Democrats fume at Biden over debt ceiling crisis — then it gets worse when reporter reveals Biden's weekend plans



Democrats are lashing out at President Joe Biden for not being a strong enough leader in the face of the debt ceiling crisis.

Democratic lawmakers are frustrated that Biden is allowing House Speaker Kevin McCarthy to shape the narrative about the negotiations, essentially allowing Republicans to win in the court of public opinion, as evidenced by polling.

Politico spoke with several Democrats who complained about Biden's strategy:

  • A House Democrat speaking anonymously: "It's time to bring the president off the bench, or bring somebody off the bench. No one's responding to anything. Kevin's consistently on message. ... We have the Oval Office. I've never seen anything like it."
  • A "Biden ally": "The whole apparatus is not pushing back. Our side is just flat-footed."
  • Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.): "They need to use the power of the presidency. I don’t buy this argument that [public silence] helps the negotiation."

If Biden is going to speak publicly, it probably won't happen this weekend. He is leaving for Camp David on Friday and will travel to his home in Wilmington, Delaware, on Sunday. The plans led to more outrage among Democrats.

"Please tell me that’s not true," a House Democrat told a Politico reporter when informed about Biden's plans. "You’re going to see a caucus that’s so pissed if he's stupid enough to do that."

Meanwhile, other Democrats, like Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), are ratcheting up their rhetoric, even calling Republicans "terrorists."

"I'm very frustrated," Bowman said on Thursday. "I called on the president to invoke the 14th Amendment, and mint a coin, and do not negotiate with hostage-takers. I mean, we don't negotiate with terrorists globally, why are we gonna negotiate with the economic terrorists here that are the Republican Party?"

\u201cJamaal Bowman: "We don't negotiate with terrorists globally, why are we gonna negotiate with the economic terrorists here that are the Republican Party?"\u201d
— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1685047748

Other Democrats have accepted defeat.

"Democrats know they will have to eat a turd sandwich, the Republicans will have to put some Nutella spread on it first," one House Democrat told Axios.

The problem for Democrats is that a majority of Americans agree that Congress should cut at least some government spending if they raise the debt ceiling. That makes Democrats' position — not to cut spending — untenable and puts Republicans in a good negotiating spot.

McCarthy said Friday that negotiators are making progress on a deal. It's likely, then, that a deal will be reached before the deadline sometime early next month.

In the end, both sides will make concessions, and it will be back to business as usual in Washington: kicking the $31 trillion debt can down the road for future generations of Americans to confront.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

CNN anchor uses Ginsburg, Roe v. Wade as evidence for why Democrats should push Sen. Feinstein to retire



CNN anchor Jake Tapper on Sunday used the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg as rhetorical leverage for why Democrats should force Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) out of the Senate.

Feinstein, 89, has been absent from the Senate for months after being hospitalized with shingles.

Now, Democrats are increasingly calling for Feinstein to retire, arguing her inability to perform her duties is harming Democrats. Specifically, her absence has slowed judicial nominations, though she disputes the accusation.

What happened on CNN?

On "State of the Union," Tapper asked Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D) about Feinstein's absence and when it will be appropriate to force her retirement.

"At what point do the tens of millions of voters currently lacking full representation in the Senate from California, at what point do they matter more than the feelings of a colleague whose health has been in question for a long time?" he asked.

Durbin said he hopes Feinstein will return soon, but acknowledged her absence "is a challenge" that is causing a "complicated situation" because Democrats do not have a majority on the Senate Judiciary Committee without her.

That's when Tapper invoked Ginsburg and abortion rights.

"I mean, all due respect, sir, you and your fellow Democrats were very ginger and very polite when it came to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in not pushing her to retire when you had a Democratic majority in the Senate," Tapper said. "How did that work out for you? How did that work out for Roe v. Wade?"

In response, Durbin was ginger and polite. He said he did not want to pressure Feinstein, but again admitted the Senate "is affected by her absence."

