Elon Musk’s X Suspends Journalist Who Reported Leaked J.D. Vance Docs

Free speech hero Elon Musk is yet again silencing his perceived opponents. This time, he is doing J.D. Vance’s dirty work.

Independent journalist Ken Klippenstein on Thursday reported on the leaked 271-page dossier on Vance, allegedly from the Trump campaign’s research team, which mainstream media outlets had refused to publish. Just hours later, Klippenstein was banned from X, where he’d shared a link to his reporting and to the dossier.

X users have found that they are unable to even post the link to Klippenstein’s Substack newsletter on X without receiving a message that the link is “potentially harmful.”

For ease, here is Klippenstein’s reporting on the dossier: https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/read-the-jd-vance-dossier

This isn’t the first time Musk has used X to meddle with progressive accounts on the platform. X has come under fire for banning or limiting an NPR story critical of Trump, the Uncommitted Movement account, and even KamalaHQ. 

In January, Musk temporarily banned Klippenstein, who worked for The Intercept at the time, and a handful of other journalists. The only connection between them: their left-wing politics and their criticism of Musk.

Though some may try to argue that Klippenstein’s post broke X guidelines by publishing hacked materials and is thus “doxxing” Vance, Twitter actually changed its terms of service years ago, in part thanks to the Hunter Biden laptop story and claims of “anti-conservative” bias. The page regarding the platform’s hacked materials policy no longer exists. Musk heavily criticized Twitter’s supposed suppression of the laptop story, later elevating the so-called “Twitter Files” with right-wing journalists Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss to expose the social media company’s previous content-moderation strategies.

At the time of publication, Klippenstein’s account is still suspended.

Donald Trump says he has a plan for the economy, but that doesn’t mean it’s any good.

According to independent nonprofit nonpartisan researchers, Trump’s policies on tariffs, deportations, and the Federal Reserve would, if put in action, seriously hike inflation, wipe out jobs, and slow U.S. production and economic growth.

In even the most generous modeling, inflation would reach 6 percent by 2026 and consumer prices would balloon 20 percent by 2028.

According to an analysis from the Peterson Institute for International Economics published Thursday, the devastating effects on the economy could last through 2040.

Trump promises to carry out “mass deportations” if elected president. Doing so could “cause a large inflationary impulse and a significant loss of employment (particularly in manufacturing and agriculture) in the US economy,” the researchers found. The deportation plan on its own would provide no economic benefit to Americans.

Warwick McKibbin, a senior fellow and co-author of the study, told CNN that the institute estimates that deporting undocumented workers would cause a pandemic-like “shock,” especially in the agriculture industry.

“Can you imagine taking 16 percent out of the labor force in agriculture?” McKibbin said, who noted the ripple effects would include rising cost of food or even permanent loss of supply.

Trump’s isolationist approach to the economy through deportations and tariffs on U.S. imports would hurt the American people most. “We find that ironically, despite his ‘make the foreigners pay’ rhetoric, this package of policies does more damage to the US economy than to any other in the world,” wrote the authors.

Of course, the Trump team denied the findings, with Trump campaign senior adviser Brian Hughes telling CNN the exact opposite: “Trump policies will fuel growth, drive down inflation, inspire American manufacturing, all while protecting the working men and women of our nation from lopsided policies tilted in favor of other countries.”

A Cornell University student is on the verge of losing his student visa and being deported over taking part in a pro-Palestine protest.

Mamadou Taal, a Ph.D. student in Africana Studies, was suspended Monday by the university after he took part in a protest against a career fair attended by defense contractors L3Harris and Boeing last week. Taal is studying at Cornell on an F-1 student visa, which can be terminated by a suspension.

On Thursday, Taal posted on X that his appeal to the university was rejected by the vice president of student and campus life, Ryan Lombardi, and that there was no investigation or due process.

“I maintain that all my actions have been peaceful and in accordance with my First Amendment rights,” Taal’s post reads. “This is a deliberate targeting of a Black Muslim student at an institution where those two identities are increasingly unwelcome. When it comes to Palestine the university will abandon all commitments to academic freedom and free speech to protect its corporate interests.”

Taal is still able to appeal to the university’s provost, but believes he’ll be deported if that appeal is rejected. The university accuses Taal and other protesters of entering the career fair by pushing and shoving campus police officers, but Taal told The Nation he had no part in this. According to student journalists at the Cornell Daily Sun, there wasn’t any physical violence toward police, although recruiters, students, and administrators appeared to be distressed.

“I can say categorically that I shoved no police officer, nor did I not listen to a lawful directive, like they’re claiming,” Taal said. He told the Sun that he only gave a speech outside before taking part in the career fair protest, and only attended that protest for five minutes before leaving.

If Taal is deported, it would be a drastic new step in university attempts across the country to tamp down on pro-Palestinian protests. Taal’s case has already drawn backlash, with a petition calling on the university to reverse its suspension drawing 2,700 signatures from Cornell students and faculty. It seems that many campuses will go to any lengths to make these protests go away, even if it means deporting students and ignoring the First Amendment.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams held a chaotic, short-lived press conference Thursday morning to address his damning public corruption indictment—only for the charges to be made public while he was speaking to the press.

Adams  was indicted Wednesday in a federal case, though the specific charges against him were not immediately released. 

“I always knew that if I stood my ground for New Yorkers that I would be a target—and a target I became,” Adams said in a statement that night. He said that charges against him were “entirely false, based on lies,” though it was not yet clear what those charges were. 

