According to a Democratic source speaking to Axios, former First Lady Michelle Obama is scheduled to speak at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) on Tuesday night.
Her name was initially absent from the DNC lineup announced on Sunday, despite her regular appearances at party conventions since 2008.
Although Obama has repeatedly expressed her disinterest in pursuing a political career, her involvement is noteworthy due to her enduring popularity in American politics, which could have a significant impact on the upcoming election.
Michelle Obama has addressed every Democratic National Convention since her husband's nomination in 2008. Her speeches have traditionally been given prime speaking slots, reflecting her importance to the party and her ability to connect with voters.
In the 2020 convention, Obama's speech garnered more online engagement than any other speaker, according to data from NewsWhip. Her address, which included a pointed critique of then-President Trump, went viral on social media platforms.
The former First Lady's 2020 convention speech included a memorable line where she described Trump as "in over his head," a statement that resonated with many viewers and became a widely shared moment from the event.
The Democratic National Convention is set to begin on Monday, with a night-by-night schedule of themes and speakers released by organizers on Sunday morning. Monday's theme is "For the People," featuring speeches from President Joe Biden, Dr. Jill Biden, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson will deliver the welcome address.
Tuesday's theme is "A Bold Vision for America's Future." In addition to Michelle Obama, former President Barack Obama will make a primetime address. Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff is also scheduled to speak, with Illinois Governor JB Pritzker providing the welcome.
Wednesday's convention theme is "A Fight for Our Freedoms." Vice Presidential nominee Tim Walz will deliver his acceptance speech tonight. Other speakers include former President Bill Clinton, Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.
The convention will conclude on Thursday with the theme "For Our Future." Vice President Kamala Harris will accept the convention's nomination for president during this final night of the event.
Despite her stated disinterest in politics, Michelle Obama's decision to speak at the convention underscores her ongoing influence within the Democratic Party. Her popularity and ability to engage voters make her a valuable asset as the party looks to energize its base ahead of the upcoming election.
In conclusion, Michelle Obama's upcoming address at the Democratic National Convention on Tuesday night adds a powerful voice to the event's lineup. Her consistent presence at party conventions since 2008 and her popularity among voters make her participation significant.
The convention's schedule includes speeches from other prominent Democrats, culminating in Vice President Harris's acceptance of the presidential nomination on Thursday. As the event unfolds in Chicago, Obama's hometown, her address is expected to be a highlight of the convention.
In a turn of events that has raised significant concerns about investigative transparency, Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) revealed that the FBI released the body of presidential assassin Thomas Matthew Crooks for cremation only ten days after the attempt on former President Donald Trump's life.
Higgins argues that this early release, coupled with the cleanup of evidence from the crime scene, has severely hindered the ongoing investigation, as Breitbart reports.
On July 13, a shocking assassination attempt was made on former President Trump. Just ten days later, on July 23, the FBI permitted the cremation of Crooks' body, raising immediate red flags for Rep. Clay Higgins. Upon seeking to examine Crooks' body, Higgins found it had already been released and cremated without prior notification to relevant authorities.
Higgins, concerned about the integrity of the investigation, pointed out that the FBI had cleaned up biological evidence from the crime scene. “Cops don’t do that, ever,” he remarked, questioning the FBI’s rapid actions. Despite the Butler County Coroner having legal authority over the body, Higgins asserted that such a decision for cremation could only take place with FBI consent.
Higgins’ inquiries on Aug. 5 unveiled a baffling reality: many key local authorities, including the Butler County Coroner and Sheriff, were unaware of the body’s cremation. He reported, “Nobody knew this until Monday, August 5.”
The FBI released the crime scene after merely three days, a move that left many first responders and law enforcement officials surprised and distrustful. Higgins characterized the FBI’s actions as contradictory to standard law enforcement practices.
Congress was actively investigating the assassination attempt dubbed "J13" when this revelation came to light. According to Higgins, the FBI should have been fully aware that such premature actions would hamper congressional investigations and other oversight efforts. He elaborated, “The FBI does not exist in a vacuum. They had to know that releasing the J13 crime scene would injure the immediate observations of any following investigation.”
