Trump’s Ultimatum to Republicans Sparks Shutdown Fears

On Monday, Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson visited Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago following the attempt on Trump’s life. Two days later, the Republican presidential nominee is publicly pressuring Johnson and his fellow Republicans in Congress to follow his orders on the spending bill, pushing the entire country to the brink of a government shutdown.

On Wednesday, the House is set to vote on a continuing resolution to extend government funding—to which Johnson is attaching the SAVE Act, a MAGA-backed bill that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote.

The spending plan with the SAVE Act attached is expected to fail, and, as NOTUS reports, “at that point, the question is whether [Johnson] can just bring up a clean continuing resolution to avoid a shutdown, or if he’ll have to engage in more … ‘failure theater.’”

On Wednesday afternoon, Trump chimed in on Truth Social, exhorting Republicans to take a hard line on the SAVE Act. “If Republicans don’t get the SAVE Act, and every ounce of it, they should not agree to a Continuing Resolution in any way, shape, or form,” Trump wrote, recklessly indifferent to the prospect of a government shutdown.

Trump’s post asserted, baselessly, that “Democrats are registering Illegal Voters by the TENS OF THOUSANDS,” and concluded, “BE SMART, REPUBLICANS, YOU’VE BEEN PUSHED AROUND LONG ENOUGH BY THE DEMOCRATS. DON’T LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN.”

The Brennan Center has deemed the SAVE Act a “misguided” piece of legislation, since noncitizen voting is already illegal and “vanishingly rare.” David Dayen at The American Prospect writes that the act is largely aimed at sowing doubt about the legitimacy of the 2024 election and making “people who have the legal right to vote … too nervous about potential harassment by law enforcement to do so.”

A network of county election officials in Georgia is strategizing behind the scenes to help Donald Trump in the upcoming 2024 presidential election.

The Guardian, along with Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, obtained emails through a public records request from a group calling itself the Georgia Election Integrity Coalition, which includes election officials from at least five counties in the state. The emails show favoritism by the group toward Trump, as well as efforts by the group to show fraud in the 2024 elections, despite no vote yet having been cast.

Emails were sent between the officials, as well as election deniers in Georgia and around the country. These included groups like the Tea Party Patriots, or TPP, and the Election Integrity Network, or EIN, a group founded by former Trump adviser Cleta Mitchell. Members include Michael Heekin, a Republican member of the Fulton County board of elections, and his colleague Julie Adams, Debbie Fisher of Cobb County, Nancy Jester of DeKalb County, and Roy McClain of Spalding County. All of them have a history of refusing to certify election results, and Adams works directly for the TPP and EIN.

In the emails, members discuss how to combat scrutiny, in one case regarding a letter from a Democratic attorney warning officials against refusing to certify election results. Adams sent a different email under her Tea Party Patriots address with a meeting agenda including an item about a “New York Times reporter traveling to several counties in Georgia.”

Trump’s supporters on the Georgia state election board, despite facing ethics complaints, have already changed the rules to make it easier to delay or refuse to certify election results. Georgia Governor Brian Kemp, despite being criticized by Trump, now says the former president’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election wasn’t a big deal. These emails show further evidence of what could be a plan to not only cast doubt on unfavorable election results in two months but also to swing the state in Trump’s favor, in a much more coordinated manner than the fake electors effort in 2020.

MAGA Republicans seem weirdly upset that inflation is going down.

The Federal Reserve announced Wednesday that it will cut interest rates by half a percentage point, a move that signals inflation has decreased significantly. The announcement comes after Donald Trump and J.D. Vance spent months attacking the Biden administration for high levels of inflation, even as it fell to the lowest rate in years.

At a Vance rally in Raleigh, North Carolina, the Ohio senator’s audience didn’t seem too happy about the change.

Vance was asked for his reaction to the Fed cutting rates, which would “alleviate inflation for a lot of people.” Before he could answer, his crowd started to boo.

This response was particularly odd considering the fact that cutting interest rates has the potential to actually be good news for everyone.

Lowering the prices of consumer goods, such as groceries, is an issue affixed at the center of the presidential race, despite the fact that it’s not necessarily within the president’s control.

There are a few reasons for what’s happening here. The first is that the crowd just plainly didn’t understand what cutting interest rates would mean. The second is the same reason that Vance responded with, saying that “a half a point is nothing compared to what American families have been dealing with for the last three years.” So, in that way, the first option and the second option are pretty much the same thing.

And then there is the third option, which was illustrated by Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville.

“The Fed’s drastic rate cut is so shamelessly political,” Tuberville wrote in a post on X. “Our nation’s central bank has no business moving rates this close to an election and is clearly trying to tip the balance in favor of Kamala Harris.”

