seems the campaign’s play has yet to pay off.

Donald Trump’s lengthy interview with Elon Musk earlier this week may have violated federal campaign regulations, at least according to one Democratic-aligned political action committee that has already filed an FEC complaint over the issue.

The complaint, filed Tuesday by End Citizens United, argued that the unfettered “conversation” on X, Musk’s $12.5 billion company, amounted to a “virtual campaign event” financed by the social media platform. Per the FEC’s website, a contribution is “anything of value given, loaned or advanced to influence a federal election.”

End Citizens United also claimed that the event did not fall under press exemptions set forth by the election commission on the basis that X is not a traditional news outlet; that the company devoted “considerable resources” to host the interview, including dedicating “real time staff” to fix numerous technical glitches; and (perhaps most significantly) that Musk has repeatedly voiced his support for Trump in the 2024 race, and launched the talk with the intention to platform Trump’s personal beliefs.

“Because X spent considerable resources to host an event to expressly advocate for Trump and was not entitled to the press exemption for that event, Respondents have violated the ban on giving and receiving corporation contributions,” the complaint alleged.

The group called for the FEC to “immediately investigate” the violations and to take “appropriate remedial action” against the “brazen corporate contribution.”

Unfortunately for End Citizens United, such high-profile complaints can take months or even years for the ideologically gridlocked six-commissioner panel at the FEC to investigate, making it highly unlikely for the group to reach a consensus before the November election.

“The Donald Trump-Elon Musk campaign rally hosted on X wasn’t just an incoherent diatribe of lies marred by technical difficulties—it was a blatantly illegal corporate contribution to Donald Trump’s campaign,” said End Citizens United president Tiffany Muller in a statement. “This brazen corporate contribution undermines campaign finance laws and would set a dangerous precedent for unfettered, direct corporate engagement in campaigns.”

Donald Trump’s livestream interview with Elon Musk on X Monday night was plagued not only with technical glitches but also Trump’s own slurred speech. Late Tuesday night, Trump finally came up with an excuse.

“My conversation with Elon last night was heard by a RECORD audience, and was really something special, as Elon himself is very special—and I thank him for such a strong Endorsement!” Trump posted on Truth Social. “Unfortunately, because of the complexity of modern day equipment, and cellphone technology, my voice was, in certain areas, somewhat different and strange. Therefore, we have put out an actual, and perfect, recording of the conversation. ENJOY!!!”

The post followed another late-night post, made an hour before, where Trump went on the offensive against Kamala Harris.

“Kamala: You ruined San Francisco, one of the greatest cities in the World, you ruined California, one of the greatest places on Earth—And you will turn America into a giant combination of both,” Trump’s post read. “We are not going to let that happen. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

Trump’s excuse probably won’t be bought by anyone but the right. The Harris campaign has already seized upon his glitches, as well as Trump’s extremist rhetoric from the interview. The Trump campaign is trying to claim that one billion people watched the livestream, but that’s not going to get much traction either. The likeliest explanation for Trump’s slurring words may be his cognitive decline, which is all the more noticeable now that he’s the oldest candidate in the race.

Elon Musk’s judge-shopping attempt to get back at advertisers has failed.

The CEO of X (formerly Twitter) is trying to sue a coalition of advertisers who he claims conspired against the social networking site by refusing to buy advertisements. Reed O’Connor, a federal judge in the northern district of Texas, recused himself from the lawsuit Tuesday after NPR reported that he owns stock in Tesla, another one of Musk’s companies.

Last week, Musk sued the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, a group of advertisers, media agencies, and platforms that focus on safety in media and technology. The lawsuit also targets the parent organization of GARM, the World Federation of Advertisers, and four of its member companies: Orsted, Unilever, CVS Health, and Mars.

Musk appears to have chosen the northern district because it is a favorite of conservatives, as almost all of its judges have been appointed by Republicans, even though the case has little, if anything, to do with Texas. O’Connor has a reputation for giving the right the rulings they are looking for. For example, he has repeatedly tried to gut or eliminate the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, even going after HIV drugs and cancer screenings. 

