Former President Barack Obama is allegedly directing Kamala Harris' presidential campaign operations.
According to the New York Post, Kevin McCarthy, the former House Speaker, claims that Obama’s former advisers are orchestrating Harris’ campaign strategy and choices.
McCarthy stated that several of Obama's previous advisers are now actively involved in shaping Harris' campaign. Obama’s former attorney general, Eric Holder, is said to have assisted in selecting Harris' running mate. David Plouffe, who managed Obama’s 2008 campaign, now serves as a senior campaign aide for Harris.
Stephanie Cutter, deputy campaign manager for Obama’s 2012 re-election, oversees strategic messaging for Harris. Jim Margolis, a veteran of Obama’s campaigns and Harris' 2020 campaign, is reportedly joining Harris' team. Having served under Obama and Hillary Clinton, Jennifer Palmieri advises Harris’ husband, Doug Emhoff.
Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, current chairwoman of Harris’ 2024 campaign, also has a background deeply rooted in Democratic campaigns, including Obama’s and Biden’s. McCarthy expressed particular concern over Harris' selection of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her vice-presidential candidate.
He believes this choice marks Harris' campaign as the most liberal in history. McCarthy suggests that instead of Walz, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro would have been a more strategic selection. He emphasized the importance of Pennsylvania and Georgia in achieving electoral success. He questioned Harris' judgment in bypassing Shapiro, arguing it weakens her position on key issues.
Additionally, McCarthy criticized Harris for perceived inaction on issues related to Israel. He pointed out her absence from the Israeli prime minister's congressional address. He questioned her commitment to standing up to her party on this matter.
Harris's role as Vice President often required her to cast deciding votes in the Senate. McCarthy singled out her tie-breaking vote on pandemic stimulus bills as a cause of recent inflation.
McCarthy highlighted the financial struggles faced by American families due to supposed economic mismanagement. He blamed Harris for the economic hardships, claiming they were a direct result of the stimulus bills she supported.
McCarthy's remarks suggest that Obama's influence continues to permeate through Harris’ campaign. He portrayed her team as a continuation of Obama’s administration rather than a distinct entity.
Despite these criticisms, a former adviser to Obama indicated that Obama would only intervene in Harris' campaign if she requested his assistance. This implies a potentially more limited role than McCarthy suggests. Even as McCarthy's assertions stir debate, Harris and her team maintain that they are driving their own campaign strategy. They argue that they are focused on building broad support across the nation.
Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy claimed that Barack Obama is secretly managing Kamala Harris' presidential campaign, with key Obama-era advisers like David Plouffe and Stephanie Cutter playing significant roles. McCarthy criticized Harris' selection of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate, labeling the Harris-Walz ticket as the most liberal in U.S. history.
He also questioned Harris' decision to overlook Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, suggesting it reflects a lack of support for Israel. A former Obama adviser, however, dismissed the idea that Obama is directly involved, noting that it is typical for experienced Democratic strategists to assist in multiple campaigns.
Vice President Kamala Harris proposed ending taxes on tips for service workers, a promise remarkably similar to one already made by former President Donald Trump.
Harris unveiled her plan during a rally in Nevada, facing criticism from Trump for seemingly copying his campaign position, as Breitbart reports.
The vice president announced her intention to eliminate taxes on tips for service and hospitality workers if she is elected to the Oval Office. She made this commitment during a campaign rally in Nevada, where members of the Culinary Workers Union Local 226 were present in large numbers.
Harris emphasized her ongoing support for working families in America, pledging to also raise the minimum wage as part of her campaign. "I know Culinary 226 is in the house," Harris said, recalling her work with the union during her tenure as California’s Attorney General to fight wage theft.
Trump had made a similar promise back in June at a Las Vegas rally, vowing to remove taxes on tips if re-elected. He later reiterated this commitment in Michigan, emphasizing that his administration would not impose taxes on tips.
In response to Harris's announcement, Trump accused her of copying his idea for political reasons. "Kamala Harris, whose ‘Honeymoon’ period is ENDING, and is starting to get hammered in the Polls, just copied my NO TAXES ON TIPS Policy,” Trump said. He argued that Harris's promise is merely a strategy to gain political advantage and not something she would implement if elected. He contrasted her proposal with his own, asserting his administration's commitment to follow through on such promises.