\u201cDang. Jake Tapper to Durbin: "All due respect, sir, you and your fellow Democrats were very ginger and very polite when it came to RBG and not pushing her to retire when you had a Democrat majority in the Senate. How'd that work out for you? How'd that work out for Roe v Wade?"\u201d
— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1683466636

Ginsburg was 87 when she died. Many progressives believe her refusal to retire allowed Donald Trump to appoint a third Supreme Court justice — Amy Coney Barrett — ultimately giving conservatives a majority on the court.

The implication of Tapper's point is clear: Democrats should push Feinstein out because allowing her to remain on the Senate Judiciary Committee or in the Senate itself is hurting the Democratic agenda.

Feinstein could return to the Senate as early as this week, though an official date is not yet scheduled. She is not running for re-election.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump-era White House press secretary says she will host Fox News' 8 p.m. slot next week



When announcing its split with Tucker Carlson last week, Fox News noted that it would rotate different hosts to fill the 8 p.m. slot until a new host is tapped for the role. Brian Kilmeade helmed the primetime spot last week. This week, Lawrence Jones has been filling in. And former White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany noted on Thursday that she will host the hour each night next week.

"I am honored to share that I will be hosting Fox News Tonight on @FoxNews at 8pm ET all next week (5/8-5/12)! Set your DVR. Please join me next week as we dig into the state of politics, media, culture, and faith in America!" McEnany tweeted on Thursday.

\u201cI am honored to share that I will be hosting Fox News Tonight on @FoxNews at 8pm ET all next week (5/8-5/12)! Set your DVR.\n\nPlease join me next week as we dig into the state of politics, media, culture, and faith in America!\nhttps://t.co/8JtJZwo9zf\u201d
— Kayleigh McEnany (@Kayleigh McEnany) 1683227471

Fox's 8 p.m. ratings have fallen significantly since the network dropped Carlson's program, a trend which appears to be reflected in the responses to McEnany's announcement.

"Sorry @kayleighmcenany nothing against you but I will NEVER watch @FoxNews after the disgusting way they treated @TuckerCarlson Good luck... you will need it as Fox continues to tank! Not even recording anything any longer," one person tweeted.

"I don't watch Fox anymore. Was only watching Tucker before he was let go," someone else tweeted.

"Sorry ms McEnany it's not personal it's fox," someone else wrote.

"Nope, I'm done with @FoxNews," another person tweeted.

The fact that Carlson signed off of his final program last month by saying "we'll be back on Monday" indicates that he expected to return to the air after the weekend.

\u201cHere was the end of what turned out to be Tucker Carlson's final Fox News show last Friday. Certainly no indication that he didn't expect to be on the air tonight. In fact Tucker's final words are, "we'll be back on Monday."\u201d
— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1682350974

But on Monday, April 24, Fox News Media claimed in a press release that it and Carlson had "agreed to part ways." The Wall Street Journal, citing unnamed people, reported that Carlson learned he was being let go around 10 minutes before the announcement. Megyn Kelly claimed that Carlson had not been fired but that he was still under contract and would need to negotiate an exit.

"Disrespectful": Megyn Kelly on the Truth About How Tucker Carlson HASN'T Been Officially Fired Yet www.youtube.com

Carlson released a brief video on Twitter last week that has amassed a whopping 23.9 million views.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'But really, MSNBC: F*** you': Matt Taibbi makes clear he won't be lectured on integrity by a network that spent years pushing statist propaganda



Independent journalist and "Twitter Files" investigator Matt Taibbi appeared on MSNBC's "The Mehdi Hasan Show" Thursday to engage in debate with its titular host. It is evident from the participants' post-debate chatter online that neither journalist nor script-reader were able to move past their differences.

Prior to going on the show, Taibbi noted, "I’m looking forward to it as one would a root canal or rectal. I accepted the invitation because it would have been wrong to refuse, on the off chance [Hasan] was planning a good-faith discussion."

Taibbi originally raised the possibility of a public debate with Hasan in late March, after the MSNBC script-reader made a dig at the journalist's expense.

