ROLLING CONTROVERSY: Far-left Dem Jasmine Crockett faces week of backlash amid 'unhinged' comments
Far-left Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, has just undergone a week full of flubs and controversies that have her facing a possible censure in the House of Representatives and scathing criticism from the president and White House.
Crockett, who is known as one of the leading young, Progressive Democrats in the House, did not have a good week.
It started with Crockett being warned on Sunday to "tread carefully" by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi for her comments saying "all I want to see happen on my birthday is for Elon to be taken down" amid a spate of violent attacks and threats against Tesla owners and workers.
Seemingly not heeding that warning, Crockett stepped into another controversy when a video interview of her was released in which she appeared to call for conservative Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, to be "knocked over the head."
Democrats Are The Party Of 'Rage And Hatred': Ted Cruz
In response to a question about how Democrats can win elections in the red state of Texas, Crockett said, "I think that you punch, I think you punch, I think you OK with punching."
Read On The Fox News App
"It's Ted Cruz," she went on. "I mean, like this dude has to be knocked over the head, like hard, right? Like there is no niceties with him, like at all. Like you go clean off on him."
These comments earned her a significant amount of outrage by conservatives, with the White House's "rapid response" X account calling her "another unhinged Democrat inciting violence."
The main controversy of the week, however, came when Crockett appeared to laughingly mock wheelchair-bound Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, by calling him "Governor Hot Wheels" during a pro-LGBTQ benefit dinner.
The comment sparked national outrage, with commentators on both sides of the political aisle condemning the mockery of disabled people, even if they happen to be governors.
The Loudest Silence: Top Democrats Remain Mum Amid Violent Attacks On Tesla
"We in these hot a-- Texas streets, honey. Y'all know we got Governor Hot Wheels down there, come on now! And the only thing hot about him is that he is a hot a-- mess, honey!" she said, laughing.
Abbott, who is an outspoken supporter of President Donald Trump and a staunch border hawk, has been wheelchair-bound since he was struck by a falling tree while on a jog at age 26.
After the Abbott comment surfaced, Trump weighed in during a Wednesday interview, calling Crockett "a lowlife" and "a very low-IQ person."
"I don't imagine the Democrats are going to have a person like that running their party," the president said.
Social Media Erupts Over Jasmine Crockett 'Gaslighting' About Calling Abbott 'Governor Hot Wheels'
Rep. Randy Weber, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital he would soon be introducing a resolution to censure Crockett because of her statements.
Despite this, Crockett refused to apologize multiple times in an interview with FOX Business before growing frustrated and ending the conversation. Instead, the lawmaker pointed to a statement she put out on social media in which she denied the "hot wheels" comment was meant to make fun of Abbott's condition.
"Why would I apologize when I put out a statement? My statement was clear," Crockett said when confronted on the matter.
In her online statement, Crockett claimed: "I wasn't thinking about the governor's condition – I was thinking about the planes, trains, and automobiles he used to transfer migrants into communities led by Black mayors, deliberately stoking tension and fear among the most vulnerable."
"Literally, the next line I said was that he was a 'Hot A-- Mess,' referencing his terrible policies. At no point did I mention or allude to his condition," she wrote.
Rep Jasmine Crockett Claims 'Hot Wheels' Comment Was Misinterpreted, Her Past Comments Say Otherwise
Kimberly McClain, Crockett's chief of staff, responded to a request for comment by Fox News, saying, "Please be assured that the Congresswoman, in no way, meant any harm toward the Governor OR meant to take lightly any medical conditions that he may have."
Despite her statements, Crockett seems to have a pattern of making comments about Abbott "rolling" places, seeming to mock Abbott's condition.
Just last week, the congresswoman reposted a post featuring Abbott in the White House, which read, "Rolling up to the White House to cheer on the president destroying the agency that makes sure kids in wheelchairs have equal access to education is wild."
