Trumpworld Troublemaker Spotted Amid ICE Barbie's Security Drama
Corey Lewandowski, who is apparently working extremely closely with Kristi Noem at the moment, was spotted in footage from the dramatic scene at the Department of Homeland Security secretary's Los Angeles press conference on Thursday.
The chaos erupted when California Senator Alex Padilla was handcuffed and forcibly removed from the news conference, a move that Democrats slammed. Padilla said he was there 'peacefully' and had raised his voice to ask a question before multiple agents pounced on him.
In footage aired by NBC4 Los Angeles, Lewandowski is seen standing beside a handcuffed Padilla after the scuffle. He didn't immediately return a request for comment.
Lewandowski, a former Trump campaign chief, has been working as a close advisor to Noem, the Wall Street Journal reported in April. Designated a 'special government employee,' he's taken on a top role by her side and is often the only person to accompany her to meetings, sources told the Journal.
That personnel choice was sure to get tongues wagging, given the rumors that have dogged the two for years. In 2023, two conservative tabloids—the Daily Mail and New York Post—reported that the pair, suspected of being romantically linked since at least 2021, were having an affair.
The two MAGAworld mainstays, who are both married, have publicly denied any affair. A DHS spokesperson told the Journal the department 'doesn't waste time with salacious, baseless gossip.'
Noem still hasn't appointed a formal chief of staff, but staffers reportedly view Lewandowski as the de factor person in the role, with some even referring to him as the 'shadow secretary.'
The GOP operative wanted to serve as Noem's chief of staff, but Trump and his top aides were uncomfortable with the optics given the rumors, the Journal reported.
And that might not be the only work he's doing for Noem. In February, a source told The Swamp that Lewandowski was spotted in Noem's Washington apartment building taking boxes down to the trash room.
Lewandowski has been one of the most polarizing figures in Trump's orbit—a bare-knuckled political operative known as much for his loyalty as the scandal that seems to follow him.
When he joined Trump's campaign last year, he was said to have butted heads with top aides, including co-campaign chairs Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Dems 'deliberately obfuscating' truth about 'big, beautiful bill' with this claim: Watchdog
After House Republicans passed reconciliation language banning taxpayer funds from paying for sex change treatments, Democrats began using language to drum up opposition that conservative watchdog group the American Principles Project says is meant "to confuse people and make it sound like we're trying to ban normal healthcare, medically necessary healthcare." The House-passed version of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act includes provisions that prohibit federal Medicaid and Affordable Care Act funding from being spent on "gender transition procedures for any age" in all 50 states. In response, Democrats and left-wing groups have begun claiming the GOP's spending package seeks to eliminate "medically-necessary care." However, according to APP President Terry Schilling, "it's a lie" and an effort to combat the prevailing notion among Americans that taxpayer funds should not be paying for transgender procedures. "They're deliberately obfuscating here, and it's because they don't have any good arguments," Schilling told Fox News Digital. "We shouldn't be paying for any cosmetic sex change procedures with our tax dollars, and that's what we're cutting here. "But they're introducing and now ramping up these highly weaponized and high-powered words to confuse people and make it sound like we're trying to ban normal healthcare, medically necessary healthcare." After Republicans in the House of Representatives passed their version of the GOP spending package last month, the Congressional Equality Caucus complained that "Congress should be working to make healthcare more affordable – not banning coverage of medically necessary care." "House Republicans changed a previous anti-trans provision so it now cuts off federal Medicaid and Affordable Care Act funding for medically-necessary care for ALL transgender people — no matter their age," a press release from the pro-trans Human Rights Campaign said after the House passed its spending bill. According to APP's Schilling, arguments that Republicans are taking away "medically necessary" healthcare from anyone are "just not true." To make his point, APP's Schilling pointed to one of the left's frequent sources for transgender medical recommendations, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). Schilling pointed out that WPATH's guidelines and standards explicitly state there is no "one-size-fits-all approach" to treating individuals with gender dysphoria. "These are not medically necessary [treatments]. It's a lie. These are cosmetic," Schilling argued. "If you look at WPATH, even according to their own standards, transgender-identifying people don't actually have to medically transition. They say there's no one size fits all. Well, I'm sorry, but medically necessary means you need it in order to survive. You need it for your health. And they're saying in their own writings that it's not medically necessary, that it's not a one-size-fits-all." Schilling added that they're "arguing out of both sides of their