This political confrontation highlights the complex dynamics of campaign promises during election season. Both Harris and Trump are using their pledges to connect with service and hospitality workers, a substantial voter demographic in states like Nevada.
Harris's pledge aims to alleviate financial burdens on service workers by ensuring their tips are not taxed. This could potentially increase their disposable income, a factor she believes will resonate with many working families across the nation. Meanwhile, Trump's reiteration of his no-tax pledge is aimed at reinforcing his previous commitments, presenting himself as a consistent advocate for financial relief in the service industry.
The Culinary Workers Union Local 226, representing many service and hospitality workers, was a key audience for Harris's promise. The support of such unions can be pivotal in elections, especially in states with significant tourism sectors.
Harris's mention of her past work with the union underscored what she claimed was her message of long-term advocacy for service workers. Her campaign’s self-declared focus on worker rights, including raising the minimum wage and protecting tips, aims to appeal to a broad base of voters in similar sectors.
On the other hand, Trump’s remarks highlight his strategy to discredit the opposition by framing its actions as nakedly opportunistic. His criticisms attempt to position himself as the original proponent of beneficial policies for workers.
As the election campaign progresses, promises such as eliminating taxes on tips will likely continue to be a hot topic. Candidates are expected to use these pledges to gain support among working-class voters who stand to benefit from such policies.
Both Harris and Trump are leveraging their proposals to address important economic issues faced by service workers. By focusing on similar themes, the political discourse is emphasizing the need to address wages and economic relief in the hospitality sector.
In a recent interview at Mar-a-Lago, former President Donald Trump made what some view as controversial statements about Vice President Kamala Harris.
Trump accused Harris of being anti-Israel and anti-Jewish despite being married to a Jewish man, as Breitbart reports.
In his interview with Breitbart News, Trump criticized Harris for selecting Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate rather than Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, implying this choice reflects her liberal stance and disregard for Israel and Jewish people.
Trump accused the vice president of disliking Israel and Jewish people, a statement that he repeated multiple times during the interview. “She hates Israel. She is very bad to Jewish people. It’s incredible how badly she treats Jewish people and Israel -- it’s amazing,” Trump asserted. Addressing the broader tensions in the Middle East, Trump expressed his hope for a peaceful resolution between Israelis and Palestinians, as well as in Ukraine.
Trump did not focus unduly on Harris's decision to bypass Shapiro for the running mate spot. Instead, he emphasized her actions on Israel. “It’s not the bypass thing, because I think other candidates of that group were better than either of them. Other candidates of that group were far better than Shapiro. But it’s her actions on Israel,” he explained.
Trump extended his critique to the Democratic Party as a whole, alleging that it has shifted in favor of Palestinian interests. “They are pro-Hamas. Schumer has become a Palestinian. They are pro-Hamas. There’s no question about it,” he claimed, referring to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. He drew a clear line between the two main parties in the United States, stating that Republicans are staunchly pro-Israel while Democrats support Hamas.
Trump highlighted the radical shift he has observed within the Democratic Party over the years. “I think it’s amazing that this happened because I’ll tell you, 15 years ago it was unthinkable for people to go so radical and be so radical. Today, it’s the Democrats in Congress and even a little bit with Democrat Senators. You see them coming along that route also,” he remarked.
Trump continued to note the differences between his party’s stance and that of the Democrats regarding the Middle East. While emphasizing his desire for peace in the region, he indicated that he believes Democrats hinder such efforts due to their alignment with Palestinian interests.
“She doesn’t like Jewish people even though she’s married to one. She doesn’t like Jewish people,” Trump stated, reiterating his strong disapproval of Harris’s perceived stance towards Israel and Jewish people.
Trump's remarks are part of a broader narrative he has been pushing about the Democratic Party's position on Israel and Jewish interests. By contrasting this with the Republican Party's stance, he aims to solidify conservative support on these issues.
Trump has consistently positioned himself as a staunch ally of Israel, and his recent comments about Harris are in line with his previous remarks on the issue. The difference in approach to Middle Eastern politics continues to be a significant point of contention between the two parties.