During his re-election campaign against former Democratic Rep. Robert Francis "Beto" O'Rourke, Crockett again slammed Abbott on X, saying, "The new nickname I have for Beto O'Rourke is the king of the clap backs! Beto is rolling around the state… Where is Abbott rolling to?"
Jasmine Crockett's 'Clean-up' Of 'Governor Hot Wheels' Comment Ripped As 'The Worst'
Amid all this, another video of Crockett, this time speaking with The 19th last week, surfaced of Crockett dismissing the topic of trans inclusion in women's and girls' sports as a "distraction," while minimizing the potential impact they've had on the lives of women and families.
"In this election, we allowed ourselves to be divided. We allowed them to distract us, and we allowed them to talk about the trans folk," Crockett said. "According to them, the trans kids, they want to play sports. That is the biggest issue that we've had. Since when? Since when? Find the little trans child that is ruining your life. I mean, I'm just like, what are we doing? Like, what are we doing?"
The scrutiny this week created renewed criticism on Crockett's past remarks about Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., being in an interracial marriage.
"The fact that you're sitting around talking about 'life was better under Jim Crow,' like, is this because you don't understand history? Or literally it's because you married a White woman and so you think that whitewashed you?" Crockett told The Breakfast Club in June, as reported by the Washington Free Beacon.
Fox News Digital's Gabriel Hays, Liz Elkind, Jackson Thompson and Anders Hagstrom and Fox News Business' Hillary Vaughn contributed to this report. Original article source: ROLLING CONTROVERSY: Far-left Dem Jasmine Crockett faces week of backlash amid 'unhinged' comments
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Just three people' took on Ohio education law — and sparked a movement
Some Ohio colleges and universities fell in line before Senate Bill 1, the 'Advance Ohio Higher Education Act,' even passed through the state legislature. And when it finally did in March, it had a chilling effect. Universities shirked diversity, equity and inclusion programs to comply, and the silence from once-outspoken opponents was striking. Those early signs of kowtowing were bad indicators that the members of Youngstown State University's faculty union just couldn't get behind. 'There was such passion against SB 1 whenever it was being pushed through the legislature, so why isn't that passion still there?' Mandy Fehlbaum, a sociologist and the grievance chair for YSU's chapter of the Ohio Education Association, recalled wondering in a phone interview. 'Some people were saying, 'Oh well, we worked so hard. Now we're tired, and we just have to accept it.' And like, no, we don't have to accept it.' So they set out to reverse it. While other education unions are weighing legal action to overturn the law, which aims to overhaul the state's higher education system, Fehlbaum, YSU-OEA president Mark Vopat and union spokesperson Cryshanna Jackson Leftwich chose to go political. They began an effort in April to get a referendum on the November ballot, starting with gathering signatures from the 1,000 registered Ohio voters necessary to have their petition certified to the secretary of state. They collected over 6,200 signatures from registered voters in just over a week and certified the petition in early May. Now, the petition committee is taking on its greater challenge: gathering more than 250,000 signatures in at least 44 of the state's 88 counties by June 25 — just two days before the law is set to take effect. If their grassroots cause is successful, the law will be paused until Ohioans vote in the general election on whether SB 1 remains law or is ultimately repealed. 'There were three of us that said we are fed up, three individuals… who said, 'We want to do the right thing, and we want to do something,'' Jackson Leftwich, who also serves as a political science professor at YSU, told Salon. Sometimes you just have to do something, she added. 'You can stop or fight against [something] — and you might not always win, but you can make your voice heard. You can have some opposition. You can give these people some pushback to make them think twice.' Republican Gov. Mike DeWine signed the bill into law on March 28, less than 48 hours after it hit his desk. The legislation, a 42-page revival of previous legislation taken from model bills devised by the conservative National Association of Scholars, implements regulations on classroom discussions on 'controversial beliefs,' including climate policy, marriage, immigration and electoral politics. It also strikes diversity, equity and inclusion programs, policies and scholarships as well as related spending; prohibits faculty strikes; and blocks unions from negotiating tenure among other provisions. Proponents of the bill, including Republican sponsor state Sen. Jerry Cirino, argue that it enhances freedom of speech and academic freedom, promotes intellectual diversity, and 'installs a number of other worthwhile provisions,' including establishing post-tenure periodic review and banning political and ideological litmus tests in hiring, promotions and admissions decisions. 