NPR’s report found that O’Connor owns between $15,001 and $50,000 worth of Tesla stock, which gives the appearance of a conflict of interest and ultimately seems to have led to O’Connor’s recusal. But while that will delay the advertiser lawsuit, O’Connor is still presiding over a different Musk lawsuit against Media Matters, filed in November, accusing the liberal media watchdog of defaming X by pointing out the rise in hate speech on the site.

The Media Matters lawsuit is still ongoing and still has the right-wing judge presiding over it. Even with O’Connor’s recusal from the advertiser lawsuit, Musk had a small measure of success as GARM announced last week that it would be disbanding, claiming that it didn’t have the financial resources to fight billionaire Musk. The question is how much more money Musk is willing to spend to punish perceived slights.

Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign has been altering the headlines on real articles in Google search results to make them appear more pro-Harris, Axios reported Tuesday.  

The articles—which, unbeknownst to the outlets publishing them, are transformed into advertisements by the Harris campaign—include a banner that says “Paid for by Harris for President” floating above URLs linking articles on sites such as the Associated Press, Reuters, The Independent, and more. 

The headlines and deks, or subheads, of these articles have been changed in the search results to emphasize support for Harris’s accomplishments. 

For example, an article about Harris’s economic plan published by NPR was accompanied by the headline “Harris Will Lower Health Costs” and a dek that states “Kamala Harris will lower the cost of high-quality affordable health care.”

While the banner is meant to make clear that the results are advertisements, not articles, the ads may create the impression that Harris is backed by certain news organizations when she is actually not. 

Spokespeople for CNN, USA Today, and NPR told Axios that they weren’t aware their brands were being used by the Harris campaign. 

A spokesperson for The Guardian, which had also been featured in the ads, made a statement to Axios. “While we understand why an organization might wish to align itself with the Guardian’s trusted brand, we need to ensure it is being used appropriately and with our permission,” the spokesperson said. “We’ll be reaching out to Google for more information about this practice.”

This style of ads is common in commercial marketing, and Google has said that those ads don’t violate its rules. However, this approach may ultimately prove to be a gambit that lacks an actual advantage as it potentially undermines trust in the news. 

It is also unclear why Harris’s campaign felt the need to do this, as there has been plenty of positive coverage of Harris since President Joe Biden withdrew from the race and endorsed her to replace him.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump isn’t running these kinds of ads, according to Google’s transparency center, although he has edited articles he posted on Truth Social. But honestly, why would he want to align himself with mainstream media, which he actively rails against? Trump has previously vowed retribution against the press, which he claims has treated him unfairly, referring to journalists as the “enemy of the people.”

The momentum behind Kamala Harris has been so major that it may turn Florida blue again in November.

The Democratic presidential nominee is closing the gap on the Sunshine State’s solidly red status, according to a USA Today/Suffolk University/WSVN-TV survey of 500 registered voters released Tuesday. The poll results suggest Harris is just five percentage points behind Donald Trump—a far cry from the 19-point advantage that Florida Governor Ron DeSantis had over Democrat Charlie Crist in 2022.

The USA Today poll showed Trump receiving the support of 47 percent of surveyed potential voters in Florida, while Harris gained the support of 42 percent. That five-point difference is within the poll’s margin of error.

Independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. trailed behind with 5 percent, while another 5 percent were undecided or refused to disclose their preference.

Another poll conducted by Civiqs indicated that the number of Democrats feeling positive about the upcoming election had shot up since President Joe Biden exited the race, with approximately 34 percent of the party reportedly feeling hopeful. The number of surveyed participants feeling negative—including “scared,” “depressed,” and “angry”—had all gone down.

That could be why former Texas Representative Beto O’Rourke believes that the Lone Star State could also be coming into play for Harris—or, at the very least, that her candidacy would motivate enough Texas Democrats to vote downballot in other contentious races.

“The thing is you now see Democrats smiling,” O’Rourke told MSNBC Monday. “There is joy in our party. There is electricity moving through our system. And yes, places that I think were written off are now in contention.”