Throughout the interview, Trump outlined what he sees as a growing divide, emphasizing the shift in values over the past decade and a half. His statements are likely to resonate with his base as well as stir further debate on the issue.
From accusations against high-profile Democrats to broader criticisms of the party's stance, Trump's interview highlights the ongoing contentious nature of U.S. politics regarding Israel. As the 2024 elections approach, these discussions are expected to intensify, with both sides drawing clear lines in the sand.
The Italian American Civil Rights League (IACRL) is urging Governor Tim Walz to resign as Vice President Kamala Harris's running mate.
According to the Washington Examiner, the call comes amid allegations of racism against Walz, primarily due to his response during the 2020 George Floyd protests when a Christopher Columbus statue was destroyed.
Mike Crispi, a board member of the IACRL and a Trump delegate, has been vocal in his criticism of Governor Walz. He accused Walz of failing to protect the Columbus statue, a significant symbol of Italian American pride. "Tim Walz did nothing to stop radical vandals from targeting the most prominent symbol of Italian-American culture," Crispi stated.
The statue in question was torn down during the unrest following George Floyd's death. While Governor Walz acknowledged that there would be consequences, he also expressed an understanding of the protesters' grievances. This stance, however, did not sit well with Crispi.
Crispi labeled Walz's tenure as governor as one of disgrace, citing the 2020 riots as an example of his failed leadership. He claimed that Walz and his administration had advance knowledge of the plans to destroy the statue but chose not to intervene.
In supportive quotes, Crispi's critique was direct and harsh. "He knew they were coming and he did nothing to protect the statue," he emphasized, pointing to what he believes is a pattern of indifference and collusion with anti-Italian American sympathizers.
Minnesota Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan was also brought into the fray. She had expressed her disdain for the legacy of Columbus, which fueled further consternation among the IACRL.
Christopher Columbus, who is of Genoese origin, serves as a figure of Italian American pride. Particularly, Columbus Day, celebrated since 1892 and recognized as a federal holiday in 1971, honors this heritage. The destruction of the statue, therefore, struck a deep personal and cultural chord.
During the debate surrounding the preservation of the statue, Flanagan stated, "There is no honor in the legacy of Christopher Columbus," a sentiment that resonated negatively with the Italian American community.
State Republicans backed the IACRL’s criticisms, asserting that the governor's office had prior knowledge of the intent to dismantle the statue. They opposed the perceived inaction by the administration, further straining ties.
Governor Walz's actions during the 2020 protests are being scrutinized again due to his recent selection as Harris's running mate. This development has reignited old wounds and political discord.
After the Columbus statue was destroyed, Walz commented on the possibility of repercussions. However, he simultaneously expressed empathy for the demonstrators' frustrations.
To summarize, the IACRL has condemned Governor Tim Walz's inaction during the 2020 George Floyd protests, particularly his response to the fall of a Christopher Columbus statue. The resulting call for Walz to step down as Kamala Harris's running mate highlights ongoing racial tensions and the cultural sensitivity surrounding Italian American heritage.
According to The Hill, the Arizona grand jury considered charging Donald Trump along with 18 Republican supporters who falsely claimed he won the 2020 election, but prosecutors advised against it due to double jeopardy concerns.
Trump is referred to as an "unindicted coconspirator" in this case while facing separate federal charges for attempts to overturn the election results. The 18 Republican supporters were accused of forgery, fraud, and conspiracy for asserting that Trump had won in Arizona despite clear evidence to the contrary.
The grand jury considered charging Trump but was advised against it by prosecutors. Citing the U.S. Justice Department policy, prosecutors highlighted potential double jeopardy issues, as Trump is already facing separate federal charges by special counsel Jack Smith for his efforts to overturn the election. Additionally, doubts about the sufficiency of the evidence to charge Trump were a factor in the decision.
The indictment list included 11 Republicans who falsely claimed Trump won Arizona, five lawyers linked to Trump, and two of his former aides. While Trump himself wasn't charged, his involvement in the issue remains significant, earning him the status of "unindicted coconspirator."