'Our Founders treasured diversity of thought so highly they made free speech our very first guaranteed right,' Cirino said in a January news release announcing the bill's introduction. 'It's time to bring that right back to campus.' But that's where the petition committee's qualms come in. They argue the legislation is actually a censorship bill, replete with union-busting measures and a vague maze of anti-DEI stipulations that stymie students' access to social support, financial resources and needed accommodations. Meanwhile, course regulations said to bolster diversity in thought place professors in a confusing bind over the content they can teach and problematic ideas they must entertain in class. 'Students who want to hold views like, 'Slavery was good,' — I shouldn't have to take class time to seriously entertain certain ideas like that,' Vopat, a philosophy professor , told Salon. Vopat, Fehlbaum and Jackson Leftwich also flagged other glaring issues. The law, they argued, effectively ends tenure by folding tenure policy into the purview of each public institution's board of trustees. Plus, it requires the inclusion of a question about whether a professor creates an unbiased classroom environment on student evaluations, the answer to which they fear could spur investigations into faculty as the law regulates discussion of controversial subjects. Altogether, they say the law has the potential to drive students away from Ohio's public universities. 'This bill... at least in my experience, in my 20-plus years at Youngstown State and higher ed, it just dismantles what higher ed's supposed to be,' Vopat added in a phone interview. It makes the university into a business where profit is king and faculty are 'just replaceable.' The term-limited governor's signature began a 90-day timeline for any interested Ohioan to launch an effort to challenge the legislation. After consulting with other education unions and hearing nothing about a ballot referendum in the works, Vopat, Jackson Leftwich and Fehlbaum — with the support of YSU-OEA's executive committee — decided that they would be the ones to take up the charge. Their effort felt like a race against time, one that Vopat said they knew from the beginning they wouldn't be able to win alone. They drafted the initial petition language, had it reviewed by a former YSU student-turned-lawyer and sent calls out to their network of unions to set the process in motion. As more and more people requested access to it, their work to certify the petition to stay SB 1 and get the law on the ballot gained momentum. In just 10 days, they obtained 6,253 signatures across 423 part-petitions, according to the Ohio SB 1 petition website. While Vopat said he initially pegged the ballot referendum a 'long shot' and a 'Hail Mary,' he now regrets that characterization. 'Now, I think we're actually in the game, like there's time, because once we announced, we've had a huge groundswell of support. I mean, it was shocking how many people,' Vopat told Salon. Since their petition was certified on May 5, the group has secured a cohort of more than 1,500 volunteers statewide to help with signature gathering and garnered the backing of more than a dozen organizations, including Blue Ohio, Indivisible and the Ohio Democratic House Caucus. They've also fundraised just under $40,000 and founded the Labor, Education, and Diversity ballot issue political action committee to support the referendum effort. All of the money they've raised thus far goes toward materials, mainly printing the 18,000 petitions and counting currently in circulation across the state. While Fehlbaum said the process has presented a 'steep learning curve' — relying on volunteer help, navigating the particulars of scanning each copy of the petition and starting a PAC for the first time — she, Vopat and Jackson Leftwich have been blown away by the support their effort has received from Ohioans thus far. Fehlbaum, who leads the petition committee's outreach and organizing arm, declined to share exactly how many signatures they've collected since certification because the organizers don't want the numbers to encourage their opposition to push harder. Fehlbaum did say, however, that they've collected signatures in 82 of Ohio's 88 counties — blowing one of the requirements out of the water — and saw huge returns from Memorial Day weekend. Pride events throughout June and Juneteenth present other ripe signature-gathering opportunities they hope to capitalize on. 