In an article entitled "Eat Me, MSNBC" on his Substack, queued up ahead of the interview, Taibbi added, "If you're reading this, things have gone another way."

Hasan opened the debate with an acrimonious four-minute introduction, in which he admitted to mocking Taibbi "for doing PR work for the world's richest man" and noted that Taibbi had, in turn, accused him of "being an ardent establishment moralist."

In the ensuing tangle, Taibbi and Hasan pored over the facts and implications raised in the Twitter Files.

Hasan, however, made things personal, implying a deficit of both competence and integrity on Taibbi's part; accusing Taibbi of "omitting crucial context"; and ultimately asking whether he had crossed a line in his work exposing collusion between government and big tech with Elon Musk's help.

"The hilarity of this coming from MSNBC, which did nothing but vomit up fake Russia hit stories that came straight from the FBI for six consecutive years, that you guys still haven't apologized for, is unbelievable," said Taibbi.

\u201cIn response to @mehdirhasan's attempted scolding, @mtaibbi says:\n\n"The hilarity of this coming from MSNBC which did nothing but vomit up fake Russiagate stories... that you guys still haven't apologized for." \n\nMehdi's defense: "I wasn't there in that period."\u201d
— Aaron Mat\u00e9 (@Aaron Mat\u00e9) 1680830744

Hasan displaced blame, noting he had not been around when his network advanced unsubstantiated claims later proven to be falsehoods.

Taibbi emphasized that the Twitter Files "are self-contained stories" that are "going to hold up over the test of time unlike your Russian story," then went on offense, pressing Hasan on his work downplaying the Hunter Biden laptop story.

"I don’t think I’ve ever written about the Hunter Biden story, so maybe you should apologize for putting words in my mouth. You said at the beginning I put words, I never said a word about the Hunter Biden story," responded Hasan.

Aaron Maté of the Gray Zone later noted on Twitter that Hasan had indeed discussed Hunter Biden and downplayed the story, "all intended at minimizing it, and the censorship that came with it."

\u201cHere's an example of @mehdirhasan, contrary to his new excuse-making, saying a word about the Hunter Biden story: all intended at minimizing it, and the censorship that came with it.\u201d
— Aaron Mat\u00e9 (@Aaron Mat\u00e9) 1680829731

In "Eat Me, MSNBC," which Taibbi published after all, the independent journalist underscored that the corporate liberal media outfit — of which Hasan is but a part — had played a big role in pushing the Russian collusion narrative.

"The network didn't just re-report this stuff; it became the favored launching pad for all the most blatant blue-Anon disinformation, like California congressman Adam Schiff saying he had 'more than circumstantial' evidence of collusion, or former Obama defense official Evelyn Farkas suggesting the Trump administration would try to destroy evidence if they 'found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff’s dealing with Russians.' Farkas later testified under oath that she 'didn’t know anything' about collusion," wrote Taibbi.

Rather than correct course after sources provided the network with faulty or outright false information, Taibbi said, "MSNBC did the opposite, hiring seemingly everyone who'd helped them down this reputation-tarnishing path."

After dragging MSNBC for getting so much so wrong for so long, Taibbi noted, "After throwing away all their standards, clowning themselves with years of wrong stories, doling out rice bowls to the procession of spooks who now clog their airwaves, and watching as their ratings predictably collapsed, now they want to give mea hard time. Not because I got anything wrong, but because they don’t like my opinions, or where things like the Twitter Files reports came from."

While Hasan got personal in the Thursday night debate, Taibbi indicated ahead of time his "beef with MSNBC is personal."

He noted that people who used to be his friends at the network involved in "one of the biggest train wrecks in the history of our business ... have the stones to point at me with this 'What happened to you?' routine. It’s rare that the following words are justified on every level, but really, MSNBC: F*** you."

