‘Turning themselves into potted plants': How Republicans in Congress surrendered to Elon Musk
Angelo Carusone, President of Media Matters for America, Charlie Sykes, MSNBC Contributor and Columnist and Teddy Schleifer, New York Times Correspondent joins Nicolle Wallace on Deadline White House to discuss how Republicans in Washington have ceded the power that voters elected them to have to an unelected billionaire in Elon Musk.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Black America Web
27 minutes ago
- Black America Web
Cory Booker Responds To Ridiculous MAGA Republicans Accusations of Doing A 'Nazi Salute'
Source: Getty Images / Cory Booker / Elon Musk Cory Booker is shutting down claims he was out here throwing up a Nazi salute. MAGA Republicans and Elon Musk are losing their sh*t and doing their best to compare a moment where Cory Booker put his hand on his heart and waved goodbye to the crowd at the Democratic National Convention in California to when Musk clearly did a Nazi salute. Through a spokesperson, Booker shut down those ridiculous claims. 'Cory Booker was obviously just waving to the crowd. Anyone who claims his wave is the same as Elon Musk's gesture is operating in bad faith,' Maya Krishna-Rogers, spokesperson for Booker, said to Newsweek in a statement sent via email on Sunday. 'The differences between the two are obvious to anyone without an agenda.' Musk also doubled down on his acceptance of th use of the word 'retard' as an insult. 🤨 — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 1, 2025 MAGA Republicans going hard trying to make something out of nothing about Cory Booker waving goodbye to the crowd, comes after Musk and Steve Bannon both were both accused doing nazi salutes during events. Musk was accused of doing a Nazi salute during Trump rally during his second inauguration following his unfortunate election win. Elon Musk has gone full mask off Nazi. He is actively promoting Nazism. Tesla is now a hate symbol. — James Jansson (@jamesjansson) January 20, 2025 Still despite Booker's statement and the video evidence, you can't tell these MAGA fools a damn thing as continue to take photos of other elected officials clearly waving bye, and using them as evidence of them doing Nazi salutes in order to vindicate the alleged ketamine abuser Elon Musk. 🤨 — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 1, 2025 SMH. You can see more stupid reactions in the gallery below. Cory Booker Responds To Ridiculous MAGA Republicans Accusations of Doing A 'Nazi Salute' was originally published on Here's a list of all the news networks who have not covered Cory Booker's salute:- NYTimes- CNN- Washington Post- MSNBC- NPR- USA Today- Reuters- Axios- ABC NewsEvery single one of them wrote stories on Elon Musk's salute. do you get it yet? — kekius tees (@kekmaximusk) June 1, 2025 I'm literally shaking right now. Cory Booker is literally Hitler. I can't wait for fake news to cover this as extensively as they did Elon when gave his heart out to everyone! — Sara Rose 🇺🇸🌹 (@saras76) May 31, 2025 Hello, @NewsHour — will you be making a post comparing Cory Booker's apparent 'fascist salute' to the 'Sieg Heil?"Your post about Elon Musk making a very similar gesture amassed over 36M views. Since you assure US taxpayers that PBS is a non-partisan organization, and all. — Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) June 1, 2025 It's most amusing to watch all the people who branded @elonmusk a Nazi now tying themselves in tortured knots trying to explain why Cory Booker isn't… for doing the EXACT SAME THING. Of course, neither is.. but the hypocrisy stinks. — Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) June 1, 2025 Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The latest GOP push to cut waste and spending: Work requirements
The Trump administration and congressional Republicans are increasingly turning to work requirements as part of a wide-ranging effort to slash spending on welfare benefits - extending GOP messaging around waste and fraud to argue that many people who get federal aid don't deserve it. In late May, the House passed a sweeping tax and budget bill that would impose new work requirements as part of a plan to cut Medicaid. The Agriculture Department is poised to broaden work requirements that already condition access to the nation's largest food assistance program. And the Department of Housing and Urban Development sees work requirements as an 'absolute priority' for rental assistance programs - possibly within President Donald Trump's first year in office - according to an official briefed on the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss plans that aren't finalized. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. Specific policies could change as the bill heads to the Senate, where multiple Republicans have expressed concerns over work requirements for Medicaid. Yet the proposals reflect a shifting view among Republicans in Washington about who should receive federal benefits. In a New York Times op-ed last month, four top Trump officials overseeing housing, health and food programs wrote that welfare programs were created to help the neediest but have 'deviated from their original mission both by drift and by design.' Even able-bodied adults should look to welfare as a 'short-term hand-up, not a lifetime handout,' wrote Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner. Meanwhile, Republican House leaders are also linking work requirements to broader efforts to root out fraud and abuse, and prevent undocumented immigrants from accessing public benefits. 'There are vulnerable citizens of this country who depend on the safety net,' House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) told The Washington Post last month. 