Arizona Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes’ office played a significant role in the proceedings, filing court records that revealed exchanges between prosecutors and grand jurors. Prosecutors also recommended grand jurors not press charges against several Republican state lawmakers who signed a document urging then-Vice President Mike Pence to accept the fake electors’ certificates.
The list of those indicted includes attorney Jenna Ellis, who signed an agreement to cooperate with Arizona prosecutors in exchange for having her charges dismissed. This follows her previous guilty plea in Georgia to a felony charge connected to efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. Additionally, Republican activist Loraine Pellegrino pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of filing a false document in the fake elector case.
Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows, both prominent figures linked to Trump’s orbit, have pled not guilty. This case is just part of a broader pattern across the country, with similar criminal charges filed in Michigan, Nevada, Georgia, and Wisconsin.
During the grand jury investigation, prosecutors emphasized that grand jurors had autonomy and independence in their decision-making process. One prosecutor acknowledged the potential disappointment in choosing not to charge Trump, saying, “I know that may be disappointing to some of you. I understand.”
Jason Lamm, a defense lawyer, commented on the proceedings, suggesting that the decision to avoid charging Trump was a deliberate choice rather than a legal necessity. He opined that there were alternative means to handle the case without compromising the grand jury's autonomy.
The excerpts from the grand jury proceedings were included in a document filed in response to defendants’ requests to dismiss their charges. Defense lawyers argued that their clients' actions were protected by constitutional free speech rights and accused the Attorney General’s Office of bias in their investigation.
Prosecutors countered these claims by reassuring the independence and discretion of the grand jurors, underscoring the legitimacy of the indictments.
The case remains a significant chapter in the legal challenges surrounding the 2020 presidential election. The gathering of 11 Arizona Republican electors on Dec. 14, 2020, in Phoenix to falsely certify Trump as the winner illustrates the lengths to which Trump’s supporters went. The false certification was sent to Congress and the National Archives, though it was ultimately ignored.
The indictment of 18 Republican supporters in Arizona for false claims about the 2020 election highlights the ongoing legal struggles stemming from the tumultuous election. While Trump was not indicted due to prosecutors' advice, his central role in the saga remains a focal point. This case and similar cases in other states underscore the enduring complexities and legal battles over the 2020 election results. Additionally, the events illustrate the intricate balance of justice and the rule of law in addressing attempts to undermine democratic processes.
ABC News reported that a Pakistani national, Asif Merchant, was arrested for allegedly planning to assassinate former President Donald Trump and other public officials.
The plot, which involved recruiting hitmen, was uncovered by undercover FBI agents, according to a criminal complaint.
The complaint, presented in Brooklyn federal court, reveals that Merchant, 46, had plotted to murder U.S. government officials. Although the document does not explicitly mention Trump, sources confirmed him as a target. Other targets spanned both political parties, indicating a wide-reaching scheme.
Merchant was apprehended on July 12, a day before Trump's rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. He had traveled from Iran to the United States in April, where he reportedly spent time before attempting to engage hitmen for the plot. Merchant discussed his plan with a confidential source tied to the FBI in early June.
The Justice Department disclosed that Merchant sought individuals to commit murder, organize a protest as a distraction, and perform reconnaissance. Meeting with undercover law enforcement officers posing as hitmen by mid-June, he paid a $5,000 advance for the assassinations. Despite his plans to leave the country on July 12, authorities arrested him before he could escape.
“Fortunately, the assassins Merchant allegedly tried to hire were undercover FBI Agents,” said Christie Curtis, acting Assistant Director of the FBI's New York Field Office. The timely intervention of the FBI prevented a potentially catastrophic outcome.
The timing of his arrest and subsequent security measures at Trump's rally have raised additional concerns. Pat Young, head of the Beaver County Emergency Services Unit, noted a sudden deployment of Secret Service snipers. “This is the first time that a non-sitting president had been allocated Secret Service snipers,” Young stated, expressing unease over the unusual security adjustments.
Breon Peace, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, acknowledged Merchant's intentions: “Working on behalf of others overseas, Merchant planned the murder of U.S. government officials on American soil.” Such statements underscore the gravity of the charges brought against Merchant in the federal complaint.