So, good news isn’t really good news unless Trump is the one behind it. That’s what you get for trying to govern, I guess.

Donald Trump took his promise of the largest mass deportations in U.S. history to horrific new heights over the weekend, when he promised to begin a policy called “remigration.”

In one of the former president’s several outlandish missives, Trump ranted about his anti-immigrant immigration policy. Among promises to “stop all migrant flights” and “suspend refugee resettlement,” he vowed Saturday to “return Kamala’s illegal migrants to their home countries (also known as remigration).”

Stephen Miller, the ghoul behind some of Trump’s harshest immigration policies, reshared the post. “THE TRUMP PLAN TO END THE INVASION OF SMALL TOWN AMERICA: REMIGRATION!”

Whenever Miller, with his affinity for white nationalism, backs up an immigration policy, one can usually assume it’s for the purpose of making America a white nation—and lo and behold, that’s exactly what “remigration” means.

The Associated Press described “remigration” in 2019 as “the chilling notion of returning immigrants to their native lands in what amounts to a soft-style ethnic cleansing.” Essentially, remigration would mean forcing non-ethnically European immigrants and their families to leave the U.S., even if they are citizens. The horrific policy proposal is a direct response to the racist “great replacement” theory, which has been pushed by many right-wing U.S. politicians, including J.D. Vance.

While “remigration” is not a commonly used word in U.S. politics, it is slightly more in evidence in European politics, where far-right politicians have pushed to maintain a homogeneous cultural and ethnic society.

For example, Herbert Kickl, the leader of the Austrian far-right party, advocated in June for a “remigration commissioner.” In August, Kickl urged “remigration” while introducing the party’s manifesto advocating for “homogeneity” in Austria, rather than diversity. He also has previously said that remigration could be used to revoke the citizenship of non-whites who “refuse to integrate.”

Martin Sellner, the activist head of the so-called Identitarian Movement, which extols the superiority of European ethnic groups, posted about Trump’s use of the word on X. “#Remigration has had a massive conceptual career,” Sellner wrote in German. “Born in France, popularized in German-speaking countries and now the term of the hour from Sweden to the USA!”

So did Trump know he was using the obscure language of the far right? It seems likely.

“He knows what he is doing,” Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a history professor who studies fascism and authoritarianism, told Mother Jones. “He chooses his words carefully.”

This story has been updated.

An Ohio sheriff who threatened local supporters of Vice President Kamala Harris is doubling down on his dangerous rhetoric, insisting that people need to “accept responsibility” for their political leanings.

Portage County Sheriff Bruce Zuchowski took to Facebook on Tuesday to elaborate on his controversial remarks that spurred the sudden, protesting resignation of a county commissioner from the local Republican committee.

“As the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of Portage County, I have sworn to protect ALL citizens of my County. Recently, I placed a post on my personal facebook page that may have been a little misinterpreted??” Zuchowski wrote on his official page.

“I … as the elected sheriff, do have a First Amendment right as do all citizens. If the citizens of Portage County want to elect an individual who has supported open borders (which I’ve personally visited Twice!) and neglected to enforce the laws of our Country … then that is their prerogative,” Zuchowski continued. “With elections, there are consequences. That being said … I believe that those who vote for individuals with liberal policies have to accept responsibility for their actions! I am a Law Man … Not a Politician!”

The warning came days after Zuchowski willingly threw himself into electoral politics in their yards in a Facebook post that referred to the vice president as a “Flip-Flopping, Laughing Hyena.” He suggested Friday that his constituents send him the personal addresses of locals with Harris’s campaign signs in their yards.

“I say … write down all the addresses of the people who had her signs in their yards!” Zuchowski wrote on Friday. “Sooo … when the Illegal human ‘Locust’ (which she supports!) Need places to live … We’ll already have the addresses of their New families … who supported their arrival!”

The post was seemingly made in reference to a virulent conspiracy theory spread by top Republicans, including Donald Trump and J.D. Vance, about Haitian immigrants eating other residents’ pets in Springfield, Ohio—roughly 200 miles away from Zuchowski’s district.

Since Vance and Trump began elevating the myth last week, Springfield has received at least 33 bomb threats, forcing it to evacuate and temporarily shutter several of its schools, colleges, festivals, and a significant portion of its government facilities, including City Hall, the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, the Ohio License Bureau, the Springfield Academy of Excellence, and Fulton Elementary School.

Multiple city officials, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, and even Vance himself have stated in no uncertain terms that the conspiracy is false.

The Trump campaign would rather sow more chaos in Springfield, Ohio, over the Haitian immigrant conspiracy than make it right.