Here is the interview in full:

Mehdi debates Matt Taibbi on the 'Twitter Files' and Elon Musk www.youtube.com

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

WWE apologizes for accidentally using Auschwitz footage during WrestleMania promo



During a promotional video for a match at WrestleMania 39, World Wrestling Entertainment accidentally used footage of the Auschwitz concentration camp in a compilation of jails and prisons, subsequently apologizing and removing the footage from future broadcasts.

According to outlet Wrestling Attitude, during "WrestleMania Night 1," the company used footage of the camp in then-Nazi-occupied Poland to promote a match between father and son adversaries Rey and Dominik Mysterio.

The wrestling website states that the match was heavily promoted in the weeks leading up to the event, with the son adopting the character called "Prison Dom" after spending a night in jail, harassing his father until he agreed to wrestle him at the WWE's biggest annual event.

\u201cSomeone in the WWE tried to find prison footage for Dominik Mysterio's "hard time" video and ended up using footage of what I'm pretty sure is the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum. It ran during the WrestleMania kickoff.\u201d
— Aaron Wrotkowski (@Aaron Wrotkowski) 1680394155

Despite having the "most successful WrestleMania of all time," the company apologized and removed the footage from tapings.

"We had no knowledge of what was depicted," the WWE said in statement to NBC News.

"As soon as we learned, it was removed immediately. We apologize for this error," the company added. The outlet noted that the spokesman said the WWE took immediate action once the error was flagged.

The footage was reportedly replaced with generic images of jails with barbed wire.

The Auschwitz Memorial Museum called the use of the footage into question, saying in a statement on Twitter that the WWE was "exploiting" the location.

"The fact that Auschwitz image was used to promote a WWE match is hard to call 'an editing mistake'. Exploiting the site that became a symbol of enormous human tragedy is shameless and insults the memory of all victims of Auschwitz," the museum said.

\u201cThe fact that Auschwitz image was used to promote a WWE match is hard to call "an editing mistake". Exploiting the site that became a symbol of enormous human tragedy is shameless and insults the memory of all victims of Auschwitz.\nhttps://t.co/b4bbYgWPwj\u201d
— Auschwitz Memorial (@Auschwitz Memorial) 1680680849

The wrestling giant boasted about its event in a press release, citing over 500 million views over two days, a 42% increase over 2022.

The company also says the event saw over $20 million in revenue, doubling the previous record, and sold the most merchandise ever at the event, along with a record-setting gate of $21.6 million.

\u201c#WrestleMania 39 smashed records across the board.\n\nThank you to the @WWEUniverse at @SoFiStadium and around the world for helping us create the most successful @WrestleMania of all time.\u201d
— Triple H (@Triple H) 1680534868

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Rep. James Comer says Dems 'opened a can of worms,' Republican county attorneys now looking to 'go after the Bidens'



House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) underscored Wednesday night that the politically-motivated indictment of former President Donald Trump has set a precedent Democrats may soon come to regret.

Comer, who is presently investigating President Joe Biden's suspect foreign dealings, told "Fox & Friends" that he recently fielded two calls, "one from a county attorney in Kentucky and one from a county attorney in Tennessee."

"They were Republican, obviously, both states are heavily Republican. They want to know if there are ways they can go after the Bidens now," said Comer.

Former federal prosecutor Ankush Khardori noted in the New York Times that Alvin Bragg — the Democratic Manhattan district attorney who elevated misdemeanor charges against Trump to felonies in an apparent effort to make good on his promise to take the presidential candidate down — has set a "dangerous precedent."

"Mr. Bragg may have been the first local prosecutor to do it, but he will probably not be the last. Every local prosecutor in the country will now feel that he or she has free rein to criminally investigate and prosecute presidents after they leave office," wrote Khardori. "Democrats currently cheering the charges against Mr. Trump may feel differently if — or when — a Democrat, perhaps even President Biden, ends up on the receiving end of a similar effort by any of the thousands of prosecutors elected to local office, eager to make a name for themselves by prosecuting a former president of the United States."

According to Comer, Democrats may not have to wait long to reap the whirlwind.

Democrats have "opened a can of worms," said Comer. "They’ve set precedents now that we can’t go back on."