Higgins was notably disturbed by the delayed coroner's and autopsy reports, which were overdue as of Aug. 5. Highlighting the importance of his examination, he stated, “I will not ever be able to say with certainty that those reports and pictures are accurate according to my own examination of the body.” He further argued that the reports and photographs alone couldn’t guarantee an accurate understanding of the body’s state without firsthand examination, suggesting that any resultant findings could be suspect.
On the same day as the cremation, both the House Homeland Security Committee and the Oversight Committee had initiated investigations into J13. Speaker Mike Johnson subsequently announced the creation of an official congressional investigation team to delve deeper into the incident.
Higgins continued to question the rationale behind the FBI's decision to release Crooks' body for cremation under these questionable circumstances. “Why, then, by what measure, would the FBI release his body to the family for cremation?” he asked, expressing his skepticism about the agency's motivations.
Higgins did not pull back in condemning the FBI’s actions, describing them as a "pattern of investigative scorched earth." This accusation implies that the federal agency's handling of the case may have been reckless and obstructive, potentially compromising the trust and efficacy of the investigative process.
The timeline and nature of the FBI’s actions in releasing both the body and the crime scene have become central concerns. Congress and Rep. Higgins are scrutinizing these decisions, demanding accountability and transparency from the agency.
Summing up, Rep. Clay Higgins has expressed grave concerns about the FBI's decision to release Thomas Matthew Crooks' body for cremation. The seriousness of the early cleanup of biological evidence and the release of the crime scene after only three days strike at the heart of the investigative integrity. With congressional investigations underway, the focus remains on whether due diligence and proper procedures were followed by the FBI.
Jamal Trulove, a rapper and actor, has endorsed Donald Trump for the 2024 election after a traumatic wrongful conviction under Kamala Harris.
Trulove was wrongfully convicted of murder under Harris’s tenure and has shifted his political allegiance due to his disillusionment with the Biden-Harris administration, as Just the News reports.
Finding fame as a rapper and actor, Trulove was convicted of murder in 2010. The incident occurred while Harris was the district attorney of San Francisco, a role she held from 2004 to 2011.
Trulove was initially arrested in October 2008 for a fatal shooting that happened in 2007. He was sentenced to 50 years to life based solely on one witness's testimony. During the trial, Trulove faced additional charges related to firearm possession due to a previous conviction. His trial was marked by alleged prosecutorial misconduct, with Trulove asserting that Harris was present and laughed at his sentencing.
The California First District Court of Appeal later reduced Trulove’s conviction from first-degree to second-degree murder. It was agreed by the court that Assistant District Attorney Linda Allen had committed misconduct during the initial trial.
In 2015, Trulove saw his conviction overturned and was acquitted after a retrial. The reexamination of evidence by defense experts played a crucial role in his acquittal. Following his release, Trulove pursued a federal civil rights lawsuit against San Francisco for the misconduct in his original trial. In 2018, he was awarded a $10 million settlement, later increased to $13.1 million in March 2019.
Trulove had initially supported the Biden-Harris ticket in 2020 but has since become a vocal critic. He accuses Harris of gross misconduct during his trial and has expressed strong disapproval of her and President Joe Biden.
Trulove's traumatic experiences have left him staunchly opposed to Harris's political career. He reminisces about how Harris’s office had overseen his wrongful conviction, a memory that continues to haunt him. "In 2008, I was framed for murder and wrongfully convicted by the office of Kamala Harris," Trulove stated, emphasizing his psychological scars from the incident.
His criticisms extend beyond his personal experiences. Trulove voiced strong opposition to Harris’s tenure as district attorney, when she refrained from seeking the death penalty for a gang member who killed a police officer, a decision that was controversial among various groups.
Trulove’s support for Trump also stems from his broader discontent with the Biden-Harris administration. He recalls fewer conflicts and lower grocery prices during Trump’s tenure. “When Trump was in office, sh-t was cool,” he said, lamenting the changes he perceives under Biden's presidency. Trulove believes Trump’s policies were preferable by comparison.
Trulove has articulated that his endorsement of Trump isn’t aimed to attract approval but is rooted in his personal experiences and beliefs. He acknowledges the backlash he might face but stands firm in his decision.