mouth." "We're calling out the transgender industry, and we're trying to stop them from confusing even more people as we pass a very, very good and important bill," he said. In a statement to Fox News Digital, the Human Rights Campaign argued "gender-affirming care" is considered "best practice" and "evidence-based" by every major medical association in the country, noting that studies have shown it significantly improves mental health outcomes for transgender youth. "Healthcare decisions should be made by patients, families, and doctors — not the American Principles Project," HRC said. Schilling said he has run numerous polls and focus groups about whether Americans agree with taxpayer funds supporting individuals' gender transitions, and he told Fox News Digital that the overwhelming sentiment from people across the political spectrum is that they should not. "Here's where Americans are at," Schilling said. "They want to ban the procedures for anyone under 18. And, anyone over 18, they want you to pay for it yourself. That's where they're at, and that's where [APP is] at, and that's where Donald Trump is at. That's where Republicans in the House and Senate are at." The Congressional Equality Caucus did not respond to requests for comment on this article.
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Justice Department's early moves on voting and elections signal a shift from its traditional role
ATLANTA (AP) — In North Carolina, it was a lawsuit over the state's voter registration records. In Arizona and Wisconsin , it was a letter to state election officials warning of potential administrative violations. And in Colorado, it was a demand for election records going back to 2020. Those actions in recent weeks by the U.S. Department of Justice's voting section may seem focused on the technical machinery of how elections are run but signal deeper changes when combined with the departures of career attorneys and decisions to drop various voting rights cases. They represent a shift away from the division's traditional role of protecting access to the ballot box. Instead, the actions address concerns that have been raised by a host of conservative activists following years of false claims surrounding elections in the U.S. Some voting rights and election experts also note that by targeting certain states — presidential battlegrounds or those controlled by Democrats — the moves could be foreshadowing an expanded role for the department in future elections. David Becker, a former department attorney who worked on voting rights cases and now leads the Center for Election Innovation & Research, said the Justice Department's moves represent a departure from focusing on major violations of federal law. 'This would be like the police department prioritizing jaywalking over murder investigations,' he said. A Justice Department spokesperson responded with 'no comment' to an emailed request for more information about the actions, including whether similar ones had been taken in any other states. Actions come amid major changes at the DOJ Conservatives for years have called for an overhaul at the Justice Department in both personnel and priorities. President Donald Trump also has criticized how elections are run, falsely blaming his 2020 loss on widespread fraud. Earlier this year, he signed an executive order seeking a sweeping overhaul of election operations — an authority the Constitution grants to the states and Congress. After his win last November, Trump installed key allies at the Justice Department, including Attorney General Pam Bondi , who has made similar claims about the 2020 election. Multiple reviews in the presidential battleground states affirmed Democrat Joe Biden's win in 2020 , Trump and his allies lost dozens of lawsuits , and even Trump's attorney general at the time said there was no evidence of widespread fraud. Justin Levitt, a former deputy assistant attorney general in the department's civil rights division, said most of the DOJ's actions appeared reasonable and focused on issues that had already been raised by conservative activists in those states. They also are the type that would be expected from a conservative administration, he said, with the exception of the Colorado request. He called that 'well out of bounds.' 'This administration has prioritized grievance, even perceived grievance when there is no basis in fact,' said Levitt, who also served as a senior policy adviser in the Biden administration. 'And it's dismaying, but not surprising, that the civil rights division would do the same.' Department wants records related to the 2020 election The department's request to Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a Democrat, asked for all records relating to last year's presidential election. Federal law requires those to be kept for 22 months. In the request, the department stated it had received a complaint alleging that Griswold's office was not in compliance with federal law relating to voter registration. The request also directs Griswold to preserve any records of the 2020 election that might still be in the state's possession. Griswold, in an interview, called the request a 'fishing expedition' and said her office responded by providing state voting files. 'I'm not even sure they know what they are looking for,' Griswold said. 