MTG sours on Republican Party, claims GOP ‘turned its back on America First'
Greene (R-Ga.) lauded President Trump's performance in office, but warned about growing daylight between lawmakers and the base during an interview with the Daily Mail.
'I don't know if the Republican Party is leaving me, or if I'm kind of not relating to [the] Republican Party as much anymore,' she said. 'I don't know which one it is.'
'I think the Republican Party has turned its back on America First and the workers and just regular Americans.'
Over recent months, Greene has been publicly at odds with Trump on foreign policy, including the bombing of Iran, the president's pivot toward Ukraine in its defense against Russian invaders, and Israel's war in the Gaza Strip, which she recently labeled a 'genocide.'
3 Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene bluntly tore into the state of the Republican Party.
Bloomberg via Getty Images
3 The Georgia Republican faulted the 'good ole boys' club within the party for some of its ails.
AFP via Getty Images
In public, Greene has been adamant that she 'has always been President Trump's most outspoken ally,' and there is no 'break' between her and him.
However, she also claimed a 'good old boys' club within the congressional Republican party is undercutting the president's agenda.
'I'm not afraid of [House Speaker] Mike Johnson at all,' declared Greene, who charged ahead last year with a failed bid to dethrone the Louisianian after he took up legislation to send about $61 billion in aid to war-torn Ukraine.
The Georgian also claimed that party leaders have done a poor job elevating women, telling the Mail 'the one that really got shafted was Elise Stefanik.'
3 New York Rep. Elise Stefanik is rumored to be mulling a campaign for governor.
AP
Trump initially nominated the upstate rep to serve as his ambassador to the United Nations, but that was rescinded this past March amid fears for the razor-thin House Republican majority.
'She got screwed by Mike Johnson, and she got screwed by the White House. I'm not blaming Trump, particularly. I'm blaming the people in the White House,' added Greene, who went on to question why new UN envoy nominee Mike Waltz got 'awarded after Signalgate'.
Reps for Johnson and Stefanik, who is expected to run for governor of New York next year, did not respond to a request for comment.
Greene, 51, further dinged her party for failing to deliver on promises such as the Department of Government Efficiency's (DOGE) cost cutting initiative and slashing the deficit.
'Like, what happened to all those issues? … I don't know what the hell happened with the Republican Party. I really don't,' she told the outlet.
'But I'll tell you one thing, the course that it's on, I don't want to have anything to do with it, and I, I just don't care anymore.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
4 minutes ago
- Axios
Trump, Murdoch agree to pause WSJ case deposition until after dismissal ruling
President Trump and Rupert Murdoch reached a deal Monday to postpone the media mogul's deposition in a libel lawsuit related to the Wall Street Journal publishing a report on an Epstein birthday book, per court filings. Why it matters: Trump's lawyers had raised concerns about Murdoch's age and health when they asked a federal court in Florida last week to expedite the 94-year-old's deposition, but the deal postpones this until after the outlet's upcoming motion to dismiss the case. Now, neither Murdoch nor the 79-year-old Trump are likely to be deposed for months, per Politico's Josh Gerstein, who first reported on Monday's filing in Miami. Zoom in: "Until Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Complaint is adjudicated, the Parties agree not to engage in discovery," according to the filing. If the WSJ's motion to dismiss Trump's lawsuit is denied, Murdoch would appear in person for a deposition within 30 days of such a ruling. Murdoch must provide a sworn declaration about his current health condition within three days of a court order approving the agreement and the Australian-born mogul has agreed to provide regular updates on his health, per the filing. Driving the news: Trump is suing Murdoch, the WSJ, its owner Dow Jones, its parent company News Corp. and others over the Journal report last month about a " bawdy" birthday letter" that the outlet said bore the president's name.