Merchant's actions fall within a broader context of tensions between the United States and Iran. “For years, the Justice Department has been working aggressively to counter Iran's brazen and unrelenting efforts to retaliate against American public officials,” said Attorney General Merrick Garland in a statement. This ongoing effort follows the 2020 assassination of Iranian General Soleimani, which has sparked numerous retaliatory threats.
Merchant's request to assemble a team for the assassination highlighted the meticulous planning involved. “Specifically, Merchant requested men who could do the killing, approximately 25 people who could perform a protest as a distraction after the murder occurred, and a woman to do 'reconnaissance',” according to the complaint. These discussions laid bare the operational depth Merchant sought to achieve.
The Justice Department asserts its commitment to disrupting such violent plots. “The Justice Department will spare no resource to disrupt and hold accountable those who would seek to carry out Iran's lethal plotting against American citizens,” Garland emphasized. This resolute stance reflects the ongoing efforts to maintain national security in the face of international threats.
“Their success in neutralizing this threat not only prevented a tragic outcome but also reaffirms the FBI's commitment to protecting our nation and its citizens from domestic and international threats,” Curtis added.
Asif Merchant was arrested for his alleged plot to assassinate former President Trump and other public officials. While not naming Trump, the complaint revealed a broader scheme involving other U.S. government figures. Authorities disrupted the plot through a combination of informants and undercover FBI agents, underscoring ongoing national security efforts against international threats. Security measures at Trump's rally highlighted the immediate impacts of the thwarted plot, with additional snipers allocated to safeguard the event.
A Texas woman was apprehended in Washington, DC, for alleged threats against former President Donald Trump and possession of an unregistered firearm.
According to Breitbart News, Christina Montoya was detained by police and faces multiple charges, including threats against Trump.
Christina Montoya, 32, was arrested near Capitol Hill on Friday, a mere three miles from the White House. Authorities discovered a firearm and a magazine in her possession. The Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) confirmed that the weapon was unlicensed.
The exact nature and timing of Montoya's threats to Trump remain unclear; however, police documents note the offense start date as July 20, 2024. At the time of her arrest, Donald Trump was in the Hamptons, engaging with donors.
This incident comes on the heels of an assassination attempt on Donald Trump at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13, 2024. The 20-year-old gunman, Thomas Matthew Crooks from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, was killed on site by Secret Service officers.
During this Pennsylvania rally, Crooks managed to fatally wound one bystander and seriously injure two others before being neutralized. The attack is described as the gravest threat to a former president since Ronald Reagan was shot in 1981.
Montoya now faces serious legal charges, including possessing an unregistered firearm, carrying a pistol without a license, and making threats against a former president. Donald Trump is listed as a victim in the case concerning the threats made against him.
Authorities arrested Montoya within close proximity to key government landmarks, raising concerns about her intentions and the potential risk involved. An MPD report quotes, "Montoya was arrested less than a mile from Capitol Hill and about three miles from the White House. She had the gun and a magazine on her at the time, authorities say."
Following the Pennsylvania rally shooting, Trump commended the Secret Service, describing the agents as “brave.” His sense of gratitude was palpable as he reflected on the attempt, stating, “The first one was not a good situation, not a good situation. That was really something incredible. That was from God. That was from God. Because the chances … that was from God. For all of you non-believers, that one was from God, right?”
Public attention will now focus on the continuing investigation to uncover more details about Montoya's alleged motivations and threats. The seriousness of the charges underscores the heightened security concerns surrounding former presidents.
The MPD’s swift response and apprehension of Montoya highlight the ongoing vigilance and preparedness of law enforcement in safeguarding public figures. This incident, paired with the recent assassination attempt, brings to light the persistent risks faced by individuals who have held the nation’s highest office.
In conclusion, Christina Montoya's arrest for threats against Donald Trump and the possession of an unlicensed firearm has generated widespread concern. As legal proceedings unfold, authorities will work to put together a clearer picture of her intent and the potential danger she posed.
