Harris Refuses to Change Course on Israel in Alarming First Interview

Kamala Harris made her Middle East policy abundantly clear during her first big media interview on Thursday: America will continue to arm Israel, unconditionally.

In the much-hyped interview with CNN’s Dana Bash, and Tim Walz by her side, Harris was asked how she’d differentiate her stance on Israel from President Joe Biden’s.

“Would you do anything differently, for example, would you withhold some U.S. weapons shipments to Israel? That’s what a lot of people on the progressive left want you to do,” asked Bash.

“Let me be very clear. I’m unequivocal and unwavering in my commitment to Israel’s defense and its ability to defend itself, and that’s not going to change,” replied Harris. “As I said then [on October 7], I say today Israel has a right to defend itself … and how it does so matters.”

Harris went on to clarify that “far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed” by Israel, but still refused to commit to changing U.S. policy on Israel.

Harris emphasized the need for a cease-fire agreement saying “we have to get it a deal done,” mentioning the Biden administration’s presence this week at negotiations in Qatar. At talks in Doha, the potential deal included a limited six-week cease-fire, prisoner release, and aid into Gaza in exchange for 33 living hostages returned to Israel. However, Hamas has not participated directly in the talks because they say the negotiations “provide cover for Israel to continue its war”—and Israel left the talks on Thursday with no final agreement. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu said he believes Israel must keep military pressure to force a deal.

Harris has previously told Netanyahu, “It is time for this war to end,” but the Israeli prime minister has refused to accept anything but a “partial” cease-fire deal, like the one that was being negotiated in Doha.

As Bash pointed out, many Americans are looking at Harris and Biden to cease arms sales to Israel. A June CBS poll found that 61 percent of Americans oppose weapons aid to Israel, including 77 percent of Democrats and 62 percent of independents. Moreover, 77 percent of those under 30 oppose arming Israel in its continued assault on Gaza. Another YouGov/IMEU Policy Project poll this month found that voters in swing states are more likely to vote for a nominee who vows to withhold weapons.

CNN’s Bash continued by zeroing in on this issue, pressing the vice president in terms of how this deal would get done. “But no change in policy, in terms of arms and so forth?”

“No, we have to get a deal done,” Harris replied, shooting down the possibility of an arms embargo. “I remain committed, since I’ve been on October 8, to what we must do to work toward a two-state solution—where Israel is secure and in equal measure, the Palestinians have security and self determination and dignity.”

Former New York City mayor turned Trump fixer Rudy Giuliani may soon lose control of all his assets for his involvement in defaming two Georgia poll workers in 2020.

The defamed election workers, mother-daughter duo Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, successfully sued Giuliani last year—and asked a federal court Friday to hand over control of his assets to fulfill the judgment.

In a court filing, the pair accused Giuliani of having “spent years evading accountability for his actions” with extemporaneous litigation and unproductive bankruptcy filings.

“Now that Mr. Giuliani’s bankruptcy case has been dismissed, Plaintiffs are finally in a position to receive a measure of compensation by enforcing their judgment,” attorneys for Freeman and Moss wrote. “In this motion, Plaintiffs seek two remedies to which they are entitled under New York law: an order requiring Mr. Giuliani to turn over personal property in his possession in satisfaction of the judgment, and an order appointing Plaintiffs as receivers with the power to take possession of, and sell, both real and personal property that Mr. Giuliani does not turn over.”

Giuliani was ordered to pay nearly $150 million in damages in December to Freeman and Moss. Since then, the former Trump attorney unsuccessfully filed for bankruptcy, lost his accountant over his insurmountable debts, begged Trump for help settling his seven-figure legal fees (he refused), had his WABC radio show canceled for spewing 2020 election lies, and miserably started his own coffee brand, “Rudy Coffee,” in an effort to funnel in some extra cash.

But running out of funds didn’t hamper Giuliani’s prolific spending habits. In May, unsecured creditors for the disbarred attorney slammed Giuliani’s “extravagant lifestyle” as “gross mismanagement,” and torched him for having “accomplished almost nothing” in his bankruptcy case. That resulted in a New York judge throwing out the bankruptcy case in July, calling the former city mayor a “recalcitrant debtor.”

Giuliani is also under the gun for a lawsuit from his former legal representation, who accused him of failing to pay his bill and allegedly only dishing out $214,000 of nearly $1.6 million in legal expenses. Giuliani, meanwhile, claimed he was stiffed by his favorite client, Trump, to the tune of millions of dollars. Amazingly, Giuliani’s legal troubles don’t end there, either: The MAGA henchman is also one of 19 co-defendants in the Georgia election interference case and was named in April in an Arizona indictment charging another slew of Republican officials and Trump allies for their alleged involvement in a scheme to overturn the state’s 2020 presidential election results.

After this story was published, Giuliani’s spokesperson reached out to The New Republic to decry the news.