21 minutes ago
How Russia reins in the internet by blocking websites and isolating it from the rest of the world
TALLINN, Estonia -- YouTube videos that won't load. A visit to a popular independent media website that produces only a blank page. Cellphone internet connections that are down for hours or days. Going online in Russia can be frustrating, complicated and even dangerous. It's not a network glitch but a deliberate, multipronged and long-term effort by authorities to bring the internet under the Kremlin's full control. Authorities adopted restrictive laws and banned websites and platforms that won't comply. Technology has been perfected to monitor and manipulate online traffic. While it's still possible to circumvent restrictions by using virtual private network apps, those are routinely blocked, too. Authorities further restricted internet access this summer with widespread shutdowns of cellphone internet connections and adopting a law punishing users for searching for content they deem illicit. They also are threatening to go after the popular WhatsApp platform while rolling out a new 'national' messenger that's widely expected to be heavily monitored. President Vladimir Putin urged the government to 'stifle' foreign internet services and ordered officials to assemble a list of platforms from 'unfriendly' states that should be restricted. Experts and rights advocates told The Associated Press that the scale and effectiveness of the restrictions are alarming. Authorities seem more adept at it now, compared with previous, largely futile efforts to restrict online activities, and they're edging closer to isolating the internet in Russia. Human Rights Watch researcher Anastasiia Kruope describes Moscow's approach to reining in the internet as 'death by a thousand cuts." "Bit by bit, you're trying to come to a point where everything is controlled.' Kremlin efforts to control what Russians do, read or say online dates to 2011-12, when the internet was used to challenge authority. Independent media outlets bloomed, and anti-government demonstrations that were coordinated online erupted after disputed parliamentary elections and Putin's decision to run again for president. Russia began adopting regulations tightening internet controls. Some blocked websites; others required providers to store call records and messages, sharing it with security services if needed, and install equipment allowing authorities to control and cut off traffic. Companies like Google or Facebook were pressured to store user data on Russian servers, to no avail, and plans were announced for a 'sovereign internet' that could be cut off from the rest of the world. Russia's popular Facebook-like social media platform VK, founded by Pavel Durov long before he launched the Telegram messenger, came under the control of Kremlin-friendly companies. Russia tried to block Telegram between 2018-20 but failed. Prosecutions for social media posts and comments became common, showing that authorities were closely watching the online space. Still, experts had dismissed Kremlin efforts to rein in the internet as futile, arguing Russia was far from building something akin to China's 'Great Firewall,' which Beijing uses to block foreign websites. After Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the government blocked major social media like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, as well as Signal and a few other messaging apps. VPNs also were targeted, making it harder to reach restricted websites. YouTube access was disrupted last summer in what experts called deliberate throttling by authorities. The Kremlin blamed YouTube owner Google for not maintaining its hardware in Russia. The platform has been wildly popular in Russia, both for entertainment and for voices critical of the Kremlin, like the late opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Cloudflare, an internet infrastructure provider, said in June that websites using its services were being throttled in Russia. Independent news site Mediazona reported that several other popular Western hosting providers also are being inhibited. Cyber lawyer Sarkis Darbinyan, founder of Russian internet freedom group Roskomsvoboda, said authorities have been trying to push businesses to migrate to Russian hosting providers that can be controlled. He estimates about half of all Russian websites are powered by foreign hosting and infrastructure providers, many offering better quality and price than domestic equivalents. A 'huge number' of global websites and platforms use those providers, he said, so cutting them off means those websites 'automatically become inaccessible' in Russia too. Another concerning trend is the consolidation of Russia's internet providers and companies that manage IP addresses, according to a July 30 Human Rights Watch report. Last year, authorities raised the cost of obtaining an internet provider license from 7,500 rubles (about $90) to 1 million rubles (over $12,300), and state data shows that more than half of all IP addresses in Russia are managed by seven large companies, with Rostelecom, Russia's state telephone and internet giant, accounting for 25%. The Kremlin is striving 'to control the internet space in Russia, and to censor things, to manipulate the traffic,' said HRW's Kruope. A new Russian law criminalized online searches for broadly defined 'extremist' materials. That could include LGBTQ+ content, opposition groups, some songs by performers critical of the Kremlin — and Navalny's memoir, which was designated as extremist last week. Right advocates say it's a step toward punishing consumers — not just providers — like in Belarus, where people are routinely fined or jailed for reading or following certain independent media outlets. Stanislav Seleznev, cyber security expert and lawyer with the Net Freedom rights group, doesn't expect ubiquitous prosecutions, since tracking individual online searches in a country of 146 million remains a tall order. But even a limited number of cases could scare many from restricted content, he said. Another major step could be blocking WhatsApp, which monitoring service Mediascope said had over 97 million monthly users in April. WhatsApp 