'It's an uphill battle for sure,' Fehlbaum said, describing the challenge of informing voters about the bill and their petition. 'We realize we are underdogs in this, but we are doing our best to put a concerted effort there, and I think that it's very feasible we'll be able to do it.'Ohio's public academic institutions have been rolling out changes to comply with the law as the state closes in on the deadline for SB 1 to take effect. Much to the dismay of its students and faculty, Ohio State University was ahead of the curve, announcing diversity office closures and staffing cuts in February in compliance with federal directives to slash DEI programs and in preparation for a then-progressing SB 1. In late April, the University of Toledo discontinued nine undergraduate majors — including Africana studies, Asian studies, disability studies, Spanish and Women's and Gender Studies — to adhere to SB 1's low conferral rate requirements. Ohio University also announced a week later that it was sunsetting its Division of Diversity and Inclusion, which housed its Women, Pride and Multicultural Centers, and established six working groups to implement the law's new requirements. The southeastern Ohio institution also generated backlash when it paused a Black Alumni Reunion event in an apparent reaction to the bill. Jackson Leftwich, Vopat and Fehlbaum see these changes in a broader context. The state's upending of Ohio colleges through SB 1, they said, is a microcosm of the Trump administration's battle against higher education, cowing public and private universities into compliance with anti-DEI, anti-immigration and anti-protest measures or slashing funding from institutions that refuse. 'If the federal level held strong, then the state couldn't get away with it, because people could file federal lawsuits against the state,' Jackson Leftwich said. 'But the state sees the weakness in the federal government, and so they're like, 'We can get away with doing the wrong thing.'' But Vopat said he also sees possibilities for nationwide change in that connection. He hopes that seeing their effort to protect higher education — no matter how successful it ends up — will show other Americans that they have the power to fight back, too. 'I'm hoping that people realize that there is a chance that you can do this, that there are other people who feel the same way — that things have gone too far — and [that] we need to pull back and stop some of these things that are happening, not only in Ohio, but in Florida, Indiana, other places across the country.'
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Granderson: Voters who don't vote? This is one way democracy can die, by 20 million cuts
During China's imperial age, those deemed guilty of the worst offenses were sometimes sentenced to death in a public square by a brutal form of execution known as lingchi. Soldiers — using sharp blades — would slice away pieces of flesh from the accused until they died. Translated, lingchi means 'death by a thousand cuts.' Maybe democracy does die in darkness, as journalist Bob Woodward often suggests. Or maybe democracy's demise comes in the light of day, in a public forum, where everyone can bear witness. Sometimes those holding the knives are the oligarchs or elected officials drenched in corruption. And sometimes there's blood on the hands of the people. On Saturday, voters in San Antonio — the seventh-largest city in the country — are headed to the polls to decide the first open mayoral race since President Obama's first term. Or at least some voters will be. In November 2024, nearly 60% of the 1.3 million registered voters in the county cast a ballot in the general election. However, in the local election held last month, barely 10% showed up to the polls. Before anyone starts throwing shade at San Antonio, in Dallas the turnout was even lower. Lackluster participation in an 'off year' election is not new. However, the mayoral race in San Antonio has increased national interest because the outcome is being viewed as a litmus test for both the strength of the Democrats' resistance and the public's appetite for the White House's policies. Like other big blue cities nestled in legislatively red states, San Antonio's progressive policies have been under constant assault from the governor's mansion. And with neither the progressive candidate, Gina Ortiz Jones, or her MAGA-leaning opponent, Rolando Pablos, eclipsing 50% of the vote in May, the runoff has drawn more than $1 million in campaign spending from outside conservative groups looking to flip the traditionally blue stronghold. The outcome could provide a possible glimpse into the 2026 mayoral race in Los Angeles, should the formerly Republican Rick Caruso decide to run against Mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat. When the two faced off in 2022, around 44% of the city's registered voters went to the polls. Caruso lost by less than 90,000 votes in a city with 2.1 million registered voters — most of whom didn't submit a ballot. It is rather astonishing how little we actually participate in democracy, given the amount of tax dollars we have spent trying to convince other nations that our government system is the best on the planet. Capitulating to President Trump's unsubstantiated claims of mass voter fraud, many local conservative elected officials have tried to ram through a litany of 'voter integrity' policies under the guise of protecting democracy. However, democracy is not a delicate flower in need of protection. It's a muscle in need of exercise. 