'They can request all the data they want, and it's not going to prove anything.' North Carolina elections have been a particular target for Republicans In North Carolina, where Republican lawmakers recently wrested control of the state election board from the Democratic governor, Justice Department lawyers filed a lawsuit accusing state election officials of failing to ensure that all voter records include identifying information, such as a driver's license. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, who oversees the civil rights division , said in a statement announcing the lawsuit that accurate voter rolls are critical to ensuring elections are conducted 'fairly, accurately, and without fraud.' The previous board had acknowledged the issue and updated the state's voter registration form. The new board leadership has vowed to address it. Skeptical of the motives In Wisconsin, which Trump won in 2016 and 2024 but lost in 2020, department lawyers recently sent a letter to the state election commission accusing it of not providing a complaint process for those raising concerns. This comes as Republican state lawmakers are pushing legislation to expand the ability to appeal decisions made by the six-member commission, which is equally divided between Republicans and Democrats. Republican lawmakers have long complained about commission decisions they perceive as benefiting Democrats. The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a law firm that frequently defends Republicans on election issues, supports both efforts, said Lucas Vebber, the firm's deputy counsel. 'It's ensuring that Wisconsinites are entitled to have their complaints heard and adjudicated,' he said. 'As something as important as our elections, it's vital to ensure that process is transparent and available to everyone.' Rep. Lee Snodgrass, a Democrat on the Wisconsin Legislature's elections committee, said state law needs some tightening around how election complaints are handled, but she's dubious about the motives of the Trump administration and conservative activists in the state. They are looking for ways 'to cast doubt on election integrity, so if they don't get the results they want they can cry foul,' Snodgrass said. Concerns about future actions In Arizona, DOJ lawyers said the state was not clearly telling voter registration applicants to provide a driver's license if they have one and asked the state to conduct a review to identify any noncitizens. Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, responded by saying Arizona requires those registering to vote in state and local elections to provide proof of citizenship and conducts checks using the state's motor vehicle records. In Oregon, Justice Department lawyers weighed in on an ongoing lawsuit filed by the conservative group Judicial Watch. It alleges the state has failed to comply with federal laws on maintaining voter lists and making these records available for public inspection. John Powers, a former Justice Department attorney who now serves as legal director for the Advancement Project, said he was concerned about the moves coupled with the Justice Department's staff departures and its withdrawal from voting rights cases. Powers said he hoped, with midterm elections next year, that the department would not pursue minor technical issues in a way that could undermine public confidence in elections. 'I would be lying if I said I wasn't concerned about what the future might hold,' he said. ___ Bauer reported from Madison, Wisconsin. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
San Francisco Chronicle
2 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Justice Department's early moves on voting and elections signal a shift from its traditional role
ATLANTA (AP) — In North Carolina, it was a lawsuit over the state's voter registration records. In Arizona and Wisconsin, it was a letter to state election officials warning of potential administrative violations. And in Colorado, it was a demand for election records going back to 2020. Those actions in recent weeks by the U.S. Department of Justice's voting section may seem focused on the technical machinery of how elections are run but signal deeper changes when combined with the departures of career attorneys and decisions to drop various voting rights cases. They represent a shift away from the division's traditional role of protecting access to the ballot box. Instead, the actions address concerns that have been raised by a host of conservative activists following years of false claims surrounding elections in the U.S. Some voting rights and election experts also note that by targeting certain states — presidential battlegrounds or those controlled by Democrats — the moves could be foreshadowing an expanded role for the department in future elections. David Becker, a former department attorney who worked on voting rights cases and now leads the Center for Election Innovation & Research, said the Justice Department's moves represent a departure from focusing on major violations of federal law. 