“I think Harris-Walz rise or increase the chances that we’re going to be able to win these races,” O’Rourke continued, referring to the House race between Democrat Michelle Vallejo and Republican Representative Monica De La Cruz, as well as Democratic Representative Colin Allred, who’s gunning for Senator Ted Cruz’s seat.

“Who knows, but Joe Biden lost Texas by only 5.5 points in 2020. It’s been moving faster into the blue column than any other battleground state. Anything, I think, is possible in this year, and with the energy that those two are bringing to the ticket, I think that Texas could possibly be in play,” O’Rourke said.

Representative Ilhan Omar’s Democratic primary opponent Don Samuels has had quite the week leading up to polls opening in Minnesota on Tuesday—including openly courting Republican voters and getting caught possibly breaking campaign finance laws.

In a WhatsApp group chat titled “Zionists for Don Samuels,” Alexander Minn—who has been a director of strategic engagement for Samuels’s campaign since 2022—openly discussed campaign strategy with its many members, The Intercept reported on Sunday. Minn is no longer with the campaign, according to Samuels’s campaign manager, Joe Radinovich.

This chat of wealthy pro-Israel donors included businessman Michael Sinensky, who said he’d worked with a super PAC called Make a Difference MN, which he proudly claimed had taken on the role of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in the race.

“I’ve heard dozens of questions of where is AIPAC,” Sinensky wrote in the chat. “We are fucking AIPAC now.”

AIPAC has funded the victorious primary challengers of two other progressive lawmakers in the Squad, Representatives Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush, both of whom were critical of Israel and its U.S.-backed military campaign in Gaza, which has killed nearly 40,000 people. Both lawmakers were knocked out in their primary races, against the tidal wave of pro-Israel funding and opponents who supported Israel.

Omar seems to be the next target from the list of lawmakers who have called for a cease-fire and criticized Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. Last month, she called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a “war criminal who is actively committing genocide against the Palestinian people while putting the lives of the hostages and the stability of the region in jeopardy.”

Sinensky, who argued that Zionists ought to be supportive of “alt right Christian Neo Nazis on the PRESIDENTIAL LEVEL” in the group chat, later alleged that Omar was antisemitic in a statement to The Intercept. Minn also claimed that she was a “purveyor of hate against Jewish people.”

In the chat with Minn, Sinensky claimed that he’d worked with Make a Difference MN to raise $120,000 since the end of July to support Samuels’s bid. Campaign finance laws strictly prohibit political campaigns from coordinating with super PACS.

While Minn tried to make clear the legal boundaries preventing his coordination, he still discussed raising six-figure sums for Make a Difference MN. Minn also said that his campaign was “in regular communication with AIPAC.”

“Several members of my campaign staff, myself included, have intimate relationships with active and Former executive member of AIPAC,” Minn wrote in a message on July 24.

In the “Zionists for Don Samuels” chat, Minn also discussed strategies to attract Republican voters, to bolster support for Samuels. While Radinovich claimed that he “doesn’t think winning a primary with Republican voters in an 80 percent Democratic district is a strategy that would be successful,” it seems that Samuels has moved forward with outreach to conservative voters anyway.

Samuels appeared on Fox News Monday night, speaking about a fundraising surge he’d experienced since Bush was knocked out of her primary only a week ago. He called Omar “divisive and combative.”

“She picks a side including simply trying to divide her constituency and ignores the other side,” he said, claiming she had taken “contrarian actions” apart from her Democratic colleagues.

Samuels said he’d gone from 100 volunteers to 13,000 volunteers. When asked why he had decided to challenge Omar, he did not mention Israel.

More than 1,400 people have been charged with federal crimes as a result of the January 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection, with over 540 of them receiving jail time. But one lucky defendant who was indicted in May is getting a nice overseas vacation.

The Miami New Times reports that Barbara Balmaseda, a Florida woman and GOP strategist, received permission on July 19 from U.S. District Judge John Bates to go on her honeymoon to Spain and Italy for two weeks beginning on August 29 and ending on September 13.