The MAGA leadership is reportedly “not displeased” that its virulently racist pet-eating conspiracy has drawn widespread condemnation, according to The Bulwark. Instead, the campaign would seemingly rather keep the topic in the news, believing Trump could win big on immigration in November as opposed to thornier issues that Republicans have routinely lost over in recent elections, such as abortion.

“We talk about abortion, we lose. We talk about immigration, we win,” one Trump adviser told The Bulwark.

Multiple city officials and Ohio Governor Mike DeWine have categorically denied the conspiracy, and local authorities have said there were no reports or evidence of pets being stolen or eaten. On Sunday, Republican vice presidential pick J.D. Vance effectively admitted himself that the anti-immigration conspiracy was bogus.

“If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do,” he told CNN.

But having no evidence and, frankly, not believing the lie themselves doesn’t seem to matter to the Trump-Vance ticket.

“We’ll take the hit to prove the bigger point,” the adviser told The Bulwark.

Springfield, the epicenter of the conspiracy, is practically on its own with regard to the fallout of becoming a national punch line. Since Vance and Trump began elevating the myth last week, Springfield has received at least 33 bomb threats, forcing it to evacuate and temporarily shutter several of its schools, colleges, festivals, and a significant portion of its government facilities, including City Hall, the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, the Ohio License Bureau, the Springfield Academy of Excellence, and Fulton Elementary School.

Trump, meanwhile, will likely not be paying a visit to the location of his pet conspiracy, according to a source familiar with his travel who spoke with Columbia Journalism Review.

At a Tuesday night campaign rally in Michigan, Donald Trump briefly strayed from a point about international affairs to make an absurd remark about climate change.

Claiming that nuclear proliferation is the true “global warming” (even as the former president has faced criticism for accelerating the nuclear arms race), Trump said, “When I hear these people talking about global warming, that’s the global warming you have to worry about, not that the ocean’s going to rise in 400 years an eighth of an inch.”

Trump then went on to speak rosily about rising sea levels: “You’ll have more seafront property, right, if that happens. I said, is that good or bad? I said, isn’t that a good thing? If I have a little property on the ocean, I have a little bit more property—I have a little bit more ocean.”

According to a CNN fact-check of similar claims Trump has made in the past, his estimate is a severe lowball: “Sea level rise is already more than an eighth of an inch annually—and it is accelerating.” But perhaps more baffling is the idea that climate change will create more opportunities for real estate.

Shared on social media by the Kamala Harris campaign and other accounts, Trump’s comments immediately generated ridicule.

Users on X, for example, have pointed out that the Michiganders Trump was addressing would probably not “have more seafront property,” barring an impossible catastrophe in which oceans rose hundreds of feet. (In reality, climate change reportedly threatens the region in other ways, including rising lake levels.)

Reporter Tom McKay posted, “Won’t there actually be less ‘seafront’ property because the land area necessarily contracts when sea levels rise.” Jim Swift of The Bulwark shared a meme noting that rising sea levels could threaten Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort.

Others criticized Trump’s comments for trivializing the grave threat climate change poses to human life. The youth climate group Climate Defiance, for example, cited the World Economic Forum’s estimate that 410 million people “could be displaced or harmed by sea level rise this century.”

Senator Bernie Sanders is attempting to block over $20 billion in arms sales to Israel through a series of resolutions.

The Associated Press reports that Sanders wrote a letter to his fellow senators Wednesday saying that “we must end complicity in Israel’s illegal and indiscriminate bombing campaign, which has caused mass civilian death.”

Sanders plans to introduce the resolutions next week under Senate rules that would quickly force a vote on stopping the weapons sales. The Vermont senator is using a joint resolution of disapproval of the sales, a means of congressional oversight of foreign issues.

Sanders said he has support for the proposal, which would halt the sale of missile systems, tank rounds, new fighter jets, and other weapons responsible for the destruction in Gaza. Israel’s war in the territory has killed more than 41,000 people, including nearly 16,500 children, and injured over 95,000, according to Al Jazeera, very likely an undercount.

“We cannot ignore what the Netanyahu government has done in Gaza,” Sanders wrote, adding that “much of this carnage in Gaza has been carried out with U.S.-provided military equipment.”

“We cannot be complicit in this humanitarian disaster, we must act.”

It’s not the first effort from Sanders to halt weapons sales to Israel. In January, the Vermont senator sought to require the State Department to document human rights abuses committed by Israel after October 7, 2023. The Senate rejected that effort at the time 72–11. Similarly, this effort is a long shot and is likely to encounter significant opposition, not just in the Senate but in the Republican-controlled House.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s actions are considered war crimes by many experts, and the International Criminal Court is also seeking arrest warrants against him and Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. The response from the United States has been almost unequivocal support for Israel’s actions, and Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris hasn’t offered any new solutions to end the war, instead refusing to engage on the issue.