'should prepare to leave the Russian market,' said lawmaker Anton Gorelkin, and a new 'national' messenger, MAX, developed by social media company VK, would take its place. Telegram, another popular messenger, probably won't be restricted, he said. MAX, promoted as a one-stop shop for messaging, online government services, making payments and more, was rolled out for beta tests but has yet to attract a wide following. Over 2 million people registered by July, the Tass news agency reported. Its terms and conditions say it will share user data with authorities upon request, and a new law stipulates its preinstallation in all smartphones sold in Russia. State institutions, officials and businesses are actively encouraged to move communications and blogs to MAX. Anastasia Zhyrmont of the Access Now internet freedom group said both Telegram and WhatsApp were disrupted in Russia in July in what could be a test of how potential blockages would affect internet infrastructure. It wouldn't be uncommon. In recent years, authorities regularly tested cutting off the internet from the rest of the world, sometimes resulting in outages in some regions. Darbinyan believes the only way to make people use MAX is to 'shut down, stifle' every Western alternative. 'But again, habits ... do not change in a year or two. And these habits acquired over decades, when the internet was fast and free,' he said. Government media and internet regulator Roskomnadzor uses more sophisticated methods, analyzing all web traffic and identifying what it can block or choke off, Darbinyan said. It's been helped by 'years of perfecting the technology, years of taking over and understanding the architecture of the internet and the players,' as well as Western sanctions and companies leaving the Russian market since 2022, said Kruope of Human Rights Watch. Russia is 'not there yet' in isolating its internet from the rest of the world, Darbinyan said, but Kremlin efforts are 'bringing it closer.'
Boston Globe
34 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Texas dispute highlights nation's long history of partisan gerrymandering. Is it legal?
Who is responsible for gerrymandering? In many states, like Texas, the state legislature is responsible for drawing congressional districts, subject to the approval or veto of the governor. District maps must be redrawn every 10 years, after each census, to balance the population in districts. But in some states, nothing prevents legislatures from conducting redistricting more often. In an effort to limit gerrymandering, some states have entrusted redistricting to special commissions composed of citizens or bipartisan panels of politicians. Democratic officials in some states with commissions are now talking of trying to sidestep them to counter Republican redistricting in Texas. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up How does a gerrymander work? Advertisement If a political party controls both the legislature and governor's office — or has such a large legislative majority that it can override vetoes — it can effectively draw districts to its advantage. One common method of gerrymandering is for a majority party to draw maps that pack voters who support the opposing party into a few districts, thus allowing the majority party to win a greater number of surrounding districts. Another common method is for the majority party to dilute the power of an opposing party's voters by spreading them among multiple districts. Why is it called gerrymandering? The term dates to 1812, when Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry signed a bill redrawing state Senate districts to benefit the Democratic-Republican Party. Some thought an oddly shaped district looked like a salamander. A newspaper illustration dubbed it 'The Gerry-mander' — a term that later came to describe any district drawn for political advantage. Gerry lost re-election as governor in 1812 but won election that same year as vice president with President James Madison. Advertisement Is political gerrymandering illegal? Not under the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court, in a 2019 case originating from North Carolina, ruled that federal courts have no authority to decide whether partisan gerrymandering goes too far. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: 'The Constitution supplies no objective measure for assessing whether a districting map treats a political party fairly.' The Supreme Court noted that partisan gerrymandering claims could continue to be decided in state courts under their own constitutions and laws. But some state courts, including North Carolina's highest court, have ruled that they also have no authority to decide partisan gerrymandering claims. Are there any limits on redistricting? Yes. Though it's difficult to challenge legislative districts on political grounds, the Supreme Court has upheld challenges on racial grounds. In a 2023 case from Alabama, the high court said the congressional districts drawn by the state's Republican-led Legislature likely violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting the voting strength of Black residents. The court let a similar claim proceed in Louisiana. Both states subsequently redrew their districts. What does data show about gerrymandering? Statisticians and political scientists have developed a variety of ways to try to quantify the partisan advantage that may be attributable to gerrymandering. Republicans, who control redistricting in more states than Democrats, used the 2010 census data to create a strong gerrymander. An Associated Press analysis of that decade's redistricting found that Republicans enjoyed a greater political advantage in more states than either party had in the past 50 years. Advertisement But Democrats responded to match Republican gerrymandering after the 2020 census. The adoption of redistricting commissions also limited gerrymandering in some states. An AP analysis of the 2022 elections — the first under new maps — found that Republicans won just one more U.S. House seat than would have been expected based on the average share of the vote they received nationwide. That was one of the most politically balanced outcomes in years.