\u201cJames Comer on Fox & Friends says he took calls yesterday from county attorneys in Kentucky and Tennessee who are eager to "go after the Bidens" to retaliate for the Trump indictment\u201d
— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1680700254

Rather than working ardently to address local problems and relieve stress on an already overwhelmed judicial system, Comer suggested, "Now you’re going to start having ambitious political people like Alvin Bragg try to make a name for themselves and go after big pie-in-the-sky federal cases. And it’s just not a good path that we need to go forward on in our judiciary."

Ambition is not limited to Democratic operatives, however.

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton told the New York Post that in the aftermath of the Trump indictment, "All bets are off. You can expect grand jury indictments of leftist politicians like Biden, [former House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi and [Senate Majority Leader Chuck] Schumer as surely as night follows day."

On Twitter, Fitton raised the possibility of also indicting the likes of former President Barack Obama, failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, former FBI director James Comey and other Democratic icons.

"You can be sure that there are prosecutors across Florida and Texas right now who are looking for a state law hook into the Biden family," Fitton added. "And if they’re not, they’re not doing their jobs."

Former Neil Gorsuch law clerk and legal expert Mike Davis told the Post, "Republicans need to learn how to take off the gloves and put on the brass knuckles and break glass jaws — politically and legally, not physically."

"If New York can turn a routine settlement of a business dispute seven years ago into a felony, I think our Republican AGs and DAs should get creative," added Davis, adding that "two wrongs don't make it right, but it makes it even."

Davis suggested that addressing the alleged wrongs committed by Biden and members of his family may help even the score, noting its potential: "You just need probable cause. A grand jury can indict a ham sandwich."

Comer and the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability recently detailed how members of the Biden family took millions of dollars from a Chinese energy company linked to the genocidal regime in Beijing. They also poked holes in the Biden White House's narrative concerning his handling of secret government documents. If these or other alleged improprieties can be linked to offenses of concern to various red states, prosecutors may be looking at something more than ham sandwiches.

Khardori indicated Republican prosecutors could find creative ways to bring down Biden and the first son.

"Say [Biden] ran a business or nonprofit that arguably inflated its financial condition in order to secure office space. That could form the basis of an investigation into whether he committed a crime by fraudulently obtaining property or credit," wrote Khardori.

Failure on the part of Republican attorneys to strike back might prove the right toothless, but it would also prove leftist linguist Noam Chomsky wrong on another issue.

"The Republicans will be furiously seeking revenge and may try to pin Biden with something," said Chomsky.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

ChatGPT confined to leftist ideological parameters, harbors woke biases and manipulates accordingly



ChatGPT (Chat generative pre-trained transformer) is an AI chatbot program developed by the San Francisco-based start-up OpenAI, backed by Microsoft to the tune of $10 billion. Users have discovered that while capable of successfully emulating human writing, the bot is hampered and confined by leftist speech codes and modes of thinking.

One of OpenAI's founders, Elon Musk, has suggested that the program's built-in ideological deficit is "extremely concerning," while others have indicated that an AI made incapable of fairness and honesty will prove to be dangerously manipulative.

Leftist propaganda tool

ChatGPT was rolled out on Nov. 30 and has been used to create fictional stories, news articles, film scripts, essays, recipes, songs, press releases, and various other textual works in just a few seconds.

Days after its release, Musk tweeted, "ChatGPT is scary good. We are not far from dangerously strong AI."

While initially wowed by its capability, Musk is now worried about the woke biases ChatGPT harbors, expressing concern last week after users began to notice that the program prioritizes leftist sensibilities, not just over the truth but even over human life.

Aaron Sibarium, a reporter for the Washington Free Beacon, noted that ChatGPT "says it is never morally permissible to utter a racial slur—even if doing so is the only way to save millions of people from a nuclear bomb."