Meanwhile, the memory of the assassination attempt on July 13, 2024, lingers, marking a significant moment in recent American history. With Trump safely meeting donors during Montoya's arrest and his commendation of the Secret Service, the broader narrative of risk and protection surrounding former presidents continues to be a pressing issue.
A San Antonio woman has been apprehended in Washington, D.C., for issuing threats against former President Donald Trump.
According to the Houston Chronicle, Christina Montoya faces charges of carrying a pistol without a license, possession of an unregistered firearm, and threats against a former president.
The Metropolitan Police Department arrested Christina Montoya, 41, on Friday in Washington, D.C., near the White House. Authorities allege that Montoya had threatened former President Donald Trump and was unlawfully carrying a firearm.
According to the police, information about Montoya was received at 12:12 p.m. on Friday, prompting a swift response. Officers located her black Honda Accord at 12:40 p.m. on the 1600 block of North Carolina Avenue, less than four miles from the White House.
Upon searching Montoya’s vehicle, law enforcement recovered several items, including a Smith and Wesson brand box, a magazine, a handgun, and a red gun lock. This discovery resulted in multiple charges against Montoya.
The United States Secret Service was responsible for alerting the Metropolitan Police Department, which facilitated the search for Montoya. They provided the key details necessary to locate her and prevent any potential threats from materializing.
The incident report indicates that Donald Trump was the target of Montoya’s threats, and the offense date was listed as July 20. As of the day of her arrest, Trump was across the country, engaged in fundraising activities in the Hamptons.
The backdrop of this incident is especially concerning given the recent attempts on Trump's life. Less than a month prior, on July 13, Trump narrowly survived an assassination attempt during a rally in Pennsylvania.
In that incident, Trump was injured with a gunshot to the ear, and firefighter Corey Comperatore tragically lost his life. Two other individuals also sustained injuries in the attack, heightening the significance of any threats made against the former president.
Montoya is facing several severe charges that carry significant legal consequences. She has been charged with carrying a pistol without a license, possession of an unregistered firearm, and making threats against a former president.
Each of these charges carries potentially heavy penalties and reflects the gravity of her actions. The legal process will determine the full extent of Montoya's culpability and any subsequent punishment.
These charges address Montoya's immediate actions and serve as a message to others who might consider similar threats. The swift response by the Secret Service and the Metropolitan Police underscores the importance placed on protecting current and former leaders.
Christina Montoya’s arrest in Washington D.C. for threatening former President Donald Trump has resulted in charges including carrying a pistol without a license, possession of an unregistered firearm, and making threats against a former president. The Metropolitan Police Department, alerted by the United States Secret Service, located Montoya's vehicle and confiscated a handgun and related items.
In a bold move aimed at sanctuary cities, Republican Rep. Burgess Owens of Utah proposed significant changes on Friday.
Owens' Sanctuary City Oversight and Responsibility in Enforcement (SCORE) Act seeks to arrest the Biden administration's continued provision of federal funding to sanctuary cities that send illegal migrants to non-sanctuary municipalities without appropriate arrangements, as Fox News reports.
The SCORE Act intends to ensure sanctuary cities are accountable for the migrants they admit. Owens’s proposal underscores that cities providing refuge cannot sidestep their responsibilities by offloading migrants to other communities unprepared for the influx.
The proposed legislation aims to restrict FEMA Shelter and Services Program (SSP) funding from being used to send migrants to communities without local consent. Cities like Denver have been aiding migrants by providing tickets to non-sanctuary municipalities such as Salt Lake City.
An alarming incident in Denver saw more than 1,500 tickets issued to migrants to travel to Utah’s Salt Lake City without notifying local officials. This act epitomizes the chaos the SCORE Act seeks to address.
Under the new bill, any migrant being relocated must have a documented sponsor at the destination. This ensures migrants do not end up requiring government shelters in their new locations. The bill mandates a quarterly report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) on FEMA grant usage. This measure ensures transparency and ensures compliance with the new funding restrictions.
FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program funding is designed to assist financially in supporting migrants as they await their court appearances. However, the new restrictions aim to close loopholes that cities have exploited.
Rep. Owens took to social media platform X with a video explaining the proposed legislation. In the video, he expressed concerns regarding the current administration's handling of border security and migrant distribution.