During her career, Harris has taken stances that have attracted criticism from various quarters. While campaigning against the death penalty, she appealed a judge’s ruling that deemed it unconstitutional. Harris supported the Minnesota Freedom Fund during the 2020 riots, raising $41 million but using only a small portion for its intended purpose.
Trulove’s journey from wrongful conviction to political endorsement reflects a profound disillusionment with Harris and Biden. His criticisms of Harris’s tenure as district attorney and her broader policy decisions reveal deep-seated mistrust. His endorsement of Trump underscores a dramatic shift in political loyalty, driven by an ordeal that continues to affect him deeply.
BEDMINSTER, N.J. – Former President Donald Trump held a press conference at his New Jersey golf course, launching a sharp critique against Vice President Kamala Harris’s approach to managing rising food prices, Daily Mail reported.
Surrounded by an array of grocery items, Trump compared Harris's policies to those of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, accusing her of steering the United States toward communism.
Standing amidst shelves stocked with groceries, Trump began his criticism by likening Harris’s plan to Maduro's strategies, which have contributed to Venezuela's economic crisis. He expressed concern that Harris’s policies would lead to similar outcomes in the United States, calling them dangerous and misguided. Trump’s remarks were part of a broader attack on Harris and her policies, which he claimed were a threat to American freedoms.
Throughout the press conference, Trump did not shy away from personal attacks on Vice President Harris. He accused her of being unintelligent and unfit for the presidency, asserting that her policies would plunge the nation into chaos. “I don’t have a lot of respect for her intelligence, and I think she’ll be a terrible president,” Trump stated bluntly.
Trump's disdain for Harris was further evident when he addressed a question about advice from Republican colleagues urging him to avoid personal attacks. He dismissed such advice, maintaining that he was entitled to criticize Harris, especially given what he described as her ongoing attacks on him. “She certainly attacks me personally,” he said, referencing comments from Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.
Trump’s grievances extended to his belief that Harris had “weaponized the Justice system” against him and his allies, a claim he has repeated often in recent months. He argued that her actions were part of a broader effort by Democrats to undermine his political future.
The former president’s criticisms weren’t limited to Harris’s intelligence and character. He also painted a grim picture of the potential impact of her policies on the United States. Trump repeatedly drew parallels between Harris’s proposed health care plans and the policies of socialist regimes, warning that they would usher in a communist system in America.
“You’re all going to be thrown into a communist system,” Trump warned, characterizing Harris's health care initiatives as a direct threat to the nation’s capitalist framework. He suggested that such policies would lead to widespread economic instability and loss of personal freedoms.
In a particularly dramatic moment, Trump suggested that if Harris were to succeed in implementing her policies, the United States could become more dangerous than Venezuela. “If something happens with this election, which would be a horror show, we’ll meet the next time in Venezuela, because it’ll be a far safer place to meet than our country,” Trump predicted.
Trump's press conference, held as he continues his campaign for the 2024 presidential election, highlighted his ongoing strategy of attacking his political opponents with a mix of policy critiques and personal barbs. By focusing on Harris, he appears to be laying the groundwork for a campaign narrative that positions him as a defender of American values against what he describes as the encroaching threat of socialism.
Trump’s remarks also included a broader critique of the Democratic Party, which he accused of being hostile to his administration and his 2024 campaign. He argued that the legal cases brought against him were part of a coordinated effort to derail his political career and silence his voice. “They’re not nice to me, they want to put me in prison,” Trump claimed, reiterating his view that the justice system had been unfairly weaponized against him.
As the press conference concluded, Trump reiterated his commitment to challenging what he views as the dangerous policies of Harris and other Democratic leaders. His rhetoric suggested that the upcoming election would be a battle not just for the presidency but for the future direction of the country.
With the 2024 election drawing closer, Trump’s aggressive stance toward Harris and his vivid comparisons to Venezuela signal that his campaign will continue to focus heavily on the perceived dangers of Democratic policies. The former president's remarks are likely to resonate with his base, many of whom share his concerns about the direction of the country under the current administration.
Google’s recent admission that it blocked search predictions related to the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump has ignited a political firestorm.
Fox Business reported that Google’s executives are now under scrutiny as Senator Roger Marshall calls for them to testify under oath about the company’s handling of sensitive search data.