Balmaseda was arrested in December and indicted by a federal grand jury on May 22 on five charges related to the riots, including corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding, knowingly entering and remaining in a restricted building, and engaging in disorderly conduct in a Capitol building with the intent to impede a session of Congress.

One of those charges was a felony, which Bates mentioned in his decision.

“Particularly relevant to the Court’s conclusion are (1) the uncertain status of defendant’s sole felony charge … (2) defendant’s ties to the United States and apparent lack of ties outside the United States; and (3) defendant’s compliance with her conditions of release to date,” wrote Bates.

Prosecutors disagreed, noting that Balmaseda did not have to post bail and is under neither home detention nor a GPS monitor, and that other January 6 defendants have had overseas travel requests denied.

“The Government acknowledges that Ms. Balmaseda’s honeymoon abroad would be a nice trip to celebrate her marriage, but that does not mitigate the severity of Ms. Balmaseda’s actions before, on, and after January 6, 2021 and the interest in having recourse if Ms. Balmaseda violates her conditions,” prosecutors Matthew Graves and Taylor Fontan wrote in a motion to deny Balmaseda’s request.

According to the FBI, Balmaseda created a Telegram chat that included Florida state Senator Illena Garcia and some Miami-area Proud Boys in the months before January 6, and on the day of the riots, climbed on equipment set up for President Joe Biden’s inauguration while wearing a pink gaiter.

So why was Balmaseda’s request granted? Is it because Balmaseda is well connected? What Bates didn’t mention is that, despite having ties to the Proud Boys, Balmaseda also interned for Senator Marco Rubio from 2018 to 2019, helped to organize Ron DeSantis’s 2018 run for governor of Florida, and was a campaign manager for Garcia’s successful Florida state Senate run in 2020.

Other January 6 defendants can’t say they similarly got to go on their honeymoon abroad. Maybe Balmaseda will also try to use her connections to escape serious punishment or, if Donald Trump wins in November, will try to score a pardon.

Rupert Murdoch is sending Donald Trump a hidden message through his editorial boards: Trump, you are looking like a loser.

Through his media companies the New York Post and The Wall Street Journal, the billionaire business magnate seems to be trying to communicate to Trump that his 2024 campaign isn’t looking so hot. Though Murdoch himself isn’t penning any op-eds, his newspapers’ headlines highlight anxieties from inside the backrooms, The Daily Beast reported.

“Trump Meets Half the Moment in His RNC Speech,” read a WSJ editorial published just hours after his speech at the Republican National Convention. “Trump or Harris? It’s a Tossup for Many CEOs,” read an article at the top of the politics section on Tuesday. “Does Donald Trump Still Have It?” yet another WSJ opinion piece published Sunday asks.

“Trump Is Looking Like a Loser Again,” editor-at-large Gerard Baker wrote in a column on Monday. “The Trump of the past few weeks has looked and sounded more or less exactly like the Trump of nine years ago. This is the problem. It is this Mr. Trump who lost the presidency in 2020. It is this Mr. Trump who lost the House in 2018 and the Senate in the Georgia runoff election in January 2021.”

The relationship between Murdoch and Trump has been rocky for several years, especially after Murdoch personally greenlit the Fox News call that Trump lost Arizona in the 2020 race. When Murdoch said Trump went too far on his election conspiracies, as did some Fox hosts, Trump called the businessman a “MAGA hating globalist” who was “abetting THE DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA.”

Even though Fox was later forced to pay up big time with a $787 million defamation for parroting Trump’s false election claims, Trump continues to bash Fox News whenever he gets the chance.

Trump and Murdoch had allegedly not been in touch since the 2020 election until a few months ago, when Murdoch reached out to suggest Trump select North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum for his vice president. Perhaps the businessman saw what is now becoming clear about J.D. Vance: He’s bad for the brand.

As Murdoch showed face at the Republican National Convention last month, Donald Trump Jr. took the opportunity to slam him, telling Axios, “There was a time where if you wanted to survive in the Republican Party, you had to bend the knee to him or to others. I don’t think that’s the case anymore.”