'Some people find voting to be a chore,' Michele Carew, the elections administrator for Bexar County — which includes San Antonio — told me. 'We need to make voting easier and quite frankly, fun. And we need to get those who don't feel like their vote counts to see that it does. That means getting out and talking to people in our neighborhood, in our churches, in our grocery stores … about when elections are coming up and what's at stake locally.' Carew said that the added outside interest in the city's election has driven up early voting a tick and that she expects to see roughly a 15% turnout, which is an increase over previous years. It could be worse. The city once elected a mayor with 7% turnout back in 2013. Carew also expressed concern about outside influence on local governing. 'One of the first times I saw these nonpartisan races become more political was in 2020, and so as time goes by it's gotten even more so. I would like to think once the candidate is elected mayor they remain nonpartisan and do what's best for the city and not their party.' In 2024, a presidential election year when you'd expect the highest turnout, 1 in 3 registered voters across this country — roughly 20 million people — took a look around and said, 'Nah, I'm good.' Or something like that. The highest turnout was in Washington, D.C., where nearly 80% showed up. Too bad it's not a state. Among the lowest turnout rates? Texas — which has the second-greatest number of voters, behind only California. And therein lies the problem with trying to extrapolate national trends from local elections. Maybe Ortiz Jones will win in San Antonio this weekend. Maybe Caruso will win in L.A. next year. None of this tells us how the vast majority of Americans are really feeling. Sure, it's good fodder to debate around the table or on cable news shows, but ultimately the sample size of a mayoral election belies any claims about a result's meaning. Turnout during an off year is just too low. One thing we know for certain is most voters in America exercise their right to vote only once every four years. Oligarchs and corrupt officials are not great, but it's hard for democracy to stay healthy and strong if that's all the exercise it's getting. @LZGranderson If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Politico
8 minutes ago
- Politico
Graham wants to punish Russia with ‘bone-crushing' sanctions. It could backfire.
Sen. Lindsey Graham has pledged that his expansive sanctions bill would be 'bone crushing' for the Russian economy. But if enacted, the South Carolina Republican's proposal to impose 500 percent tariffs on any country that buys Russian energy would effectively cut the U.S. off from some of the world's largest economies — including allies in Europe. 'A 500 percent tariff is essentially a hard decoupling,' said Kevin Book, managing director of Clear View Energy Partners, an energy research firm. Graham appeared to acknowledge as much on Wednesday, when he proposed a broad carve-out for countries that provide aid to Ukraine. This exemption would spare the European Union, which continues to import almost 20 percent of its gas from Russia. But experts remain skeptical that the sky-high tariffs proposed in the Sanctioning Russia Act are in any way feasible. India and China buy roughly 70 percent of Russian energy exports, but several other countries that buy any oil, gas or uranium from Moscow — and aren't included in the carve-out — could also be exposed to tariffs under the bill. The United States, which is still reliant on imports of enriched uranium from Russia to fuel its nuclear reactors, could also run afoul of the bill. Edward Fishman, a senior researcher with the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, said countries in the crosshairs of the bill would struggle to halt their imports of Russian energy overnight. Tariffs of 500 percent on imports of goods made in China would send prices soaring, disrupt supply chains and could drive up U.S. unemployment to recessionary levels. Most likely, it would lead to a screeching halt in U.S. trade with China. 