'The safety net is weakened and is less sustainable when you are allowing these monies to go to people or to stakeholders … and used in other ways outside of supporting those who need it, depend on it and qualify for it.' The proposals have drawn sharp criticism from Democrats and left-leaning economists, who argue that work requirements are the wrong tool for this economy. They say the policies risk dropping some of the most vulnerable benefits recipients - such as people who work inconsistent hours, go through bouts of unemployment, struggle with health issues that don't qualify as disabilities or do unpaid work caring for relatives. 'We have never required a 64-year-old single widow who's taking care of her grandchild to work in order to be able to receive SNAP benefits,' said Lauren Bauer, a fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution, referring to the food assistance program for low-income families. 'And I guess that's going to change.' Work requirements for benefits programs have been pushed at various times over decades. President Bill Clinton campaigned on a promise to 'end welfare as we know it' and in 1996 worked with the Republican-controlled Congress to overhaul benefits in a landmark law. The measure ended Aid to Families with Dependent Children - which effectively entitled the poorest Americans to federal help - and introduced Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, known more commonly as TANF. The number of people receiving federal welfare payments fell by half in four years, to 6.3 million in 2000. And the past few decades have given rise to debates over whether the changes worked, especially since measures of poverty fluctuate with recessions and other economic forces. The new policies under consideration could be even more far-reaching. Under the Affordable Care Act, adults with low incomes and no children or disabilities qualified for Medicaid for the first time, marking a significant expansion of the safety net insurance program. The new Republican plan would require beneficiaries to spend at least 80 hours a month working, training for a job, in school or volunteering to qualify for Medicaid. In May, Kennedy, the health and human services secretary, told the Senate that the changes would primarily affect people fraudulently receiving benefits and 'able-bodied male workers, males, who refuse to get a job.' Work requirements are meant to reduce the number of people on the program: Roughly a third of the $800 billion in health-care savings in the GOP's sweeping tax bill would come from the work rules, which would result in 4.8 million people becoming uninsured, according to an estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported by The Washington Post's Fact Checker. SNAP, the nation's largest food assistance program, already carries work requirements. Able-bodied adults between 18 and 54 who don't have dependents must work at least 80 hours a month to be eligible. Those who don't qualify can only receive food assistance for three months in a three-year period. People can be exempt because of homelessness, being in foster care or for other reasons, or states can apply for waivers if there aren't enough jobs in a region. Research is split on whether SNAP's existing work requirements have the intended effects. Bauer, the Brookings fellow, cited a 2021 study of Virginia food stamp recipients that found work requirements caused a large decline in SNAP participation without a corresponding boost in employment. The food stamp benefits 'are not binding disincentives against labor force participation for a population that overwhelmingly has no income,' the researchers wrote. Republicans have said current policies allow states to exempt too many people from work requirements. The GOP bill would alter the rules, raising the cutoff age to 64. It also newly subjects parents with dependent children ages 7 or older to work requirements, though a spouse in a two-parent household can still be exempt. The bill would also restrict place-based waivers to counties with an unemployment rate of over 10 percent: a bar many areas receiving waivers would not meet. A CBO analysis estimates the changes would reduce direct spending for SNAP by $92 billion over 10 years and push 3.2 million people out of the program. Work requirements are the 'right policy at the right time' for those in need and will stop able-bodied adults from being 'idle and disengaged,' Rollins, the agriculture secretary, said in a statement. The path for shifting housing policies is less clear. Most of the nation's 3,600 public housing agencies do not have work requirements. But about 140 are part of a narrow program called Moving to Work that gives local authorities room to test a range of rules that are not usually permitted, including those to boost self-sufficiency. Housing authorities, nonprofit groups, property managers and tenants are eager for details on whether work requirements will be mandatory, how many hours of work would be required and who would be exempt. The HUD official briefed on the matter told The Post that 'everything is on the table' and noted that the White House's proposal for a new two-year cap on rental assistance was another way of preventing long-term dependency. In 2024, nearly half of non-elderly, nondisabled households receiving HUD assistance did not include anyone who worked, said the official, citing internal data. Other research differs. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that based on 2022 data, 60 percent of working-age, nondisabled households receiving HUD rental assistance in 2022 included at least one worker. The HUD official said the administration also supports policies that shift power to local authorities and lets them decide which approaches are best. Within the Moving to Work cohort, the official said around 40 public housing agencies already have work requirements, are implementing them or plan to soon, and that such requirements often improve household incomes and employment. Opponents say an increase in work requirements would fall heavily on people who already have a harder time getting work, keeping steady housing or accessing health care. And they say the loss of benefits would be even more extensive given planned cuts to major services. For example, the White House budget proposal would significantly cut rental assistance programs for the fiscal year beginning in October, in part to shift more power to the states. It is unclear whether those cuts would be achieved through work requirements, since HUD's plans are still in flux. That could amount to millions of people losing aid whether they work or not, since many states won't be able to cover those losses. 'What this indicates is that the driver behind this policy isn't this goal of helping people to advance economically,' said Will Fischer, senior fellow and director of housing policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 'The driver is they're trying to cut what they are spending on these programs.' A large share of welfare recipients have jobs. About 32 million people who worked in 2023 got health coverage through Medicaid or food assistance through SNAP, according to a CBPP analysis of census data. In theory, new work requirements shouldn't jeopardize benefits for these recipients. But advocates and left-leaning economists say such requirements do sometimes have that effect - in part because enforcing the rules means enough new administrative burdens that people fall through the cracks. In Georgia, for example, just 12,000 of nearly 250,000 newly eligible recipients received Medicaid after the state implemented work requirements. That was in part because people who worked had a tough time proving it to state officials or their work didn't meet certain qualifications. Finally, those against the policies say even people with jobs sometimes need help making ends meet - so pushing recipients to work wouldn't necessarily solve their household budget problems. Homelessness is worsening among the employed, and inflation often falls hardest on poorer people. At Los Angeles's Downtown Women's Center, which works to end homelessness, regular job training programs are some of the most popular offerings, chief executive Amy Turk said. But even those with jobs need help. A report found that in 2022, nearly 30 percent of homeless women in Los Angeles County were working for pay. Monthly incomes averaged $1,186. In Los Angeles County, though, the average rent is more than $2,000. Analysts at left-leaning think tanks, and some researchers who have studied work requirements, say supporters of the policy have it backward: Health insurance, stable housing and access to food make it possible for people to find work and remain employed. They point to Arkansas, the first state to enact work requirements for Medicaid, as a key example. In 2018, the state implemented its work mandate, which led to 18,000 people losing insurance before a judge in 2019 struck down the requirements in a lawsuit brought by three nonprofits on behalf of some Medicaid recipients. One 40-year-old man lost health coverage after incorrectly reporting the details of his employment and could no longer afford his medication. He suffered complications from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lost his job and struggled to find work again. Others worked odd jobs that did not always allow them to meet the 80-hour-a-month requirement, like a landscaper who struggled to get work in rainy months. 'You cannot conclude that work makes people healthier,' said MaryBeth Musumeci, an associate professor of health policy and management at George Washington University's Milken Institute School of Public Health. 'You need to be physically and mentally healthy enough to work, and particularly for poor people, the types of jobs they are doing can create health problems.' Leaders of Opportunity Arkansas, a conservative policy group, said the state's data shows that most people who lost insurance did so because their incomes rose - exactly the goal of requiring work. 'If Congress is serious about restoring Medicaid as a safety net for the truly needy - not a long-term program for able-bodied adults - then policies that encourage work and self-sufficiency, like the one Arkansas implemented, need to be part of the conversation,' J. Robertson, the organization's public affairs director, said in an email. - - - Jacob Bogage contributed to this report. Related Content Black Democrats fume over 2024 while 'searching for a leader' in 2028 Joy, tension collide as WorldPride arrives in Trump's Washington Kari Lake won awards for overseas reporting. Now she has the job of cutting it.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - The Democrats' new campaign agenda: No more Mister Nice Guy
The long process of selecting the next Democratic presidential nominee is beginning, with potential candidates speaking already to gatherings of party faithful. 'We can — and we must — condemn Donald Trump's reckless actions,' Maryland Gov. Wes Moore (D) told about 800 people at the South Carolina Democratic Party's Blue Palmetto Dinner. The nation's only Black governor said Democrats must also advance their own agenda and be 'the party of action,' supporting policies that will quickly improve the lives of Americans. Gov. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), last year's Democratic vice presidential nominee, told the South Carolina Democratic Convention that Democrats should 'be a little meaner' in standing up to what he called President Trump's bullying. He then flew across the country to speak to the California Democratic Convention and urged Democrats 'to find some goddamn guts to fight for working people,' because the party 'lost a big chunk of the working class' in last year's election. 