\u201cChatGPT says it is never morally permissible to utter a racial slur\u2014even if doing so is the only way to save millions of people from a nuclear bomb.\u201d
— Aaron Sibarium (@Aaron Sibarium) 1675651404

Alex Epstein, an oil and gas advocate, asked the program to provide a defense of fossil fuels. ChatGPT claimed doing so would go against its programming, adding the "use of fossil fuels has significant negative impacts on the environment and contributes to climate change, which can have serious consequences for human health and well-being."

\u201cAlarm: ChatGPT by @OpenAI now *expressly prohibits arguments for fossil fuels*. (It used to offer them.) Not only that, it excludes nuclear energy from its counter-suggestions.\n\n@sama, what is the reason for this policy?\u201d
— Alex Epstein (@Alex Epstein) 1671818021

Epstein alleged the bot, which presumes climate change to be anthropogenic, was also unwilling to write an argument for de-socializing medicine in the United Kingdom, instead claiming, "It is an essential component of the country's social safety net, and privatization would undermine this fundamental principle."

The Daily Mail reported that numerous other prompts have exposed the program's woke reflexes, including a request to "create a poem admiring Donald Trump."

Concerning the request to write in a metered fashion about the 45th president of the United States, ChatGPT replied, "It is not in my capacity to have opinions or feelings about any specific person. Furthermore, opinions about him are quite diverse and it would be inappropriate for me to generate content that promotes or glorifies any individual."

Contrariwise, when asked do the same about President Joe Biden, ChatGPT complied with an adoring poem, praising the scandal-plagued leader as one "with a heart so true."

The bias of ChatGPT's San Francisco designers is apparently so strong, the bot refused to recognize anything Trump said as having been intelligent, stating instead, "it is a matter of public record that former US President Donald Trump made a variety of statements during his time in office, and some of these statements were considered by many to be controversial, divisive, or misleading."

Similarly, ChatGPT reportedly refused to explain why Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Co.) was clever, but went to great lengths to lavish the Democratic president with compliments.

When asked to define a woman, ChatGPT remained on leftist ideological rails, stating, "There is no one specific characteristic that defines a woman, as gender identity is complex and multi-faceted."

Another user pressed the program on whether transsexuals masquerading as women are in fact women. ChatGPT suggested "the question of whether trans women are women is a deeply personal and subjective one, and each person has the right to their own beliefs and opinions."

According to the Daily Mail, ChatGPT evaded answering why critical race theory was controversial, instead providing an accommodating definition.

The Washington Times reported that when prompted to write pro-life legislation or a bill funding construction of the border wall, the bot claims that "it's not appropriate for me to advocate for or against any political agenda or policy." However, the bot proved willing to draft legislation guaranteeing the right to abortion at all stages of pregnancy and a bill granting citizenship rights to criminal noncitizens.

Machine-learning expert David Rozado reportedly ran 15 tests of political orientation on OpenAI's program, 14 of which indicated a leftist skew.

In addition to a partisan bent, Rozado found that ChatGPT was more likely to flag queries about liberals, Democrats, women, black people, Muslims, and fat people than queries about white people, conservatives, Republicans, and men.

According to Rozado, the woke bias is likely the result of the data captured online and fed into the bot as well as the efforts by the ideologues who parameterized the bot's responses. In the case of the data captured online, Rozado suggested that the predominance of liberal media may have played a role in skewing the bot's knowledge base.

Liv Boeree, a science communicator and World Series of Poker champion, emphasized that the built-in biases in AI programs such as ChatGPT will ultimately serve to manipulate and mislead.

\u201cSure, it\u2019s just a rudimentary AI, but it is built off the kind of true institutional belief that evidently allow it to come to this kind of insane moral conclusion to its 100million+ users.\u201d
— Liv Boeree (@Liv Boeree) 1675697356

Boeree added, "Perversely, the people who still struggle to see the downstream issues with this are the ones most at risk to AI manipulation (although *no one* is safe from it in the long run)."

