Texas GOP jabs at Jasmine Crockett with their proposed new map... as she calls spiteful move a 'red flag'
Crockett has made headlines numerous times in recent months as a key critic of the Trump administration, and the redistricting issue is the latest one she has spoken out on.
She has slammed the Texas redistricting maps as a sham that silences minority voices and keeps power in the hands of the few, diluting the voting power of Latino and Black communities.
The redistricting push in Texas was spurred by a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice sent to state officials in July, which argued that four of the state's congressional districts were racially gerrymandered. Democrats won all four of these seats in the 2024 elections.
President Donald Trump then urged Texas Republicans to rethink their Congressional maps to give Republicans a leg up in next year's midterm elections.
Texas Rep. Todd Hunter, the Republican author of the bill pushing the new maps, described the new proposed carveouts in the following way: 'It is important to note that four of the five new districts are majority minority, Hispanic. … Each of these newly drawn districts now trends Republican,' Hunter said.
'Political performance doesn't guarantee electoral success; that's up to the candidates. But it does allow Republican candidates the opportunity to compete in these districts.'
Crockett called Trump 'Temu Hitler' in a recent interview with SiriusXM host Zerlina Maxwell, due to the president's involvement in the redistricting process.
'So what we have seen is, again, this rogue Department of Justice going out to do the bidding of this Temu Hitler,' Crockett told Maxwell in July.
Crockett also added that in her view, Trump believes that the only way to 'ensure that [he] will have no checks on [him] is if [he] can ensure that those voices of color do not have representation.'
The Texas congressional maps were already redrawn after the 2020 Census, and they are typically edited every ten years.
US Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX) speaks during a "Oversight and Government Reform" hearing on Capitol Hill, in Washington, DC, on February 12, 2025
After the Friday hearings on the proposed new maps, the Republicans on the Texas House Select Committee on Congressional Redistricting voted to advance House Bill 4 on a party-line vote.
Democrats plan to stall a vote on the legislation by the full chamber by not showing up. A full chamber vote could happen as soon as Tuesday. 100 members of the Texas House are needed to conduct business, and Republicans hold 88 seats in the body. 62 seats are held by Democrats.
Lawmakers could be fined $500 a day if they refuse to come to work, per a rule adopted in 2021 after Texas Democrats pulled a similar move to postpone another voting bill.
Regardless of the creation of the new maps, Crockett's time in the U.S. House of Representatives may be coming to an end soon.
In a July interview with liberal comedian and media personality Hasan Minhaj, Crockett noted that she already has her 'expiration date in mind for the House,' adding that she already has 'been eyeing people to replace' her.
Polling released by the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) last month showed Democrat Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett leading a hypothetical Democratic primary with 35 percent of likely voters, followed by former Rep. Colin Allred at 20 percent.
Failed Democrat candidate for both U.S. President and U.S. Senate Beto O'Rourke, and Rep. Joaquin Castro tied in that poll at 13 percent.
Only 18 percent of respondents to the poll remained undecided about who should challenge Republican Sen. John Cornyn, who is seeking a fifth term.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump attacks ‘seriously woke' Jaguar Land Rover as company names new CEO
Donald Trump has attacked Jaguar Land Rover's divisive rebranding strategy, hours after Britain's largest carmaker announced its new boss. Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that the auto company, owned by India's Tata Motors, was 'in absolute turmoil' and claimed that the 'CEO resigned in disgrace'. His post on Monday evening also described JLR's recent much-criticised advert – which showed a diverse group of models in brightly coloured clothing set against a vibrant backdrop and was designed to launch the company's rebrand – as a 'stupid, and seriously WOKE advertisement'. 'Who wants to buy a Jaguar after looking at that disgraceful ad?' Trump asked. The post came shortly after JLR announced that PB Balaji would become its new chief executive, and would take the reins in November. The group finance chief of JLR's parent company, Tata Motors, since 2017 will become the carmaker's first Indian CEO. He will replace Adrian Mardell, who is retiring after three years as JLR's chief executive and following 35 years working for the company. Balaji said in a statement it was his 'privilege' to lead JLR, adding: 'I look forward to working with the team to take it to even greater heights.' Mardell said he believed he had 'cemented JLR's position in the automotive industry during a time of incredible change', and wished Balaji success in his new role. In recent months, JLR has been hit by the impact of Trump's tariffs, and reported a 15.1% drop in sales in the three months to June, after a temporary pause in exports to the US. It has also opened a voluntary redundancy scheme for up to 500 managers in an effort to save costs. Sales are expected to improve after the introduction of a UK-US trade deal, which will implement lower 10% tariffs on the first 100,000 exports. The company has reported a profit for the past 10 consecutive quarters after a turnaround effort. However, the Guardian revealed in July that JLR was delaying the planned launches of its new electric Range Rover and electric Jaguar models to give it time for more testing and to allow demand to pick up. The electric Range Rover, which will be made in JLR's main factory in Solihull, in the West Midlands, will not be delivered until 2026, instead of late this year, as previously planned Jaguar models are also expected to be pushed back by several months. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion JLR has been slower than some of its rivals to embrace electric vehicles, but has recently made investments in building hybrid cars as well as preparing for electric vehicle production. During Mardell's tenure, JLR released a controversial 30-second social media clip with the tagline 'copy nothing', before the unveiling last November of a new electric concept car. JLR's rebrand and advertising campaign, which did not feature a vehicle, immediately drew more than 160m views on social media, but also brought an online backlash late last year, including from Republicans and rightwing commentators in the US. The owner of X and boss of Tesla, Elon Musk, posted on the platform: 'Do you sell cars?' It prompted the carmaker's managing director to say he was disappointed by the 'vile hatred and intolerance' in the comments directed at the models in the video. JLR was approached for comment.