“Despite our pleas when the federal government did nothing as its broken immigration policies overloaded our shelter system with no relief, I put the people of New York before party and politics,” said Adams, suggesting this might be the reason he’d been “targeted.”

The next morning, the mayor held an official press conference on a public street outside of Gracie Mansion in Manhattan. Flanked by supporters, who were there to voice their confidence in the embattled mayor, Adams was also greeted by protesters. 

“This is not a Black thing! This is not a Black thing! This is a you thing! This is a you thing, Eric Adams!” shouted one protester as Adams chuckled awkwardly. 

“Your policies are anti-Black. You are a disgrace to all Black people in this city!” the protester continued. “This is not a Black thing, this is a justice thing!”

As Adams began speaking, he insisted he was “not surprised” by the indictment. “This is not surprising to us at all. The actions that have unfolded over the last 10 months. The leaks. The commentary. The demonizing,” he said.

Adams confirmed that he would not be stepping down as New York City’s mayor but instead “continue to do the job for 8.3 million New Yorkers that I was elected to do.” (The indictment alleges that Adams swindled more than $10 million in public funds for his 2021 mayoral campaign.) 

Adams enlisted several speakers, including the Reverend Herbert Daughtry; Hazel Dukes, head of the NAACP New York State Conference; and activist Jackie Rowe Adams, who had to scream to be heard above the hecklers and protesters. 

When a reporter notified Adams that the indictment had been unsealed, his face fell. The reporter also asked him to clarify his suggestion that he’d been targeted by the federal government. 

“I think we should ask the federal investigators and prosecutors who directed them to the actions that we are witnessing right now,” Adams responded. 

“You know I have ran many campaigns. I have been part of many campaigns. And um, the scrutiny of those campaigns always revealed the same thing. I follow the rules, I follow the law. I do not do anything that’s going to participate in illegal campaign activity. And I will not do that.

“And I’ve instructed not only in writing, but in verbal conversations with the team, we do not participate in straw donors, we do not participate in foreign donors,” Adams said. “We know what those rules are, we comply with those rules. And I think that my attorneys are going to reveal that as we move forward.”

The 57-page indictment alleged precisely the opposite, claiming that Adams had sought out and received luxurious trips and straw-man payments facilitated by a senior Turkish official. Those perks were then allegedly covered up by Adams and members of his staff. In return for all the favors, Adams allegedly pressured the New York Fire Department to sign off on a new Turkish consulate skyscraper without a fire inspection. The full indictment includes other charges as well, alleging hefty straw-man payments from a construction company owner and the owner of a Turkish university.

One reporter asked Adams to respond to the charges, which went back to before his 2021 mayoral campaign, despite Adams implying the indictment was payback for complaining that the federal government had helped to create an immigration surge in New York City. The mayor was also asked, point-blank, whether he had taken kickbacks from foreign countries or intervened on behalf of the Turkish government—and that seemed to be all he could take. 

“My legal team will peruse the entire indictment. We got it today when it was released,” said a pained-looking Adams. “The news media received information before we did.”

“It appears as though the goal is to try to try this case publicly, and not in the criminal justice system that’s in place,” he said. 

“If it’s campaign violations, I know I don’t violate the campaign. If it’s foreign donors, I know I don’t take money from foreign donors,” Adams said. 

Adams then abruptly ended the news conference and shuffled away with his herd of supporters, as some in the crowd cheered, “RESIGN! RESIGN! RESIGN!”

Democratic Senator Ron Wyden proposed a new bill Wednesday that would pack the Supreme Court and dramatically overhaul the nation’s highest court.

Wyden’s bill would expand the court from nine justices to 15 over 12 years, and require two-thirds of the Supreme Court and federal circuit courts of appeals to overturn any law passed by Congress. The bill would require the Senate to automatically schedule a vote on nominees to the high court if they are held up in committee for more than 180 days.

Senators would be barred from blocking nominees to the court by refusing to vote on them. Federal judicial circuits would be expanded to 15 from 13, which would add 60 appellate court judges and 100 to district courts.

The bill would also increase financial transparency measures for Supreme Court justices, requiring them to make their tax filings public. The IRS would be required to audit their tax returns and release the results. Anyone nominated to the court would have to disclose three years of tax returns.

Court proceedings would also be affected, with a two-thirds majority of the court having the ability to force a fellow justice to recuse themselves from a case. Justices would be required to release opinions to the public and detail their votes on issues decided on an emergency basis, upending the infamous “shadow docket.”

The bill stands little chance of passing, particularly in the Republican-controlled House. But it is the strongest proposal from Democrats for reforming the judiciary, not only tackling the Supreme Court but making changes to the federal circuit as well. In July, President Biden announced his own ideas for judicial reform, but only called for 18-year term limits for Supreme Court justices as well as a binding code of conduct.

Calls for court reform blew up after April 2023, when a ProPublica investigation revealed Thomas received previously undisclosed luxury vacations from billionaire Republican donor Harlan Crow. Four months later, more revelations of undisclosed gifts followed, including at least 38 vacations and 26 private jet flights given to Thomas from an array of right-wing billionaires. Thomas in 2003 also accepted a free trip to visit Vladimir Putin’s hometown in Russia.

Justice Samuel Alito has had his own scandals, involving political advocacy in the form of political flags flying outside of his home, and he was also implicated for receiving gifts from Crow and other right-wing billionaires. Wyden’s proposal may not survive Congress or even legal challenges, but it is the first serious proposal to expand the court. The question is whether Wyden can get any other Democrats to sign on.