logo
Ex-Gov. George Pataki claims NY's top 3 Dems ‘hiding in the weeds' on Mamdani support: ‘Where is the leadership?'

Ex-Gov. George Pataki claims NY's top 3 Dems ‘hiding in the weeds' on Mamdani support: ‘Where is the leadership?'

New York Post6 days ago
New York's top three Dem leaders are 'hiding in the weeds' by refusing to say whether they support socialist Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani for mayor, ex-Gov. George Pataki said Sunday.
The Republican former three-term governor singled out Gov. Kathy Hochul, US Senate Democratic Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries as spineless for refusing to take a stand on Mamdani, who he labeled a Marxist and antisemite.
'The mainstream media is not asking Jeffries, is not asking Schumer, is not asking Hochul, 'Are you for Mamdani or not?' Give us an answer. Don't hide. They are all hiding,' Pataki said on WABC 770 AM The 'Cats Roundtable' program.
Advertisement
4 Former Gov. George Pataki called out top Democrats in New York for 'hiding in the weeds' when it comes to Democartic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani
ZUMAPRESS.com / MEGA
4 Pataki blasted Gov. Kathy Hochul for saying that she is backing Mamdani in the general election.
Hans Pennink
'You can't really have a party that stands for anything when you have a Marxist running, and the three main leaders in New York of the Democratic Party – Jeffries, Schumer and Hochul – are all hiding in the weeds. Make them come out of the weeds. Are you for [Mamdani] or not?'
Advertisement
Pataki said the Democratic leaders may feel they're in a 'no-win' situation, but they can't forever duck the Mamdani question.
'If they endorse Mamdani, they have endorsed an antisemite Marxist. If they don't endorse him, then they're going to get primaried by all these left-wing radicals,' he told host John Catsimatidis.
Courage is required in this extraordinary situation, the former governor said.
4 House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries met with Mamdani this week, but did not endorse him.
ZUMAPRESS.com
Advertisement
'Where is the leadership? Are you going to support this left-wing antisemite? Or are you going to stand up for common sense? They're afraid to do it. We can't let them get away with it,' Pataki said of Hochul, Schumer and Jeffries.
Some critics claim Mamdani is antisemitic for backing the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel, the world's only Jewish state. The Democratic mayoral candidate has said opposing the Zionist state is not antisemitic and that he would fight against Jew hatred as mayor.
Jeffries, a congressman from Brooklyn who could become the next House speaker if Democrats win back the chamber in next year's midterm elections, met with Mamdani on Friday.
A Jeffries spokesman said the meeting was constructive but did not elaborate.
Advertisement
4 Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has also avoided making an endorsement in the mayoral election.
Bonnie Cash/UPI/Shutterstock
Schumer said he has spoken with Mamdani and will meet with him.
Hochul has spoken with Mamdani since his primary victory and suggested she opposes his plan to hike taxes on millionaires and corporations by a combined $9 billion to back his agenda for fare-free buses, universal extended child care and the expansion of affordable housing. Both of his proposed tax increases require Albany's approval, and Hochul and state legislators are up for re-election next year.
The Republican National Committee is already posting old clips of controversial statements made by Mamdani about seizing private property and questioning the purpose of jails and prisons.
Pataki claimed Republican mayoral nominee and Guardian Angels founder Curtis Sliwa has the best shot to defeat Mamdani. Incumbent Mayor Eric Adams and ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo both are running on independent ballot lines.
'I still think Curtis Sliwa can win this race. No one knows this city better than him. He will qualify for matching funds. … He'll have a few million to make the case. He has a major party line,' Pataki said.
'What these polls don't show is that both Cuomo and Adams don't have a party line. They're running on created-by-petition parties. No one has ever won without having a major party line,' the ex-gov said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

How redistricting in Texas and other states could change the game for US House elections
How redistricting in Texas and other states could change the game for US House elections

Chicago Tribune

time20 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

How redistricting in Texas and other states could change the game for US House elections