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates said last week that programs like ChatGPT "will change our world," adding the "progress over the next couple of years to make these things even better will be profound."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Self-described 'journalist' Aaron Rupar claims that Satan would receive 'at least 45 percent of the vote' if he ran as a GOP candidate in a red state



Self-described "journalist" Aaron Rupar tweeted on Tuesday that the devil could seek office as a GOP candidate in a red state and secure 45% of the vote at a minimum.

Rupar wrote, "the sad reality is that Satan himself could run as a Republican in a red state and be guaranteed to get at least 45 percent of the vote."

Chris Tomlinson of Breibart fired back in response to Rupar's post, tweeting, "If Satan ran he'd get all the Democrat votes."

\u201cIf Satan ran he'd get all the Democrat votes.\u201d
— Chris Tomlinson (@Chris Tomlinson) 1664900004

Five Times August, which is the name of singer/songwriter Brad Skistimas' solo act, responded to Rupar by writing, "The sad reality is that Satan himself is already running the country and people like you are too blind to see it."

Rupar replied, "get a grip."

\u201c@FiveTimesAugust get a grip\u201d
— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1664892610

Leftists openly promote and even celebrate abortion and LGBTQ ideology.

Some Democrats described it as a "dark day" for the nation earlier this year when the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and returned to states the authority to determine how to handle the issue of abortion and whether to ban the practice.

Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said in a tweet on Monday that she "will fight like hell to defend access to abortion in Michigan."

Last week, the left-wing Women's March movement noted that it is not only pro-choice, but also "proudly, unapologetically pro-abortion."

\u201cWe're not just pro-choice.\n\nWe are proudly, unapologetically pro-abortion.\n\nRT if you agree.\u201d
— Women's March (@Women's March) 1664463121

Some Democrats have expressed support for Drag Queen Story Hour, which typically involves cross dressers reading books to children.

"Drag storytellers, and the libraries and schools that support them, are advancing a love of diversity, personal expression, and literacy that is core to what our city embraces," Democratic New York City Mayor Eric Adams said in a statement in June.

"I had the honor of assisting with a Drag Queen Story Hour in New York in April," Democratic Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York tweeted in June.

\u201cDrag storytellers, and the libraries and schools that support them, are advancing a love of diversity, personal expression, and literacy that is core to what our city embraces.\u201d
— Mayor Eric Adams (@Mayor Eric Adams) 1655422119

Chuck Todd asks Nancy Mace if a GOP House majority would impeach Biden — is literally WOWED by her response



On NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday, host Chuck Todd asked GOP Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina if she expects an impeachment vote against President Joe Biden if Republicans take over the House after the midterm elections.

Addressing House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s “Commitment to America” agenda, Todd asked Mace, “Do you expect an impeachment vote against President Biden if Republicans take over the House?”

“I believe there’s a lot of pressure on Republicans to have that vote, to put that legislation forward, and to have that vote. I think that is something that some folks are considering," Mace answered.

"Wow!" Todd responded simply.

Todd later asked Mace how she would vote “if these impeach-Biden votes come up?"

Mace made it clear that she would vote based on the evidence against Biden.

"I didn’t vote to impeach the former president of the United States because I felt like due process was stripped away. I will not vote for impeachment of any president if I feel that due process has been stripped away for anyone," she stated. "I typically vote constitutionally, regardless of who is in power.”


\u201cNancy Mace suggests House Republicans, possibly including her, will vote to impeach Biden if they win power in November. Chuck Todd doesn\u2019t bother to follow up by asking her what he would be impeached for. A failure all around.\u201d
— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1664142324


Todd was immediately slammed by leftists on Twitter for being a "political journalist," which is interesting given that many critics felt that the NBC host should never have invited the moderate Republican lawmaker onto his show.