The controversy erupted after Google revealed that its autocomplete function intentionally omitted search predictions regarding the assassination attempt on Trump. This incident occurred on July 13, leaving the former president with a wound to his ear, one spectator dead, and two others critically injured.
Mark Isakowitz, Google’s Vice President, explained that the decision to block such search predictions aligns with the company’s policy against promoting or predicting hypothetical political violence. He clarified that Google's systems are designed to avoid suggesting search terms that could be construed as accusations of serious wrongdoing, particularly when insufficient evidence supports such claims.
Isakowitz emphasized that these policies aim to prevent harm by limiting the spread of potentially harmful information. However, the revelation that Google’s systems continued to block predictions related to the assassination attempt as late as July 28 has drawn sharp criticism from lawmakers, particularly Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas.
Sen. Marshall, a Republican, has expressed deep concern over what he perceives as Google’s attempt to downplay or obscure the assassination attempt on a former president. He argues that Google's actions could hinder public awareness and accountability in cases of significant political violence.
In response to the controversy, Sen. Marshall has demanded that Google’s top executives appear before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. He has made it clear that he expects these executives to testify under oath, where they would be required to provide a full account of their company’s actions without the protection of corporate jargon or technical explanations.
Marshall’s insistence on testimony comes amid growing concerns over the influence of large tech companies on public discourse, especially when it comes to politically sensitive topics. He has publicly criticized Google’s explanation for the autocomplete omissions, calling it an inadequate defense that fails to address the seriousness of the issue.
“Google is now openly admitting that they were blocking and eliminating search prompts regarding the assassination attempt on President Trump,” Marshall said in a statement. He described Google’s actions as a deliberate effort to downplay the incident, labeling their written defense as “bizarre” and suggesting it was a “hypothetical act of political violence.”
Sen. Marshall has hinted that if Republicans regain control of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee after the November elections, they may pursue a more extensive investigation into Google’s practices. This could lead to broader scrutiny of how tech companies handle politically sensitive information and the implications for national security.
As the situation developed, Google acknowledged the issue and began implementing improvements to its systems. However, the company's response has not quelled the criticism from Sen. Marshall, who remains skeptical of Google’s commitment to transparency and accountability.
In his statement, Marshall emphasized that the time for corporate evasions is over. He believes that Google’s executives must be held accountable for their actions, particularly when they involve significant national security concerns. “Under oath, they won’t be able to hide behind an algorithm or get away with corporate double-speak,” Marshall warned.
Following the revelation that Google designed its search autocomplete to omit results pertaining to an assassination attempt against former President Trump, Senator Roger Marshall has demanded that Google executives testify under oath before the Senate Homeland Security committee. Despite the incident being widely covered, Google's policy prohibited autocomplete predictions related to "hypothetical political violence," which resulted in the omission of search results about the attack. The company has acknowledged the issue and stated that it has begun implementing improvements to its autocomplete system.
According to Reuters, the FBI has launched an investigation into claims from Donald Trump's presidential campaign that state-sponsored hackers from Iran targeted it.
The probe also includes alleged hacking attempts on advisers to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris's campaign, which was reported to have begun in June and was uncovered by Microsoft.
On Monday, the FBI announced it was looking into allegations of a cyber attack on Donald Trump's presidential campaign. The claims, initially raised by Trump's campaign, accuse the Iranian government of orchestrating the hack.
According to Trump, Microsoft informed his campaign on Saturday that Iranian hackers had breached one of its websites. Despite the intrusion, Trump emphasized that the hackers from Iran managed to access only publicly available information.
The investigation is not limited to Trump's campaign. It also encompasses alleged cyberattacks targeting advisers of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. These attempts are believed to have started in June when Biden was still in the race for president.
The Washington Post has reported that the FBI suspects that Iran is behind these breaches in an effort to steal sensitive data from both presidential campaigns. Kamala Harris’s team has not yet responded to requests for comments regarding the situation.
Trump's campaign cited a report from Microsoft researchers released on Friday as evidence of Iran's involvement. This report indicated that hackers linked to the Iranian government had attempted to compromise an account belonging to a "high-ranking official" connected to a U.S. presidential campaign in June.