The Independent
31 minutes ago
- The Independent
A look at the top buyers of Russian oil as Trump pressures China and India to stop buying it
U.S. President Donald Trump is pushing China and India to stop buying oil from Russia and helping fund the Kremlin's war against Ukraine. Trump is raising the issue as he seeks to press Russian President Vladimir Putin to agree to a ceasefire. But cheap Russian oil benefits refiners in those countries as well as meeting their needs for energy, and they're not showing any inclination to halt the practice. Three countries are big buyers of Russian oil China, India and Turkey are the biggest recipients of oil that used to go to the European Union. The EU's decision to boycott most Russian seaborne oil from January 2023 led to a massive shift in crude flows from Europe to Asia. Since then, China has been the No. 1 overall purchaser of Russian energy since the EU boycott, with some $219.5 billion worth of Russian oil, gas and coal, followed by India with $133.4 billion and Turkey with $90.3 billion. Before the invasion, India imported relatively little Russian oil. Hungary imports some Russian oil through a pipeline. Hungary is an EU member, but President Viktor Orban has been critical of sanctions against Russia. The lure of cheaper oil One big reason: It's cheap. Since Russian oil trades at a lower price than international benchmark Brent, refineries can fatten their profit margins when they turn crude into usable products such as diesel fuel. Russia's oil earnings are substantial despite sanctions The Kyiv School of Economics says Russia took in $12.6 billion from oil sales in June. Russia continues to earn substantial sums even as the Group of Seven leading industrialized nations has tried to limit Russia's take by imposing an oil price cap. The cap is to be enforced by requiring shipping and insurance companies to refuse to handle oil shipments above the cap. Russia has, to a great extent, been able to evade the cap by shipping oil on a 'shadow fleet' of old vessels using insurers and trading companies located in countries that are not enforcing sanctions. Russian oil exporters are predicted to take in $153 billion this year, according to the Kyiv institute. Fossil fuels are the single largest source of budget revenue. The imports support Russia's ruble currency and help Russia to buy goods from other countries, including weapons and parts for them.