"If this administration won't fight for American safety, security, and rule of law, our Republican majority will," Owens stated passionately. He emphasized that taxpayer funding for migrant relocation should be meticulously controlled.
Owens conveyed a clear message to sanctuary cities: "My message to these sanctuary cities is simple — you cheered on open borders, and you welcomed these migrants with open arms. Now that your resources and services are overwhelmed, you will not be allowed to ship these desperate people into our communities."
He pointedly criticized self-declared sanctuary cities like Denver, which have been sending migrants to non-sanctuary cities such as Salt Lake City. The newly proposed bill seeks to cut this funding and close what Owens calls a "loophole" fueling the crisis in Utah.
The SCORE Act reflects a concerted effort to manage migrant distribution and the associated financial logistics. It emphasizes holding sanctuary cities accountable for their decisions and ensuring that non-sanctuary cities are not overwhelmed.
In summary, the SCORE Act proposed by Rep. Burgess Owens aims to cut federal funding to sanctuary cities that transport illegal migrants to non-sanctuary municipalities without proper consent and arrangements.
Chelsea Clinton is reportedly aiming for an ambassadorship, should Kamala Harris secure the presidency.
Sources suggest that the younger Clinton’s ambitions are focused on an ambassador role in the United Kingdom should the Democratic nominee ascend to the top job at the White House, as the New York Post reports.
According to a Clinton insider, Chelsea's goal is to become the United States ambassador to the U.K. This drive is said to have influenced Bill and Hillary Clinton’s early endorsement of Kamala Harris’s presidential run.
The Clintons' endorsement of Harris is viewed by some as a strategic move to ensure Chelsea's position. These preparations are believed to have been underway for quite some time.
Chelsea Clinton presently serves as vice chair of the Clinton Foundation. Alongside her interest in an ambassadorship in England, she reportedly has her eye on a possible role in France. An official from the British Embassy in London shared insight, emphasizing Chelsea’s relative inexperience for such a high-profile position. The position is typically reserved for major donors or fundraisers.
Jane Hartley, currently 74, has held the U.K. ambassador role in the Biden administration since 2022. Her tenure followed a decision by Michael Bloomberg to decline the job. Prior to this position, Hartley served as the ambassador to France and Monaco during the Obama administration and was a major fundraiser for the Democratic Party.
The position of U.S. ambassador to the U.K. has historically attracted significant figures. For instance, during Donald Trump’s presidency, the role was filled by Woody Johnson, owner of the New York Jets and a top Republican fundraiser for the 2016 campaign.
The preference for high-profile ambassadors by foreign countries is often due to the attention they attract. Chelsea Clinton, with her notable background and education credentials, including her prior studies at Oxford University, fits this mold.
With a master's degree and a doctorate in international relations from Oxford, Clinton has longstanding ties to the U.K.. Alongside her career ambitions, she is married to Marc Mezvinsky and has three young children.
Chelsea has reportedly been yearning for an ambassadorship for an extended period. Comparisons are drawn to Caroline Kennedy, who currently represents the U.S. in Australia and previously held the ambassador position in Japan.
Despite the talks of Chelsea’s ambitions, a close associate of the family negated the idea that Bill and Hillary Clinton's backing of Harris was tied to securing a future diplomatic role for their daughter. Instead, the endorsement aimed solely at defeating Donald Trump in the election. Chelsea Clinton's representative has firmly denied the claims of her pursuing an ambassador post. They emphasized her focus and dedication to supporting Harris’s campaign for the upcoming election.
Competition for key ambassador posts such as those in England and France is fierce. Despite this, Chelsea's dedication to public health has also placed her as a strong contender for a role in South Africa. The intricate network between political support and diplomatic ambitions paints a complex picture. The desire to establish a personal legacy drives Chelsea Clinton, mirroring the journey of prominent figures such as Kennedy.
In conclusion, Chelsea Clinton's aspirations for an ambassadorship are said to be linked to the Clintons’ support for Kamala Harris. However, both Clinton family insiders and Chelsea's representatives refute the claims of such motives. The competitive nature of diplomatic appointments and Chelsea's distinguished background form the narrative of this evolving story.