The same report revealed that the hackers had taken control of an account held by a former political adviser. They then used this compromised account in an attempt to target the high-ranking official. The report did not disclose the identities of the targets involved.
Despite these allegations and the ongoing investigation, the Iranian government has consistently denied any involvement in hacking Trump's campaign. The narrative from Trump's campaign is that these cyber activities represent a coordinated effort by Iran to interfere with the election process.
Donald Trump's assertion that hackers can only access publicly available information aims to downplay any potential damage caused by a cyber attack. However, the full scope and impact of the breach remain under investigation by the FBI.
Kamala Harris’s status in the presidential race adds another layer of complexity to the investigation. Harris became the Democratic presidential nominee following Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the race the previous month. Her campaign has yet to issue an official comment regarding the alleged hack.
The FBI’s efforts will be critical in determining the veracity and impact of these hacking accusations. This investigation highlights the increasing threats of cyber intrusions in the democratic electoral process, particularly from foreign state actors.
The FBI is actively investigating allegations of hacking attempts on both Donald Trump’s and the Biden-Harris campaigns, believed to be orchestrated by Iranian state actors. While Trump asserts that only public information was accessed, the investigation’s broader implications highlight the significant impact of cyber threats on political processes.
A report by USA TODAY states that former President Donald Trump's campaign has accused "hostile" foreign sources of hacking and leaking internal documents and communications.
Campaign spokesman Steven Cheung attributed the hack to foreign sources hostile to the United States, suggesting it was an attempt to interfere with the 2024 election. The campaign cited a recent Microsoft report warning of increased digital election-meddling activity by Iran.
The breach was first reported by Politico, which received the documents from an anonymous source. According to Steven Cheung, a spokesperson for the Trump campaign, the hackers are believed to be associated with Iran, though he did not provide concrete evidence linking the cyberattack directly to the country.
The campaign pointed to a recent report from Microsoft as potential evidence. The report highlighted increasing digital interference by Iran, including a spear phishing attack that targeted a presidential campaign. Microsoft confirmed that it had notified the individuals and organizations targeted in these recent cyberattacks.
Cheung expressed concern over the breach, stating that the stolen documents were intended to cause chaos in the U.S. election process. He also warned that any media outlets publishing these documents would be aiding foreign adversaries.
Further details emerged when Politico reported that it had been receiving emails from an anonymous AOL account since July 22. The emails contained what appeared to be internal communications from senior Trump campaign officials, including a research dossier on Vice Presidential nominee JD Vance dated February 23.
While the Trump campaign has raised alarms over Iranian interference, Politico and USA TODAY have been unable to independently verify the hackers' identities or motives. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, while having issued warnings about Iran's attempts to meddle in U.S. elections, declined to comment on the specifics of this incident.
The timing of the hack and leak is particularly concerning to the Trump campaign, which noted that Microsoft’s report coincided with the announcement of Trump’s running mate on July 15. The campaign believes this could indicate a targeted attempt to undermine their political strategy.
Christopher Krebs, the former head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), weighed in on the issue via social media. He likened the current situation to the 2016 election, during which Trump famously invited Russian hackers to find Hillary Clinton’s missing emails. Krebs warned of continued efforts to exploit divisions within American society and to disrupt the integrity of the election process.
This incident is a reminder of the ongoing cybersecurity challenges that have plagued U.S. elections in recent years. The alleged involvement of a foreign nation, particularly Iran, echoes past concerns about the vulnerability of political campaigns to cyberattacks.
In response to the breach, the Trump campaign has been quick to denounce the actions of the hackers and to criticize any media outlets that might publish the stolen documents. Cheung’s statements reflect a deep concern over the potential impact of this leak on the election.
The ramifications of this breach could extend beyond the immediate political landscape. As the 2024 election draws closer, the possibility of further cyberattacks looms large, with foreign adversaries seemingly intent on influencing the outcome.
The Trump campaign has accused foreign hackers of leaking internal documents and communications to disrupt the 2024 U.S. presidential election. These documents were reportedly obtained by a news organization from an anonymous source and are believed to have been sourced from hostile foreign entities. Campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung cited a recent Microsoft report indicating increased Iranian cyber activities targeting U.S. elections, suggesting Iran's involvement in the hack.
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.