'This would be like the police department prioritizing jaywalking over murder investigations,' he said. A Justice Department spokesperson responded with 'no comment' to an emailed request for more information about the actions, including whether similar ones had been taken in any other states. Actions come amid major changes at the DOJ Conservatives for years have called for an overhaul at the Justice Department in both personnel and priorities. President Donald Trump also has criticized how elections are run, falsely blaming his 2020 loss on widespread fraud. Earlier this year, he signed an executive order seeking a sweeping overhaul of election operations — an authority the Constitution grants to the states and Congress. After his win last November, Trump installed key allies at the Justice Department, including Attorney General Pam Bondi, who has made similar claims about the 2020 election. Multiple reviews in the presidential battleground states affirmed Democrat Joe Biden's win in 2020, Trump and his allies lost dozens of lawsuits, and even Trump's attorney general at the time said there was no evidence of widespread fraud. Justin Levitt, a former deputy assistant attorney general in the department's civil rights division, said most of the DOJ's actions appeared reasonable and focused on issues that had already been raised by conservative activists in those states. They also are the type that would be expected from a conservative administration, he said, with the exception of the Colorado request. He called that 'well out of bounds.' 'This administration has prioritized grievance, even perceived grievance when there is no basis in fact," said Levitt, who also served as a senior policy adviser in the Biden administration. "And it's dismaying, but not surprising, that the civil rights division would do the same.' Department wants records related to the 2020 election The department's request to Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a Democrat, asked for all records relating to last year's presidential election. Federal law requires those to be kept for 22 months. In the request, the department stated it had received a complaint alleging that Griswold's office was not in compliance with federal law relating to voter registration. The request also directs Griswold to preserve any records of the 2020 election that might still be in the state's possession. Griswold, in an interview, called the request a 'fishing expedition' and said her office responded by providing state voting files. 'I'm not even sure they know what they are looking for,' Griswold said. 'They can request all the data they want, and it's not going to prove anything.' North Carolina elections have been a particular target for Republicans In North Carolina, where Republican lawmakers recently wrested control of the state election board from the Democratic governor, Justice Department lawyers filed a lawsuit accusing state election officials of failing to ensure that all voter records include identifying information, such as a driver's license. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, who oversees the civil rights division, said in a statement announcing the lawsuit that accurate voter rolls are critical to ensuring elections are conducted 'fairly, accurately, and without fraud.' The previous board had acknowledged the issue and updated the state's voter registration form. The new board leadership has vowed to address it. Skeptical of the motives In Wisconsin, which Trump won in 2016 and 2024 but lost in 2020, department lawyers recently sent a letter to the state election commission accusing it of not providing a complaint process for those raising concerns. This comes as Republican state lawmakers are pushing legislation to expand the ability to appeal decisions made by the six-member commission, which is equally divided between Republicans and Democrats. Republican lawmakers have long complained about commission decisions they perceive as benefiting Democrats. The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a law firm that frequently defends Republicans on election issues, supports both efforts, said Lucas Vebber, the firm's deputy counsel. 'It's ensuring that Wisconsinites are entitled to have their complaints heard and adjudicated,' he said. 'As something as important as our elections, it's vital to ensure that process is transparent and available to everyone.' Rep. Lee Snodgrass, a Democrat on the Wisconsin Legislature's elections committee, said state law needs some tightening around how election complaints are handled, but she's dubious about the motives of the Trump administration and conservative activists in the state. They are looking for ways 'to cast doubt on election integrity, so if they don't get the results they want they can cry foul,' Snodgrass said. Concerns about future actions In Arizona, DOJ lawyers said the state was not clearly telling voter registration applicants to provide a driver's license if they have one and asked the state to conduct a review to identify any noncitizens. Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, responded by saying Arizona requires those registering to vote in state and local elections to provide proof of citizenship and conducts checks using the state's motor vehicle records. In Oregon, Justice Department lawyers weighed in on an ongoing lawsuit filed by the conservative group Judicial Watch. It alleges the state has failed to comply with federal laws on maintaining voter lists and making these records available for public inspection. John Powers, a former Justice Department attorney who now serves as legal director for the Advancement Project, said he was concerned about the moves coupled with the Justice Department's staff departures and its withdrawal from voting rights cases. Powers said he hoped, with midterm elections next year, that the department would not pursue minor technical issues in a way that could undermine public confidence in elections. 'I would be lying if I said I wasn't concerned about what the future might hold,' he said. ___ Bauer reported from Madison, Wisconsin.