WASHINGTON — Redistricting usually happens after the once-a-decade population count by the U.S. Census Bureau or in response to a court ruling. Now, Texas Republicans want to break that tradition — and other states could follow suit. President Trump has asked the Texas Legislature to create districts, in time for next year's midterm elections, that will send five more Republicans to Washington and make it harder for Democrats to regain the majority and blunt his agenda. The state has 38 seats in the House. Republicans now hold 25 and Democrats 12, with one seat vacant after the death of a Democrat. 'There's been a lot more efforts by the parties and political actors to push the boundaries – literally and figuratively – to reconfigure what the game is,' said Doug Spencer, Rothgerber Jr. Chair in Constitutional Law at the University of Colorado. Other states are waiting to see what Texas does and whether to follow suit. The rules of redistricting can be vague and variable; each state has its own set of rules and procedures. Politicians are gauging what voters will tolerate when it comes to politically motivated mapmaking. Here's what to know about the rules of congressional redistricting: Every decade, the Census Bureau collects population data used to divide the 435 House seats among the 50 states based on the updated head count. It's a process known as reapportionment. States that grew relative to others might gain a seat at the expense of those whose populations stagnated or declined. States use their own procedures to draw lines for the assigned number of districts. The smallest states receive just one representative, which means the entire state is a single congressional district. Some state constitutions require independent commissions to devise the political boundaries or to advise the legislature. When legislatures take the lead, lawmakers can risk drawing lines that end up challenged in court, usually for violating the Voting Rights Act. Mapmakers can get another chance to resubmit new maps. Sometimes, judges draw the maps on their own. By the first midterm elections after the latest population count, each state is ready with its maps, but those districts do not always stick. Courts can find that the political lines are unconstitutional. There is no national impediment to a state trying to redraw districts in the middle of the decade and to do it for political reasons, such as increasing representation by the party in power. 'The laws about redistricting just say you have to redistrict after every census,' Spencer said. 'And then some state legislatures got a little clever and said, well it doesn't say we can't do it more.' Some states do have laws that would prevent midcycle redistricting or make it difficult to do so in a way that benefits one party. Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., has threatened to retaliate against the GOP push in Texas by drawing more favorable Democratic seats in his state. That goal, however, is complicated by a constitutional amendment that requires an independent commission to lead the process. Texas has done it before. When the Legislature failed to agree on a redistricting plan after the 2000 census, a federal court stepped in with its own map. Republican Tom DeLay of Texas, who was then the U.S. House majority leader, thought his state should have five more districts friendly to his party. 'I'm the majority leader and we want more seats,′′ he said at the time. Statehouse Democrats protested by fleeing to Oklahoma, depriving the Legislature of enough votes to officially conduct any business. But DeLay eventually got his way, and Republicans replaced Democrats in five seats in 2004. In 2019, the Supreme Court ruled that federal courts should not get involved in debates over political gerrymandering, the practice of drawing districts for partisan gain. In that decision, Chief Justice John Roberts said redistricting is 'highly partisan by any measure.' But courts may demand new maps if they believe the congressional boundaries dilute the votes of a racial minority group, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Washington Rep. Suzan DelBene, who leads House Democrats' campaign arm, indicated at a Christian Science Monitor event that if Texas follows through on passing new maps, Democratic-led states would look at their own political lines. 'If they go down this path, absolutely folks are going to respond across the country,' DelBene said. 'We're not going to be sitting back with one hand tied behind our back while Republicans try to undermine voices of the American people.' In New York, Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul recently joined Newsom in expressing openness to taking up mid-decade redistricting. But state laws mandating independent commissions or blunting the ability to gerrymander would come into play. Among Republican-led states, Ohio could try to further expand the 10-5 edge that the GOP holds in the House delegation; a quirk in state law requires Ohio to redraw its maps before the 2026 midterms. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said he was considering early redistricting and 'working through what that would look like.'

Paramount, Skydance expected to close deal on Aug. 7
Paramount, Skydance expected to close deal on Aug. 7

The Hill

time20 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Paramount, Skydance expected to close deal on Aug. 7

Paramount and Skydance announced Friday that, with the Trump administration's approval, the highly anticipated merger between the entertainment giants is expected to take place next month. The Aug. 7 date, unveiled in a press release, comes after the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on Thursday allowed Skydance's acquisition of Paramount to move forward after the merger was first proposed last year. FCC Chair Brendan Carr in announcing the decision said he welcomed Skydance's commitment to remaining 'unbiased' in its journalism and willingness to promote 'a diversity of viewpoints across the political and ideological spectrum.' 'Americans no longer trust the legacy national news media to report fully, accurately, and fairly,' Carr added. 'It is time for a change.' The move caps off months of turmoil between Paramount Global, the parent company of CBS, and President Trump. Trump sued CBS's '60 Minutes' last year after he argued an interview it aired with former Vice President Harris was altered in her favor during the 2024 presidential election cycle. While the company fought the claims, including releasing a full transcript from the episode, it ultimately settled with the administration for $16 million. Those funds are set to go to Trump's eventual presidential library. The news outlet has also faced criticism in recent days after CBS made the decision to sunset 'The Late Show with Stephen Colbert' next May, after more than 30 years on air. Paramount said the move was based on finances, but critics have argued the settlement and Skydance deal were likely involved — and bribery allegations have been floated. Comedian Stephen Colbert, who has hosted the show since 2015, has been openly critical of the merger. Colbert blasted the network earlier this week for choosing to axe the show and thanked those who have reached out in support, including Democrats, press freedom advocates and many of his late-night counterparts. He added that 'one key mistake' the network made when moving forward with the plan is that 'they left me alive.' Colbert also lashed out at Trump after the president said in a post online that he 'absolutely' loved that the comedian was getting 'fired.' 'How dare you, sir,' the host responded. 'Would an untalented man be able to compose the following satirical witticism: 'Go f‑‑‑ yourself.'' Under the terms of the $8 billion merger, the company will become 'New Paramount' and will be led by Trump-ally and billionaire David Ellison, the son of tech tycoon and Oracle founder Larry Ellison.