'It would hurt Americans quite a bit,' Fishman said. The legislation's goal, co-sponsored by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), is to starve Russia's war economy, which continues to earn hundreds of billions of dollars from energy exports. There is widespread support for the overall objective, with 82 senators signing on to Graham's bill so far, and growing support for a companion bill in the House. The bill is likely to change significantly as it moves through Congress and in consultations with the Trump administration, said Matt Zweig, senior policy director of FDD Action, a nonprofit advocacy organization affiliated with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. It may also take a long time. 'With sanctions legislation, you're also normally dealing with iterative processes where you would want to go through every nook and cranny,' Zweig said. Still, the widespread bipartisan support for the legislation suggests there is a high degree of support among lawmakers for tougher action on Russia. 'What Congress may be doing is pressuring the executive branch to act,' said Adam Smith, a partner at the law firm Gibson Dunn. 'There is a sense in the Senate that more sanctions on Russia need to be imposed, or ought to be imposed,' added Smith, who was a senior adviser to the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control during the Obama administration. Graham, the bill's most vocal Republican advocate, said as much in a meeting with reporters in Paris over the weekend, where he described the bill as 'one of the most draconian sanctions bills ever written.' 'The Senate is pissed that Russia is playing a game at our expense and the world's expense. And we are willing to do something we haven't been willing to do before — and that is go after people that have been helping Putin,' Graham said. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, dismissed concerns that the bill is too harsh. 'We need to make Putin understand he has to stop screwing around and come to the table. But we also need to follow it up and make clear we will be tough,' she said. Not everyone agrees. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who has long been skeptical about the effectiveness of sanctions to change the behavior of U.S. adversaries, bashed the bill on Monday as 'literally the most ill-conceived bill I've ever seen in Washington,' he said. 'It would be a worldwide embargo on 36 countries.' Meanwhile, Russia and Ukraine have made little progress on peace talks. Officials from both countries met in Istanbul on Monday and agreed to a further prisoner swap, but failed to achieve any major breakthroughs. Graham and Blumenthal visited Ukraine, France and Germany during last week's congressional recess, where they discussed the sanctions bill, as well as efforts to push Russia to the negotiating table. The proposal has been welcomed by European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen, who met with Graham in Berlin on Monday. 'Pressure works, as the Kremlin understands nothing else,' Von der Leyen said in a statement. 'These steps, taken together with U.S. measures, would sharply increase the joint impact of our sanctions.' Senate Majority Leader John Thune indicated Monday that the chamber could take up the legislation later this month. Republican senators have said they would like to secure the approval of the White House before moving forward. The proposed use of blanket tariffs to target countries that continue to do business with Russia's energy sector is novel and appears to be pitched to Trump's interests. On Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump viewed sanctions as 'a tool in his toolbox,' but declined to comment about his position on the bill. Trump appeared to be inching closer toward supporting the bill in a post on Truth Social on Wednesday, which linked to an op-ed in The Washington Post supporting the legislation. Speaking in the Oval Office on Thursday, Trump indicated he wanted lawmakers to secure his approval before moving forward with the bill. 'They're waiting for me to decide on what to do,' he said, describing the legislation as a 'harsh bill.' The president has liberally wielded tariffs to advance his foreign policy agenda, but his implementation has been spotty. Wall Street has even adopted a trading strategy referencing Trump's capriciousness called TACO, which stands for 'Trump Always Chickens Out.' Tariffs of 145 percent on China, imposed in April, lasted a month before being dramatically scaled back to make way for trade talks, which have so far failed to secure a breakthrough. As it stands, the bill includes some levers that Trump could pull to forestall the tariffs, requiring the president to make a formal determination that Russia is refusing to negotiate or has violated any future peace agreement. Nahal Toosi, Joshua Berlinger, Phelim Kine and Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.