“This lawsuit has always been designed to censor and bully the mayor, and to deter others from exercising their right to speak up and to speak out,” spokesman Ted Goodman said in a statement. “America is facing an existential crisis. We were once a country that put a premium on free speech and the integrity of our justice system, yet we now live in a time where the justice system has been weaponized against Mayor Giuliani and so many others for strictly partisan political purposes.”

This story has been updated.

Donald Trump was absolutely incomprehensible at his campaign rally in Potterville, Michigan, on Thursday.

While starting off talking about how Kamala Harris “destroyed the city of San Francisco,” Trump’s rant quickly devolved into him ranking which presidents were most “horribly treated.”

Of course, Trump considers himself the most persecuted, with Andrew Jackson following close behind.

“Andrew Jackson they say was the worst of all, that he was treated worse than any other president,” Trump rambled. “And I said, ‘Do that study again,’ because I think there’s nobody close to Trump,” he continued, speaking in the third person. “I even got shot! And who the hell knows where that came from.” Abraham Lincoln, whom he mentioned lower down in his ranking, also famously was shot.

But perhaps Trump’s tangent about the presidents was the most coherent part of his speech in Michigan, which was supposed to be about the economy. He struggled to find what he wanted to say after claiming California was “destroyed.”

“I own a big building there—it’s no—I shouldn’t talk about this—but that’s okay I don’t give a damn because this is what I’m doing. I should say it’s the finest city in the world—sell and get the hell out of there, right? But I can’t do that, I don’t care. I lost billions, billions of dollars.”

And yet Trump’s team says Kamala Harris doesn’t make any sense…

Even Donald Trump’s number two can’t seem to make heads or tails of his recent comments on in vitro fertilization.

Speaking with CNN on Friday, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance couldn’t cook up a reasonable explanation of the Republican presidential nominee’s sudden flip-flop on IVF access, which included saying that “right from the beginning” he was “always for IVF” and suggesting that government funding or insurance companies should cover the procedure.

“How would this work if a state—and you believe that states should have the right to make these decisions—if a state bans IVF, but Donald Trump says he wants to guarantee and/or pay for IVF for everyone who wants it, how would that work?” asked CNN’s John Berman.

“I think it’s such a ridiculous hypothetical,” Vance started. “Alabama, which is maybe the most conservative state in the entire union, has actively protected fertility access and fertility treatments. There’s no state in the union, whether a right-wing state or a left-wing state that I think is trying to ban access to fertility treatments.”

That is, however, not true. Earlier this year, the Alabama Supreme Court issued a devastating decision that classified single-celled, fertilized eggs as children, effectively stalling IVF access across the state. In a desperate bid to salvage votes, Alabama Republicans then passed a law to shield IVF providers from lawsuits or criminal charges relating to the death of embryos. Even still, legal experts have warned that while the new law helps clinics, there’s a long way to go in actually protecting fertility treatments for patients.

At the national level, Senate Republicans—including Vance—near-unanimously voted against a bill in June that would have enshrined IVF access across the country.

“You also voted against a measure that would have guaranteed access to IVF around the country, so it’s possible, right?” asked Berman, pointing to potential future restrictions on the family development procedure.

“Well, no, two things John: First of all, yes, a court made that decision in Alabama and like the next second, the Alabama state legislature fixed that problem and ensured women had access to these fertility treatments,” Vance said. “And all that I voted on, John, was for religious liberty.”

“I don’t want Christian hospitals or Christian charities to be forced to do something that they don’t want to do,” Vance continued. “We have multiple Republican measures that support fertility treatments, support IVF, but don’t require Christian hospitals or other religious organizations to violate their conscience.”

Trump has worked to soften his anti-choice position in recent weeks and appeal to women’s rights activists in an effort to draw more voters to his campaign—but his renewed rhetoric won’t change the practical effects of his presidency, not least of all instilling a hyper-conservative Supreme Court that overturned Roe v. Wade, which Trump has proudly taken credit for. In 2023, the former president also claimed that he should be celebrated for every single state abortion ban.

Donald Trump seems to believe that the price of bacon is caused by the blowing of the wind.

At a campaign town hall in La Crosse, Wisconsin, on Thursday, the 78-year-old presidential candidate rambled incoherently about wind power while answering a question about inflation.

An attendee asked Trump his plan “to make life more affordable and bring down inflation,” in what should have been a softball question for the Republican candidate.

“Some people don’t eat bacon anymore,” Trump replied. “We are going to get the energy prices down,” he continued, jumping from topic to topic. 

“This was caused by their horrible energy. Wind. They want wind all over the place. But when it doesn’t blow, we have a little problem.”

In the most charitable read, it seems like Trump was trying to complain about food price inflation, which has slowed after hitting a high in 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But jumping right into complaining about wind energy decimates any point he was trying to make. Additionally, if Trump is trying to blame wind power for rising energy costs, he’s dead wrong.

This is not the first time Trump has complained about wind energy. Previously, the former president has said he “never understood wind,” claimed wind farms are driving whales “batty,” and told oil and gas executives that he hates wind. The more he babbles, the more it’s clear he has no idea what he’s talking about.