J.D. Vance attempted to fill in the gaps of Donald Trump’s health care “concepts of a plan” over the weekend, but buried behind his pledge to protect those with preexisting conditions came the promise of policies that would actually jeopardize their access to care. And Trump is doing nothing to deny that this would be the case.

During an appearance Sunday on Meet the Press, NBC’s Kristen Welker asked Vance if he could assemble the breadcrumbs Trump has offered into an actual policy plan. Vance responded by pointing out that during Trump’s first term, he chose to build on the Affordable Care Act rather than destroy it.

The Ohio senator explained that this time around, Trump’s elusive health care plan was “actually quite straightforward” and said that the former president would “want to make sure that preexisting coverage conditions are covered.” Vance also said Trump would “want to implement some deregulatory agenda so that people can choose a health care plan that fits them.” He criticized a “one-size-fits-all approach” that sorted people “into the same risk pools.”

However, the kind of deregulation Vance refers to is exactly the kind that would make it practically impossible for those with preexisting conditions to get affordable health care, according to Semafor.

When asked for clarification on this position, Trump campaign spokesman Brian Hughes declined to say whether Trump agreed with moving people with preexisting conditions into different “risk pools.”

“Senator Vance and President Trump share the underlying principles of using more choice in the marketplace and efficiency as tools for better, more affordable health care,” Hughes told Semafor.

In 2017, the GOP-led House passed the American Health Care Act, which included the proposal for a waiver that would do just what Vance had described: allow “insurers to set premiums on the basis of an individual’s health status,” including preexisting conditions. The opposite of a “one-size-fits-all” solution, right?

There’s only one problem: The Congressional House Budget Office issued a report analyzing the bill and predicting that the waiver would result in those with preexisting conditions inevitably being priced out of their insurance.

The report estimated that as a result of those waivers, “community-rated premiums would rise over time, and people who are less healthy (including those with preexisting or newly acquired medical conditions) would ultimately be unable to purchase comprehensive nongroup health insurance at premiums comparable to those under current law, if they could purchase it at all.

“As a result, the nongroup markets in those states would become unstable for people with higher-than-average expected health care costs,” the report said. “That instability would cause some people who would have been insured in the nongroup market under current law to be uninsured.”

With the waiver, healthier people could opt for non-group insurance plans, which would remain inexpensive, while less healthy people were pushed toward pricey community-rated options. The report estimated that the price of community-rated options would rise until “those premiums would be so high in some areas that the plans would have no enrollment.”

The Senate rejected that waiver, and Trump was ultimately unable to make any substantial changes to the ACA. However, Vance has made clear that Trump would be willing to make the same mistakes all over again should he make it to the White House a second time.

It’s not yet clear what exactly the former president’s plan is. When asked, Trump said he didn’t know because he’s “not president right now.” But his refusal to flat-out reject the concept of separate risk pools should be a huge red flag.

The Trump-appointed judge who threw out the former president’s criminal classified documents case wasn’t up-front about her own conflicts, and now the details of her backroom liaisons are beginning to trickle out.

Judge Aileen Cannon failed to disclose that she attended a banquet at a conservative law school in May 2023 to honor the late conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, flouting a 2006 rule requiring judges to file formal disclosures when they attend seminars or conferences that could influence their decisions. But it’s not the only time that Cannon has failed to notify the public of her partisan behavior, according to ProPublica.

In 2021 and 2022, Cannon took week-long trips for legal colloquiums sponsored by conservative judiciaries and hosted at an expensive resort in Pray, Montana, where rooms can cost upward of $1,000 per night. The retreats did not go reported until NPR reporters called Cannon out on the omission as part of NPR’s national investigation into gaps in judicial disclosures.

“Judges administer the law, and we have a right to expect every judge to comply with the law,” Virginia Canter, chief ethics counsel for the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, told ProPublica.

Cannon, who seemed determined to hold up the classified documents case at every possible opportunity, ultimately tossed the case in July on the basis that special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional. Smith is currently appealing the decision with the Eleventh Circuit. (William H. Pryor Jr., the chief judge of the Eleventh Circuit, was also at the May 2023 banquet, though he properly disclosed his attendance.) But her own future on the case isn’t clear: CREW has asked the appeals court to intervene and replace the controversial judge on the critical case.

If the government wins the appeal, they will be able to ask the court to assign a new judge to the case—though, ultimately, the future of the classified documents trial is contingent on the outcome of the November election. Should Trump lose, the case will move forward regardless of whether the government wins the current appeal. But should he win, Trump could use his presidential powers to wipe the federal case off the map.