Trump says Japan will invest $550 billion in US at his direction. It may not be a sure thing
Trump says Japan will invest $550 billion in US at his direction. It may not be a sure thing

The Hill

time20 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Trump says Japan will invest $550 billion in US at his direction. It may not be a sure thing

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is bragging that Japan has given him, as part of a new trade framework, $550 billion to invest in the United States. It's an astonishing figure, but still subject to negotiation and perhaps not the sure thing he's portraying. 'Japan is putting up $550 billion in order to lower their tariffs a little bit,' Trump said Thursday. 'They put up, as you could call it, seed money. Let's call it seed money.' He said 90% of any profits from the money invested would go to the U.S. even if Japan had put up the funds. 'It's not a loan or anything, it's a signing bonus,' the Republican president said, on the trade framework that lowered his threatened tariff from 25% to 15%, including on autos. A White House official said the terms are being negotiated and nothing has been formalized in writing. The official, who insisted on anonymity to detail the terms of the talks, suggested the goal was for the $550 billion fund to make investments at Trump's direction. The sum is significant: It would represent more than 10% of Japan's entire gross domestic product. The Japan External Trade Organization estimates that direct investment into the U.S. economy topped $780 billion in 2023. It is unclear the degree to which the $550 billion could represent new investment or flow into existing investment plans. What the trade framework announced Tuesday has achieved is a major talking point for the Trump administration. The president has claimed to have brought trillions of dollars in new investment into the U.S., though the impact of those commitments have yet to appear in the economic data for jobs, construction spending or manufacturing output. The framework also enabled Trump to say other countries are agreeing to have their goods taxed, even if some of the cost of those taxes are ultimately passed along to U.S. consumers. On the $550 billion, Japan's Cabinet Office said it involves the credit facility of state-affiliated financial institutions, such as Japan Bank for International Cooperation. Further details would be decided based on the progress of the investment deals. Japanese trade negotiator Ryosei Akazawa, upon returning to Japan, did not discuss the terms of the $550 billion investment. Akazawa said he believes a written joint statement is necessary, at least on working levels, to avoid differences. He is not thinking about a legally binding trade pact. The U.S. apparently released its version of the deal while Japanese officials were on their return flight home. 'If we find differences of understanding, we may have to point them out and say 'that's not what we discussed,'' Akazawa said. The U.S. administration said the fund would be invested in critical minerals, pharmaceuticals, computer chips and shipbuilding, among other industries. It has said Japan will also buy 100 airplanes from Boeing and rice from U.S. farmers as part of the framework, which Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said would be evaluated every three months. 'And if the president is unhappy, then they will boomerang back to the 25% tariff rates, both on cars and the rest of their products. And I can tell you that I think at 25, especially in cars, the Japanese economy doesn't work,' Bessent told Fox News' 'The Ingraham Angle.' Akazawa denied that Bessent's quarterly review was part of the negotiations. 'In my past eight trips to the United States during which I held talks with the president and the ministers,' Akazawa said. 'I have no recollection of discussing how we ensure the implementation of the latest agreement between Japan and the United States.' He said it would cause major disruptions to the economy and administrative processes if the rates first rise to 25% as scheduled on Aug. 1 and then drop to 15%. 'We definitely want to avoid that and I believe that is the understanding shared by the U.S. side,' he said. On buying U.S. rice, Japanese officials have said they have no plans to raise the current 770,000-ton 'minimum access' cap to import more from America. Agricultural Minister Shinjiro Koizumi said Japan will decide whether to increase U.S. rice imports and that Japan is not committed to a fixed quota. Trump's commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, has suggested that the Japanese agreement is putting pressure on other countries such as South Korea to strike deals with the U.S. Trump, who is traveling in Scotland, plans to meet on Sundayv with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to discuss trade. 'Whatever Donald Trump wants to build, the Japanese will finance it for him,' Lutnick said Thursday on CNBC. 'Pretty amazing.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store