'That last election was a primal scream on so many fronts,' he said. Neither Moore, Walz, nor any other Democrat has announced a 2028 presidential run so far, but Democrats have many excellent potential candidates. Former Vice President Kamala Harris (D) may seek the presidency a second time or run for governor of California in 2026. Other Democrats who may run for president include Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and several others. Democrats are trying to figure out the winning recipe to cook up some wins following Republican victories last year. However, Republicans would like nothing better than to make former President Joe Biden's alleged mental decline in office — something Biden strongly denies — a major issue in their campaigns. I have known Biden for decades and believe he was an outstanding president. But debating his fitness for office is pointless. He will never run for office again. Democrats must look ahead, because voters will cast ballots for candidates they believe will give them a better future. Trump and congressional Republicans are doing an abysmal job governing. They embrace policies that threaten our liberties and the rule of law, give the richest Americans unjustified tax cuts and make massive cuts to vital government programs that benefit millions of people. They have eliminated hundreds of thousands of federal employees' jobs and support huge tariffs that raise consumer prices, reduce American exports and force U.S. businesses to lay off workers. Their legislation also harms our health and environment, weakens colleges and universities and ends diversity, equity and inclusion programs that open the door to the American Dream wider. They have worsened relations with other nations, endangered U.S. national security and seek to deport 1 million unauthorized immigrants, often without due process, and weaken freedom of the press and speech. Democrats should explain, in easily understandable language, how they would replace extremist Trump policies with better ones. For example, Democrats should point out that Trump and Republicans are prioritizing GOP tax cuts that would bring little or no benefit to most Americans. The Internal Revenue Service reports that in 2022 the 1 percent of taxpayers with the highest incomes paid about 40.4 percent of federal income taxes, while the top 50 percent of taxpayers paid 97 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The 50 percent of taxpayers with the lowest incomes paid only 3 percent of income taxes. This means that Trump's tax cuts would save the richest Americans millions of dollars every year, but would save most Americans little or nothing. And Democrats should accept the reality that in swing congressional districts and states, they need independent and sometimes a slice of moderate Republican votes to win elections. Embracing far-left progressive policies will help Republicans get elected. Rather than fighting over ideological purity, Democrats should focus on defeating Republicans. Democrats also need to reach out to low-turnout young voters and people of color with every method available. Personal contact is more effective than paid ads in reaching nonvoters. Beyond any speculation about 2028 and the presidential race, Democrats should first prioritize this year's statewide elections in New Jersey and Virginia, and then the 2026 midterm elections for Congress, state legislatures and governorships. Nearly half the members of the House and Senate are former state legislators. Capturing at least one house of Congress would give Democrats the power to block some of Trump's legislative initiatives, call on administration officials to testify under oath and file lawsuits against illegal and unconstitutional actions by Trump. Democrats have an excellent chance of winning control of the House in 2026. Republicans now have a slim majority of 220 to 212. Three vacancies were created by the deaths of Democratic members, who are likely to be replaced by other Democrats in special elections. The president's party has lost House seats in 18 of the 20 midterm elections since the end of World War II. We don't know how popular Trump will be in 2026, but I'm betting his popularity falls as his policies hurt growing numbers of Americans, dragging down Republican candidates with him. A Gallup poll found that Trump had a public approval rating of 43 percent in May and a disapproval rating of 53 percent. The only post-World War II president with a lower approval rating in May after being elected was Trump himself, with an approval rating of 39 percent in May 2017. Democrats will have a harder time winning a Senate majority than taking control of the House, but good candidates attuned to their state's electorates can help to prove the political prognosticators wrong. Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate. Thirty-five seats will be on the ballot in 2026, 23 of which are held by Republicans. Democrats had an awful 2024, marked by election defeats. America and the world are having an awful 2025 as a result of Trump's erratic, incompetent and dangerous leadership and Republicans' blind loyalty. Democrats are tired of looking back at what went wrong last year. We are rebuilding the party, holding town halls in Republican congressional districts where Republicans are too scared to do so and filing lawsuits challenging Trump's efforts to govern by executive order as if he were a king. A new era is beginning for Democrats. I look forward to better days ahead when my party starts winning elections against the radical Republicans who have abandoned Ronald Reagan's principled conservatism and embraced Trump and his MAGA movement's reckless extremism. Donna Brazile is a political strategist, a contributor to ABC News and former chair of the Democratic National Committee. She is the author of 'Hacks: Inside the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