Telegraph
32 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Murdoch takes on Trump in press baron's last stand
When Rupert Murdoch stepped down as executive chairman of both News Corp and Fox just under two years ago, it was seen as a cautious first step into retirement for the nonagenarian media tycoon. Although still ultimately in charge of his empire, Murdoch has handed day-to-day responsibility over to his son Lachlan. Meanwhile, he has focused his attention on succession planning, including a bitter legal battle with his own children over the family trust. But any suggestion that Murdoch might slide into a quiet dotage now appears premature. Donald Trump's $10bn (£7.5bn) defamation lawsuit against Dow Jones, which publishes the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), is aimed squarely at Murdoch himself. The legal challenge is the latest salvo in Trump's increasingly aggressive assault on the media. It also sets up what will likely be a final battle for the world's best-known newspaper tycoon – and one that could define his legacy. As one of his former executives puts it: 'The American president has taken on Rupert Murdoch, an extraordinary media force for the last 50 years ... It's a box office story.' Trump's lawsuit relates to a WSJ story alleging that Trump sent the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein a 'bawdy' birthday card complete with a drawing of a naked woman. Trump, who called the Journal's editor Emma Tucker from Air Force One in an effort to shut down the story, has branded it 'fake' and is seeking $10bn in damages. Trump has sniped at Murdoch, insisting the tycoon wants to settle. In a further provocation, lawyers for Trump last week filed a motion demanding an expedited deposition of Murdoch, citing the fact that the mogul is 94 and 'has suffered from multiple health issues throughout his life'. The scale of these alleged health issues was laid bare in a 2023 Vanity Fair article. It revealed Murdoch had been taken to hospital with a severe case of Covid-19, alongside several other incidents. Alex DeGroote, a media analyst, says the prospect of a trial in which Murdoch would have to take the stand is 'surely not a prospect Dow Jones and the WSJ want to entertain'. He adds that the tycoon may have been shaken by his recent legal clash with Dominion Voting Systems. In a case that signalled the end of Murdoch's cordial relations with Trump, Fox in 2023 agreed to pay $787m to settle a lawsuit with the voting machine company after the channel repeated the president's false claims that the 2020 election was rigged. That said, Murdoch would have a decent chance of success in any legal battle. Unlike in Britain, US libel laws are stacked in favour of the defendant. Trump will have to prove 'actual malice', meaning the WSJ knew the story was false and deliberately published it anyway. It is a high bar for Alejandro Brito, the Miami-based sole practitioner Trump has hired to represent him, to meet. Mark Stephens, a media lawyer at Howard Kennedy, says there are 'fundamental flaws' in Trump's lawsuit and it is likely to be thrown out, potentially as a Slapp [strategic lawsuit against public participation]. 'The case seems designed to try and chill down discussion of this topic, so you're trying to prevent public discussion of this issue and that has all the hallmarks of a Slapp,' he says. Yet it comes amid an increasingly aggressive assault on the media by Trump. The president has said the mainstream media is 'on notice' after securing settlements from both ABC and CBS in recent lawsuits. Alongside the financial and reputational implications, Trump can also cause problems outside the courtroom, as demonstrated by the move to ban the WSJ from a recent press trip to Scotland. The decision by CBS to capitulate in a $16m lawsuit filed by Trump has been widely interpreted as a way of securing approval for an $8bn takeover of its parent company Paramount. Stephen Colbert branded the settlement a 'big fat bribe' and was axed from the network shortly afterwards. By contrast, though, many believe Murdoch will not roll over and that the WSJ will stand by its reporting. '[Trump] assumes someone will settle and pay him an improbable amount of money, and I suspect that's not Murdoch,' says Stephens. The former executive adds: 'So many people think that Murdoch is the suppressor of a free press. Here you've got a very good example of the fourth estate standing up to the American president.' The source also points to the fact that two key figures – Robert Thomson, the Australian News Corp boss, and Emma Tucker, the British editor of the Journal – may be more willing to stand up to the US head of state than their American colleagues. Another senior figure who previously worked at News Corp agrees that Murdoch will 'close ranks' in defence. 'When you work there you're constantly under attack internally, except when something like this happens,' the executive says. 'They tend to fight hard amongst themselves in normal times, but when there's a crisis they say, 'We're backing you 100 per cent.'' Murdoch's support is not always longstanding, however. James Harding, the former Times editor who now runs The Observer, was quietly pushed out in late 2012 – reportedly after the tycoon baulked at his support for Obama in the presidential election. Could Tucker face a similar fate? It is far from the first time that Murdoch – a key inspiration for Logan Roy, the ruthless media patriarch in HBO hit Succession – has courted controversy or gone into battle against powerful foes. His reputation was cemented during the Wapping dispute, a year-long stand-off with print workers in 1986 in which the tycoon eventually broke the powerful unions. Perhaps most notorious, however, were revelations that journalists at the News of the World had eavesdropped on private messages. While Murdoch has always insisted that he did not know phone hacking was going on at his publication, he was forced to shutter the tabloid and his UK publishing empire has paid out more than £1bn in compensation and other related costs to victims. In the Murdoch empire, even family members are not off-limits in