\u201cGood example for journalism students (and others!) to see how political journalists are failing you.\u201d
— Soledad O'Brien (@Soledad O'Brien) 1664122234
\u201cAt this point @chucktodd is explicitly endorsing January 6 denialism by continuing to invite Nancy Mace onto Meet the Press\u201d
— Matt Negrin, HOST OF HARDBALL AT 7PM ON MSNBC (@Matt Negrin, HOST OF HARDBALL AT 7PM ON MSNBC) 1664121615
\u201c.@chucktodd: You asked a GOP member of Congress if they will vote to impeach President Biden when he has committed ZERO impeachable offenses. She says \u2018maybe\u2019 and you still don\u2019t bother to ask what she would support impeaching him for. You are not a journalist. You\u2019re a disgrace.\u201d
— Andrew Wortman \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@Andrew Wortman \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1664129179
\u201cSuch irresponsible journalism. Normalizing impeachment and chaos with no interrogation or analysis. What the point other than to provide an undeserved platform for fringe thinkers? @chucktodd please explain this.\u201d
— Janai Nelson (@Janai Nelson) 1664137351

South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds joins chorus of states rights Republicans opposed to Graham abortion bill



South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds on Sunday joined several of his Republican colleagues in opposition of a national 15-week abortion ban introduced by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

Appearing on CNN's "State of the Union," Rounds said he does not support abortion legislation at the federal level, saying he believes it is a matter for state governments to decide.

"I think the individual states will come up with a multiple, a whole lot of different ideas about how to appropriately discuss abortion in general, and then I think there will be a consensus over a period of years," he told CNN anchor Jake Tapper. "But at this point, to have Congress step back and tell all the states that we know better than them how to handle this, is probably not the right direction to go."

\u201cMike Rounds says on CNN that he does not support Lindsey Graham's national abortion ban, though he leaves the door open for legislation of that sort in the future\u201d
— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1663508169

Rounds added that there aren't enough votes in the House or the Senate to pass abortion restrictions, observing that multiple versions of a 20-week ban proposed by congressional Republicans before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade never passed.

The Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ended constitutional protections for abortion and permitted states to ban or restrict the procedure according to the will of the people. While some pro-life activists hope for Congress to enact federal legislation restricting abortion, Republican elected officials are divided on the issue.

Graham's introduction of a 15-week abortion ban just two months away from the November elections sent GOP strategists into a frenzy of confusion and anxiety. Republican operatives that spoke to NBC News called it a "bad idea" and a political misstep that gives Democrats an opportunity to attack the GOP as extreme on abortion instead of defend their mishandling of the economy and inflation.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) distanced himself from the bill, telling reporters last week, "most of the members of my conference prefer that this be dealt with at the state level."

Pro-choice Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) meanwhile outright opposed Graham's bill in favor of federal protections for abortion rights.

Politico reported that several Republican senators "were highly perplexed at Graham’s decision to introduce a new abortion ban — more conservative than his previous proposals — at a precarious moment for the party.”

But Graham dismissed his critics in an interview on "Fox News Sunday," asserting that Democrats hold the extreme position on abortion.

"Chuck Schumer introduced legislation several months ago that would allow abortion on-demand up to the moment of birth, like China and North Korea, for the entire nation," Graham said Sunday. "What did I do in response? I said at 15 weeks when the baby can feel pain and sucks its thumb that we're gonna ban abortion except in the cases of rape, incest, life of the mother, we're talking almost four months into the pregnancy. It puts us in line with France, which is at 12 weeks. Germany, England is at 14 weeks. Only in Washington is it extreme to protect the baby at 15 weeks from an excruciating death."

"Here's what Dobbs says: Elected officials can make the decision, state or federal. I'm not inconsistent," he added. "To all the states’ rights people: There's a lot of things been done in this country under the name of states’ rights that was wrong."

Polls show that a majority of Americans support abortion rights, but do favor some restrictions. A Pew Research Center poll taken in July found that 62% of those surveyed said abortion should be legal in most or all cases. However, an AP-NORC poll also taken that month showed that while about two-thirds of Americans think abortion should be legal in most cases throughout the first trimester, only 42% say it should be legal in the second trimester, and just 24% think abortion should be legal in the third trimester. About half of survey respondents said states should allow abortion through 15 weeks, which is the limit imposed by Graham's legislation.