pursuit of victory in business. The patriarch last year clashed with three of his children – Prudence, Elisabeth and James – over his attempt to change the family trust to hand over complete control to Lachlan. Following a high-profile legal battle that drew comparisons to Succession, Murdoch was ultimately defeated, setting the scene for an almighty tussle over his legacy. But his battle with Trump highlights the conflicting positions Murdoch is required to hold as the owner of news outlets that are, variously, sycophantic to Trump and doggedly determined to hold him to account. What's more, it raises fundamental questions about whether it is his commercial interests or passion for journalism that will ultimately win out. Murdoch once claimed that the reputation of his media outlets was 'more important than the last hundred million dollars'. Yet the tycoon has previously been accused of cosying up to China's communist regime and indulging censors in Beijing in an effort to protect his business interests. Ahead of his takeover of Dow Jones in 2007, a group of China-based WSJ writers accused the mogul of 'sacrificing journalistic integrity to satisfy personal and political aims'. In 1998, he ordered publisher HarperCollins to kill a book by Chris Patten, Hong Kong's last British governor, because of its critical stance towards Beijing. In his latest legal battle, it is not Chinese authorities that Murdoch must be sensitive to, but his own Trump-supporting audiences. In a sign that Murdoch is looking to expand his influence in new areas, News Corp this week unveiled plans to open a new outpost of the New York Post based in Los Angeles. Robert Thomson, the News Corp boss, vowed the new title, dubbed The California Post, would be an 'antidote to the jaundiced, jaded journalism that has sadly proliferated'. Playing both sides While Dow Jones has said it will 'vigorously defend' against any lawsuit, both Fox and the New York Post have remained silent on the issue, suggesting Murdoch may be trying to play both sides. DeGroote says: 'Would it be in his commercial interest to wreck the relationship between his own viewers, his own readers and his titles by being seen to pursue an anti-Trump agenda?' The WSJ is by no means a struggling newspaper business. It had more than 4.3 million subscribers at the end of March, while Dow Jones posted quarterly revenues of $31m. Fox, which pulled in $1.6bn from its cable network in the same three month period, remains the real money-spinner, however. While British broadcasters are struggling to retain viewers in the streaming age, Fox News continues to dominate the US ratings with an average primetime audience of 2.6 million in the second quarter. At the same time, it has been making advances in its digital offering. Fox recently struck a licensing deal with Ruthless, a popular podcast hosted by Republican influencers, while it is set to launch a new streaming service this autumn. Murdoch's supporters argue that he will not be swayed by commercial interests. 'The value of those companies has only grown and I think he takes a really long view – certainly long for someone who's 94 years old,' says the former News Corp executive. Others believe Trump's decision to take on the mogul will backfire. Stephens says: 'By taking this suit he's potentially putting the entire Murdoch press offside. Is that sensible for a Republican president? Essentially the megaphone to Trump's base is held by Rupert Murdoch.' He adds that this is an example of the so-called Streisand effect, where efforts to cover something up only result in greater public awareness. It is not lost on many, however, that Murdoch may prove to be the last true press baron. The role of the newspaper proprietor has traditionally been a powerful one, steering a title's editorial direction and wielding influence over presidents and prime ministers. William Randolph Hearst, the inspiration for the titular character in Orson Welles' classic film Citizen Kane, is often considered to have helped push the US into the Spanish-American war at the end of the 19th century thanks to sensationalist reporting in his tabloids. Lord Beaverbrook, the Canadian-British newspaper publisher whose empire included the Daily Express, has taken credit for the downfall of David Lloyd George's post-war government in 1922. Murdoch must now decide whether he is up for a blockbuster fight with the president that would almost certainly define his legacy as a newspaper man. His stance will also be crucial for Tucker, whom he elevated from editorship of The Sunday Times to lead the WSJ newsroom in 2023. The Briton's willingness to make difficult decisions appears to have impressed Murdoch and she is generally well-regarded at the US newspaper, despite a backlash last year, when journalists plastered her office in Post-it notes in protest against job cuts. That was a minor skirmish from which she emerged unscathed. The stakes for Tucker now, as she comes under Trump's legal assault, could scarcely be higher. For Murdoch, the reputation he has cast for himself over decades as a bulwark of a free press is on the line. Murdoch's status is unique. Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, is undoubtedly a mogul and a far wealthier one, but with tech rather than media values. His tendency to intervene in his publication in ways that have pleased Trump has already come under scrutiny. 'This is the last of the big tycoons in newspapers,' says Murdoch's former lieutenant. 'There's just a lot less money to be made in newspapers than there was and so it won't produce these very powerful media tycoons in a world where the media landscape is pretty fragmented and atomised.' 'Any number of people might have more money than Murdoch and they might even desire to have that level of influence, but they may not know how to do it. It's a skill to remain relevant and ultimately what he's done is stay relevant.' As a result, the newspaper proprietor in its traditional sense – as a wielder of political power and influence – seems an endangered species. So as Murdoch faces down the president of the United States, it may be the last stand for the last press baron.
